|
trenchdigger
Feb 1, 2008, 4:17 PM
Post #51 of 75
(5826 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
climbingaggie03 wrote: IMO if it was bolted by hand on lead, then it's trad. We have a crag in TX that has some run out slabs that were bolted on lead with a hand drill. It's definitely not sport, and it was put up when there was no sport climbing, so I think it's fine to call it trad.
I would agree. Also worth mentioning that there was no "trad" climbing when it was put up.
|
|
|
|
|
wyoclimb
Feb 3, 2008, 2:26 AM
Post #52 of 75
(5778 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2007
Posts: 115
|
I was wondering if stone mountain (N.C.) ? Is slab climbing ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Feb 3, 2008, 4:10 PM
Post #54 of 75
(5743 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
chilli wrote: caughtinside wrote: csproul wrote: chilli wrote: i don't know why, but i'm getting kind of frustrated by everyone continuing to say that it's a sin to run backwards when belaying to catch a fall on a sport route. there ARE SOME conditions under which (stone mountain example) Many people don't really consider Stone Mtn to be sport climbing. Just because it is bolted doesn't make it sport. Bingo. A 150' pitch with 4 or 5 bolts is not, and never has been, a sport climb. as i said earlier, i don't consider it "sport" either, but being bolted doesn't that technically take it out of the realm of trad (for those routes for which you're using bolts)? waitaminute. i'm just nit-picking/playing around with words at this point... perhaps it's better if i just say that there are useful applications for running belays in bolted climbs, but not in what we would consider "true sport climbing."
As for the running belay, the situations at Stone Mountain where this is a viable strategy are fairly limited. Nothing that starts from the Tree Ledge can be done this way.
JL
|
|
|
|
|
chilli
Feb 3, 2008, 4:22 PM
Post #55 of 75
(5738 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2007
Posts: 401
|
saxfiend wrote: For fuck's sake... JL
don't get your panties in a twist there, bud. i already said that i was just pointlessly engaging in a word-game at that point. semantics aside, thanks for the fervent correction of ill-chosen vocabulary.
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Feb 3, 2008, 7:35 PM
Post #57 of 75
(5721 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
trenchdigger wrote: majid_sabet wrote: trenchdigger wrote: majid_sabet wrote: bigfatrock wrote: I have only recently started getting into trad, so far I have only followed on a hand full of routes/pitches. I was wondering if it's safe to run backwards to catch a big fall like I do in sport climbing or would that risk pulling out the gear? I am assuming if it's really well placed it won't be an issue, but I was thinking if there was a stopper placed that could take downward force but not outward from the rope being pulled back. What are you guys' thoughts on that? belayer has to keep the rope in-line with falling climber to use the rope as a shock absorber. Pulling yourself away from the last piece while belaying will create a directional pull which may apply up to 1.5 x of the belay forces in to last piece. just something to think about. [url=http://www.freeimagehosting.net/][img]http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/ef21d2d06c.jpg[/img] By "last piece" do you mean the highest piece or the belayer's directional? 1.5x what force? 1.5x the force without the directional? I think I need some red and green arrows... I am going to put the red arrow on your head and hammer it down with my green hammer . If the belayer is in-line with rope then falling forces will be transferred to his belay device. once he pulls himself away from the anchor, he will creates a direction pull as shown in the image. I am sure that last piece ( next to belayer) will take some of the impact but you do the math and come up with the right figure professor. Undoubtably it will take some of the load. But I think you pulled the number out of your ass.
In that case, wouldn't it be a brown arrow?
A "running" belay is very different than a running belay.
Then again, when my partner was running up a bolted but runout trad climb where he otherwise would have decked, I was the one who bolted when he fell. He was a good sport about the hard stop, saying he would prefer high forces on his piece than on the ground at the bottom of the climb.
Enough of my running off at the mouth.
|
|
|
|
|
rockie
Feb 5, 2008, 9:35 PM
Post #60 of 75
(5559 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2007
Posts: 1130
|
I second that comment:
Actually, chilli, it's called the running belay, because the belayer literally runs away from the wall to remove slack from the system.
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 6, 2008, 2:49 PM
Post #61 of 75
(5540 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
First of all, it's hard for me to imagine any beginning trad climber putting themselves in a position to have to run backwards to catch their climber. Or a beginner being able to think quickly enough to do it if needed.
Taking slack in quickly (or running backwards) is VERy situational and is only to save the climber from decking or hitting objects (possible numerous objects) in a fall. It is not a sport or trad thing, but rather has to do with the angle of the climb, and sparseness of protection. It will put more force on the climbers top piece, but that is not a consideration if you are trying to keep him from hitting the ground. All you can do is HOPE that the piece is strong enough. It is the opposite of a soft catch which a lot of climbers (wrongly) consider the realm of sport climbing. You, know there are climbers out there that are climbing overhanging trad routes.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 6, 2008, 6:17 PM
Post #62 of 75
(5515 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: First of all, it's hard for me to imagine any beginning trad climber putting themselves in a position to have to run backwards to catch their climber. Or a beginner being able to think quickly enough to do it if needed.
I disagree. There is a subset of beginners (I was one) who intuitively believe that they should shorten every fall, and their isntinct is to yard in slack, crouch, or run back in response to any fall. I thought this was proper belaying for many years, a belief that was reinforced by my partners, who always thanked me for shortening their falls. We were climbing moderate trad routes that would be considered slabs by today's standards, and so getting slammed into the rock by a hard catch was never an issue.
Unfortunately, many of us carried this belay model over to sport climbing. I never questioned it until I was rather seriously injured when I was slammed into a wall by such a catch (in the gym, no less) by an experienced climber. That got me to rethink my entire approach to belaying. Since then, I've been an Internet crusader for dynamic belaying, and I think I've had an impact on the belay habits of a number of climbers. When I first became a proponent of dynamic belaying, I constantly ran into resistance from long-time climbers who believed that modern ropes provided all the dynamicity needed for a safe catch; but gradually attitudes have changed, and now I rarely meet a climber who doesn't comprehend the importance dynamic belaying in appropriate situations.
But, anyway, to get back on point, I think it's important to explain to beginners that it usually is not correct to take in slack by any means when the leader falls, because some beginners want to do so intuitively.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 6, 2008, 6:58 PM
Post #63 of 75
(5504 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: First of all, it's hard for me to imagine any beginning trad climber putting themselves in a position to have to run backwards to catch their climber. Or a beginner being able to think quickly enough to do it if needed. I disagree. There is a subset of beginners (I was one) who intuitively believe that they should shorten every fall, and their isntinct is to yard in slack, crouch, or run back in response to any fall. I thought this was proper belaying for many years, a belief that was reinforced by my partners, who always thanked me for shortening their falls. We were climbing moderate trad routes that would be considered slabs by today's standards, and so getting slammed into the rock by a hard catch was never an issue. Unfortunately, many of us carried this belay model over to sport climbing. I never questioned it until I was rather seriously injured when I was slammed into a wall by such a catch (in the gym, no less) by an experienced climber. That got me to rethink my entire approach to belaying. Since then, I've been an Internet crusader for dynamic belaying, and I think I've had an impact on the belay habits of a number of climbers. When I first became a proponent of dynamic belaying, I constantly ran into resistance from long-time climbers who believed that modern ropes provided all the dynamicity needed for a safe catch; but gradually attitudes have changed, and now I rarely meet a climber who doesn't comprehend the importance dynamic belaying in appropriate situations. But, anyway, to get back on point, I think it's important to explain to beginners that it usually is not correct to take in slack by any means when the leader falls, because some beginners want to do so intuitively. Jay
I agree with everything you just said, but I see a difference in running back and just sitting back to resist the fall (which almost every beginner does). To actually have enough time to run back to take in slack, means that there is quite a bit of distance towards their last piece of protection. That was my point. I don't see beginners putting themselves in a position where they are running out something that they are endanger of falling on.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 6, 2008, 7:33 PM
Post #64 of 75
(5490 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Regarding running back to catch a fall:
I once watched in horror as a climber pulled down on a block the size of a small fridge... that turned out not to be attached at all.
Simultaneously, the climber let go of the rock and pushed backwards (or he would have been pulled down by the block) and the belayer let go of the rope. So the climber flipped over backwards, and as the rock (and inverted climber) slid down the slab directly for him, the belayer ran for his life. So now climber and block are freefalling/sliding down the slab, breaking smaller rocks off as they go. 10 feet back, the belayer managed to get control of the rope again (it was a slingshot belay) and stopped the climber, who's head was about three feet off the ground.
You wouldn't believe the amount of noise that block made as it fell. Sounded like the whole cliff was falling down.
As you might imagine, watching that made an impression on me. I thought about what I might have done in the belayer's situation, since staying put and locking off would have been bad, and dropping the climber while running was also bad. It took a little practice, but I taught myself to be able to keep enough friction in the device so the climber doesn't fall, while running backwards.
If that belayer hadn't run... yech. He'd still be under that boulder today.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
drfelatio
Feb 6, 2008, 7:53 PM
Post #65 of 75
(5481 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2004
Posts: 475
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: I don't see beginners putting themselves in a position where they are running out something that they are endanger of falling on. Josh
I don't know man. One of my first trad climbs was on a 50ft, 5.6R at the Red. it's an easy face climb protected by a thin seam that peters out to nothing about 1/2 way up. You runout the last 20-25 feet and then mantle onto a large ledge to the anchors. It's generally acknowledged that if you fall making that mantle, you will deck unless your belayer runs away to take up slack.
Whether or not you'd consider this a "beginner" climb is debatable. It's an easy climb, for sure, doable by 5.8/5.9 climbers if they have the head for it.
[/spray]
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 7, 2008, 12:36 AM
Post #66 of 75
(5460 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: I agree with everything you just said, but I see a difference in running back and just sitting back to resist the fall (which almost every beginner does). To actually have enough time to run back to take in slack, means that there is quite a bit of distance towards their last piece of protection. That was my point. I don't see beginners putting themselves in a position where they are running out something that they are endanger of falling on.
I don't understand your logic, since we're talking about the beginner being the belayer, so the beginner wouuld not be the one who has run it out. That said, at places like J Tree there are plenty of run out routes with moderate ratings that beginners lead all the time.
Finally, consider this scenario. The leader is five feet above a bolt, and yards out a ton of slack to clip the next bolt at full arm's length. For a 6-foot tall climber, that would put about 13 feet of slack in the rope. Add a couple extra feet of slack from the belayer, and the fall, before rope stretch, would be around 28 feet. If the belayer is paying attention and anticipates the fall, then he would have time to take at least a couple steps back, and then dive to the ground to further shorten the fall. I see no reason to make a distinction between this behavior and running back.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Feb 7, 2008, 12:37 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 7, 2008, 1:14 PM
Post #67 of 75
(5426 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I agree with everything you just said, but I see a difference in running back and just sitting back to resist the fall (which almost every beginner does). To actually have enough time to run back to take in slack, means that there is quite a bit of distance towards their last piece of protection. That was my point. I don't see beginners putting themselves in a position where they are running out something that they are endanger of falling on. I don't understand your logic, since we're talking about the beginner being the belayer, so the beginner wouuld not be the one who has run it out. That said, at places like J Tree there are plenty of run out routes with moderate ratings that beginners lead all the time. Finally, consider this scenario. The leader is five feet above a bolt, and yards out a ton of slack to clip the next bolt at full arm's length. For a 6-foot tall climber, that would put about 13 feet of slack in the rope. Add a couple extra feet of slack from the belayer, and the fall, before rope stretch, would be around 28 feet. If the belayer is paying attention and anticipates the fall, then he would have time to take at least a couple steps back, and then dive to the ground to further shorten the fall. I see no reason to make a distinction between this behavior and running back. Jay
Yeah, I probably should have said, I don't see a leader, beginner or otherwise, putting themselves in that position with a n00B belayer. As for the situation you described, I consider that to be much more instinctive than running back, but then again, I was never in that position as a new belayer (thank God).
|
|
|
|
|
chilli
Feb 8, 2008, 1:48 AM
Post #68 of 75
(5385 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2007
Posts: 401
|
rockie wrote: I second that comment: Actually, chilli, it's called the running belay, because the belayer literally runs away from the wall to remove slack from the system.
rockie, please READ earlier posts! i said the same thing a while ago. like i said before to the last person that "corrected" that statement, sorry about the mixup, it's not "running" b/c of runout, it's "running" because the belayer RUNS to avoid having the climber slide on the slab runout. i just am lousy at clear sentence structure. and yes, i am aware AND have used the NC Stone Mountain Running Belay. sorry that sounded a bit like an ass. i would like it though if you would read the followup posts before correcting the same lousy sentence structure as someone else made note of.
great now I'M the one getting my panties in a twist.
i guess i'm going to go work those out of the crack now.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Feb 8, 2008, 2:55 AM
Post #69 of 75
(5377 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
Just to attempt a hijackiing manuver - how many of you are are aware of a much older and quite different use of the phrase "running belay" (used typically in Europe especially Britian in the 40's and 50's)? What do you suppose it meant? How many refer to your slings as "runners"?
|
|
|
|
|
JohnCook
Feb 8, 2008, 3:25 AM
Post #70 of 75
(5372 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2006
Posts: 221
|
It is a term still used in the UK. A running belay (runner) is a piece of protection through which the rope runs. When a belayer runs its called 'trying to stop the leader falling too far or decking' or occasionally 'trying to get out of the way of a falling leader'. A belayer running has been well documented for years in the UK and Europe (Still can't think of the UK as 'Europe'.) Read Joe Brown 'The Hard Years' Don Willans 'Portrait of a Mountaineers' and 'The Villain'. An extreme version is when a party is walking in a narrow snow/rock crest. If one falls the other member of the rope jumps down the other side. Been involved in all three of these scenarios, both as leader and catcher, and they take a lot of instinct suppression.
|
|
|
|
|
rockie
Feb 8, 2008, 4:12 AM
Post #71 of 75
(5366 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2007
Posts: 1130
|
Thank you John Cook for clarifying that point.
We don't class UK as Europe either (I should say; seeing as I originate from the UK). And no we don't want to join the Euro either
And No Chilli I won't do as you say, if you want to change your own meaning that is fine, but I know what I meant, and it is as John Cook correctly implied above.
TC
(This post was edited by rockie on Feb 8, 2008, 5:01 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 8, 2008, 6:42 AM
Post #72 of 75
(5337 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
olderic wrote: Just to attempt a hijackiing manuver - how many of you are are aware of a much older and quite different use of the phrase "running belay"...
I am, and as a consequence, when people use the phrase "running belay" to mean "running belayer" it always rubs me the wrong way.
In a similar vein, contrast what "natural pro" means today with what it meant when people knew what "natural" means.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Feb 8, 2008, 6:46 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 8, 2008, 7:19 PM
Post #73 of 75
(5261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
jt512 wrote: olderic wrote: Just to attempt a hijackiing manuver - how many of you are are aware of a much older and quite different use of the phrase "running belay"... I am, and as a consequence, when people use the phrase "running belay" to mean "running belay er" it always rubs me the wrong way. In a similar vein, contrast what "natural pro" means today with what it meant when people knew what "natural" means. Jay
Uh, trees, horns, threads, chicken-heads etc, right? I only started trad climbing a few years ago, though, so what do I know.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Feb 8, 2008, 7:59 PM
Post #74 of 75
(5252 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
cracklover wrote: Uh, trees, horns, threads, chicken-heads etc, right? I only started trad climbing a few years ago, though, so what do I know. GO
Very good. Chockstones are always a favorite. Quite a step forward (or was it?) when it became acceptable to sling the chock and clip it as opposed to untying the rope (from around your waist), threading it, and retying it. With that breech in ethics the next thing you know people were stick clipping....
|
|
|
|
|
JohnCook
Feb 8, 2008, 11:52 PM
Post #75 of 75
(5237 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2006
Posts: 221
|
Don't forget the working mans protection in the 50's, carrying a pocket full of assorted hard pebbles to jam in a crack. These could then be threaded with a sling which was tied around the rope, these were called 'chockstones'. The rope and the sling were both hemp (until thelate 50's) so melting by friction wasn't a concern, hemp usually broke before it had time to get hot. Carabiners (steel, talk about climbing with a handicap) became cheaply available in the early 50's when the ministry of defence sold off its wartime stock of stuff. They also sold off some nylon ropes, and protection became better, and about the early 50's climbers started to call protection running belays instead of slings. Then machine nuts and later manufactured nuts (early 60's) bacame available. They were called chocks because they replaced chockstones, and only later in the 60's did the word nuts become more commonly used by the younger climbers to mean anything metallic that could be jammed in a crack.
There have been many variants on the theme, eg bicycle cranks stuck in routes, park fences, left over rock drills and bits of railway lines and wooden stemples etc from earlier quarrying operations. This list is endless.
Here endeth the history lesson. I was there for much of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
