For nearly a year, I was of the school that "the shorter the fall, the better" and me and my partner always crouched down when catching a fall. This was fine for less than vertical, easy trad and sport climbs, but as the rock got steeper, and the falls more frequent, we found a huge problem with belaying this way. Falls from less than about 4 feet above a bolt on steep rock resulted in slamming HARD into the rock 5 feet below the bolt.

Hey. Thanks so much for the info. It has help me come to understand a little more about belaying. And yes, i am in that 50% of gym instructors who could carry a conservation!!!!! lol thanks again.

Nice post Travis.
To continue the discussion, it seems to me that the belayer jumping as the leader weighs the rope serves two purposes. One is to reduce the impact forces on the equipments, another is to change the trajectory of the leader from swinging into the rock to a more vertical fall. To be able to reduce the impact forces the belayer must be able to time his jumping precisely, which takes practices and requires the belayer to be at high alert at all times (not to argue that he shouldn't). When the protections are bomber and reducing impact forces are less important, can the belayer just blindly pay out slacks when the leader passes a protection, giving there's no danger of decking? For example after the leader passes a protection, the belayer pays out 4 feet of slacks and keeps the slack as the leader climbs on. If the leader falls at 4 feet above the protection, he'll fall 12 feet which would produce a more vertical trajectory compared to the 8 feet fall would produce without the 4 feet extra slack.
I have too little experience to speak from so this is all in my head. Does this sound reasonable to you guys?

When the protections are bomber and reducing impact forces are less important, can the belayer just blindly pay out slacks when the leader passes a protection, giving there's no danger of decking?

For example after the leader passes a protection, the belayer pays out 4 feet of slacks and keeps the slack as the leader climbs on. If the leader falls at 4 feet above the protection, he'll fall 12 feet which would produce a more vertical trajectory compared to the 8 feet fall would produce without the 4 feet extra slack.

If the pro is a concern then dynamics can be introduced by letting rope slip through the device. But I'm sure you all will think I'm crazy for saying that. peace~

Puma, when using a gri-gri, it is impossible to allow rope to slide through the device to give a dynamic belay...

Gloves are important.

Puma, when using a gri-gri, it is impossible to allow rope to slide through the device to give a dynamic belay..

wrong, all you have to do is hold the cam down with your non break hand.
Not very many people use this technique. I have only seen this used for sport and it allows for an even softer catch than jumping can provide.

This thread sounds like a BS to me. Jumping, running... circus.
I understand there exeptions: x rated climbs, etc but for the rest of us
modern belay devices and ropes have enough dynamic properties already.

Keep it simple, give an extra slack if needed and leave your gri-gri for the gym or top rope.

G

oh yeah - my main partner has this habit he picked up of dropping down when the leader pops, which just ends up slamming me into the rock at or above the nearest bolt. i'll have to show him yer post - thanks for the info !
-t

This thread sounds like a BS to me. Jumping, running... circus.
I understand there exeptions: x rated climbs, etc but for the rest of us
modern belay devices and ropes have enough dynamic properties already.

I can understand using a gri-gri on a long climb (days) when you might become inattentive but look at the numbers.

Puma, when using a gri-gri, it is impossible to allow rope to slide through the device to give a dynamic belay... this is where the jumping comes in. with an atc on the other hand, you can allow rope to slide through the device. imho, it is much better to use an atc on multi-pitch for the reason you described above.
- ike

Would love to see that one tried out in a reality. Doesn't sound too bright. As far as I know, the most common (and very dangerous) error using a grigri is pilot error that somehow prevents the cam on the grigri from engaging. By using the technique you suggest here you set yourself up for such an error. Sounds bloody dangerous. If you're going to let rope slide through a belay device it seems wise not to use a grigri. When using the grigri I do it because of the auto-locking functionality, and I don't try counteracting this function. When trad climbing multipitch my trusted reverso is always with me :wink:

hellclimber

....
The people that use this technique are not the people who would drop you with a grigri. They are the kind of people who skip the last couple bolts and then jump when they get to the anchors for fun and to save time. Merely jumping would not provide a safe catch in this situation. I am not advocating this practice, I merely pointed it out in response to the statement that it is impossible to do.
This technique scares me less than someone letting an atc purposely slip more than a couple of inches. At least with this technique if you let go of the device the falling climber stops whereas if a kink knocks your hand off the rope with an atc, the climber decks.

wrong, all you have to do is hold the cam down with your non break hand.
Not very many people use this technique. I have only seen this used for sport and it allows for an even softer catch than jumping can provide.

Your jumping would add another 1' at most, not that much diff.

Being a good belayer takes practice, experience, and a good attitude.

first of all, this is a great topic! thanks for all the information. i've learned a lot about belaying from climbing with more experienced people, but in retrospect i wish i had known a lot of this stuff when i first started climbing. now i have to admit, i have never jumped as a belayer, and i've belayed my share of leaders falling. this is mostly because i'm light (105 pounds) and always get pulled way up in the air when belaying lead falls. should i change my attitude? i don't think i've climbed with anyone lighter than me before, but maybe i should jump in certain circumstances?? your advice would be appreciated.

This is a great topic, but I want to know how come people think that a Gri-gri leads to a more static belay than an ATC?

To say it again - this has been a great thread.

I had an "idea", which may be dumb - but I'm just creatively thinking here (better to do it in this forum, then in the real world :) ).. But is it possible to use a screamer, or something similiar, between your harness and belay device? So if it's soo hard of a fall, regardless of what piece they are falling on and how far, you have a belay screamer - something to absorb that impact?

I know what you guys are saying. I work at at climbing wall in SC. And our boss only wants us to teach the static belay. But here is a story for you that if I did a dynamic belay the climber would have been seriously hurt. \
I was climbing on Summersville Lake on the 4th of july. My partner was climbing Sold Out. When she got to the last bolt for her draw, the bolt was not there. She is about 50 feet in the air, her last draw is 15 feet below her. And 20 feet off the ground in a huge ledge. So do the math. Anyways she fell. I started running backwards and just dropped to the ground when the rope started to get tight. Yeah she did bang into the mountain and messed up her ankle a little bit. But she stopped three feet from smacking that ledge. Now if just did a dynamic belay it would have been 100 times worse.

The force that it takes to activate a screamer is usually higher than the force it would take to pull a belayer off of the ground.

If I fall, I only want my belayer thinking about one thing, and that one thing is to hold the brake hand side of the rope as tight as friggen hell.

If I fall hard enough to warrant a jump, the belayer is gonna jump whether he likes it or not. If I can't pull him off the ground, it's not a hard fall.

The last thing I want is my belayer dancing around with other things on his mind. Just hold the friggin rope no matter what.

My climbing partner is 60-65lbs lighter than I am. I have JUST begun leading and have yet to fall. I am a bit nervous to find out what will happen when I do. I have lifted her off the ground slightly while falling on top rope, so I am sure falling on lead will drag her upwards in a hurry! Would a dynamic belay on her part be the right thing to do in our case? I understand the physics behind jumping and how it softens my impact, but I also don't want to be able to kiss her as she whips pass me either! Any thoughts??

I guess the point is that, I never considered dynamic belays because I was rarely in a position to need them. I still think I'd be afraid to get a dynamic belay from a noob though. Perhaps that's my faith in the ability of others slipping instead of the rope.

My climbing partner is 60-65lbs lighter than I am. I have JUST begun leading and have yet to fall. I am a bit nervous to find out what will happen when I do. I have lifted her off the ground slightly while falling on top rope, so I am sure falling on lead will drag her upwards in a hurry! Would a dynamic belay on her part be the right thing to do in our case? I understand the physics behind jumping and how it softens my impact, but I also don't want to be able to kiss her as she whips pass me either! Any thoughts??

Since the time this thread started, the Italian study came out which showed that it is the belayer's hand strength which has the greatest influence on peak loads at the top piece of protection. That study showed that loads had already peaked by the time the belayer is lifted. It showed that smaller belayers tended to give softer catches.

hate to bump this, but I read through the entire thread and I'm curious--does leaving extra slack out have the same effect as jumping as the rope becomes weighted? Or does it just lengthen the fall?

I was taught to give little slack near the ground (first or second bolt outside, third in the gym cos they're closer together) because the risk of decking is pretty high. But higher up I was taught to leave more slack out.

Recently when leading in the gym I caught a fall and my friend smacked his foot into the wall. I felt pretty bad and I think it's because I didn't give a dynamic enough belay. However last winter when we led in the gym frequently, this never happened--I'd always get sucked up about three feet and he never tapped the wall. Maybe I got fatter?

The advice you heard is generally good, but it should always be applied to the specific situation. For instance, if they are right over a roof, you want to have enough slack out so that they don't hit the lip. If they're high on an extremely steep route, but are working the route, you may want to give them a slightly tighter belay than usual so that they don't fall out of reach of the rock/wall. But that is pretty generally good practice (close to the ground = less slack, higher up=more slack).

In the situation where your partner hit the wall hard, were you using the same belay device as in the past?

Was this route more circuitous, because the more the rope bends between you and the climber, the more friction, and the less you'll be pulled up during a fall.

hate to bump this, but I read through the entire thread and I'm curious--does leaving extra slack out have the same effect as jumping as the rope becomes weighted? Or does it just lengthen the fall?

Given that I am talking about sport climbing, I don't really care about the impact force so much as the potentially for smacking the wall. For a discussion of belaying a trad leader it would probably be important to consider, though.

I've found that weighing 100 lbs is a surefire way to give a dynamic catch every time.

Interestingly, I just scrapped some numbers on a piece of paper and I got to the (possibly wrong) conclusion that leaving some slack will actually increase the impact factor of the fall. The only exception is when trying to avoid a factor 2 on multipitch routes.
Please, let me know if I'm wrong:

Being y the distance from the belayer to the last piece of protection and x the distance of the climber above the last protection:

FF1 = 2x / (x+y)

Now if we add some slack (s):

FF2 = (2x + s) / (x+y+s)

FF2 > FF1 except when 2x > x+y (which would be decking on a single pitch climb).

...Secondly, on a multipitch route, I commonly tie in using the rope and will give myself a few feet of slack so I can move around comfortably at the anchor. This provides flexibility for me to provide a dynamic belay most of the time (all dependent upon having the right anchor configuration, and as was stated before, you have to do what is right for the situation). This necessitates that you think very carefully about placing those first pieces of pro because a fall on anchor would yank the belayer down a few feet...

--I'd always get sucked up about three feet and he never tapped the wall. Maybe I got fatter?

why the preference for hopping around to provide dynamic belay?

Grigri lockup fears mostly.

Grigri lockup fears mostly.

DMT

Dingus, you have a lot of good points, but I don't agree with you on GriGri( I know you don't like them) If you feel better with ATC, then that's what you should use.....anyways, I don't think it's a grigri lockup. The idea is that you jump( not like a dyno jump, just a hop) when your partner is starting to put tension on the rope. If done correctly you act as almost a counter balance softening the catch. Correct me if I'm wrong......

Sounds right to me, cept for my alleged grigri-hate. Don't hate em at all and use one quite frequently.

I don't dispute the effect you describe. I still think the jumping thing became accepted because of grigris and feeding issues.

Cheers dude!

this (multipitch), in my opinion, is the perfect case in which i try to avoid the whole jumping bit, because i find the quick pay of some slack as the leader falls to be just as (and actually more) effective, and much safer. i've used it a few times and it's done a stellar job. why the preference for hopping around to provide dynamic belay? or have i misinterpreted your statement?

I'm 150 lbs, so unless the fall is near the protection piece I'm always pulled up. I've never tried paying out slack during a fall, that seems like a complex task, especially since you don't always know a fall is coming (if the climber is out of view). I'm not confident that I could rely on such a technique.

What I wonder is how different a gri-gri is vs. an ATC in such a case (where the belayer acts as a counter weight).

Hmm, does anyone know a cheap way to calculate loads? I have a rope I'm about ready to retire and I'd be intrigued enough to try this out myself if I could find a way to calculate the impact forces.

...I've never tried paying out slack during a fall, that seems like a complex task, especially since you don't always know a fall is coming (if the climber is out of view). I'm not confident that I could rely on such a technique.

I've hear rumors of your version of a running belay and I'll credit the occasional application as being a much better solution than taking a 100' whipper. However (and perhaps I'm incorrect), where I'm from the term running belay is used interchangeably with the term simul-climbing. The technique in which both partners climb simultaniously on a shortened length of rope, in order to decrease the amount of time spent building anchors on long routes.

A
fall on static rope with little elongation and a fixed anchor point will generate much higher impact forces
than a fall on dynamic rope using a running belay.
http://www.sterlingrope.com/...ument/techmanual.pdf

sterling rope uses running belay as to mean dynamic belay .... as does the UIAA

good enuff for me .... though maybe not for RCers

i always took running belays to mean one where the bottom climber wa unanchored ... whether simuling or not ...

in this UIAA document ... i doubt that that running belay simply means top piece as we have ... stance vs. running belay



edit ... i should clarify my running=dynamic belay ... what i should have said is an unachored belay and thus possibly dynamic ... bleh

not that it really matters except to RC folks ... its not like were dealing with stuff like "lower", "on/off belay", "climb on" ... which can have real consequences if your screw up the terminology

if i need what some people may call a "running belay" ... i tell my belayer in no uncertain terms to "run the fcuk back" should i fall

No, you seem to just misunderstand the phrase. Without seeing the context from which you drew that figure I can't be sure, but it seems pretty clear that the column on the left is what you might consider an "anchor", and the column on the right is a piece placed by a leader as part of the protection system while on lead. AKA, a "running belay".

And yes of course it matters in real life. IRL I read things and learn from them, and I communicate with others, sometimes using complex terms. If I misunderstand what I read, does that not impact my understanding? Or if I myself understand, but I communicate poorly, does that not lead others to misunderstand?

"Running belay" is a term that means different things in different contexts. The OP did a great job at using it appropriately. No need to mess things up.

GO