|
USnavy
Mar 8, 2010, 4:59 PM
Post #26 of 68
(5885 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
jbro_135 wrote: Well I think it's ok that Majid's statement is astronomically incorrect because we're discussing rock climbing, not astronomy!
astronomically
One entry found.
Main Entry: as·tro·nom·i·cal
Pronunciation: \ˌas-trə-ˈnä-mi-kəl\
Variant(s): also as·tro·nom·ic \-mik\
Function: adjective
Date: 1556
1 : of or relating to astronomy <astronomical observations>
2 : enormously or inconceivably large or great <astronomical numbers>
— as·tro·nom·i·cal·ly \-mi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb
(This post was edited by USnavy on Mar 8, 2010, 5:01 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Mar 8, 2010, 5:03 PM
Post #27 of 68
(5882 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
greatview wrote: edit: and I largely doubt anyone can jump at the exact moment of the shockload. just imagine: leader shouts -> hold tight, im falling. -> you jump -> he still struggels -> jump again -> he almost falls -> jump again -> he falls -> jump again -> he was already hanging. just doesnt work, maybe i dont climb enough, but it didnt work as far as i experienced. edit: spälling
You are entirely wrong. This is bad for the people you climb with. Lastly, best to refrain from posting on subjects you know very little about.
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Mar 8, 2010, 5:50 PM
Post #28 of 68
(5861 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
USnavy wrote: majid_sabet wrote: according to a report I posed in the LAB, dynamic belay does not do much. I am NOT even going to start on the thousands of ways your statement is astronomically incorrect. That just goes to prove how you don’t ever lead anything hard enough to cause you to fall...
length of rope in service, initial friction in the first biner is taking great porting of initial shock in the system and I do not think feeding another 5 feet of rope thru the belay device significantly reduces the shock other than making it just comfortable for the belayer to arrest the fall.
but again, I am taking to combat commando who only understands forces and nothing else and by the way, how is the bolting project going ?
|
|
|
|
|
bill413
Mar 8, 2010, 6:22 PM
Post #29 of 68
(5850 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674
|
majid_sabet wrote: USnavy wrote: majid_sabet wrote: according to a report I posed in the LAB, dynamic belay does not do much. I am NOT even going to start on the thousands of ways your statement is astronomically incorrect. That just goes to prove how you don’t ever lead anything hard enough to cause you to fall... length of rope in service, initial friction in the first biner is taking great porting of initial shock in the system and I do not think feeding another 5 feet of rope thru the belay device significantly reduces the shock other than making it just comfortable for the belayer to arrest the fall. but again, I am taking to combat commando who only understands forces and nothing else and by the way, how is the bolting project going ?
And that comfort would be a result of? Perhaps reduced impact force on the belayer?
|
|
|
|
|
jbro_135
Mar 8, 2010, 6:53 PM
Post #30 of 68
(5827 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2009
Posts: 662
|
USnavy wrote: jbro_135 wrote: Well I think it's ok that Majid's statement is astronomically incorrect because we're discussing rock climbing, not astronomy! That word references more then astronomy. astronomically One entry found. Main Entry: as·tro·nom·i·cal Pronunciation: \ˌas-trə-ˈnä-mi-kəl\ Variant(s): also as·tro·nom·ic \-mik\ Function: adjective Date: 1556 1 : of or relating to astronomy <astronomical observations> 2 : enormously or inconceivably large or great <astronomical numbers>
— as·tro·nom·i·cal·ly \-mi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb
yeah but you used it wrong you old turd, go read a book
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 8, 2010, 7:49 PM
Post #31 of 68
(5813 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
uni_jim wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: uni_jim wrote: most of the time when people talk about a dynamic belay, they mean to say that the belyer is actively doing something to a) soften the catch or b) shorten the fall. That is dangerous misinformation. A dynamic belay softens the catch. Shortening the fall is something else. Jay JT up to his old tricks again! He said very specifically when you might shorten a fall (if the climber is in danger of a ground fall). I'm sure there's more you can add that will help the OP understand the difference... The point is that shortening a fall is not dynamic belaying. If I ask a partner for a dynamic belay, I expect to get a soft catch, not slammed into the wall. Dangerous misinformation, like I said. Jay I don't think it is "dangerous misinformation," but perhaps you have a better term for reelin' in the slack? An active belay, perhaps? And I didn't tell the OP to try to go shatter everyone's ankles, nor am I in the habit of doing so myself. I stated that there is a situation where it is an appropriate technique to use to prevent a ground fall. Anyway, my interpretation of a "dynamic belay" has always been that the belayer feeds or takes slack during the fall/catch to provide the safest outcome possible. Most of the time (especially for sport climbers and on vertical to overhanging terrain) it will mean softening the catch. That has just been the way I have always undestood the term. go climb a rock.
Well, you've misunderstood the term, and you've passed your misinformation on to others. Now, you've been corrected, so you won't do that anymore, right?
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
I_do
Mar 8, 2010, 10:06 PM
Post #32 of 68
(5763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2008
Posts: 1232
|
jt512 wrote: uni_jim wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: uni_jim wrote: most of the time when people talk about a dynamic belay, they mean to say that the belyer is actively doing something to a) soften the catch or b) shorten the fall. That is dangerous misinformation. A dynamic belay softens the catch. Shortening the fall is something else. Jay JT up to his old tricks again! He said very specifically when you might shorten a fall (if the climber is in danger of a ground fall). I'm sure there's more you can add that will help the OP understand the difference... The point is that shortening a fall is not dynamic belaying. If I ask a partner for a dynamic belay, I expect to get a soft catch, not slammed into the wall. Dangerous misinformation, like I said. Jay I don't think it is "dangerous misinformation," but perhaps you have a better term for reelin' in the slack? An active belay, perhaps? And I didn't tell the OP to try to go shatter everyone's ankles, nor am I in the habit of doing so myself. I stated that there is a situation where it is an appropriate technique to use to prevent a ground fall. Anyway, my interpretation of a "dynamic belay" has always been that the belayer feeds or takes slack during the fall/catch to provide the safest outcome possible. Most of the time (especially for sport climbers and on vertical to overhanging terrain) it will mean softening the catch. That has just been the way I have always undestood the term. go climb a rock. Well, you've misunderstood the term, and you've passed your misinformation on to others. Now, you've been corrected, so you won't do that anymore, right? Jay
The world doesn't work that way.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 8, 2010, 10:48 PM
Post #33 of 68
(5752 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
I_do wrote: jt512 wrote: uni_jim wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: uni_jim wrote: most of the time when people talk about a dynamic belay, they mean to say that the belyer is actively doing something to a) soften the catch or b) shorten the fall. That is dangerous misinformation. A dynamic belay softens the catch. Shortening the fall is something else. Jay JT up to his old tricks again! He said very specifically when you might shorten a fall (if the climber is in danger of a ground fall). I'm sure there's more you can add that will help the OP understand the difference... The point is that shortening a fall is not dynamic belaying. If I ask a partner for a dynamic belay, I expect to get a soft catch, not slammed into the wall. Dangerous misinformation, like I said. Jay I don't think it is "dangerous misinformation," but perhaps you have a better term for reelin' in the slack? An active belay, perhaps? And I didn't tell the OP to try to go shatter everyone's ankles, nor am I in the habit of doing so myself. I stated that there is a situation where it is an appropriate technique to use to prevent a ground fall. Anyway, my interpretation of a "dynamic belay" has always been that the belayer feeds or takes slack during the fall/catch to provide the safest outcome possible. Most of the time (especially for sport climbers and on vertical to overhanging terrain) it will mean softening the catch. That has just been the way I have always undestood the term. go climb a rock. Well, you've misunderstood the term, and you've passed your misinformation on to others. Now, you've been corrected, so you won't do that anymore, right? Jay The world doesn't work that way.
Oh, I know. I'll try dripping a little more sarcasm next time.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 1:42 AM
Post #34 of 68
(5720 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
I'm sure this has been said to you before many times, but there is a great difference between 'teaching' and 'attempting to prove moral and intellectual superiority'.
Looking at the term itself, do you actually have a good argument (other than that it may be generally accepted usage) for why dynamic belay wouldn't cover both taking in and letting out slack when the climber is falling?
Among other things, the term dynamic refers to variation, versatility, taking action in relation to something, being changeable, active ...
Seems to me dynamic could and perhaps should refer to either.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 9, 2010, 2:00 AM
Post #35 of 68
(5717 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
davidnn5 wrote: Looking at the term itself, do you actually have a good argument (other than that it may be generally accepted usage) for why dynamic belay wouldn't cover both taking in and letting out slack when the climber is falling?
It means what it means because that is the accepted and the expected usage among climbers. Communication between climber and belayer needs to be succinct and accurate. When I ask my partner if he's going to "rappel," I need to know that he knows that "rappelling" is different than "lowering." If I yell "falling," I need to know that my belayer knows that "falling" is different than "take." If yell "slack," I need to know that my belayer knows that that means give me more of it, not less of it. And if I tell my partner that I want a "dynamic belay," I need to know that he knows that that means soften the catch, not shorten it. This is standard terminology that every climber should know and use. Start making up your own parochial definitions, then don't expect to be able to communicate proficiently and safely outside your local circle of climbers.
In reply to: Among other things, the term dynamic refers to variation, versatility, taking action in relation to something, being changeable, active ...
Not in climbing it doesn't. Dynamic ropes don't do any of those things. They just soften the catch by decreasing the climber's deceleration. Ditto for dynamic belays.
In reply to: Seems to me dynamic could and perhaps should refer to either.
It's not a case of what it "should" mean. It's what it does mean to climbers. If you want to obfuscate communication with your partners, then go ahead and make up your own definition.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 2:24 AM
Post #36 of 68
(5703 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: Among other things, the term dynamic refers to variation, versatility, taking action in relation to something, being changeable, active ... Not in climbing it doesn't. Dynamic ropes don't do any of those things. They just soften the catch by decreasing the climber's deceleration. Ditto for dynamic belays.
C'mon J - are you seriously telling me a dynamic rope isn't variable, changeable or versatile? What else is rope stretch other than a dynamic response to a change in load conditions?
Anyhoo... At your behest, I hereby nickname all belay maneuvers "Smurf". As in "Hey, watch what you're smurfing doing while you smurf me with that smurfy thing you smurfing eedjit!"
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 9, 2010, 2:32 AM
Post #37 of 68
(5697 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: Among other things, the term dynamic refers to variation, versatility, taking action in relation to something, being changeable, active ... Not in climbing it doesn't. Dynamic ropes don't do any of those things. They just soften the catch by decreasing the climber's deceleration. Ditto for dynamic belays. C'mon J - are you seriously telling me a dynamic rope isn't variable, changeable or versatile?
Now you're just being an idiot.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Mar 9, 2010, 2:32 AM
Post #38 of 68
(5696 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
wow.
terrible thread. If anyone lurking reads this, ignore absolutely EVERYTHING that has been written in here, with the exception of jt512.
And this post, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Mar 9, 2010, 2:39 AM
Post #39 of 68
(5690 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: Among other things, the term dynamic refers to variation, versatility, taking action in relation to something, being changeable, active ... Not in climbing it doesn't. Dynamic ropes don't do any of those things. They just soften the catch by decreasing the climber's deceleration. Ditto for dynamic belays. C'mon J - are you seriously telling me a dynamic rope isn't variable, changeable or versatile? What else is rope stretch other than a dynamic response to a change in load conditions? Anyhoo... At your behest, I hereby nickname all belay maneuvers "Smurf". As in "Hey, watch what you're smurfing doing while you smurf me with that smurfy thing you smurfing eedjit!"
(This post was edited by camhead on Mar 9, 2010, 2:40 AM)
|
|
Attachments:
|
Picture 6.png
(71.0 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 2:44 AM
Post #40 of 68
(5682 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care 
By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image!
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 2:52 AM
Post #42 of 68
(5669 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
camhead wrote: davidnn5 wrote: I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image! Yeah, please tell me how the image button works to embed a picture that I have attached to the post. I had never tried that before. Hopefully I'll figure out how to do it before you break the 5.10 barrier.
Assume - makes ass out of you. Me, I'm good ;) 
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 9, 2010, 2:55 AM
Post #43 of 68
(5664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
davidnn5 wrote: camhead wrote: davidnn5 wrote: I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image! Yeah, please tell me how the image button works to embed a picture that I have attached to the post. I had never tried that before. Hopefully I'll figure out how to do it before you break the 5.10 barrier. Assume - makes ass out of you. Me, I'm good ;)
Let me guess: you define 5.1 to be equal to 5.10.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 2:58 AM
Post #44 of 68
(5656 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: camhead wrote: davidnn5 wrote: I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image! Yeah, please tell me how the image button works to embed a picture that I have attached to the post. I had never tried that before. Hopefully I'll figure out how to do it before you break the 5.10 barrier. Assume - makes ass out of you. Me, I'm good ;) Let me guess: you define 5.1 to be equal to 5.10. Jay
Let me guess: You presume that bothering to record a few routes in the database recently for the purpose of having them listed thereby defines everything I've ever done.
While I wouldn't have expected Camhead to follow my inference (to wit: assuming that is all I've ever climbed is very stupid), I expect more of you, J-hardman!
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Mar 9, 2010, 3:04 AM
Post #45 of 68
(5654 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: camhead wrote: davidnn5 wrote: I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image! Yeah, please tell me how the image button works to embed a picture that I have attached to the post. I had never tried that before. Hopefully I'll figure out how to do it before you break the 5.10 barrier. Assume - makes ass out of you. Me, I'm good ;) Let me guess: you define 5.1 to be equal to 5.10. Jay Let me guess: You presume that bothering to record a few routes in the database recently for the purpose of having them listed thereby defines everything I've ever done. While I wouldn't have expected Camhead to follow my inference (to wit: assuming that is all I've ever climbed is very stupid), I expect more of you, J-hardman!
I wasn't assuming that all you had climbed was on your ascents list. I was just assuming that you don't climb 5.10.
Try to keep up, unless, of course, you "just don't care."
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Mar 9, 2010, 4:30 AM
Post #46 of 68
(5620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
davidnn5 wrote: jt512 wrote: davidnn5 wrote: camhead wrote: davidnn5 wrote: I'm sure you have some kind of point, but as my information mentions, I really don't care By the way, the image button might help next time. 12000+ posts and it took you two tries to embed an image! Yeah, please tell me how the image button works to embed a picture that I have attached to the post. I had never tried that before. Hopefully I'll figure out how to do it before you break the 5.10 barrier. Assume - makes ass out of you. Me, I'm good ;) Let me guess: you define 5.1 to be equal to 5.10. Jay Let me guess: You presume that bothering to record a few routes in the database recently for the purpose of having them listed thereby defines everything I've ever done...
I suppose it should be obvious that you (like many others here, of course) have consciously chosen to leave any of your meaningful rock climbing achievements off your list of reported accomplishments--and instead opted to merely list the truly insignificant ones. Right.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
greatview
Mar 9, 2010, 7:40 AM
Post #47 of 68
(5601 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2010
Posts: 27
|
Now I get it, this forum only listens to those with a whole lot of comments ...
well, carry on, this place is not a happy place.
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 9, 2010, 7:53 AM
Post #48 of 68
(5597 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
Oh mah gawd. Curt, Camhead and JT in one thread. I just evilgasmed.
Sorry guys, I had to work. But if it helps you maintain the rage, I'm a dwarf black white asian guy who climbs -V7, but only to a maximum height of four feet.
When you guys are done climbing 5.27s, can you tell me how i bolt cracks and chip holds? Also looking for tips on best climbs to practise these bolting/chipping skills on...
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 9, 2010, 7:56 AM
Post #49 of 68
(5594 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
davidnn5 wrote: Oh mah gawd. Curt, Camhead and JT in one thread. I just evilgasmed. Sorry guys, I had to work. But if it helps you maintain the rage, I'm a dwarf black white asian guy who climbs -V7, but only to a maximum height of four feet. When you guys are done climbing 5.27s, can you tell me how i bolt cracks and chip holds? Also looking for tips on best climbs to practise these bolting/chipping skills on...
*plonk*
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 9, 2010, 8:02 AM
Post #50 of 68
(5589 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
greatview wrote: Now I get it, this forum only listens to those with a whole lot of comments ...
No. People, such as yourself, who have no clue what they are talking about, are completely free to post their "opinion", though it's far from clear to me why that's a good thing.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Mar 9, 2010, 8:09 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
