...Curt's response clearly wasn't addressing that portion of your statement, go back and look at what he bolded

Oh I know exactly what he bolded. He stopped bolding right before the part where I pointed out the possible effects of taking too much time on an alpine route. Read the next paragraph past what Curt bolded. I understand his problem comprehending what I said -- when you have put yourself up on a pedestal that tall, the clouds make it hard to read fine details.

Curt is just being myopic, he's all caught up in the fact that there is a risk to multitasking, and ignoring the larger picture. An alpine climbing team (try to keep up here Curt, alpine climbing is the context of everything I've said in this thread) is simultaneously being exposed to several risks that are far greater in magnitude than the risk of momentarily taking your hands off an autoblock. Reducing your exposure time to those larger risks has to be among your prime concerns.

If autoblock failures were common, Curt would have more of an argument, but it just ain't so. Accidents/deaths related to rockfall, icefall, nightfall, hypothermia, etc., are not rare at all -- the literature is full of them. The literature is not full of autoblock failures, despite a great volume of use all over the world.

Am I willing to inflict the small risk of hands-off autoblocking on myself, and my two best friends, in exchange for even a few minutes less exposure to rock fall, icefall, frostbite, etc?

Hell yes I am. I will make that choice every time. Anyone who wouldn't do the same for me doesn't truly understand the context.

explain again how rock fall, icefall or frostbite are related to hands free belaying again?

You keep bringing up the example of a three person team but if time really is a big safety consideration, you probably shouldn't be climbing in a team of three anyway. You want real time savings, dump a person.

...And thats all Curt said. HE does not want HIS belayers playing that game. Thats HIS call. Just like it is YOUR call to do the opposite.

Thats the beauty of climbing. We get to make up and play by our own rules and we are entirely responsible for the consequences.

You keep bringing up the example of a three person team but if time really is a big safety consideration, you probably shouldn't be climbing in a team of three anyway. You want real time savings, dump a person.

Curt is free to snip parts of what I write, and criticise them out of their stated context -- just as I am free to point out the fallacy of him doing so.

You're a real crack-up...or insane.

I have never taken you out of context even once, while "redlude97," "notapplicable" and I have all pointed out where you have taken my comments in this thread out of context. Talk about psychological projection...

Of course, since you're attempting to defend a basically indefensible practice, that really is about all you've got.

Carefully read through my last response to redlune97. If you can be honest with yourself, and get past your prideful need to defend the position you have taken, you can clearly see that I have defended the practice of hands off autoblocking (within the stated context). I even clearly show how that seemingly risky practice can be put to good use to reduce the overall risk for the team...

As usual for RC, you have both taken stances so far opposite each other it's like watching Congress. The answer lies in the middle.

Sandstone, there is no reason to take your hands fully off the rope. You can easily dig in a pack with your index finger and thumb while holding the brake side across your palm with the other fingers engaged, particularly if you pack correctly and have essentials in an outside pocket or on top.

Curt, what alpine routes/experience do you have specifically?

...Sandstone, there is no reason to take your hands fully off the rope. You can easily dig in a pack with your index finger and thumb while holding the brake side across your palm with the other fingers engaged, particularly if you pack correctly and have essentials in an outside pocket or on top.

... I simply don't buy your arguments...

Sure.

In some contexts, like rock climbing on relatively short routes on long summer days, time/speed is not one of your paramount concerns. Efficiency is great, but inefficiency is unlikely to cause you great bodily harm.

In the context of a long alpine climb, especially on short winter days, time/speed is one of your paramount concerns. The longer you are on a pitch, the longer you are exposed to the rockfall, icefall, and avalanche dangers that pitch may hold.

If you run out of daylight, and can't find your descent route, or go down the wrong way in the dark, you may find yourself on avalanche prone slopes, or be forced into a bivvy in winter conditions. That can cause you to lose toes, or kill you.

So a big part of the alpine game is speed. Anything you can do to save time reduces your exposure to your greatest risks. Accepting a risk that has proven to be very small, in exchange for reducing multiple larger risks, is a very good call.

Let's say that by multitasking (going hands free to hydrate, snack, adjust layers, etc.) while belaying up my seconds I can shave off 30 minutes of time during the day. Can that 30 minutes make the difference in whether or not we have enough light left to find our "safe" descent route? Absolutely it can.

On one climb I topped out in failing light, with heavy snow falling from an intensifying storm (despite a forecast and earlier observations that said otherwise). Going back down the way we came up was not an option due to the snow loading on the slopes above that funneled into our route. I yelled down to just leave the pro and get up the pitch as fast as possible. The few extra minutes of light was far more valuable than a few hundred bucks worth of gear. It was the right call, we found our "safe" descent route just as the light failed, and made it down through the storm without injury.

My original post was in response to Jay's statement that there was no good reason to belay in autoblock mode. I agree with him 100% for some contexts, but added that there exists a context where his statement does not hold true.

Curt piped in with his usual snarky snippets, and tried to slam me by pulling part of what I wrote out of its context. But he was wrong in doing so, I clearly stated my context in my original post. Or maybe Curt just didn't grasp what winter alpine climbing means, and the complex nature of risk management in that context -- despite his quickness to judge those who do.

This statement here invalidates anything else you have to say on the subject.

3-person "block" leading has been a staple of hard alpine climbing for so long that I have a decade-old book that supports this very practice, written by the foremost practitioner of the art during the 90s. Try again.

I will take your word on that one. I have no alpine experience. While I've never seen a team of three move faster than a team of two on the rock, there are probably other considerations in the alpine environment that make it advantageous.

I was mostly responding to address question of acceptable levels of risk and informed consent within the team. I should have confined my comments to that.

Out of curiosity though, is one of the advantages of that style an overall increase speed?

Yet you offer nothing in response other than insults, bad assumptions, and worn out cliches.

I had hopes of a spirited and substantial debate, Moose had high hopes for you too. I don't know what he's feeling, but my disappointment has to be something like what my dog feels when he gets done with one of those plush toy squirrels I buy for him.

The thing puts up a pretty good bluff on the outside, but once you get past that there's only fluff.

Its one thing to say that that in certain situations you do the best you can to choose which risks to take and weigh and balance those decisions, it is another to say that taking your hands of the brake strands is not putting your seconds in danger, which you stated.

Like I said previously, it may be a small risk, but it is one that is known to potentially occur, and shouldn't be swept under the rug.

You seem to be taking sentences of what I have written and criticising them in isolation, ignoring their carefully stated context. You are free to do so, but I am free to keep pointing you back to the context of those sentences.

What I'm saying doesn't make sense in other contexts. I don't think autoblocking should be used at all in most types of climbing.

The context of my comments is a very narrow slice within the wide array of types of climbing that exist. If you don't understand that context, and have a desire to, I recommend that you at least read some of the classic books on the subject (including the one petsfed alluded to).


Nothing is being swept under the rug. My original point was that on long alpine climbs, especially on short winter days, speed=safety. Literally. Assumptions you have made in other contexts may need to be re-evaluated.

If my team accepts the minimal risk of hands free autoblocking to reduce the time exposed to multiple dangers which are far greater in scale, then we have made a very good trade. The overall risk to the team goes down.