|
|
|
|
fulton
Jul 3, 2006, 7:03 PM
Post #51 of 54
(3462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
CrackLover,
I'm revisiting this topic after some-time away.
In reply to: ctardi wrote: fulton - That is essentially the same, except for the master point, where the rope is attached. I could see myself trying that, but i'm not sure if I like it.
In reply to: fulton wrote: Yes, very similar except for the master point. In fact, there really isn't a "master point" at all using the method (that I) previously described, rather; this method essentially creates two COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT anchor points that share the same length of static cord. The real advantage with this method is that you can adjust each 'arm' of the anchor without affecting the other 'arm'. Conversely, any adjustment in your system affects ALL component parts (by shifting the master point)--thus any single adjustment (of one 'arm') would require subsequent adjustment to the other 'arm'.
In reply to: ctardi wrote: Hmm, in practice, wouldn't the toprope pull both "master point" biners together, creating a single equalized point with some irrelevant slack rope between them? So in effect, you do create a toprope point that shifts exactly in the same manner that ctardi's master point shifts with any change to the position of the gear or the length of the rope on either side. GO
So, finally, I think that we have finally meandered towards the point I ought to have made. My set up is SERNE, b/c! --> the two clove hitches create redudancy, whereas; the figure eight offers a SINGLE LOOP as the MASTER POINT - NOT redudant / NOT SERNE
Think about the situation in terms of a cordelete - a cordelete maintains the tenents of SERNE b/c the master point contains multipule loops (below the knot); should one loop below the knot fail, the master point remains intact. This is the desired affect of using the two 'biner/two clove hitch method rather than relying on a single figure eight - which comes down to a single loop of rope.
In conclusion - I never use this method, but I do recomend it. It's both fool-proof and so simple as to be mis-leading as to the many advantages.
|
|
|
|
|
fulton
Jul 3, 2006, 7:12 PM
Post #52 of 54
(3462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
I just noticed that ctardi's photo depicts some hybrid/bastardized/figure-eight with two loops below the knot - so his anchor IS SERNE.
But, I also think ctardi's knot looks so damn ugly; whereas the setup I described looks very handsom, which is also important.
Peace
|
|
|
|
|
fmd
Jul 4, 2006, 5:00 PM
Post #53 of 54
(3462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 15, 2006
Posts: 656
|
[quote="fulton"]I just noticed that ctardi's photo depicts some hybrid/bastardized/figure-eight with two loops below the knot - so his anchor IS SERNE.
The knot looks like a double overhanded knot?? I would climb with this set up, I would just feel more comfortable with a yosesmite bowline or a figure eight where the clove hitch is.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jul 5, 2006, 2:31 AM
Post #54 of 54
(3462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Fulton, I think in the future you should also recommend that climbers should have more than one rope - and of course, each rope should have its own belayer. After all, those, too, are not redundant.
G :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
|
