Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Trad Climbing:
Anchors - Analysis (No 3)
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Trad Climbing

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All


knieveltech


Nov 17, 2008, 8:07 PM
Post #26 of 95 (8117 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [majid_sabet] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.


glahhg


Nov 17, 2008, 8:18 PM
Post #27 of 95 (8110 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 69

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

equalette = too many unnecessary knots


donald949


Nov 17, 2008, 8:53 PM
Post #28 of 95 (8085 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 24, 2007
Posts: 11455

Re: [epoch] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Would have to agree that this piece looks tippy. Looks like you could turn it as viewed CCW and get it to slot nicely. Maybe. Otherwise turn it endwise.


So you pre tie that Equalette mess? Well that should work, but I noticed you had to use QD's to extend two sides. Also second the idea of gates facing away from the rock.
Generally I don't like QD's on gear, too short and too stiff. Pulls out and up on gear too much while leading. I use 1 or 2 foot runners. 4 foot if the route meanders.
Finally, regarding an upward pull piece. It should be seperate from the anchor, and tied directly to the harness. Avoids the multiplication of forces from outward pulls on shallow angles.
D


coolcat83


Nov 17, 2008, 9:24 PM
Post #29 of 95 (8067 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 27, 2007
Posts: 1007

Re: [shoo] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shoo wrote:
coolcat83 wrote:
your setup looks like a quad, also the recommended clip in is two lockers, one on each strand, i've used it it slides easily and should one strand fail or the biner get loaded you have the other.

I say all this with the caveat that I have been told I build too much redundancy in my anchors. But better safe than sorry.

One of the key points of the quad is that you don't have to use two carabiners to anchor into. You can clip 1, 2, or 3 master point cords and be fully redundant (with near-perfect redundancy if you clip into 2), except of course for the single locking carabiner.

yes...sorta


shoo


Nov 17, 2008, 9:30 PM
Post #30 of 95 (8063 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501

Re: [donald949] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

donald949 wrote:
So you pre tie that Equalette mess?

I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations.

And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette.


majid_sabet


Nov 17, 2008, 11:25 PM
Post #31 of 95 (8036 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette


knieveltech


Nov 18, 2008, 2:01 AM
Post #32 of 95 (8006 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [majid_sabet] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette

Then clearly you've never used one.


jollymon


Nov 18, 2008, 6:55 AM
Post #33 of 95 (7970 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 5, 2008
Posts: 55

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

1. omnidirectional pulling direction for anchor in general.
2. poor cam placement. interior side has way different extension from the outside. Easy walker. Outside edge of cam too close to outside rim of wall I think from the picture of the entire anchor rigging.
3. of course that second hex has poor size for that position. 1 up.
4. equalize all protection, not two pieces and one piece.
individual pro on upper left hex looks longer then other equalized.
5. if that much is wrong then it needs a total rework...if I came upon this in place...no way i'm out on that one.


majid_sabet


Nov 18, 2008, 7:48 AM
Post #34 of 95 (7960 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette

Then clearly you've never used one.

I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book.


shockabuku


Nov 18, 2008, 12:44 PM
Post #35 of 95 (7941 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868

Re: [jollymon] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

What does this:

jollymon wrote:
individual pro on upper left hex looks longer then other equalized.

mean?


MikeSaint


Nov 18, 2008, 1:21 PM
Post #36 of 95 (7930 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 19, 2007
Posts: 426

Re: [shockabuku] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I have no idea what the Equalette is or how it works. I've been doing searches on the Equalette, still not sure I know what I'm looking at.


billl7


Nov 18, 2008, 1:45 PM
Post #37 of 95 (7922 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890

Re: [jollymon] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jollymon wrote:
2. poor cam placement. interior side has way different extension from the outside. Easy walker.
Why does that make it more likely to walk than a placement with equal deployment? When it comes to cams walking, I am concerned more about rope-action, direction of pull, and cracks that widen around the point of placement. Not whether I have even cam deployment. Edit: besides, that cam's deployment looks pretty dam good to me.

jollymon wrote:
4. equalize all protection, not two pieces and one piece.
There are systems to equalize odd numbers of protection although doing it redundantly and dynamically is usually not done cleanly (even with the equalette).

Anyway, why always equalize between three instead of two and then one? I understand the load is not truely equalized across all pieces. But the primary in general anchor building is to place bomber individual pieces. Why always go to extremes every time if one usually has bomber individual placements and limited anchor extension upon failure.

Bill L


(This post was edited by billl7 on Nov 18, 2008, 1:52 PM)


billl7


Nov 18, 2008, 1:51 PM
Post #38 of 95 (7916 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890

Re: [MikeSaint] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

If you do traditional climbing then get the newer anchor book by John Long and Bob Gaines. It is a useful book even if you never use the equalette.


knieveltech


Nov 18, 2008, 2:05 PM
Post #39 of 95 (7909 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [majid_sabet] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette

Then clearly you've never used one.

I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book.

Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it.


Partner epoch
Moderator

Nov 18, 2008, 3:06 PM
Post #40 of 95 (7877 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163

Re: [MikeSaint] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

MikeSaint wrote:
I have no idea what the Equalette is or how it works. I've been doing searches on the Equalette, still not sure I know what I'm looking at.
Start here; follow the first link and read the entire thread. Then go out and buy the book referenced subsequent to the link. Finally read the second bundle of links.


glahhg


Nov 18, 2008, 3:28 PM
Post #41 of 95 (7865 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 69

Re: [shoo] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

shoo wrote:
donald949 wrote:
So you pre tie that Equalette mess?

I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations.

And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette.

It's not about the strength reduction of the knots, it's about taking the time to tie them all, and then the complete mess you have when you're done. The goal is to go clip clip clip "on belay" ASAP, not spend 20 minutes tieing up a clusterfuckolette.


shoo


Nov 18, 2008, 3:54 PM
Post #42 of 95 (7846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501

Re: [glahhg] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

glahhg wrote:
shoo wrote:
I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations.

And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette.

It's not about the strength reduction of the knots, it's about taking the time to tie them all, and then the complete mess you have when you're done. The goal is to go clip clip clip "on belay" ASAP, not spend 20 minutes tieing up a clusterfuckolette.

I have bolded the relevant text for you.

Once you have the feel for equalettes down, the difference in time between tieing a cordolette and an equalette is virtually negligible. You often end up saving time in adjustments, since the equalette by its nature doesn't need to be adjusted much, and where it does, it's extremely easy to do so.

Even if it takes a second or two longer, the benefits (situation dependent, of course) more than make up for it. To take it to an extreme, it would be faster for me just to jump on a ledge and hip belay, but that's not what we're going for here.

In the set up in question, Epoch is using a 4 cord setup, which I'm not a big fan of since it is a pain to tie. This kind of setup really does take a lot of time to put together, and is usually best done pre-tied. I've only found this setup to be useful for horizontally oriented bolted belays, since I can pre-tie, clip and go.

The CF from an equalette is usually due to poor management of the master point cords. I generally prefer to use the original version with a single masterpoint locking carabiner in a sliding x, as seen in TradRenn's post.


dingus


Nov 18, 2008, 4:04 PM
Post #43 of 95 (7837 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [MikeSaint] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

MikeSaint wrote:
I have no idea what the Equalette is or how it works. I've been doing searches on the Equalette, still not sure I know what I'm looking at.

You're looking at an anchor strategy designed by self-appointed open-source internet committee.

Tell me THAT doesn't send shivers up your spine.

Just clove it bro, and CLIMB ON!

DMT


dingus


Nov 18, 2008, 4:07 PM
Post #44 of 95 (7835 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [epoch] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

epoch wrote:
Then go out and buy the book referenced subsequent to the link. Finally read the second bundle of links.

I tip my hat to the Master Largo. What he did with the cordellette equalette quagmire (created it, fostered it, debunked it, stimulated it, challenged it, enlisted ba legion of climbing geeks on the internet (witness this thread) to experiment and then SOLVED IT with his new book... genius!) was a THING OF MARKETING BEAUTY.

Simply beautiful. I tip my hat to the Master.

But I am NOT buying his book, sorry.

DMT


(This post was edited by dingus on Nov 18, 2008, 4:08 PM)


dingus


Nov 18, 2008, 4:14 PM
Post #45 of 95 (7829 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [shoo] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shoo wrote:
Even if it takes a second or two longer, the benefits (situation dependent, of course) more than make up for it.

What benefits? For traditional free climbing I found the cordelette to be a complete waste of time. The so-called benefits were illusions. This is something I stated long before Long actually tested and debunked the MAJOR theory used to justify this time-wasting procedure.

What benefits, actually real and tangible benefits, does this equalette offer?

I believe modern climbers are WAY TOO CONCERNED with equalization of anchors, period. Its a bugaboo, mostly illusory and filled with anecdotal 'evidence' of those dead parties who failed to equalize? (NOT!)
DMT


Partner cracklover


Nov 18, 2008, 4:44 PM
Post #46 of 95 (7816 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162

Re: [dingus] Anchors - Analysis (No 3) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
What benefits, actually real and tangible benefits, does this equalette offer?

IMO - one of the benefits might be that the fucking herd of so called "trad" climbers who want every single belay to have two big fat shiny bolts might be slowed down a little.

That would be a huge benefit to me.

GO


(This post was edited by cracklover on Nov 18, 2008, 4:44 PM)


majid_sabet


Nov 18, 2008, 5:49 PM
Post #47 of 95 (7782 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette

Then clearly you've never used one.

I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book.

Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it.

You guys build these sort/type anchors cause your daddy showed it to you in his so called ANCHOR BOOK and as long a head cow moves toward to barn, all the other cows follow. I am not saying you are cow but sometimes I feel people do not think why they are building an anchor but they keep following the same fu*king thing. If you’re main goals are building a safer anchor to support you in case SOL then you should ask yourself the following;

1-What am I dealing with (hole, crack, tree….)
2-What do I have with me (three cams, four knots, two cords…)
3-What is this anchor for (belay, rap, hauling, rescue…..)
4-Where is the direction of end load ( How much side to side movements the master point may see )
5-What is the distance of my moving ropes ( rope in service to determine the maximum shock load that anchor may see….etc)
6-What is worse thing that could happen to me if one of the anchor legs fails ( master point movement, other pieces popping etc)
7-What is my backup (little bush on the side, another single old pitons..etc)
8-How much time do I want to spend to build it
9-Asking few other things I forgot to mention


Partner epoch
Moderator

Nov 18, 2008, 5:55 PM
Post #48 of 95 (7776 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163

Re: [majid_sabet] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear .

It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.

I called that CFulette

Then clearly you've never used one.

I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book.

Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it.

You guys build these sort/type anchors cause your daddy showed it to you in his so called ANCHOR BOOK and as long a head cow moves toward to barn, all the other cows follow. I am not saying you are cow but sometimes I feel people do not think why they are building an anchor but they keep following the same fu*king thing. If you’re main goals are building a safer anchor to support you in case SOL then you should ask yourself the following;

1-What am I dealing with (hole, crack, tree….)
2-What do I have with me (three cams, four knots, two cords…)
3-What is this anchor for (belay, rap, hauling, rescue…..)
4-Where is the direction of end load ( How much side to side movements the master point may see )
5-What is the distance of my moving ropes ( rope in service to determine the maximum shock load that anchor may see….etc)
6-What is worse thing that could happen to me if one of the anchor legs fails ( master point movement, other pieces popping etc)
7-What is my backup (little bush on the side, another single old pitons..etc)
8-How much time do I want to spend to build it
9-Asking few other things I forgot to mention
It's a different way of looking at things.


Partner epoch
Moderator

Nov 18, 2008, 6:07 PM
Post #49 of 95 (7771 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163

Re: [epoch] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Also, since everyone here is so inclined to be such an armchair critic (majid I'm looking at you), I invite you all to show off a creation of yours to partake in this series.


dingus


Nov 18, 2008, 6:15 PM
Post #50 of 95 (7765 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [epoch] Anchors - Analysis (part II) [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

epoch wrote:
Also, since everyone here is so inclined to be such an armchair critic (majid I'm looking at you), I invite you all to show off a creation of yours to partake in this series.

I show off my climbing-related creations ALL THE TIME, here and elsewhere.

My anchors are simple, like me. Some pieces with the rope tied directly to the best piece. The rest are serial-clove-chained for backup. I only equalize once in a great while - by far an exception in my climbing. But many times I introduce a sling to a 2nd piece and anchor in seperately to that as well, for a little redundancy. But that depends.

The two big opposites - no extension AND equalization... are not happy housemates. They really don't like each other.

But I think this bedrock of SERNE anchor philosophy is rooted in nothing more substantial than opinion.

DMT

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Disciplines : Trad Climbing

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook