|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 16, 2004, 6:57 PM
Post #1 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Perspective, from my point of view; in the twenty years that I have been climbing and among the people I have met, I don't know of anyone with serious injuries from rock fall caused by another climber.(ice is different) I do know someone that was killed by lightning, one guy died from an unfinished knot, another guy was killed by a serac falling on him. One guy died in a storm on K2. One guy died in an adventure route fall most likely caused by the rottenness of the route.
One person was killed by pulling off a rock and having it land on him. And, he was bouldering at the time. (It seems doubtful that a helmet would have made a difference, the rock took out the side of his neck.) The only other major rock fall death at a cragging area that I can recall hearing about was a guy knocking a plate down on his girlfriend and taking her arm off.)
For most of these and for most people, all of these are highly unusual events. With the exception of maybe lightning, all of these things are, or should be, on par with winning the lottery. Qualifier: This is for someone that follows the basic rules. i.e. someone that avoids being on top of a mountain in a thunderstorm. Someone, that doesn't let other people drop rocks on their head. (particularly their climbing partners)
Re: the comparison between helmets and seatbelts. Wearing a seatbelt is equivalent to buying half of all the tickets. Wearing a helmet is more like buying ten tickets instead of one. (These seem like reasonable ballpark estimates, anyone want to take a shot at punching real numbers?.)
As far as falling and hitting your head on a rock? I have taken, belayed, or witnessed something on the order of 10,000 to 20,000 falls. Couple broken ankles and a bunch of dropped climbers sums up the injury tally. No concussions, no scalp injuries, maybe someone chipped a tooth. Never any helmets. The key was not falling in such a way as to hit your head. People seem to think that isn't possible. Practice shows that it is.
As far as I can tell from anam and other sources, head injuries seem to be much more common in the mountains, and not just because of loose rock. The larger cause seems to be long tumbling falls. (mostly based on stories from various climbers that have taken falls in the mountains. They pretty much all got hurt.)
Lately, I have been seeing helmets ding into the rocks and ground, all to many times. (one of the major reasons why I question why people are doing what they are doing)
On the basis of that analysis, I am pretty confident that in most situations, a helmet actually provides very little additional protection as long as you play by the rules. Climbing partners, route selection, decisions to climb underneath another party, difficulty level relative to ability. Whether you have to learn, not to let the rope behind your leg, the hard way? Just about everything is going to have a much greater (on the order of a 1000 to 1 ?) effect (?) on your safety.
=-=-=-=-
My biggest problem with the modern helmet crowd is that in practice, and among other things, it has replaced the DO NOT CLIMB UNDERNEATH OTHER PEOPLE rule. Lets see, which makes more sense? Wear a helmet in an effort to protect yourself from people dropping things on you or don't climb underneath the people in the first place?
So the newbie crowd has discarded the idea of not falling on easy routes. Discarded the rule of not climbing under other people. Discarded the idea of learning how to follow before they start leading. Decided that dropping a rock on their partner, it isn't their fault. After all of that, they go out and buy a helmet and talk about how much safer they are because of it, and how anybody who doesn't wear a helmet must be stupid.
The hypocrisy that I see from the group as a whole, gets old. Particularly when reading these "I wear a helmet threads."
=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=
I wear a helmet in the mountains, (unless it's a ridge traverse) aid climbing, and rope solo. I have never had a climbing partner pull a gumbie could of killed me stunt with rock fall. When climbing in loose terrain, my climbing partners place gear in such a way that the rope doesn't knock anything down. They test hold before they pull on them and then they make sure pull less hard then anyone else. In the rare event that a hold does break off, they either hold on to it or they toss it in a safe direction. If it is too big to do the above, they will not pull it off in the first place.
Here is a clue, when there is a large chalk X drawn on a rock. Sometimes it means, here is a big jug, other times it means, do not touch. It is almost always easy to tell the difference. If you look for it. Not surprisingly, some people fail to notice that distinction.
Let's take Tahquitz and Suicide for example. The increase in rock fall hazard is way out of proportion to the increase in climber traffic. It was getting crowded on weekends 15 years ago. There wasn't the same rock fall madness that there is today. If anything, it was more common to come close to getting hit by a figure eight. (The sound of a figure eight pinging down the weeping wall is something I will never forget)
There was a definite correlation between the increase in the use of helmets and the increase in the need to wear a helmet. People seem to be getting the helmet message pretty good. On the other hand, they do not seem to be getting the message that it is possible to climb without sending every other rock down the cliff. From what I have seen people are getting worse at this every year and the rocks that they are sending down are getting larger as well.
I will not climb there on weekends anymore because I consider it an unreasonable and unnecessary risk. I climbed there for years without a helmet, I will still climb there mid-week without a helmet. The only rock fall that has ever hit me was small stuff from sudden thunder showers. If your of the opinion that wearing a helmet compensates for that additional risk, then I would have to say that you are deluding yourself.
Tahquitz was originally noted for having exceptionally nice and clean lines. Isn't it funny how things change over time. Anyone think that it is Tahquitz that has changed?
Bold and fearless is good to a degree. Getting killed by letting a gumby drop a rock on your head is stupid.
The main hazard that I use a helmet for is naturally occurring rock fall. That is in quite a contrast the reports on this site, which seem to be almost all climber caused.
The old school way of things largely negated the need for a helmet in order to protect yourself from rock fall. (with the exception of natural rock and ice fall, typically in the mountains or on a wall.)
I know a number of thirty year climbers that are so bold and seemingly reckless (one biner belays, running out pitches, not placing gear for the second.) that I tend not to climb with them. Unless, I am feeling particularly adventurous... Anyway, these guys will pretty much NEVER climb underneath another party. Sorry, but even with all their crazy antics, these guys are still probably safer than most of the conservative newbies.
I have seen a connection between wearing a helmet and taking lead falls. (particularly on 5.9's and under) The helmet crowd tends to forgo the idea of climbing within your limits. (Is anyone going to deny that the modern crew falls more often. Is anyone going to claim that is because falls are safe now?)
I have also seen a correlation between wearing a helmet and letting the rope get behind your leg, and between helmets and taking stupid unsafe falls on the first two bolts of a sport climbs! People start leading earlier and with less experience and skill then was the case in the old days. Anyone want to make a case that this has improved safety.
For myself, I climb on choss all the time. I just make sure that it is steep enough that I am not going to drop anything on my belayer. Maple and the Potrero are great examples. Climb the steeper stuff and you are fine without a helmet. Climb the easier lower angle stuff and you are not fine even with a helmet.
The bottom line is that I have seen a higher percentage of people with helmets doing stupid things specifically related to the supposed protection a helmet offers. And these are the same people that supposedly have a higher standard of safety. That is just wrong. You use a helmet safely and I am fine with it. Safety devices are great as long as they don't make you more unsafe.
Some of my favorite posts from the helmet debate:
In reply to: one good reason to wear a helmet-- it helps you climb harder. You can worry about the consequences of a fall less and that lets you commit more.
In reply to: I recently had a party climb right up under the second on a climb I was guiding. When I cautioned the lower party that climbing that close was dangerous if we were to dislodge something they proudly stated: That's why I'm wearing this helmet.
In reply to: Um... this is why you always ought to wear a helmet. I helmet is better protection against falling stuff than the belayer trying to move out of the way….
In reply to: Apparently, helmets don't look cool - so people take them off for the mag photos, or some junk. Personally, I think it's extremely irresponsible for climbing mags to have pictures of people without helmets, climbing, in their mags. Sets the wrong image.
Response: This comes up quite a lot. What person would really decide a safety equipment decision on the basis of how it looks??? Most people that make the mags have been climbing for a long time. Most people that have been climbing for a long time have come to realize the sometimes a helmet offers additional safety and other times it doesn't.
There was an accident involving rockfall at (snip). A climber was leaning over tying his shoes up when a rock came down and struck him in the back of the head. He was not wearing his helmet at the time.
Response: They tried to emphasize the benefits of a helmet on the basis of this thread. He apparently didn't(and doesn't?) have a clue that it might not be a good idea to hang out directly underneath people climbing.
In reply to: Exactly. I've seen someone take a 30 footer into the ground, and after his initial collapse, he went head first into a rock. The front of his helmet was dented in. It would have def. sucked if he wasn't wearing a helmet.
Response: He's been climbing for a year and he has already seen a once in a lifetime fall.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Some paraphrases
You should wear a helmet because I put cams behind loose blocks and then fall on them.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It is a good thing that I wear a helmet, because I have been hit in the head by large rocks twice in my first six months of climbing. (ps. my wife got hit as well.(in the head))
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It is the ropes fault that it knocked a rock down on me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It is not my climbing partners fault that he knocked off/pulled off/ placed gear in/ etc., loose rock which then proceeded to hit me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The rock just broke.
Response
I have news for you, the rock just breaking is even rarer then natural rock fall. If you yard a hold off a route it is often due to the fact that you are the weakest and/or the dumbest person that has ever climbed that route. The large majority of the time, a broken hold is due to pulling in the wrong way on the wrong hold. Neither sport climbing or bouldering have been able to remove the need to be careful how you pull on things. Many newbie climbers seem to think that you should be able to pull any which way on anything, in fact they go out of their way to pull on things in some misguided effort to clean the route.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Instances of rock fall just happening are extremely rare and highly predictable. They are largely associated with recent large scale activity, and then maybe storm/rain related. (tends to be small stuff) Sun hit and snow and ice can be another major cause.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The whole climbing industry is built around, "buy my stuff and you will be a safer climber." The marketing guru's seem to have people figured out pretty well. Too bad their bottom line is making money selling gizmos to people instead of actually encouraging safe behavior.
The climbing industry has to deal with safety issues in terms of generalizations and compromises. (safety wise and in terms of making money) People that base their safety decisions on generalizations scare me. The consequences of being unsafe is a very personal thing and safety decisions should be made in that light.
People often climb underneath other people now. The climbing industry seems not see that as a problem, they like crowds and the fact that it gives them a good scenario to sell helmets. It is not in their best interest to emphasize that it is unsafe to climb underneath other people, it is in their interest to say buy this and it will make your unsafe decisions safer... (of course they would never phrase it that way)
Another bottom line is that people would actually be safer if they used a helmet in addition to the old guidelines instead of as a misguided and failed attempt at replacing them.
If you're wearing a helmet, and you get hit in the head by a rock. Seems like most people on this site would say "good thing I bought a helmet." If someone was really interested in staying alive, their response would be more on the lines of "O>K> dumbass, what did I do wrong that led to my getting hit on the head with a rock?"
I pretty much consider it a fact that as a group, disregarding other factors, people that wear helmets do tend to be more accident prone.
I will also say this. Just because someone plays at being a safety nazi doesn't guarantee that they are safe climbers.
None of this should be taken as encouraging anyone not to wear a helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
studuk2000
Dec 16, 2004, 7:33 PM
Post #2 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 17, 2004
Posts: 38
|
Hey,
i like the slant you have taken on the whole helmet wearing angle. i have always approached any climb with some common sense, i.e. if i pull on this will it come away in my hand. the same goes for belaying, why stand where you can get hit should they dislodge rock or drop gear, but even so you have a much better chance of avoiding any falling object if you are watching.
saying this i would always wear a helmet when climbing just incase i do win the lottery and get a rock fall on my head.
my once case of having something coming down past me was actaully a person jumping off the top of the small cliff that i was climbing, it was over the deep water so they were topping themselves! luckily i was climbing an overhanging section of the rock at that point so was well clear of the falling body, but it was still too close for comfort. the people jumping off did get more than an earful when i got to the top. when asked why they didnt look down the face before jumping off the answer was "i didnt think there would be anybody there"
|
|
|
|
|
une
Dec 16, 2004, 7:42 PM
Post #3 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2004
Posts: 55
|
Interesting theory, to a degree I agree with you. Owning or opperating a device that claims a high level of safty can and usually does lead to carelessness. When I first got my drivers licence my mother owned a Volvo. That car was a tank. I was so sure that neither myself or any passengers would get hurt in an accident that I drove like an idiot.
Had my family not owned a "safe" car I would probably have been a bit more carefull when driving. Then again I was young and stupid then. Ahh, the good 'ol days.
To get back to the point, a helmet can lead to thinking you are safe when you are not. But, this in no way should be blamed on the helmet.
I guess we (refering to newbies) all need to reaquaint ourselves with proper safty procedures from time to time. Oh yeah, and don't forget your helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
dawnawanna
Dec 16, 2004, 7:45 PM
Post #4 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2004
Posts: 77
|
I recall a similar argument a couple of months ago on RC.com
To me the argument sounds like, "People who wear a seatbelt don't drive as safe." I understand the argument... But why not wear a helmet AND practice good, safe climbing principles? It just seems silly to not wear a helmet because some people do dumb things while wearing a helmet.
I do agree that your judgement will most likely make the biggest difference in keeping you safe, but why not add a helmet?
This summer Boise saw a belayer die in a rockfall accident. It does happen, even in popular climbing areas. Perhaps a helmet would have helped.
Dawn
|
|
|
|
|
cactusjack
Dec 16, 2004, 7:57 PM
Post #5 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 27, 2004
Posts: 62
|
MMMM, I work with the rehab of tramatic brain injuries using robotics: So I see a lot of the aftermath of what a blow to the head can do or a stroke.
I climb TR, oooh, relatively safe an no long wipper falls. But rocks still fall from the top, caused by god knows what that I can't control. Last week 3 freakin rocks at Point Dume the size of my fist or bigger fall, from some lame people at the top, who took the back way in, so we didn't know they were up there untill sh## comes flying down. One skinned my neck a little, ohh helmet didn't protect that one.
Point being, if stuff can fall on you wear a helmet. I can recover from a shattered collar bone to some degree or other scratches and what not, but getting turned into a vegtable is a permanent condition. If something bigger falls and kills me, then I'm dead and happy, but tramatic brain injury sucks.
But your right too many people take on the superman mentality just because they wear a helmet, and that puts everyone around them at risk.
|
|
|
|
|
lostdog
Dec 16, 2004, 7:57 PM
Post #6 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 112
|
glad to see some real input from an experienced climber, you did an excellent job putting things into perspective. i personally do not wear a helmet, but for no other reason than it makes me uncomfortable. but i also adhear to to some strict personal guidelines, namely, "As long as i don't F*** up, the only thing thats gonna get me is something outta my control, & even that is limited."---climb on...
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Dec 16, 2004, 8:05 PM
Post #7 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
I agree wholeheartedly with your angle. People tend to forget that your most important safety equipment is what you are trying to protect with a helmet.
It is important to realize, though, that you will indeed be safer WITH a helmet, PROVIDING, that you have taken every step possible not to put yourself in a position where a head injury is possible. Then, and only then, will a helmet serve the purpose it was designed for; protecting you from natural rock fall.
As a habit, I always wear mine when trad climbing but never when sport. This is not because I have deemed that trad is dangerous and sport is not. It is because i have thought about it and have decided that there are more variables in trad and I want to take that step to be a little safer. I still, whether climbing trad or sport, am aware of the situation and always base my decisions (what/where/when to climb) on safety. Sometimes I take addtional risks, but i am always aware of them.
A helmet can never replace your better judgement. Don't let the purchase of that new brainbucket take away the need for the knowledge and the awareness that should be a prerequisite for climbing.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
slavetogravity
Dec 16, 2004, 8:12 PM
Post #8 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 1114
|
In the two instances that have resulted in me being clocked in the head by falling rock where not addressed in the earlier rant. Given the level of detail in the argument I’m surprised it wasn’t addressed.
While rappeling off multi pitch climbs YOUR rope dislodges loose rock and sends in down on top of you.
Given the nature of most rappel routes, it’s impossible to avoid being directly in the path of your falling rope and any rock it decides to bring down with it. I can understand that this could be an over site buy anyone who is used to walking off the top their routes or is used to climbing on very solid rock. I could think of a couple of popular rappel routes in the Bugaboos and Canadian Rockies that are a virtual shooting galleries. Where loose rock “pinging” off your helmet EVERY time you pull your rope is just par for the course. Sure most of the falling rock is pebble size. But there’s nothing like the sound of a softball size rock flying past your head at terminal velocity to make you glad you chose to wear your helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
cactusjack
Dec 16, 2004, 8:23 PM
Post #9 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 27, 2004
Posts: 62
|
Ok, one last thing. This is my Rant!
I keep hearing "I wear a helmet for trad but not for sport." Let me tell you that arguement is like saying I wear a condom for missionary but not for doggy style....here's a hint its still sex. Same with climbing: Aid, Trad, Sport, TR. If something can fall and hit you in the head, it doesn't care if you were sport climbing. My little story about pt dume last weekend, I forgot to mention the other guys with us were climbing the arrete sport style, and Sh## fell on them too!
Only been climbing for 8 yrs, but I've seen enough head injuries from all sports and life to know life doesn't care, so protect your head.
|
|
|
|
|
stevsop
Dec 16, 2004, 8:28 PM
Post #10 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 24
|
Please allow me to papaphrase some of your main points:
1. People who wear helmets climb recklesslly as a result.
Do you play with matches on your carpet because "That's what fire departments are for"? Niether do I. If you do, you won't be climbing for long.
2. When rockfalls occur, it's almost always human error (cam behind loose rock, etc.) And I never make mistakes while climbing, so I souldn't have to wear a helmet.
Murphy's law is just waiting to accellerate towards your unprotected scalp at 9.8 m/s. Mistakes happen. Especially when people are tired, hungry, dehydrated, exhausted, i.e. climbing.
3. Helmets are foisted upon innocent climbers by greedy gear companies.
C'mon. Do you really believe this? Check the ratio of helmet ads to ads with unhelmeted climbers in the latest issue of Climbing.
4. I shouldn't have to wear a helmet since dangerous conditions are the fault of inexperienced climbers.
This just in, ladies and gentlemen: CLIMBING HUGE CLIFFS IS DANGEROUS. Regardless, new climbers are a reality, and perhaps a safety issue, but blaming all head injuries on them is a little silly.
I don't care if YOU wear a helmet or not (as long as you're not belaying me), but you logic is severely flawed and demonstrates a dangerous attitude towards safety, that is "I'm an old grizzled veteran, and I know how to climb (place gear, take a fall, manage rope,) safely, so nothing bad will happen to me. Furthermore, anyone who lacks my experience is reckless and shouldn't be allowed in my favorite crags."
Fundamental Attribution Error: Humans tend to blame the actions of others on personality flaws while we claim our own actions are dictated by the situation we are placed in.
|
|
|
|
|
adamd
Dec 16, 2004, 8:30 PM
Post #11 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 27, 2004
Posts: 62
|
In reply to: I pretty much consider it a fact that as a group, disregarding other factors, people that wear helmets do tend to be more accident prone.
I can't follow you on that thought but I do agree with you that some climbers rely on helmets to protect them when they should be thinking about the bigger picture.
I've been noticing more climber induced rockfall lately as well. This fall in the Gunks one weekend (canadian thanksgiving with lots of french speaking visitors...) was particularly bad, but should I extrapolate from this that Quebecois are more likely to drop rocks than NYC climbers? Nope....and not many of them were wearing helmets either.
A mantra from tying into ropes with students...don't forget that they're trying to kill themselves and take you with them. It's not a bad idea to treat anyone climbing above this way.
Like with any other safety systems in climbing, helmets can be appropriate or superfluous, provide a margin of safety or a false sense of security...
I agree with you about learning how to fall (I've never taken an upside down lead fall) and most helmets (maybe the petzl meteor is an exception) don't seem to provide much protection in upside down falls.
How do you think this relates to guided/organized groups that have policies that mandate helmet use? At a popular TR crag with seemingly zero loose rock (obviously some areas are cleaner than others) it seems that these students who are forced to wear helmets might learn some bad habits...always wear a helmet, but don't take any other rockfall precautions or even think about the danger. Seems like these groups would be better served by discussing the dangers (in this low risk tr crag environment) and having to make a personal choice. Alas the insurance companies and our cultural fear of litigation strike again and we slide closer towards the illusion of freedom from harm.
|
|
|
|
|
d.ben
Deleted
Dec 16, 2004, 8:35 PM
Post #12 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
"If you yard a hold off a route it is often due to the fact that you are the weakest and/or the dumbest person that has ever climbed that route."
*You could also be the person to climb a route right after the dumbest person to ever climb that route, but they just got lucky.
|
|
|
|
|
boltdude
Dec 16, 2004, 8:37 PM
Post #13 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 685
|
Interesting rant, there are elements of truth in there. Especially climbing under other parties - I just go elsewhere (yeah, not everyone has the luxury).
Still, let's assume helmets for climbing had never been invented and no one wore them, ever.
Would the current situation that you're ranting against be any different?
I'd say helmets have far less to do with it, and lack of mountaineering & trad climbing background has much more to do with it. People pulling on blocks that anyone with a solid background would know to stem around, casual attitude towards falling (good on overhung sport, very bad on most lower grade sport and trad), lack of awareness of placing pro behind loose stuff, etc.
I know a few folks who are way solid climbers who pretty much always wear a helmet. They are outnumbered by young hotshots who don't and old-school guys who don't, but certainly don't fit your "helmet crowd" generalization.
Anyway, the best point folks should take from your long post is simple: newer climbers should learn not to touch/dislodge stuff that looks suspicious, and to use directionals to keep the rope from doing the same.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 16, 2004, 8:42 PM
Post #14 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Re: Pulling rappel ropes.
My observation is that most people that get hit by rocks from pulling ropes, could have easily prevented it from happening if they had been more aware of the problem before the rock hit them.
With care and foresight, it is often possible to rap and pull with a minimum of rock fall. This is probably less tricky then leading that same terrain without dislodging anything.
Sometimes it's a crapshoot no matter what you do. Consider using your pack as a shield.
I religiously avoid rappelling with loose rock around. For that matter, over the years, I have tended to avoid anyplace with a reputation for loose rock.
Climbing on loose rock is an art.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 16, 2004, 8:43 PM
Post #15 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I've been climbing for thirty years and wouldn't even entertain the idea of helmets until about 10 years ago when a young friend (29) from Utah who was a very gifted and experienced climber took a 10' lead fall on a slightly overhanging route and banged the side of his head. He ended up with permanent brain damage, essentially lost use of the right side of his body head to toe, lost much of his ability to communicate, and no longer lives independently.
Beyond this I've been mostly climbing at Beacon Rock and in this past year alone have been clocked twice by loose rock. I also have a wife and child these days and just can't justify the possibility of being disabled or dying as a result of a preventable injury.
All that said, I still don't like wearing a helmet, though the Petzl Erin Roc is about as easy to use and comfortable as they get. Occasionally, though, I don't wear it if I'm 100% sure the route I'm on, know has no loose rock, and neither myself nor anyone above can dump rock down on purpose (tourons) or by accident.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Dec 16, 2004, 8:45 PM
Post #16 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
This reminds me of Echo Dome - the most "sportily" bolted area in the Wichita Mt's of OK - where most of the holds are on a top layer that has broken away in many places, and is hollow underneath (hence the "Echo") -
it's good training for not breaking holds, and both OK guidebooks as well as the RDB emphasize "PULL DOWN, NOT OUT!!!!!!"
It's also convenient that the belay for these climbs (it's a one-pitch wall) is protected in that it's set back from the wall behind a shorter, intermediate wall (hard to describe but it also shields from the frequently heavy gusts of wind)
Thanks for the good reminder -
|
|
|
|
|
cgailey
Dec 16, 2004, 8:47 PM
Post #17 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 585
|
I agree with you. I'm still gonna wear my helmet in most cases however.
|
|
|
|
|
scrappydoo
Dec 16, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #18 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Posts: 139
|
In reply to: Fundamental Attribution Error: Humans tend to blame the actions of others on personality flaws while we claim our own actions are dictated by the situation we are placed in.
Nice post, stevesop.
While I do agree that newby climbers are more reckless and less aware of the dangers (so, not taking adequate safety precautions), this is only incidentally linked to helmet-wearing.
The incidental linkage between unsafe climbing practices and helmet wearing, is that newbies are typically younger and have been raised with "wear a helmet" messages from childhood. A lot of these newbies also don't have the time/knowledge/ experience climbing before they start leading. Probably as a result of climbings popularity and its huge growth, there's no longer enough grizzled old timers for these new folks to apprentice with. So, new climbers (wearing helmets in greater numbers than seasoned climbers) are less aware and safe than people who have been climbing longer. No new news there.
However, the original argument presented is flawed, a false dichotomy. the reasoning is "the act of wearing a helmet renders a person incapable of being aware of, and taking steps towards averting, dangers"-- i.e. you can't wear a helmet AND be a safe climber at the same time. This, obviously, is patently false.
If the original poster wore a helmet, would it make him LESS safe, as he implies that it does to everyone else? No. It is an ADDITIONAL safety measure. Some people do use helmets as replacements for sound judgement, but that doesn't mean that the wearing of a helmet is the cause of poor judgement.
Also, as to "rockfall is easily predictable," and "rockfall is only caused by gumby climbers" (paraphrasing orginal post)-- Gary Roach (author of Colorado's Fourteener's) has a great quote: "geologic time includes now"
I agree with the spirit of the first post, but not its logic.
Wearing a helmet doesn't make you safe, it makes you safer. The first 90% of safety is situational awareness (etc), a helmet is merely icing the cake.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 16, 2004, 9:36 PM
Post #19 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
Thanks for your post, Dan.
The last time I wore a helmet was well over a year ago when I did a desert tower in Sedona. Sedona has a well-earned reputation for looseness- the nature of the rock, and the fact that these are mostly relatively remote climbs that don't see a lot of traffic. I decided to be prudent and wear my helmet. I found this my equivalent to being in the mountains, being on a loose thinker adventure climb, so I put on the helmet. But I haven't worn it since. I am not anti-helmet. And I am not a "grizzled veteran." I just trust my judgment, and I am confident that I make my judgment soundly every time I decide to leave the bucket at home.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 16, 2004, 10:38 PM
Post #20 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Icouldn't make it all the way through your rant but I did get the seatbelt part. As far as i am concerned wearing the seatbelt is more like buying 80% of the tickets. I started on ice and hiding behind your helmet and your pack made me a firm beliver. I have also pitched off of motorcycles at 100+mph. helmets work a heck of a lot better than your head. I evaced a guy out of hunnington ravine who split his fiberglass joe brown rignt in half and lived. if you chose to leave it behind thats fine but don't fuc#ing preach to me about it:roll: When I see some wanna be tough guy on a hog with no lid or a stupid tiny little maco skid plate the first thing that enters my mind is MORON 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
g
Deleted
Dec 16, 2004, 10:47 PM
Post #21 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: When I see some wanna be tough guy on a hog with no lid or a stupid tiny little maco skid plate the first thing that enters my mind is MORON 8^) |
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 16, 2004, 10:50 PM
Post #22 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
Well, with a lot less climbing experience than some I must say that I have personally witnessed three events where wearing a helmet prevented a serious injury. Two involved rockfall and one a pendulum fall that resulted in a pretty hard crash into a corner. None of these were "the fault" of the climber.
This same debate rages among bike racers although less so now that the USCF requires helmets-so folks can debate but must comply or not compete.
My first time through this type of discussion was about 25 years ago when I was actively competing in karate. Contests (and schools) started to require headgear driven mainly by the requirements of insurance companies. Those of us who had come up old school- no protective gear- argued that there would be mre injuries and that headgear would promote "headhunting" during sparring. While probably some of that happened, those of us who stuck around in the sport for a while did notice that in fact injuries- both in competition and training- were reduced.
So, in general I'm a believer in helmets and wear one every time I climb outdoors. And as technology improves so that helmets are lighter and more comfortable the downside of wearing one is being reduced.
Now they just have to work on helmet hair! But here in AZ you can just throw on a cowboy hat and be fine :-)
|
|
|
|
|
paige
Dec 16, 2004, 11:15 PM
Post #23 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2004
Posts: 34
|
I agree with your theory, but if one of those once in a life time falls or rare occurence does happen, wouldn't you like to be saved by your helmet? I know I would.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Dec 16, 2004, 11:23 PM
Post #24 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
In reply to: it's good training for not breaking holds, and both OK guidebooks as well as the RDB emphasize "PULL DOWN, NOT OUT!!!!!!"
I know she is the exception and not the rule, but my girlfriend of 90 lbs broke a hold because she was too short to reach the standard starting holds on a route. She is about 5 feet tall. She was forced to do a lay back off of the now broken hold. The rock was solid and myself and others had used this hold many times. Those that feel comfortable on climbs they know should be aware that knowing a climb isn't always sufficient and sometimes climbs have laybacks that must be executed despite what guidebooks recommend.
On another note, I have been thinking the same thing. My reasoning is less developed, but I have been wanting to post it.
My sister fell into the corner of a wall when she was 8 and needed stitches. I tripped over untied shoes before. Plenty of elderly fall over when they lose their sensitivity to balance. Sometimes you will walk forward while glancing back and run into a sign. I saw a lawn mower throw a rock and if I were __ feet closer it would hit me.
These and other events are every day events. Some people are more clumsy then others, but everyone hits their head sometimes. Should we wear a helmet all the time? Some mentally handicapped people do. Why don't the rest of us get on the safety bandwagon and start wearing helmets all the time? We have as much evidence or more than what many of you give in support of wearing a helmet.
I don't like hearing the one account of so-and-so being saved by their helmet. I don't like hearing how one person COULD be saved because of a helmet. This anecdotal evidence is useless in making the decision to wear a helmet. After you understand there is a chance that ___ can happen or ___ can happen then this is enough. Of course, if it can happen somebody out there will eventually do it. It is a personal decision after we know the chances.
I guess this post is made mostly because I am dissappointed in people's reasoning process in regards to their safety. I am sorry I don't have it as well formed as the OP.
Finally:
I wear a helmet very often. I support their use. I am not advocating that people stop wearing helmets. I am advocating intelligent choices made unencumbered of scare tactics.
|
|
|
|
|
theflyingsquirrel
Dec 16, 2004, 11:45 PM
Post #25 of 149
(10437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Posts: 185
|
wearing a helmet helps, especially when you have a bunch of kids at the top of pole steeple throwing f***ing rocks off the edge. why? because its fun of coarse. an oh ya its good agility practice for the guys climbing below.
i.e. stupid people kill smart people
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Dec 16, 2004, 11:51 PM
Post #26 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: .......I have personally witnessed three events where wearing a helmet prevented a serious injury. Two involved rockfall and one a pendulum fall that resulted in a pretty hard crash into a corner. None of these were "the fault" of the climber.
Please explain why these events are not the fault of the climber.
|
|
|
|
|
double
Dec 17, 2004, 12:12 AM
Post #27 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 136
|
Regardless of whether it is the climbers fault when a rock comes down, or he/she falls poorly, shit happens, and head injuries do occur. All it takes is one screw up: a rock thrown by kids, a hold weakened by freeze/thaw, whatever. Anything can happen, and a head is not very forgiving. Kayakers wear helmets, and more often find them useful when slipping on shore then in the water. Most construction sites demand them, even when there is virtually no risk of falling objects. A helmet should be seen as a mandatory piece of protection. Who cares how the injury happens or who was responsible. Who cares if people who wear helmets develop the illusion that it will save them from unsafe climbing. Any sport that involves a risk of head injury should require a helmet...whether it changes your climbing style is up to you. But in the end, wearing a bucket and avoiding a fist sized rock making you a vegetable is a good investment.
|
|
|
|
|
cjstudent
Dec 17, 2004, 12:20 AM
Post #28 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 369
|
(I read most of your rant, but i think that was more typed than all of my posts put together)
Congratulations. U've been climbing for a long a$$ time and haven't seen a head injury. Good for U.
I've seen one head injury avoided by wearing a helmet. And another head injury from a climber who tripped on a ledge and went head first into a wall...he wasn't wearing a helmet and was knocked out. SAR ended up being called in.
I'll wear my helmet just in case. I don't know that it will make a difference or not, but it might help. I mean yea, if i take that 60 footer head first dive into the ground, i doubt my helmet will help much. I also don't make it a practice to use bad judgement and try and injury my head, or climb under obvious rock fall or other climbers. But man there is this little chance that a rock could fall off and hit me in the head. or heck, a stupid tourist throwing an apple off a cliff and it nailing me in the head. (yea sounds stupid but you would understand if you've been to ship rock on a summer weekend)
But why????
-For one, i mean geez, a helmet costs $50ish for the BD Half Dome
-It doesn't weight alot.
-Its not all that hot
-It might help you keep some heat in if its cold
-It might make u look like a dumb a$$ but there's a chance u might look like one anyways.
-theres lots of rocks at the base of climbs...they had to come from somwhere
-What does it hurt?!?!?!
I can't imagine you ever being in an accident, wearing a helmet and saying "MAN I'm glad I DIDNT wear my helmet!" But while you are throwing all of these statistics around, i bet there is a person or two who's had a climbing accident and said "Da## glad I wore my helmet!"
Yes, there is no replacing judgement for wearing a helmet. And I don't think that is a good comparison. Don't just look at the dumb a$$ climbers who wear helmets...I mean, there's lots of dumb a$$ climbers out there who don't wear helmets and do newbie stupid things over and over again, just asking for it.
I just dont think, that if i thought wearing a helmet was dumb and useless that i would care to share my thoughts on the subject, I'd just climb without a helmet and go on with my merry life. But u know man there is this small freaking chance that a helmet might make the difference in you climbing again or being a statistic.
(edit: kant speal)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2004, 12:21 AM
Post #29 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I will also say this. Just because someone plays at being a safety nazi doesn't guarantee that they are safe climbers.
Word.
Nice post, Dan.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
g
Deleted
Dec 17, 2004, 12:33 AM
Post #30 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: Regardless of whether it is the climbers fault when a rock comes down, or he/she falls poorly, s--- happens, and head injuries do occur. All it takes is one screw up: a rock thrown by kids, a hold weakened by freeze/thaw, whatever. Anything can happen, and a head is not very forgiving. Kayakers wear helmets, and more often find them useful when slipping on shore then in the water. Most construction sites demand them, even when there is virtually no risk of falling objects. A helmet should be seen as a mandatory piece of protection. Who cares how the injury happens or who was responsible. Who cares if people who wear helmets develop the illusion that it will save them from unsafe climbing. Any sport that involves a risk of head injury should require a helmet...whether it changes your climbing style is up to you. But in the end, wearing a bucket and avoiding a fist sized rock making you a vegetable is a good investment. |
|
|
|
|
joeschmoe
Dec 17, 2004, 12:35 AM
Post #31 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2003
Posts: 479
|
I find it funny that alot of replies miss the point of OP, but oh well. I gotta agree helmets can bring a false sense of security. I know the first season me & snowboarding partner started wearing helmets our warcry that year was, "well we've got helmets" as we plunged into some stupid ariel that landed in nastiness. Helmets are there to protect you when good judgement can't, plain and simple. Murphey's law is a bitch and we're all subject to it, helmets just give us a slight edge over the house when shit hits the fan.
|
|
|
|
|
phxtradrock
Dec 17, 2004, 12:36 AM
Post #32 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 58
|
Ten lottery tickets is better than none :idea:
I think i'll keep wearing my helmet just in case one of those "once in a lifetime" accidents occurs.
|
|
|
|
|
lostdog
Dec 17, 2004, 12:38 AM
Post #33 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 112
|
if you wear your helmet, good for you, if you don't, good for you...
:deadhorse: 'nough said, climb on...
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Dec 17, 2004, 12:39 AM
Post #34 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: I wear a helmet in the mountains, (unless it's a ridge traverse) aid climbing, and rope solo. I have never had a climbing partner pull a gumbie could of killed me stunt with rock fall. When climbing in loose terrain, my climbing partners place gear in such a way that the rope doesn't knock anything down. They test hold before they pull on them and then they make sure pull less hard then anyone else. In the rare event that a hold does break off, they either hold on to it or they toss it in a safe direction. If it is too big to do the above, they will not pull it off in the first place.
So if you guys are so good that you can hang on to broken holds and casually toss them aside, I assume you don't ever fall either? So in addition to leaving the helmet at home, you might as well leave the rope, right?
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
danpayne
Dec 17, 2004, 12:53 AM
Post #35 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Posts: 278
|
To the original poster,
Just out of curiosity, what are you trying to accomplish with your post/rant? Are you trying to persued people to not wear helmets? Are you looking for a bunch of people to say, "WOW, You are soooo right, you're my hero!"
Whats next people? Is someone going to try to convince me that Locking biners aren't worth the money because they've never seen a regular biner become unclipped?
Or maybe someone can argue that bullet proof vests aren't worth anything.
"Well, It is your own fault for getting shot, I mean, don't piss off people with guns...","plus they could shoot you in the head."
I think I'm done with these stupid helmet arguements. If you don't want to wear one, DON'T!!!!!! But for me, if I want to wear a stuffed badger on my head because I feel safer, then feck off, Thats what I'm going to do.
|
|
|
|
|
euroford
Dec 17, 2004, 12:54 AM
Post #36 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 2913
|
i didn't even read 10% of this stuff. but i'll add this.
i really don't mind wearing my helmet, and almost always do, and so does my partner. really, why not??
|
|
|
|
|
g
Deleted
Dec 17, 2004, 1:00 AM
Post #37 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: Whats next people? Is someone going to try to convince me that Locking biners aren't worth the money because they've never seen a regular biner become unclipped? |
|
|
|
|
danpayne
Dec 17, 2004, 1:05 AM
Post #38 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Posts: 278
|
For those of you who are curious about the stuffed badger thing, its actually this
http://www.geocities.com/eldeeder/petzlbad.jpg
I find it quite comfortable. Trango makes a beaver, but I don't wear that because it smells.
|
|
|
|
|
kman
Dec 17, 2004, 1:09 AM
Post #39 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2001
Posts: 2561
|
I sometimes wear a helmet. I do wear one while belaying. Ice climbing always. Trad always. Sport sometimes. T-r rarely. Depends where I am climbing too.
It seems to me that the original poster is not trying to talk people out of wearing helmets, but helping people realize that the safety they do give you is limited. They definately are not a replacement for good judgement. If I find that a place is too risky for rockfall, gumby fall ect...I don't grab my helmet and say "it's all good with my helmet on". If I wouldn't go there without then I won't go there with (excluding ice).
Dumbest quote of the year goes to:
In reply to: one good reason to wear a helmet-- it helps you climb harder. You can worry about the consequences of a fall less and that lets you commit more.
What a STUPID thing to say!
Runner up:
In reply to: Um... this is why you always ought to wear a helmet. I helmet is better protection against falling stuff than the belayer trying to move out of the way….
Good post Alpnclmbr1
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 17, 2004, 1:16 AM
Post #40 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
In reply to: Re: the comparison between helmets and seatbelts. Wearing a seatbelt is equivalent to buying half of all the tickets. Wearing a helmet is more like buying ten tickets instead of one. (These seem like reasonable ballpark estimates, anyone want to take a shot at punching real numbers?.)
I don’t understand what you are talking about here. I assume you mean lottery tickets. If so, aren’t you more likely to win with ten tickets?
In reply to: As far as falling and hitting your head on a rock? I have taken, belayed, or witnessed something on the order of 10,000 to 20,000 falls. Couple broken ankles and a bunch of dropped climbers sums up the injury tally. No concussions, no scalp injuries, maybe someone chipped a tooth. Never any helmets. The key was not falling in such a way as to hit your head. People seem to think that isn't possible. Practice shows that it is.
In reply to: As far as I can tell from anam and other sources, head injuries seem to be much more common in the mountains, and not just because of loose rock. The larger cause seems to be long tumbling falls. (mostly based on stories from various climbers that have taken falls in the mountains. They pretty much all got hurt.)
Most mountaineers wear helmets actually.
In reply to: My biggest problem with the modern helmet crowd is that in practice, and among other things, it has replaced the DO NOT CLIMB UNDERNEATH OTHER PEOPLE rule. Lets see, which makes more sense? Wear a helmet in an effort to protect yourself from people dropping things on you or don't climb underneath the people in the first place?
How do you avoid climbing other parties on routes like “the Nose, Arches, and serenity” or other long all day multipitch routes? Are you recommending that I avoid a 20-pitch route because someone else is climbing it that day?
In reply to: So the newbie crowd has discarded the idea of not falling on easy routes. Discarded the rule of not climbing under other people. Discarded the idea of learning how to follow before they start leading. In reply to: Decided that dropping a rock on their partner, it isn't their fault. After all of that, they go out and buy a helmet and talk about how much safer they are because of it, and how anybody who doesn't wear a helmet must be stupid.
In reply to: Let's take Tahquitz and Suicide for example. The increase in rock fall hazard is way out of proportion to the increase in climber traffic. It was getting crowded on weekends 15 years ago. There wasn't the same rock fall madness that there is today. If anything, it was more common to come close to getting hit by a figure eight. (The sound of a figure eight pinging down the weeping wall is something I will never forget)
In reply to: There was a definite correlation between the increase in the use of helmets and the increase in the need to wear a helmet. People seem to be getting the helmet message pretty good. On the other hand, they do not seem to be getting the message that it is possible to climb without sending every other rock down the cliff. From what I have seen people are getting worse at this every year and the rocks that they are sending down are getting larger as well.
In reply to: I will not climb there on weekends anymore because I consider it an unreasonable and unnecessary risk In reply to: .(What do you propose for those who can only climb on weekends? Quit climbing?) In reply to: I climbed there for years without a helmet, I will still climb there mid-week without a helmet. The only rock fall that has ever hit me was small stuff from sudden thunder showers. If your of the opinion that wearing a helmet compensates for that additional risk, then I would have to say that you are deluding yourself. In reply to: The main hazard that I use a helmet for is naturally occurring rock fall. That is in quite a contrast the reports on this site, which seem to be almost all climber caused. (Rock fall is rock fall. Whether a climber causes it or natural causes, they are real. While toping out on Outer Space in Washington, I watched as a mountain goat sent loose rocks over the edge of the cliff, directly over the top of the last pitch.) In reply to: The old school way of things largely negated the need for a helmet in order to protect yourself from rock fall. (with the exception of natural rock and ice fall, typically in the mountains or on a wall.) ( I love that term, “OLD SCHOOL”. I wonder what this means most of the time. Old school guys were pounding pitons in, climbing on bowling in a coil, and using hip belays. How safe was all that. In reply to: I have seen a connection between wearing a helmet and taking lead falls. (particularly on 5.9's and under) The helmet crowd tends to forgo the idea of climbing within your limits. (Is anyone going to deny that the modern crew falls more often. Is anyone going to claim that is because falls are safe now?) (Falling is a part of climbing. If you think climbing is unsafe, then why do you even use a rope, gear, and harness?) In reply to: I have also seen a correlation between wearing a helmet and letting the rope get behind your leg, and between helmets and taking stupid unsafe falls on the first two bolts of a sport climbs! People start leading earlier and with less experience and skill then was the case in the old days. Anyone want to make a case that this has improved safety. (If someone has some good instruction, leading early on isn’t that dangerous. There’s that term “old” again.) In reply to: For myself, I climb on choss all the time.( T hat explains the lack of crowds) In reply to: I just make sure that it is steep enough that I am not going to drop anything on my belayer. Maple and the Potrero are great examples. Climb the steeper stuff and you are fine without a helmet. Climb the easier lower angle stuff and you are not fine even with a helmet. (So how does this support your argument that helmets are the root of the unsafe practices in climbing) In reply to: Instances of rock fall just happening are extremely rare and highly predictable. (Like those mountain goat) In reply to: They are largely associated with recent large scale activity, and then maybe storm/rain related. (tends to be small stuff) In reply to: Sun hit and snow and ice can be another major cause. The whole climbing industry is built around, "buy my stuff and you will be a safer climber." The marketing guru's seem to have people figured out pretty well. Too bad their bottom line is making money selling gizmos to people instead of actually encouraging safe behavior. ( I have not seen that many ads for helmet, and even fewer catalogue pictures where the climbers wear helmets.) In reply to: The climbing industry has to deal with safety issues in terms of generalizations and compromises. ( like you have done here with rok fall) (safety wise and in terms of making money) People that base their safety decisions on generalizations scare me. The consequences of being unsafe is a very personal thing and safety decisions should be made in that light. (Helmets reduce the possibility of head injuries, they don’t eliminate the possibility of injuries.) In reply to: People often climb underneath other people now. The climbing industry seems not see that as a problem, they like crowds and the fact that it gives them a good scenario to sell helmets. It is not in their best interest to emphasize that it is unsafe to climb underneath other people, it is in their interest to say buy this and it will make your unsafe decisions safer... (of course they would never phrase it that way) ( I have never heard anyone, industry or climber, encouraging other to climb under other parties. Actually, I more often hear the opposite. The message also says to climb with caution when climbing under other parties.) In reply to: None of this should be taken as encouraging anyone not to wear a helmet. (Then what was your point?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
danpayne
Dec 17, 2004, 1:32 AM
Post #42 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Posts: 278
|
Ok, so now tell me if that smiley on the left would be better off with or without a helmet?
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Dec 17, 2004, 1:33 AM
Post #43 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: *a long rant*
While I agree with much of your rant, I wouldn't make such a strong correlation between helmet wearing and general lack of safety awareness as you seem to. Remove all references to helmets from your rant and it's a good piece about being aware of one's surroundings, about having the experience and knowledge to recognize when hazards are or are not present, and having the instinct to react appropriately to hazards. Many climbers do not have that knowledge/experience/instincts, and it has nothing to do with whether or not they wear a helmet.
I see climbers needlessly placing themselves in the path of danger all the time, whether it's lounging in the noonday sun on a glacier underneath towering seracs, or at the crag hanging out at the base of climbs where someone has been killed by rockfall - the common denominator is lack of experience and lack of situational awareness, not lack of or presence of a helmet.
Last time I was thankful for my helmet we were on a glacier climbing through thick clouds with about 30 feet of visibility. I hear a wheelbarrow load of rock break loose a couple hundred feet overhead. By the time they got to us they were broken into football size or smaller, but they were MOVING, and with the poor visibility it would have been extremely difficult to avoid them. We got lucky.
Like you, I am also judicious about when I do or do not wear my helmet, but I wear it more often than not. Besides, when you wear a ball cap on the approach hike, you need something to cover up the hat head. I can't have all the hotties checking me out with nappy-ass hair.
|
|
|
|
|
lostdog
Dec 17, 2004, 1:34 AM
Post #44 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 112
|
hey somebody break up those boxers, they aren't wearing any helmets.haha :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 17, 2004, 1:35 AM
Post #45 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
One time i hitch hiked to the hospital with a broken collar bone due to a motorcycle wreck. the ER guys first comment was " good thing you had your wreck in Vermont, when I worked in NH (no helmet law) we just rolled the motocycle wrecks into the cooler downstairs" NOT advocateing a helmet law by any means but any tool that feels the need to proudly proclaim that helmets are not cool enough for him/her and don't work, belongs to the flat earth society :roll: Helmets have personaly saved my brain a few times climbing and have seen a few other positve experiences. Just ask paul pritchard about helmets if you need a negative example. rus raffa might have a thing or two to say but he can't caus he is dead. I know a few old school guys that made the leap to helmets after witnessing a chick get short roped into a roof W/ no helmet. Again if you don't want to wear one that is fine but when you start preaching about how stupid all the helmet wearers are you really do come off as fu$king macho moron.
|
|
|
|
|
kman
Dec 17, 2004, 1:42 AM
Post #46 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2001
Posts: 2561
|
In reply to: Ok, so now tell me if that smiley on the left would be better off with or without a helmet?
:lol: Considering that the guy on the left is being punched about the jaw and mouth area, a helmet would not protect from the blows. However, wearing a helmet might have given him enough of a false sense of security and inflated his confidence enough to actually kick some a$$ :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
lostdog
Dec 17, 2004, 1:45 AM
Post #47 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 112
|
good insight kman, also would protect him when he hit the ground :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 17, 2004, 1:48 AM
Post #48 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: Actually, a a few occasions I have seen head injuries that would not have happened if the climbing had worn a helmet. In two occasions, the climber fell upside down.
In reply to: None of this should be taken as encouraging anyone not to wear a helmet. (Then what was your point?) |
|
|
|
|
emilb
Dec 17, 2004, 1:52 AM
Post #49 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2004
Posts: 40
|
If you don't want to wear a helmet thats fine. If other folks want to wear one that's fine too. No need to rant about it.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 17, 2004, 2:08 AM
Post #50 of 149
(9171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
In reply to: Uh, helmets don't help you not get the rope behind your leg.
When did I say anything about a rope behind someone leg?
If you see the point, then let me know?
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 17, 2004, 2:16 AM
Post #51 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: Uh, helmets don't help you not get the rope behind your leg. When did I say anything about a rope behind someone leg?
In reply to: If you see the point, then let me know?
Dan is not saying that you shouldn't wear a helmet. Helmets do in fact have their place, and many examples have been given. He is simply re-stating that helmets are not substitutes for good judgement, knowledge, or etiquette. He is pointing out that he sees a lot of gumbys wreaking havoc or creating potentially dangerous situations, which would be otherwise relatively safe, because they think their helmet is a magical force that prevents danger.
Helmets, in general, are not a bad thing. BUT not fully understanding their necessity or function is, and the root of his rant.
Capice?
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 17, 2004, 2:42 AM
Post #52 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
Actually, the rope behind the leg is just one of many ways to end up upside down. In the situation above, the climber was starting to pull through a roof when he fell. The body positioning sent them back wards.
Other scenarios for flipping upside down are endless:
High stepping on overhanging rock
Heel hooking
Crack climbing, Jams slipping before your feet release
The list is endless.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 17, 2004, 3:38 AM
Post #53 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Uh, helmets don't help you not get the rope behind your leg. When did I say anything about a rope behind someone leg? If the climber fell upside down, chances are pretty good that the rope got caught behind his leg. There are many ways to skin a cat, but this was likely the cause.
FIrst, you and Dan seem to think that only the uninitiated get the rope behind theri leg. That's not true. For one thing, I've seen some pretty experienced climbers do it.
For another thing, if you lead enough roof routes, you'll see that sometimes you have a lot of trouble avoiding rope behind leg, even when you are aware of it and want to avoid it.
One more point, any time your feet stay on after your hands come off, you have a chance to go upside down.
Ever fall across the rope bacause your belayer was too far back from the wall? That does s nice job of flipping you around.
Lastly, if your harness is too low on your waist, so that the tie in is below your center of gravity, you have a good shot at going upside down in situations where you otherwise would not.
You can add these to what the other guy said about falling upside down.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 17, 2004, 4:08 AM
Post #54 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Uh, helmets don't help you not get the rope behind your leg. When did I say anything about a rope behind someone leg? If the climber fell upside down, chances are pretty good that the rope got caught behind his leg. There are many ways to skin a cat, but this was likely the cause. FIrst, you and Dan seem to think that only the uninitiated get the rope behind theri leg. That's not true. For one thing, I've seen some pretty experienced climbers do it.
Yeah, but how often have you seen an experienced climber fall with the rope behind his leg?
In reply to: For another thing, if you lead enough roof routes, you'll see that sometimes you have a lot of trouble avoiding rope behind leg, even when you are aware of it and want to avoid it.
Just because it's hard to avoid doesn't mean you can't avoid it. You just have to think a move ahead.
In reply to: Ever fall across the rope bacause your belayer was too far back from the wall?
But can the leader escape responsibility for this belayer error?
In reply to: Lastly, if your harness is too low on your waist...
And that is obviously the leader's error.
Dan's point -- one of them -- is that new climbers are substituting helmets for learning safe climbing practices, which "in the old days" largely obviated the need for helmets. We learned not to fall out of dangerous body positions, not to step in front of the rope (or at least to be extra careful with the rope behind our leg), not to assume that every handhold was solid, to be careful with our feet so as not to kick rocks down, not to crowd another climbing party, to make sure our belayer is standing where we want him, not wear our harness down over our hips like some kind of gansta' wannabe, etc., etc.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
sharpender
Dec 17, 2004, 5:09 AM
Post #55 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2003
Posts: 663
|
alpineclimber1 wrote:In reply to: The only other major rock fall death at a cragging area that I can recall hearing about was a guy knocking a plate down on his girlfriend and taking her arm off.)
That was not a cragging area. That is a major multipitch climbing location that elsewhere you name as a "clean" rock. Yeah, over on teh West end but where the accident occured there is a multitude of loose rock that is a danger and requires the skill of climbing parties to avoud dislodging. Also in the example cited, a helmut (she may have had one on) was clearly useless. I always heard it was loose rock dislodged and not a plate pulled from the wall. Personally I don't blame you for not climbing there on the weekends. Must be nice to have that luxury.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 17, 2004, 7:10 AM
Post #56 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Uh, helmets don't help you not get the rope behind your leg. When did I say anything about a rope behind someone leg? If the climber fell upside down, chances are pretty good that the rope got caught behind his leg. There are many ways to skin a cat, but this was likely the cause. FIrst, you and Dan seem to think that only the uninitiated get the rope behind theri leg. That's not true. For one thing, I've seen some pretty experienced climbers do it. Yeah, but how often have you seen an experienced climber fall with the rope behind his leg?
Two of the three rope behind leg falls I can think of were by experienced climbers, one of the two was by an outstanding climber (on a 5.9 sport route) who has done 5.12 trad. Anyone can make a mistake.
In reply to: In reply to: For another thing, if you lead enough roof routes, you'll see that sometimes you have a lot of trouble avoiding rope behind leg, even when you are aware of it and want to avoid it. Just because it's hard to avoid doesn't mean you can't avoid it. You just have to think a move ahead.
And just how many trad roof routes on doubles have you led? It's not as simple as you think. Sometimes it is several moves later, sometimes you can't even see the rope or your feet or legs. That it could be avoided is not the issue, people clearly do not avoid it all the time, because there are a lot of falls of this sort.
In reply to: In reply to: Ever fall across the rope bacause your belayer was too far back from the wall? But can the leader escape responsibility for this belayer error?
Not if the belayer decides to back away from the wall and the leader doesn't even know it til after he is falling over the rope.
In reply to: In reply to: Lastly, if your harness is too low on your waist... And that is obviously the leader's error.
Yes but that does not change the fact that this happens a lot. Correcting it after it has happened is impossible, and the point of my post was to show that there are a lot of ways to fall upside down besides getting the rope behind your leg.
You could argue that any time the leader falls upside down it is his error, that is not the issue. The issue is that there are many ways to fall upside down.
Dan's point -- one of them -- is that new climbers are substituting helmets for learning safe climbing practices, which "in the old days" largely obviated the need for helmets. We learned not to fall out of dangerous body positions, not to step in front of the rope (or at least to be extra careful with the rope behind our leg), not to assume that every handhold was solid, to be careful with our feet so as not to kick rocks down, not to crowd another climbing party, to make sure our belayer is standing where we want him, not wear our harness down over our hips like some kind of gansta' wannabe, etc., etc.
-Jay
Yes the old days, when magically all climbers were more careful and safer. Well I've climbed with enough old timers to have seen some of the 'safe practices' some of them employed and still use, such as chaining biners together to extend slings or make an anchor, rapping on the figure 8 with tails on the same side, not being able to place a cam worth a crap, pinching the break line and guide line together with one hand while belaying, refusing to warn a climber about the rope behind their leg because it might break their concentration-- no wonder they were concerned about falling.
Of course I've also seen new climbers and intermediate climbers make a bucket of mistakes too.
What is interesting is that in the different groups, some from each will listen and some will just ignore advice, or deny that what they are doing could have bad consequences. The ones who listen ( and who will also point out any errors YOU might make, cause we all make em) are generally those who are prudent people, or guides, or those who have seen the need for and taken safety related climbing courses.
What I have seen is that a lot of climbers, both experienced and new, get by on luck or climbing skill (as in not falling), not safe practices.
In reply to: We learned not to fall out of dangerous body positions...
You'll have to explain this. The only truly unsafe falling position I know of is having the rope behind your leg (Will I get flipped out of control and hit thw wall with the back of my head while hanging upside down?). For me the fall consequences are determined by what features I will have to contend with (will I meet a ledge or other feature on the way down; when I come to the wall, will it be smooth and regular or will I have to dodge a projection or avoid sticking a foot in a big horizontal, etc) and how good the gear is, and if the fall is a surprize fall.
In reply to: ...not wear our harness down over our hips like some kind of gansta' wannabe
This is a key thing, I'm sure some people are doing just what you say, and it's wrong, but I also believe that many harnesses are too low by accident. Everyone should test their falling position by hanging in their harness and make sure they do not tip upside down.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 17, 2004, 7:39 AM
Post #57 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: FIrst, you and Dan seem to think that only the uninitiated get the rope behind theri leg.
In reply to: one of the two was by an outstanding climber (on a 5.9 sport route) who has done 5.12 trad. Anyone can make a mistake.
In reply to: Not if the belayer decides to back away from the wall and the leader doesn't even know it til after he is falling over the rope.
In reply to: The only truly unsafe falling position I know of is having the rope behind your leg |
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 17, 2004, 7:49 AM
Post #58 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
Positions and location in this case mean to diferent things.
About my belayer. I regularly look at my belayer if I don't trust him or her. But belayers that i have complete trust in, I never watch, especially when I am climbing near my limit.
I have climbed to of the most famous roof cracks in the U.S. "Seperate Reality" and "Desert Reality". How would I keep the rope out of behind my leg on those? Personally, I decided I didn't need too, but I just want to know how.
In the long run, adding a helmet will give you more protection then not having a helmet. Good climbing practices shouldn't be overlooked just because you're wearing one.
If the fall is clean and the gear is good, than I would argue that falling is a safe practice with you any day.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 17, 2004, 8:24 AM
Post #59 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: Not if the belayer decides to back away from the wall and the leader doesn't even know it til after he is falling over the rope. What, you don't keep an eye on your belayer? My leaders routinely glance over their shoulders and snap if need be. I do likewise.
First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags.
Second, the situation I was directly refering to was at night, I was concentrating on onsighting a 10C in the dark, and silly me, fogot to take my night vision goggles. The belayer decided he needed to back up for some reason while I was floundering around.
And no, I don't usually watch my belayer. For one thing, I am 99% of the time climbing with someone who I can trust. For another thing, many routes do not allow the leader the luxury of line of sight with the belayer.
In reply to: The only truly unsafe falling position I know of is having the rope behind your leg
Little darling, those are not body positions. Those are situations. Body position refers to how your body is oriented on the rock.
You should have read a little farther though, cause I mentioned meeting features and falling consequences, just cause I knew someone would be confused. Again, the position your body is in when you fall is not the same as the terrain you are going to fall past or onto.
By the way, a hard pendulum fall into a wall is not bad if you meet the wall correctly. Been there, done that. Come in feet first, cushion the impact with your legs, no problem. That was a fall from a double heel hook while exiting a roof.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Dec 17, 2004, 8:54 AM
Post #60 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In my experiences I find it very hard to find a reason not to wear a helmet. Ignoring Aid and Ice, where helmets are a must, almost every area I've visited there has been potential for falling objects.
Take for example the Precipice in Acadia National Park. Climbs there go up to 3 pitches, and there is a hiking trail up the side of the mountain. Who know's if there is some idiot up there that just knocked a rock loose near the edge?
Another example, Whitehorse or any other large multi-pitch area. Unless your there ass early, there could be a party on a near-by route, or a few pitches up the route you want to climb. What's the suggestion? Don't do the route, go elsewhere? Or hang back a pitch and have a hemet incase they do drop a piece of gear?
Another example. A popular top-roping cliff (enter crag of your choice) where people are hiking trails across the top of the cliff. Constant new erosion, normal tree debris, ect. Someone could knock something loose, and a strong breeze or a rain storm could push it over the edge.
Another example, early spring climbing, right after freeze-thaw conditions. IE Cannon Mountain, NH.
People can leave stuff on ledges the day before you climb at an area and maybe it'll cut loose while your under it.
I just think there can be so many things going on above you that you don't know about, that often it's a very good idea to wear a helmet.
It's a comfort issue, I just believe these points have merrit.
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 17, 2004, 10:09 AM
Post #61 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
In reply to: So if you guys are so good that you can hang on to broken holds and casually toss them aside, I assume you don't ever fall either? So in addition to leaving the helmet at home, you might as well leave the rope, right? |
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 17, 2004, 10:28 AM
Post #62 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
In reply to: Most mountaineers wear helmets actually. How do you avoid climbing other parties on routes like “the Nose, Arches, and serenity” or other long all day multipitch routes? Falling is a part of climbing. If you think climbing is unsafe, then why do you even use a rope, gear, and harness?
Climbing below other parties is best avoided by not climbing directly below them. The trick is not to get hit. And there are still moments when you can be on you own on the Nose.
You should know when not to fall. That's the key. It's not about always avoiding a fall.
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 17, 2004, 10:59 AM
Post #63 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
I'm a lazy reader and I need to summarize a little:
In reply to: 1. My biggest problem with the modern helmet crowd is that in practice, and among other things, it has replaced the DO NOT CLIMB UNDERNEATH OTHER PEOPLE rule. Lets see, which makes more sense? Wear a helmet in an effort to protect yourself from people dropping things on you or don't climb underneath the people in the first place? So the newbie crowd has discarded the idea of not falling on easy routes. Discarded the rule of not climbing under other people. Discarded the idea of learning how to follow before they start leading. Decided that dropping a rock on their partner, it isn't their fault. After all of that, they go out and buy a helmet and talk about how much safer they are because of it, and how anybody who doesn't wear a helmet must be stupid. 2. As far as falling and hitting your head on a rock? I have taken, belayed, or witnessed something on the order of 10,000 to 20,000 falls. Couple broken ankles and a bunch of dropped climbers sums up the injury tally. No concussions, no scalp injuries, maybe someone chipped a tooth. Never any helmets. The key was not falling in such a way as to hit your head. People seem to think that isn't possible. Practice shows that it is. 3. I know a number of thirty year climbers that are so bold and seemingly reckless (one biner belays, running out pitches, not placing gear for the second.) that I tend not to climb with them. Unless, I am feeling particularly adventurous... Anyway, these guys will pretty much NEVER climb underneath another party. Sorry, but even with all their crazy antics, these guys are still probably safer than most of the conservative newbies. 4. If you're wearing a helmet, and you get hit in the head by a rock. Seems like most people on this site would say "good thing I bought a helmet." If someone was really interested in staying alive, their response would be more on the lines of "O>K> dumbass, what did I do wrong that led to my getting hit on the head with a rock?" 5. I will also say this. Just because someone plays at being a safety nazi doesn't guarantee that they are safe climbers. 6. None of this should be taken as encouraging anyone not to wear a helmet.
a) don't climb on the line of fire (ie. where rocks fall)
b) don't drop rocks on party below. this can be learned.
c) learn how to fall properly and learn when not to fall
d) helmet is no solution to the problem of falling objects or falling where you shouldn't
And it can be noted that someone with big emphasis on safety is usually not too safe in the reality. Adopting to the changing environment is the key. Not routines.
Wear a helmet if it's necessary but don't forget thinking twice before you do it. It might not solve the real problem.
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 17, 2004, 6:16 PM
Post #64 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: In reply to: .......I have personally witnessed three events where wearing a helmet prevented a serious injury. Two involved rockfall and one a pendulum fall that resulted in a pretty hard crash into a corner. None of these were "the fault" of the climber. Please explain why these events are not the fault of the climber.
1) Rockfall caused by hikers at top of cliff
2) Foothold broke and fell on belayer
3) Climber simply came off and pendulumed. Sure he was at fault for falling but if falling isn't allowed then no rope is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Dec 17, 2004, 6:52 PM
Post #65 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: .......I have personally witnessed three events where wearing a helmet prevented a serious injury. Two involved rockfall and one a pendulum fall that resulted in a pretty hard crash into a corner. None of these were "the fault" of the climber. Please explain why these events are not the fault of the climber. 1) Rockfall caused by hikers at top of cliff 2) Foothold broke and fell on belayer 3) Climber simply came off and pendulumed. Sure he was at fault for falling but if falling isn't allowed then no rope is needed.
On number 3, the climber shouldn't have fallen in that situation. If you're not at risk of pendulumming or slamming your head into something, fall until you're happy. Your argument is similar to the climber who falls doing proless psuedo solo. It's the climber's fault that he fell. He shouldn't have been there to begin with. See? There is no shame in backing off. There is considerable shame in getting yourself injured or worse in a place you should have the good sense not to be in.
No amount of equipment will make you completely safe, but improper usage of your most useful tool, your brain, is guaranteed to get you killed.
When you're run out above bad pro: you shouldn't fall.
When you're risking a bad pendulum: you shouldn't fall.
When you're simul climbing: you shouldn't fall.
See how this goes?
As far as the foothold falling on the belayer, well, had he been paying attention, he might've dodged it. As it stands, it was mighty handy to have a helmet on, but if the foothold was big enough to really injure him, the climber should've better tested it and (noting it was no good) not stood on it!
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Dec 17, 2004, 7:30 PM
Post #66 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: .......I have personally witnessed three events where wearing a helmet prevented a serious injury. Two involved rockfall and one a pendulum fall that resulted in a pretty hard crash into a corner. None of these were "the fault" of the climber. Please explain why these events are not the fault of the climber. 1) Rockfall caused by hikers at top of cliff 2) Foothold broke and fell on belayer 3) Climber simply came off and pendulumed. Sure he was at fault for falling but if falling isn't allowed then no rope is needed.
Thanks, but you only explained what happened in those situations, not why the climber was not at fault. In each case, it is clearly the climber (or belayer) who shares fault. As for #3, falling is allowed... but falling is not allowed when a pendulum is likely.
That is the point of the original post. A lot of climbers these days write off events such as those listed above as typical crag occurences which are outside of their realm of control. They think that by wearing a helmet, they can climb safely where rockfall is common, stand directly under a climber, pull/step on loose holds, or get careless when falling is not allowed.
Yes, by all means, wear your helmet, but judgement and common sense are what provide the most safety.
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 17, 2004, 7:35 PM
Post #67 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: On number 3, the climber shouldn't have fallen in that situation. If you're not at risk of pendulumming or slamming your head into something, fall until you're happy. Your argument is similar to the climber who falls doing proless psuedo solo. It's the climber's fault that he fell. He shouldn't have been there to begin with. See? There is no shame in backing off. There is considerable shame in getting yourself injured or worse in a place you should have the good sense not to be in. No amount of equipment will make you completely safe, but improper usage of your most useful tool, your brain, is guaranteed to get you killed. When you're run out above bad pro: you shouldn't fall. When you're risking a bad pendulum: you shouldn't fall. When you're simul climbing: you shouldn't fall. See how this goes? As far as the foothold falling on the belayer, well, had he been paying attention, he might've dodged it. As it stands, it was mighty handy to have a helmet on, but if the foothold was big enough to really injure him, the climber should've better tested it and (noting it was no good) not stood on it!
Great response. So to be clear you believe that climbers should neither fall if they might get hurt or stand where something might hit them.
No one really argues that thinking is the most important part of being safe. BUT the reason we use any type of gear is that "stuff happens" and it is not always the result of bad decisions. I have no problem with others climbing sans helmet- or sans rope for that matter. But me--I'm going to do lots of things to reduce risk and that includes both the above.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 17, 2004, 7:45 PM
Post #68 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Dan's orignal post really has nothing to do with whether or not a climber is safer wearing a helmet, per se. The answer to that all encompassing question can only ever be "it depends." I am surprised (but should not be, I suppose) at the number of responses to Dan here that indicate a fundamental lack of understanding, regarding Dan's excellent point.
I will try to restate, as simply as possible, Dan's point. Here it is:
You should take the time to learn where the real dangers in climbing, including those dangers involving potential head injuries, come from. If you do this, and then take precautions to remove yourself from those situations, to minimize the risk, you will be much safer than you would be by just wearing a helmet.
In fact, you will then be safe to the point where adding a helmet will afford you very, very little additional safety margin.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 17, 2004, 7:47 PM
Post #69 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
All this hindsight is giving me a headache.
This notion that the climber can be all knowing, all seeing, anticipating every mishap and preventing it is just ludicrous.
Entirely too many people are saying things like, "Well if THAT happened, you should have forseen it and not done ________, and avoided the situation."
IF you really think climbing is so predictable, that you are so infallible, that every mistake and bad situation can be avoided, I'm guessing that your number has not come up yet. And it might never come up. But if it does, then maybe you'll have a different attitude.
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 17, 2004, 7:51 PM
Post #70 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
ppp
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 17, 2004, 7:59 PM
Post #71 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: Thanks, but you only explained what happened in those situations, not why the climber was not at fault. In each case, it is clearly the climber (or belayer) who shares fault. As for #3, falling is allowed... but falling is not allowed when a pendulum is likely. That is the point of the original post. A lot of climbers these days write off events such as those listed above as typical crag occurences which are outside of their realm of control. They think that by wearing a helmet, they can climb safely where rockfall is common, stand directly under a climber, pull/step on loose holds, or get careless when falling is not allowed. Yes, by all means, wear your helmet, but judgement and common sense are what provide the most safety.
And my argument is that there is a difference between a bad result stemming from a bad decision and a bad outcome coming from just a statistical bad event.
No need to debate the concept of shared liability. I agree. But the reality is that climbing has lots of objective danger. Different climbers do different things to mitigate (or not) that risk. Good learning and good decision making are the most important tools and in that I agree with the OP.
But I disagee that using other things necessarily means you don't pay attention to the two main factors.
Maybe its my age. I'm 60. I don't heal fast anymore. I don't want to get hurt. I'll do anything to not get hurt.
PS I have never been injured (other than scrapes, etc) while climbing. I've never caused another to get injured. I always wear a helmet. So, ... .
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 17, 2004, 8:05 PM
Post #72 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: This notion that the climber can be all knowing, all seeing, anticipating every mishap and preventing it is just ludicrous.
While it is not possible to be "all-knowing" it certainly is possible to avoid the situations and circumstances that Dan mentioned in his original post. (i.e avoiding bad rock, not climbing below other people, not pulling your rap rope while standing directly below, etc., etc.) And if you do these things, you will most assuredly be much safer than by merely strapping on a helmet. I don't even see how this is debatable.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 17, 2004, 8:11 PM
Post #73 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. |
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 17, 2004, 8:27 PM
Post #74 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: Thanks, but you only explained what happened in those situations, not why the climber was not at fault. In each case, it is clearly the climber (or belayer) who shares fault. ... Yes, by all means, wear your helmet, but judgement and common sense are what provide the most safety.
Well it certainly isn't clear to me that they were at fault--and I was there!
The idea that one "shouldn't" fall in certain situations is not real clear. Sure experinced climbers understand and respond to "should not fall" situations but I have seen solid 5.11 leaders fall on 5.8. I have seen "tested" holds break. Come on there is lots of objective danger.
And of course, good judjement is most important--but wearing a helmet does not negate that--that's my point.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 17, 2004, 8:30 PM
Post #75 of 149
(9037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: This notion that the climber can be all knowing, all seeing, anticipating every mishap and preventing it is just ludicrous. While it is not possible to be "all-knowing" it certainly is possible to avoid the situations and circumstances that Dan mentioned in his original post. (i.e avoiding bad rock, not climbing below other people, not pulling your rap rope while standing directly below, etc., etc.) And if you do these things, you will most assuredly be much safer than by merely strapping on a helmet. I don't even see how this is debatable. Curt
IT's not debatabale. Who is debating that is is good to tape precautions and be careful and avoid the bad situations that you can avoid?
But the drift of the thread had headed to a notion that any bad situation can be avoided, and that is not true. Even if it were true that every bad situation could be avoided, experienced climbers obviously do not avoid every bad situation, just read Accidents in NAM for proof. Even good climbers, safe climbers, screw up.
In your last post, you were doing great til you said that a helmet will only provide marginal safety if you take all the other precautions. I just don't believe that.
To me, the helmet provides no safety until you are in the crap situation, then, it provides a huge safety bonus. Your argument is similar to saying that if you are a very careful driver, you don't always need your seat belt, and you can choose the right time to wear it, and that it only provides marginal safety anyway, since you are taking all these other precautions.
I'm saying that you can take every precaution, and still something bad can happen, and if you don't have your helmet on when it does, you might not live to regret it.
I think what is not debateable is that you should be prudent, be aware of the climbing situation, and take precautions. Helmets are for when the shit hits the fan, and you can never know when that will be, so I wear mine most of the time when I'm climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
gat
Dec 17, 2004, 8:33 PM
Post #76 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: In reply to: This notion that the climber can be all knowing, all seeing, anticipating every mishap and preventing it is just ludicrous. While it is not possible to be "all-knowing" it certainly is possible to avoid the situations and circumstances that Dan mentioned in his original post. (i.e avoiding bad rock, not climbing below other people, not pulling your rap rope while standing directly below, etc., etc.) And if you do these things, you will most assuredly be much safer than by merely strapping on a helmet. I don't even see how this is debatable. Curt
It seems that the people going back and forth agree that 1. the most important piece of equipment is your head, 2. a helmet adds some, if very little, added safety margin.
The place where they differ is their willingness to go without the added safety margin that a helmet can provide. This thread has morphed into another "acceptable level of risk" argument, it's just disguised as a helmet debate.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 17, 2004, 9:39 PM
Post #77 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: This notion that the climber can be all knowing, all seeing, anticipating every mishap and preventing it is just ludicrous. While it is not possible to be "all-knowing" it certainly is possible to avoid the situations and circumstances that Dan mentioned in his original post. (i.e avoiding bad rock, not climbing below other people, not pulling your rap rope while standing directly below, etc., etc.) And if you do these things, you will most assuredly be much safer than by merely strapping on a helmet. I don't even see how this is debatable. Curt IT's not debatabale. Who is debating that is is good to tape precautions and be careful and avoid the bad situations that you can avoid? But the drift of the thread had headed to a notion that any bad situation can be avoided, and that is not true. Even if it were true that every bad situation could be avoided, experienced climbers obviously do not avoid every bad situation, just read Accidents in NAM for proof. Even good climbers, safe climbers, screw up. In your last post, you were doing great til you said that a helmet will only provide marginal safety if you take all the other precautions. I just don't believe that. To me, the helmet provides no safety until you are in the crap situation, then, it provides a huge safety bonus. Your argument is similar to saying that if you are a very careful driver, you don't always need your seat belt, and you can choose the right time to wear it, and that it only provides marginal safety anyway, since you are taking all these other precautions. I'm saying that you can take every precaution, and still something bad can happen, and if you don't have your helmet on when it does, you might not live to regret it. I think what is not debateable is that you should be prudent, be aware of the climbing situation, and take precautions. Helmets are for when the s--- hits the fan, and you can never know when that will be, so I wear mine most of the time when I'm climbing.
One of the central points Dan is making, and that I agree with, is that you will not often get yourself into "the crap" situation, if you are being prudent. If you decide to knowingly put yourself in "the crap" situation by deciding to climb below other people, climb choss, climb ice, etc.--then by all means wear a helmet, because you will be somewhat safer. However, you will not be as safe as climbing under more prudent conditions, even without a helmet.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Dec 17, 2004, 9:46 PM
Post #78 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: In reply to: Thanks, but you only explained what happened in those situations, not why the climber was not at fault. In each case, it is clearly the climber (or belayer) who shares fault. ... Yes, by all means, wear your helmet, but judgement and common sense are what provide the most safety. Well it certainly isn't clear to me that they were at fault--and I was there! The idea that one "shouldn't" fall in certain situations is not real clear. Sure experinced climbers understand and respond to "should not fall" situations but I have seen solid 5.11 leaders fall on 5.8. I have seen "tested" holds break. Come on there is lots of objective danger. And of course, good judjement is most important--but wearing a helmet does not negate that--that's my point.
Since you brought it up, for those three cases you mentioned,
1) Climbing at a location where rockfall is likely
2) Belayer in line of rockfall, possibly not paying attention; climber standing on a loose hold.
3) Climber falling where he shouldn't; possibly inadequte protection for a traverse
You seem to want to absolve the climbers of any responsibility, but clearly they share some of the fault. With a little bit better judgement, even risk in situations of high objective hazard can be minimized.
I agree with your point that wearing a helmet doesn't negate having good judgement, but its difficult for me to then understand how you could dismiss the climbers' responsibility in your three original anecdotes.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 17, 2004, 9:52 PM
Post #79 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
the reason for so many responses that don't take into account the full meaning of the origional post was because the thing was too f$king long to get through. it was obvious from the first 500 words or so that its basic jist was that helmet wearers were wankers :roll: hence the various responses addressing that issue.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 17, 2004, 9:53 PM
Post #80 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Fact: Lot's of helmet wearing folks just seem not to take as much care about rock-fall as people who came of age in climbing before helmets were on the scene.
For example, many of my climbing partners take no more care when they get to one of the pebble-covered ledges at the Gunks than they do at any other ledge. It is almost a guarantee that they will knock rocks off. Even if they're careful with their feet, they'll knock rocks off with the rope in the course of their rope-work.
Some of my older partners, however, have well developed skills and tactics to avoid knocking rocks off these ledges. Unfortunately, such skills seem to be dying out.
Alpine - good post. While I've never made idiotic statements like the quotes in your post, at times I have definitely been culpable of trusting my helmet more than it deserves. I appreciate the warning, and will take it to heart.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
eastvillage
Dec 17, 2004, 10:38 PM
Post #81 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2004
Posts: 262
|
Wow, monster rant. You are an angry mofo!
In the old days, 70's, I didn't wear a helmet, didn't worry, the crags were uncrowded.
Today at the Gunks and other crowded crags, legions of gym brained idiots prowl the cliff top and rap down all over the place without warning, knocking rocks down in the process. I've seen lowering/rapping scenarios that made my jaw drop. So mainly for this reason, I wear a helmet now.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 17, 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #82 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Okay, my response is long, since I'm referring to multiple points in the original (very long) post. Please bear with me, and feel free to respond to my points in multiple posts.
I'm a noob (having started six years ago, and having started in the gym), and I generally wear a helmet when lead climbing. So I figured I'm just the person you were addressing.
In reply to: My biggest problem with the modern helmet crowd is that in practice, and among other things, it has replaced the DO NOT CLIMB UNDERNEATH OTHER PEOPLE rule.
I resemble that remark! Okay, so for weekend warriors like myself, how do you suggest I approach climbing at 3-8 pitch crags like Cannon, Whitehorse, Cathedral, Precipice, the Gunks, etc - all of which can, on a busy weekend, be as covered in climbers as a dropped lollipop with ants. Sure, I wait 'til the second has reached the next belay (rude not to) but that doesn't keep them from dropping shit on me as I lead up to their stance.
In reply to: Lets see, which makes more sense? Wear a helmet in an effort to protect yourself from people dropping things on you or don't climb underneath the people in the first place?
Which makes more sense? Hmm, well if your objective is to absolutely avoid getting something dropped on you, then your choice is obvious. But if you wish to climb at one of the crags I mention above on the weekend, well, then you've got to play the odds.
In reply to: So the newbie crowd has discarded the idea of not falling on easy routes...
This n00b is not guilty of that misperception. But then, I learned trad first, sport second - perhaps that has something to do with it.
In reply to: ...Discarded the rule of not climbing under other people.
See above.
In reply to: Discarded the idea of learning how to follow before they start leading...
That's an interesting one. I did indeed only follow a couple routes before I started leading. I did a lot of TRing first. But I also kept to easy routes when I was on the sharp end, and took any opportunity to follow a more experienced leader - hell, I still do. But let's face it, unless you're young and cute (and preferably have breasts), getting a full-time mentor ain't so easy these days. What's your solution for today's would-be trad leader?
In reply to: ...Decided that dropping a rock on their partner, it isn't their fault...
No way. My fault 100%.
In reply to: After all of that, they go out and buy a helmet and talk about how much safer they are because of it, and how anybody who doesn't wear a helmet must be stupid.
Yes, I bought one. Never told anyone else to do so, though. Still struggling though (as can be seen above) with the safety issues, though, so the purchase of said helmet did not cause my brain to turn off.
In reply to: The hypocrisy that I see from the group as a whole, gets old. Particularly when reading these "I wear a helmet threads."
I don't care for them either, but most seem to be born out of people's first-hand experience with traumatic events. Most people tend to respond to such things more on an emotional level than a logical one.
In reply to: Let's take Tahquitz and Suicide for example. The increase in rock fall hazard is way out of proportion to the increase in climber traffic. It was getting crowded on weekends 15 years ago. There wasn't the same rock fall madness that there is today. If anything, it was more common to come close to getting hit by a figure eight. (The sound of a figure eight pinging down the weeping wall is something I will never forget) There was a definite correlation between the increase in the use of helmets and the increase in the need to wear a helmet. People seem to be getting the helmet message pretty good. On the other hand, they do not seem to be getting the message that it is possible to climb without sending every other rock down the cliff. From what I have seen people are getting worse at this every year and the rocks that they are sending down are getting larger as well.
Agree 100% I suspect the Gunks is very similar to Tahquitz in this regard. See my previous post for more thoughts on this subject.
In reply to: I will not climb there on weekends anymore because I consider it an unreasonable and unnecessary risk. I climbed there for years without a helmet, I will still climb there mid-week without a helmet. The only rock fall that has ever hit me was small stuff from sudden thunder showers. If your of the opinion that wearing a helmet compensates for that additional risk, then I would have to say that you are deluding yourself.
Okay. So what do you say to climbers at the Gunks? Not safe at all on weekends? To me, this boils down to a previously unsolved problem: how much risk are you willing to assume? There's no one answer to this. All you can do is try to be honest with yourself about the real level of risks you are taking.
In reply to: Bold and fearless is good to a degree. Getting killed by letting a gumby drop a rock on your head is stupid.
That's a strong statement. Do you think it is stupid to climb at any of the dozens of popular multi-pitch trad crags in the US on weekends?
In reply to: I have seen a connection between wearing a helmet and taking lead falls. (particularly on 5.9's and under) The helmet crowd tends to forgo the idea of climbing within your limits. (Is anyone going to deny that the modern crew falls more often. Is anyone going to claim that is because falls are safe now?)
I can only speak for myself, but for me - here, you are wrong. I led traditional lines for two years before I began pushing myself at my limit regularly. With one exception, the only falls on trad routes I have ever taken have been on steep routes of 5.9 or harder.
In reply to: I have also seen a correlation between wearing a helmet and letting the rope get behind your leg, and between helmets and taking stupid unsafe falls on the first two bolts of a sport climbs! People start leading earlier and with less experience and skill then was the case in the old days. Anyone want to make a case that this has improved safety.
No. But I disagree that people used to be more patient. Lot's of "old timers" I know did some pretty stupid stuff when they were first starting out.
In reply to: For myself, I climb on choss all the time. I just make sure that it is steep enough that I am not going to drop anything on my belayer. Maple and the Potrero are great examples. Climb the steeper stuff and you are fine without a helmet. Climb the easier lower angle stuff and you are not fine even with a helmet.
Good tip.
I agree with all of your feeling about the quotes. One and all, they are ridiculous.
Regarding the rant about the climbing industry selling helmets, I think you're correct when you say:
In reply to: People often climb underneath other people now. The climbing industry seems not see that as a problem, they like crowds and the fact that it gives them a good scenario to sell helmets. It is not in their best interest to emphasize that it is unsafe to climb underneath other people, it is in their interest to say buy this and it will make your unsafe decisions safer... (of course they would never phrase it that way)
But here's the rub - people are not going to stop climbing at popular multi-pitch crags on the weekend. Do you have any solutions for these people? If you don't, then the climbing industry is giving them a level of safety that you cannot.
In reply to: Another bottom line is that people would actually be safer if they used a helmet in addition to the old guidelines instead of as a misguided and failed attempt at replacing them.
Naturally.
In reply to: I pretty much consider it a fact that as a group, disregarding other factors, people that wear helmets do tend to be more accident prone.
Seems fair, but I don't know if it is actually true.
In reply to: None of this should be taken as encouraging anyone not to wear a helmet.
No, of course not. But you have to admit, it does look a little like damning with faint praise. Anyway, my main problem with your otherwise fair rant is that it gives precious few answers for the weekend-warrior multi-pitch tradster, while suggesting that one of the tools in his arsenal is a crutch that will only get him into trouble.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
pt
Dec 17, 2004, 10:50 PM
Post #83 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 400
|
I've been climbing for about 25 years now and I learned to avoid the situations that the OP was talking about. I have recently, in the past 5 years, started to wear a helmet because I want to and I feel it adds some additional margin of safety. I have not forgotton everything I've learned about avoidance and other safety measures just because I now wear a helmet. I don't ever think I can do something safely just because I have a helmet on my head. I think many of your arguments are based on faulty logic. You can think what you want about my climbing ability and my state of mind, but you will always find me with my helmet on.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 18, 2004, 12:36 AM
Post #84 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. Just because it's common doesn't mean it's right. With a few exceptions, I guess (because there always are some) you don't want to be standing 15 feet back form the wall.
Well gee Dorothy, do tell! And I am sure that all offenders will read your post and stop standing so far back immediately.
By the way, nobody said it was right, in fact, I pointed out that it leads to trouble. Did you miss that part?
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 18, 2004, 1:40 AM
Post #85 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
keep it short, to the poiint , interesting and with a bit of humor. the full page responses suck about as bad as the origional childish rant :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 18, 2004, 1:42 AM
Post #86 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. Just because it's common doesn't mean it's right. With a few exceptions, I guess (because there always are some) you don't want to be standing 15 feet back form the wall. Well gee Dorothy, do tell! And I am sure that all offenders will read your post and stop standing so far back immediately. By the way, nobody said it was right, in fact, I pointed out that it leads to trouble. Did you miss that part?
Wait. Who's Dorothy? Do you mean John Gill's wife? I'm so confused now. Hahahaha.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 18, 2004, 1:57 AM
Post #88 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: One of the central points Dan is making, and that I agree with, is that you will not often get yourself into "the crap" situation, if you are being prudent. If you decide to knowingly put yourself in "the crap" situation by deciding to climb below other people, climb choss, climb ice, etc.--then by all means wear a helmet, because you will be somewhat safer. However, you will not be as safe as climbing under more prudent conditions, even without a helmet. Curt
That's just not true if you mostly go adventure climbing on unknown rock. You can say that it is then not prudent to do new routes, I guess. Suit yourself. I get in the crap situation a lot. On purpose. cause it's fun.
The whole idea of avoiding loose rock is funny to me, cause I see loose rock on nearly every new climb. THere is nothing more fun than trying to hit your belayer with a big rock! Of course, if you actually hit him, there could be trouble, so DON'T try this at home! Also, don't hit his dog with a rock, cause that will make him mad. Some people are funny about their dogs that way. Go figure.
But I digress. Raiing down rocks, dirt, various sorts of plant life and god only knows what is great fun, it's what doing an FA is all about. The trick is to make sure YOUR gear is out of the falliing zone, but your partner's stuff is right where everything will hit. IF you can bury some of his stuff, so much the better! Maybe he will forget about it and you can come back later and score some new gear. Burying your partner is frowned upon though, unless you hit him with a really big rock. Then you are sort of obligated to at least cover him with a big flat rock, a process known as "Flat Rocking". This procedure can also be used on the imprudent and unlucky learder from time to time.
But back to loose rock. The idea of avoiding it is fine, but if you are doing new routes in a popular area, you have some resposibility to clean up the routes so that Joe Climber will not grab on to that tempting flake edge (that is held on by sticky dirt moelcules holding hands with each other) and pull it off on himself and his friends, who are sitting in Crazy Creek chairs under the climb socializing.
All this talk about rock fall, hell, we have not even gotten to big sticks and dead trees! Now, I can tell you that there is NOTHING like tossing a 500 pound dead tree off a cliff. Especially one that is holding on by a few dead root hairs, and wishes only to kill a stupid human climber. It is much better style if you can pull the tree off while on lead, this is known as Onsight Tree Tossing. You may have to find a new belayer if you do this very often though, and most parties agree that the big stuff should come off when the second is above it and nobody is anywehre near the drop zone.
My last words about rockfall:
Gee,. all those rocks at the base of the cliff, they got there somehow... Did someone carry then in for decoration? NO! Why, I think they fell off the cliff!!!!! Some are big. Some are small. Some would not hurt your head at all. Some are large, some are round. Some would mash you in the ground.
Oh one more, it's so catchy:
Talus: Once was up, now is down. And if you have not noticed, there is a LOT of talus.
And one serious word to those who think they can avoid every bad situation: Sometimes, especially on previously unclimbed rock, you just can't tell what will come off and what will stay on. Some rock looks bad but is good, and some looks good but will come of in your hand with very little effort. Put your hand on enough new rock and you will find this out. Obviously bad rock is one thing, you can avoid that, but some crap rock is just not waving a flag and telling you that it is loose or crumbly. So you may think you can avoid bad rock, but if you were to climb on new rock much, you'd find that you can't always do that.
EDIT: Sorry Tradman, this may not be short, but I hope you got a laugh out if it. NO actual climbers or pets were harmed in the events that inspired this post, although I almost got my ass beat good for nearly dropping a tree on some friends once.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 18, 2004, 2:04 AM
Post #89 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. Just because it's common doesn't mean it's right. With a few exceptions, I guess (because there always are some) you don't want to be standing 15 feet back form the wall. Well gee Dorothy, do tell! And I am sure that all offenders will read your post and stop standing so far back immediately. By the way, nobody said it was right, in fact, I pointed out that it leads to trouble. Did you miss that part? Wait. Who's Dorothy? Do you mean John Gill's wife? I'm so confused now. Hahahaha. Curt
YOU know, the Dorothy as in ruby (climbing) slippers, naive little girl, famous qoute, Gee Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas any more!" The one whose house fell on my ex wife's sisiter.
|
|
|
|
|
c-money
Deleted
Dec 18, 2004, 2:12 AM
Post #90 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: I am surprised (but should not be, I suppose) at the number of responses to Dan here that indicate a fundamental lack of understanding, regarding Dan's excellent point. Curt
I agree. Why are people replying if they didn't bother to read the original post (and why read that much without making an effort to understand)? Yes, it is a lot of words, but none of them are too big or hard to figure out.
I enjoyed the original post and thought it had some good points.
I see the original post's point not as being that you should not bother wear your helmet, but that if you are going to all that effort to protect your head, you might use what is in that skull of yours as well...
|
|
|
|
|
gunkiemike
Dec 18, 2004, 2:40 AM
Post #91 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2266
|
Well I for one work extremely hard at all those points the OP made (not being under others, rope position, loose rock etc). It's disconcerting to learn that all those good deeds go to waste when I put my helmet on.
I agree that there is some logic bending going on. Newbies do stupid, dangerous things - AGREED. Newbies wear more helmets than sourdoughs - AGREED. There weren't decent hemets around when the grey hairs were learning the game and doing their stupid, dangerous things. But to posit a cause & effect relationship, i.e. that newbies do stupid, dangerous things because of some perceived invincibility thing related to hemets... BZZZT. You might just as well blame the Mountain Dew ads, the epics issue of Climbing magazine, a big chunk of the chest beating on this site, climbing video* etc etc.
* "Hey , if Dean P. can whip 70' onto a 0.2 Camalot, I can too!"
New climbers too often perceive the sport as being safer than it is, period. They are blase about the myriad subtle dangers. Unfortunately, the sport isn't that much safer than it was 30 yr ago. Gear has improved, yes, but crowding is worse, and the rush to climb higher grades is more common (IMO). We could debate whether it really IS more safe, or less so, but that's for another thread.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 18, 2004, 2:48 AM
Post #92 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: One of the central points Dan is making, and that I agree with, is that you will not often get yourself into "the crap" situation, if you are being prudent. If you decide to knowingly put yourself in "the crap" situation by deciding to climb below other people, climb choss, climb ice, etc.--then by all means wear a helmet, because you will be somewhat safer. However, you will not be as safe as climbing under more prudent conditions, even without a helmet. Curt That's just not true if you mostly go adventure climbing on unknown rock. You can say that it is then not prudent to do new routes, I guess. Suit yourself. I get in the crap situation a lot. On purpose. cause it's fun. The whole idea of avoiding loose rock is funny to me, cause I see loose rock on nearly every new climb. THere is nothing more fun than trying to hit your belayer with a big rock! Of course, if you actually hit him, there could be trouble, so DON'T try this at home! Also, don't hit his dog with a rock, cause that will make him mad. Some people are funny about their dogs that way. Go figure. But I digress. Raiing down rocks, dirt, various sorts of plant life and god only knows what is great fun, it's what doing an FA is all about. The trick is to make sure YOUR gear is out of the falliing zone, but your partner's stuff is right where everything will hit. IF you can bury some of his stuff, so much the better! Maybe he will forget about it and you can come back later and score some new gear. Burying your partner is frowned upon though, unless you hit him with a really big rock. Then you are sort of obligated to at least cover him with a big flat rock, a process known as "Flat Rocking". This procedure can also be used on the imprudent and unlucky learder from time to time. But back to loose rock. The idea of avoiding it is fine, but if you are doing new routes in a popular area, you have some resposibility to clean up the routes so that Joe Climber will not grab on to that tempting flake edge (that is held on by sticky dirt moelcules holding hands with each other) and pull it off on himself and his friends, who are sitting in Crazy Creek chairs under the climb socializing. All this talk about rock fall, hell, we have not even gotten to big sticks and dead trees! Now, I can tell you that there is NOTHING like tossing a 500 pound dead tree off a cliff. Especially one that is holding on by a few dead root hairs, and wishes only to kill a stupid human climber. It is much better style if you can pull the tree off while on lead, this is known as Onsight Tree Tossing. You may have to find a new belayer if you do this very often though, and most parties agree that the big stuff should come off when the second is above it and nobody is anywehre near the drop zone. My last words about rockfall: Gee,. all those rocks at the base of the cliff, they got there somehow... Did someone carry then in for decoration? NO! Why, I think they fell off the cliff!!!!! Some are big. Some are small. Some would not hurt your head at all. Some are large, some are round. Some would mash you in the ground. Oh one more, it's so catchy: Talus: Once was up, now is down. And if you have not noticed, there is a LOT of talus. And one serious word to those who think they can avoid every bad situation: Sometimes, especially on previously unclimbed rock, you just can't tell what will come off and what will stay on. Some rock looks bad but is good, and some looks good but will come of in your hand with very little effort. Put your hand on enough new rock and you will find this out. Obviously bad rock is one thing, you can avoid that, but some crap rock is just not waving a flag and telling you that it is loose or crumbly. So you may think you can avoid bad rock, but if you were to climb on new rock much, you'd find that you can't always do that. EDIT: Sorry Tradman, this may not be short, but I hope you got a laugh out if it. NO actual climbers or pets were harmed in the events that inspired this post, although I almost got my ass beat good for nearly dropping a tree on some friends once.
See, dirt, I don't think that you and Dan fundamentally disagree. You choose to put yourself into the line of fire, where there are more objective dangers and unknowns than are absolutely necessary. In those situations, Dan would agree that you are wise to wear a helmet, and I would too.
Also, I got some Caol Ila tonight-- a nice, but hard to find, Islay malt.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 18, 2004, 3:00 AM
Post #93 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. Just because it's common doesn't mean it's right. With a few exceptions, I guess (because there always are some) you don't want to be standing 15 feet back form the wall. Well gee Dorothy, do tell! And I am sure that all offenders will read your post and stop standing so far back immediately. By the way, nobody said it was right, in fact, I pointed out that it leads to trouble. Did you miss that part?
I was not even disagreeing with you, just making a statement (perhaps reiterated) that it is a bad habit, but one that both climber and belayer can control, to stand way out of the wall.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 18, 2004, 3:52 AM
Post #94 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: First, it is common to see belayers standing well back from the wall at sport crags. Just because it's common doesn't mean it's right. With a few exceptions, I guess (because there always are some) you don't want to be standing 15 feet back form the wall. Well gee Dorothy, do tell! And I am sure that all offenders will read your post and stop standing so far back immediately. By the way, nobody said it was right, in fact, I pointed out that it leads to trouble. Did you miss that part? Hi, did somebody stir a little condescending asshole into your coffee this morning? I was not even disagreeing with you, just making a statement (perhaps reiterated) that it is a bad habit, but one that both climber and belayer can control, to stand way out of the wall.
Temper temper!!!!
I guess when you make a statement that sounds condescending, you might get one back that sounds condesscending.
Never mind.
BUT you do remind me of Dorothy sometimes.
I don't drink coffee.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 18, 2004, 4:09 AM
Post #95 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: keep it short, to the poiint , interesting and with a bit of humor. the full page responses suck about as bad as the origional childish rant :roll:
Well, that's the other thing. One man's well thought out and articulated analysis is another man's childish rant.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 18, 2004, 5:26 AM
Post #96 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: keep it short, to the poiint , interesting and with a bit of humor. the full page responses suck about as bad as the origional childish rant :roll: Well, that's the other thing. One man's well thought out and articulated analysis is another man's childish rant. Curt
Dan did go a litle overboard, but it wasn't really childish. A little more pro helmet, a little more cunstructive tone for those who do seem to think a hemet providces a magic force field would have made a better post though.
But it was a rant, and he said so, so what the hell, a rant is a rant, and rant;s don't avhe to be logically or rhetorically perfect, they are RANTS.
I think we can sum it up with this:
If you are never going to Feck up, and you are never going to have to deal with an unpredictable act of god while climbing, then you don/t need to wear a helmet.
If you think a helmet guarantees your survival and allows you to do stupid things with impunity, you are wrong.
Does a helmet give you an extra bit of safety, in addition to following safe climbing pratices and using your brain? Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
Dec 18, 2004, 5:48 AM
Post #97 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
Ho, ho, the mother of all helmet debates. Although I identify emotionally with Dan, I find myself able to sympathize with a broad spectrum of responses. This means, I suppose, that I find myself in disagreement with parts of the same spectrum as well.
I see two conflicting lines of thinking both of which, in extreme forms, seem flawed.
One approach is that experienced and thoughtful climbers have an almost limitless ability to mitigate dangers. While true to a great extent, I think it is possible to carry this too far. Once in a while, and not as infrequently as we might like, things do go unexpectedly wrong. I've had rocks kicked on me by people I did not know were up there. I've had "bombproof" pro blow. I've had a hold I've used maybe 50 times break off on the 51st. I've fallen upside down for no reason I can explain in retrospect. I've lost good friends who were experienced and careful. I've seen others suffer bad injuries, and yet others walk away from things that should have killed them. After 40 years, I have become more humble, and I'm not nearly as confident in my ability to control everything as I was in my first 10, 15, 20 years of climbing.
On the other end of the spectrum are those who view climbing safety as a collection of voodoo incantations, which if recited continually will keep the evil spirits away. Helmet use, brake hand positions, rappel backups, stopper knots, and so on, become mantras that eliminate, rather than provoke thoughtful interpretation of the demands of the situation. These folks are in more danger than they think, precisely because they aren't thinking about the actual dangers they face.
This leaves me pretty firmly in the "it depends" camp. Nowadays, I wear a helmet on crags more and more. Helmets have gotten a lot lighter and less intrusive, although even a Petzl Meteor is just awful in hot weather. It is indeed harder to avoid falling objects on popular crags than it used to be. And a consequence of my relatively newfound humbleness is that a bit of redundance is a good thing, and a helmet often seems like the extra backup I put in before a big runout, even if the original piece is "bombproof." However, in the end, a personal decision has to be made. Redundance is nice, but you can't back up everything all the time, and everyone has to draw their own line---a process that can have different results on different days.
Neither of these points addresses a third issue that Dan raises but then, to my way of thinking, clouds with the suggestion that helmets somehow cause more rockfall. I think more rockfall is caused by carelessness, inattention, and a failure to recognize, much less assume, responsibility for the safety of those underneath you. I dimly sense that these attitudes are somehow related to crowding. Leading a trad pitch seems to me to be a fundamentally private occasion; there is something almost voyeuristic about watching someone struggle for composure and control on the rock. The presence of others is an intrusion, and there may be a strong desire to pretend they are not there.
But they are, and it is a matter of the most fundamental decency to be as sure as we possibly can that no harm comes to them on our account.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 18, 2004, 6:12 AM
Post #98 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Ho, ho, the mother of all helmet debates. Although I identify emotionally with Dan, I find myself able to sympathize with a broad spectrum of responses. This means, I suppose, that I find myself in disagreement with parts of the same spectrum as well. I see two conflicting lines of thinking both of which, in extreme forms, seem flawed. One approach is that experienced and thoughtful climbers have an almost limitless ability to mitigate dangers. While true to a great extent, I think it is possible to carry this too far. Once in a while, and not as infrequently as we might like, things do go unexpectedly wrong. I've had rocks kicked on me by people I did not know were up there. I've had "bombproof" pro blow. I've had a hold I've used maybe 50 times break off on the 51st. I've fallen upside down for no reason I can explain in retrospect. I've lost good friends who were experienced and careful. I've seen others suffer bad injuries, and yet others walk away from things that should have killed them. After 40 years, I have become more humble, and I'm not nearly as confident in my ability to control everything as I was in my first 10, 15, 20 years of climbing. On the other end of the spectrum are those who view climbing safety as a collection of voodoo incantations, which if recited continually will keep the evil spirits away. Helmet use, brake hand positions, rappel backups, stopper knots, and so on, become mantras that eliminate, rather than provoke thoughtful interpretation of the demands of the situation. These folks are in more danger than they think, precisely because they aren't thinking about the actual dangers they face. This leaves me pretty firmly in the "it depends" camp. Nowadays, I wear a helmet on crags more and more. Helmets have gotten a lot lighter and less intrusive, although even a Petzl Meteor is just awful in hot weather. It is indeed harder to avoid falling objects on popular crags than it used to be. And a consequence of my relatively newfound humbleness is that a bit of redundance is a good thing, and a helmet often seems like the extra backup I put in before a big runout, even if the original piece is "bombproof." However, in the end, a personal decision has to be made. Redundance is nice, but you can't back up everything all the time, and everyone has to draw their own line---a process that can have different results on different days. Neither of these points addresses a third issue that Dan raises but then, to my way of thinking, clouds with the suggestion that helmets somehow cause more rockfall. I think more rockfall is caused by carelessness, inattention, and a failure to recognize, much less assume, responsibility for the safety of those underneath you. I dimly sense that these attitudes are somehow related to crowding. Leading a trad pitch seems to me to be a fundamentally private occasion; there is something almost voyeuristic about watching someone struggle for composure and control on the rock. The presence of others is an intrusion, and there may be a strong desire to pretend they are not there. But they are, and it is a matter of the most fundamental decency to be as sure as we possibly can that no harm comes to them on our account.
Nice post, Rich. I did notice that you were wearing a helmet when we climbed together a couple of months ago. Is this (as I suspect) because there are increasing numbers of climbers in the Gunks, adding to the objective danger there--or for some other reason?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Dec 18, 2004, 6:27 AM
Post #99 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
I love it. Sport climbers and boulderers discussing objective hazards. That's rich! When was the last time you actually had man-killer rocks or ice zinging past your head? :lol: :lol: Just giving y'all a hard time.
No, really, I agreed with Dan's points about knowing what the hell you're getting yourself into, and situational awareness. I just disagree that there is a correlation between helmet wearing and gumbyness. That is effing stupid. And it's effing dangerous. Some gumby is going to read that and think that wearing a helmet isn't cool. The truth is that it IS better for gumbies to be wearing helmets until they start to figure out for themselves what is or is not safe (or safER, actually). Not as a substitute for safe behavior, but as a way to reduce at least some of the risk until they start to figure it out. What, you think newbies are just going to stop climbing because of Dan's post? Right.
Here's the deal. It's nice to think that you know what you're getting yourself into. It's nice to think that you know what crag is or is not prone to rockfall. And often you might be right. But there are rare times when you will be wrong.
Newsflash. EVERYWHERE we climb is subject to rockfall. And you may not see or hear it coming. And you many not be able to get out of the way. Ever been in a situation where there are 10 rocks coming down on you all at once? You think you can dodge that? Maybe. You think you can dodge that when your tied in and your movement is limited? Good luck. Because that's what it will be if you don't get hit - LUCK. Not skill. Not knowledge. Not experience. LUCK.
Just a couple years ago at a crag where I climbed a lot. A popular crag. Rockfall was rare. Someone walking below the cliff was hit in the head. There was nobody climbing above him. The was no warning. There was no sound. He spent 2 years in a coma, then he died. That's it.
Rockfall happens spontaneously sometimes. There's this thing called the freeze/thaw cycle, and you don't have to be very far North for it to be a factor. Enchanted Rock, outside of Texas, is a frickin' exfoliation dome. That means the shiite has been formed by freezing and thawing causing stuff to fall off. I would rarely see people wearing helmets there.
It's good advice to tell people they need to pay their dues, they need to learn how to recognize the relative danger of whatever situation they get themselves into. It is not good to say to say that people who wear helmets are fuck-ups, which is pretty much what he said here:
In reply to: I pretty much consider it a fact that as a group, disregarding other factors, people that wear helmets do tend to be more accident prone. |
|
|
|
|
tanner
Dec 18, 2004, 7:07 AM
Post #100 of 149
(9633 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
I agree with the purpose of this rant! I think helmets are never a bad idea but there are more important safty issues to discuss, that are not as visable. What about TR'ing off dangerous tree's with out testing them first? I see that one often enough.
There are tonnes of little things that can kill you.
Its also scary that many new climbers don't have any "what if" skills
Ask you self some "what If's" you might be just get humbled
Tanner
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 18, 2004, 7:49 AM
Post #101 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Re Cracklover. You seem to be one of the more sensible climbers on the site.
I haven't climbed back east very much.
I have done a lot of the weekend warrior routine.
I have arranged things so that I can work on weekends now. If I wasn't living in so cal it may have been less of an issue. (not really)
Re: Crowded multi-pitch
Be the first people on the route. It is good practice to try to be the most motivated party on the route. Easier said then done.
Climb fast. (it gives you flexibility and everyone you pass is one less person that can drop something on you)
Climb late.
Traversing routes.
Climbing harder routes eliminates a lot of problems.
Pick the party that you follow carefully. You can usually tell the party that is going to drop something, from the party that is not going to drop anything, just from watching them climb
Sometimes it is better to go bouldering.
Re leading/following
If you can stick to the no fall ethic, leading will teach you more then following. This assumes you have aced ground school. (for you, I would say climb on as many different types of rock as you can)
I learned how to climb on lead. I wouldn't characterize that as being particularly safe in the short run anyway. (ignorance is bliss)
Re?
I never really had a mentor. I met one experienced climber that didn't give a shit enough to be able to tell me to go lead this. For some reason I trusted his judgment and led the route. A year and a half later when I repeated the route and knew what the words pendulum and run-out meant......
Re: Climbing partners of different strength relative to yourself. It is good to mix it up.
In reply to: alpnclmbr1 wrote: Bold and fearless is good to a degree. Getting killed by letting a gumby drop a rock on your head is stupid. >>That's a strong statement. Do you think it is stupid to climb at any of the dozens of popular multi-pitch trad crags in the US on weekends?>>
It is kind of a personal mantra. I would be extremely embarrassed if I died from rock fall. I have a hard time thinking of a worse way to go, for a climber. I have avoided climbing at any number of places because of this issue. I am pretty confident that this practice has contributed to my safety way more then always wearing a helmet would have. I can often discard the helmet because in the bigger picture, I have more then compensated for its use.(note: this is an explanation of how I look at it. It is not a recomendation.)
In reply to: alpnclmbr1 wrote: I have seen a connection between wearing a helmet and taking lead falls. (particularly on 5.9's and under) The helmet crowd tends to forgo the idea of climbing within your limits. (Is anyone going to deny that the modern crew falls more often. Is anyone going to claim that is because falls are safe now?) I can only speak for myself, but for me - here, you are wrong. I led traditional lines for two years before I began pushing myself at my limit regularly. With one exception, the only falls on trad routes I have ever taken have been on steep routes of 5.9 or harder.
Seems like you are the new old school.
=-=-=-=-=
The really old schoolers that I know are still doing stupid unsafe stuff, by my standards.
=-=-=-=-==-=
In reply to: But here's the rub - people are not going to stop climbing at popular multi-pitch crags on the weekend. Do you have any solutions for these people? If you don't, then the climbing industry is giving them a level of safety that you cannot.
The climbing industry as a whole requires the attraction and retention of new climbers. That is inherent in their business models. I take that fact and some logical assumptions and put 2 and 2 together.....
I don't put too much of the blame at their door. But I would say that they are probably part of the problem. Their job is to try and sell you safety. My stance is that you cannot buy safety, period.
Is a ropes function to save your life in the event of a fall or is it a tool designed to encourage people to place themselves in mortal danger?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
In reply to: No, of course not. But you have to admit, it does look a little like damning with faint praise. Anyway, my main problem with your otherwise fair rant is that it gives precious few answers for the weekend-warrior multi-pitch tradster, while suggesting that one of the tools in his arsenal is a crutch that will only get him into trouble.
I pretty much think that helmets are being oversold. No need for me to add to it.
As far as the rest of it, that is the trouble with speaking in generalizations. (see above for what little I can offer)
If you wouldn't rock climb without a helmet; Yet, you would climb with a helmet. Then you are into placing your faith in the tooth fairy.
=-=-==-=-=
I treat rock fall hazard in a very similar way as I treat lightning. I am downright paranoid about lightning. (there are very few things that can get me out of bed at 2:00 in the morning)
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 18, 2004, 11:36 AM
Post #102 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
Again, my problem with this rant is that you claimed that people who wear helmets are unsafe climbers. Visit a sport crag on any weekend and you'll find very few helmets while still finding many mistakes.
I also don't agree with you that falling is not safe. Actually, thinking along those lines will be more limiting then enhancing to climbing. I order to fall safely, you have to know how to fall and when it's not safe to fall. They are definately times when falling is unsafe, but I have been on many 5.9 below routes where that was not the case.
I comletely agree with you on the main issue. Wearing a helmet doesn't make you a safer climber, but wearing a helemt will help eliminate some of the danger that are out there.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 18, 2004, 4:33 PM
Post #103 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I love it. Sport climbers and boulderers discussing objective hazards. That's rich! When was the last time you actually had man-killer rocks or ice zinging past your head? :lol: :lol:
Hey there huge
Round these parts, I am as likely to get beaned by a rock at a sport crag, more likely in fact, than I am trad.
Why?
Sport climbing on overhanging choss at developing cliffs... there is a newness to these routes that pays gravitational dividends. The belayer is often standing near the receiving ends of these deposits.
When we climb at one cliff in particular... it is considered (by us) more important for the belayer to wear than the leader.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 18, 2004, 4:38 PM
Post #104 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
I am not convinced, not even for a minute, that I am safer climbing without a helmet than with. Doesn't mean I always wear one, as ultimate safety isn't always my goal. I just don't confuse convenience and comfort with safety and prudence.
Sorry. No cookie for you.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Dec 18, 2004, 10:33 PM
Post #105 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Just ask paul pritchard about helmets if you need a negative example. rus raffa might have a thing or two to say but he can't caus he is dead.
Get your information right, Russ Raffa (NY) is alive and kicking. Where in the F%^k did you get your information?
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 18, 2004, 10:37 PM
Post #106 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Just ask paul pritchard about helmets if you need a negative example. rus raffa might have a thing or two to say but he can't caus he is dead. Get your information right, Russ Raffa (NY) is alive and kicking. Where in the F%^k did you get your information?
Maybe Russ is dead but just doesn't know it yet. Do you want to tell him, or should I? :roll:
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
gunkjunkie
Dec 19, 2004, 12:16 AM
Post #107 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2001
Posts: 153
|
I have some difficulty understanding the reasons given for not wearing helmets - they don't seem to be logical. Helmets don't cause unsafe patterns of behavior - it is very likely that the people exhibiting those undafe behaviors would act in the same manner regardless of whether they were wearing a helmet or not.
I writing on this board today because a helmet saved my life - I fell off a horse and sustained a very serious concussion. I was unconscious for over a day and unable to care myself for over a week. I was functioning at a child's level for about a month and dealt with reprecussions headaches etc. for sometime after. I hate to think what would have happened had I hit the ground without a helmet. One can have an accident at anytime - holds break, weather changes, some idiot climbs over you and drops something (happened to me) - and helmets offer an additional margin of safety. Granted they don't remove all risks - neither do rappel backups or little rangefinder dots on the metolius cams (I find these to be silly but maybe they help.).
Since my last concussion (non-climbing) I have difficulty finding words (it sucks to be holding a stapler in your hand and not be able to find the word for it) and problems learning new tasks - as well as post-head injury migranes - so even minor concussions can have serious effects.
Deirdre
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 19, 2004, 7:31 AM
Post #108 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
In reply to: Okay, so for weekend warriors like myself, how do you suggest I approach climbing at 3-8 pitch crags like Cannon, Whitehorse, Cathedral, Precipice, the Gunks, etc - all of which can, on a busy weekend, be as covered in climbers as a dropped lollipop with ants. But let's face it, unless you're young and cute (and preferably have breasts), getting a full-time mentor ain't so easy these days. What's your solution for today's would-be trad leader? That's a strong statement. Do you think it is stupid to climb at any of the dozens of popular multi-pitch trad crags in the US on weekends?
Finding a mentor is hard, but possible. Most mentors want to train future climbing partners. Pick one that has same type of goals and ask him/her stuff related to these goals. He/she will be interested. I know this since I've done it. And it's been done to me.
It is stupid to climb below anyone. Area doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
zara
Dec 19, 2004, 1:27 PM
Post #109 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2004
Posts: 60
|
(to the writer of the thread)
I just started rock climbing this year in the summer. On Friday I did a climb called "Jackie"(5.6) in the gunks. As you can see, I am a noob. I understand your post, but cant u follow all the safety guidelines you are mentioning and still wear a helmet. Surely not everyone that wears a helmet is a completely irresponsible climber.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 19, 2004, 4:21 PM
Post #110 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: (to the writer of the thread) I understand your post, but cant u follow all the safety guidelines you are mentioning and still wear a helmet.
If you make an effort to follow as many of them as you can. Then you will be safer.
In reply to: Surely not everyone that wears a helmet is a completely irresponsible climber.
You are not the only person who has made that comment. My bad for leaving that perception. Of course not.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 19, 2004, 4:31 PM
Post #111 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: I have some difficulty understanding the reasons given for not wearing helmets - they don't seem to be logical. Helmets don't cause unsafe patterns of behavior - it is very likely that the people exhibiting those undafe behaviors would act in the same manner regardless of whether they were wearing a helmet or not.
All I can say is that the increased use of a helmet has paralled the increase in irresponsable behavior around loose rock and increased exposure to loose rock.
In reply to: I writing on this board today because a helmet saved my life - I fell off a horse and sustained a very serious concussion.
Getting hurt should always be a major concern. Wearing a helmet can be a useful measure in that regard. However, it is far from being the most important step that you can take. Keep it's use in perspective. A helmet doesn't do much good if you break your neck.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 19, 2004, 4:37 PM
Post #112 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
=-=--=
Scrappydoo wrote:
In reply to: However, the original argument presented is flawed, a false dichotomy. the reasoning is "the act of wearing a helmet renders a person incapable of being aware of, and taking steps towards averting, dangers"-- i.e. you can't wear a helmet AND be a safe climber at the same time. This, obviously, is patently false.
I wear a helmet on occasion, and I like to think that I am a relatively safe climber.
=-=-=--===--
re seatbelt stats. The numbers i have seen seem to show that the adoption of mandatory seatbelt laws led to a 50% decrease in the likelyhood of dieing in a highway accident.
=-=-=--====-=-=
For what it's worth, I use a helmet for both skiing and mountain biking. I also consider both of these activities to be much more dangerous then rock climbing.
=-=-=-=-==-
In reply to: i.e. stupid people kill smart people
=--=--=-=
joeschmoe wrote:
In reply to: Helmets are there to protect you when good judgement can't, plain and simple.
=-=---=-=--=-=-=
sspssp wrote
In reply to: So if you guys are so good that you can hang on to broken holds and casually toss them aside, I assume you don't ever fall either? So in addition to leaving the helmet at home, you might as well leave the rope, right?
Speaking for myself. Often times, yes. Sometimes, it is even safer, to leave the rope behind than it would be to take it.
=-=-=-=-
In reply to: Just out of curiosity, what are you trying to accomplish with your post/rant?
I am trying to point out that wearing a helmet and then doing stupid unsafe things is to a large extent, hypocritical.
For the most part, I formed this bias ten years ago or more. When I see a helmet. Warning flags go up and I tend to watch the person. If the person does a number of stupid things in a short time, I go elsewhere. (keep in mind that I do not climb in areas with major rockfall hazard)
=-=-=-=-
Note: Being a beginner is not a justification for stupidity.
=-=-=-=-=-=
Dirtineye wrote
In reply to: If you are never going to Feck up, and you are never going to have to deal with an unpredictable act of god while climbing, then you don/t need to wear a helmet.
I have always spent a large amount of my time operating under the oopps and you die mode.
The other times are under the theory of minimizing my mistakes to the point that I am unlikely to die when I do make mistakes. In my mind, in the event of a win the lottery type of accident. A helmet saving you would be like winning the lottery twice in one moment. If a helmet saves you from a golf ball; then it is time to start worrying about the brick.
Rgold wrote
In reply to: Neither of these points addresses a third issue that Dan raises but then, to my way of thinking, clouds with the suggestion that helmets somehow cause more rockfall. I think more rockfall is caused by carelessness, inattention, and a failure to recognize, much less assume, responsibility for the safety of those underneath you.
My rant is based on how I feel about the unsafe "gumbies of america."
The reason I am directing these comments specifically towards helmet wearers is because I am assuming that they are interested in being as safe as is possible. (Spending cold cash on something that people think is uncool, that says something) My suggestions are geared towards encouraging people that want to be safe climbers to distinguish themselves from the unsafe people that sometimes don't wear helmets, but often do.
If they were choosing and using helmets in a responsible manner, then they would always be the exemplary climbers at any crag.
=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=---==--=-=-=-
As far as the length of the post. I started writing and collecting that and this post about a year ago. I planned on trimming it down at some point. As it was, it just kept getting longer. Just imagine what it would of looked like if I had waited another year.
I didn't really make any recommendations in regards to whether or not anyone should or should not wear a helmet.
Most of my comments are directed towards the practices of a group of people who tend to wear helmets, not the helmets themselves.
I would assume that most people that wear helmets are concerned about their safety. So then what is the deal with people wearing helmets and then doing crazy unsafe things. I can understand the people who do not wear helmets and do stupid unsafe things. They are just stupid. What's up with the other guys?
The defensiveness around the topic of helmets say's something. I am not sure what.
RE: risk tolerance strategies. Good luck. I try to keep a balance. If I take more risks there; I will take less risks over there...
RE: the touron's throwing things off the cliff. I treat being subject to that risk in a similar manner to natural rock fall or a threatening lightning storm. As a general rule I avoid being in those situations. When I am in them I tend to leave as soon as possible. If I get hurt under those circumstances, it's my own fault. Trying to blame it on something outside of your control is pointless.
Survival training, where they send you in with only a knife, and everyone else has guns. Think of your head as being a big target that the rock gods are trying to hit. Sometimes fear is a good thing.
I would think that just about anyone that has worn a helmet while skiing or boarding will know from personal experience that at they very minimum, they have the potential of contributing to recklessness.
RE; the guy that can only climb at a dangerous crowded crag. A certain amount of risk is inherent in the activity, if you can accept that risk. Climb on. Then, as soon as you can, arrange things so that you never have to do that again. It is one of those stack the odds in your favor, when you can.
RE: Falling head first is a good reason to wear a helmet. A helmet may save you once, it may even save you twice...
If you want to live a long and fruitful climbing life. Avoid taking headfirst falls. Whether or not you are wearing a helmet is really beside the point.
RE: inadvertent awkward falls. All I can say is that if you do a thorough enough of a job in preventing them in first place. Then you are less likely to pay the ultimate price if and when it does happen.
=-===--
A few real world scenarios that some of my observations were based on.
=--=-=-=-=-=-==-=
A guy gets two pieces off the ground, runs it out to possible ground fall territory, throws a heel hook over his head and peels. He take a head first dive at the ground and then swings sideways until he smacks into his belayer. While he is swinging sideways, his head is scraping the ground.
Thank god he was wearing a helmet??? Really, I would have to question that conclusion. The guy may have been better off not wearing a helmet and actually having hit his head. Then he might of learned something.
As it is, the guy got back up, dusted himself off, and did the same exact thing again. I didn't wait around to see if he did it a third time, or what the result was...
That kind of stuff makes me mad.
=---=-=-=-=-==-=
Of the people I know, that started climbing about 5 to 8 years after I did. I think maybe 60% of them broke an ankle. This is versus pretty much none in the crew that started when I did or before.
The new crew tried to imitate the old crew without the benefit of four or five years on the rock? That and the overall group had changed because it was slowly becoming easier to become a climber.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-
Tahquitz and suicide warning signs.
For years, helmets were a pretty good sign of someone you didn't want to climb next to. Helmets and hexes meant sierra clubbers. Again, often someone to avoid.
These signs were verified as being good warning signs numerous times over many years.
"We should leave" was rarely even debated, we just did it.
This is not to say that there were not the occasional uber safe climbers that wore helmets. These guys actually stood out in the precision of their procedures and how they climbed. They were and are far from being the norm.
=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-===-=--=-=
Note: I may be overstating things in terms of the current crew of helmet wearers. They haven't convince me of that.
Some people operate with unrealistic expectations of their helmet.
The one guy that I know that died from rock fall that got the side of his neck. (carotid artery) Are you dogmatic helmet wearers fully aware of the significance of this event?
My general impression of a random rc.com group is that it is safer to run away. Like wearing a helmet times two as far as a warning sign.
Finally, proof is in the pudding. I have gone through twenty years of moderately hard bouldering, sport, trad, and alpine. Sometimes I wear a helmet, not a big deal. The big deal is that I have never been hit on the head with a rock. (I have been tagged by ice a few times, with a helmet of course.) My absolute worst falls have been pendulums into a wall. Always feet first, and resulting in bruised feet maybe three times in twenty?
Maybe, you already can't match that effort. Doesn't matter. What does matter is the record that you can keep in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
tuna
Dec 19, 2004, 6:47 PM
Post #113 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 28, 2004
Posts: 188
|
I like to wear my helmet on long alpine routes because its shiny.
Maybe you should get a shiny helmet as well. And get a large one for that big ego of yours.
In reply to: "As far as falling and hitting your head on a rock? I have taken, belayed, or witnessed something on the order of 10,000 to 20,000 falls"
WOW that makes 7658 days since you first started climbing. We can say no more than 15,000 falls that you have seen , taken or belayed it it it means you have climbed every day since you started and on the average have fallen or belayed a faller or seen someone falling 1.9587 time per day
I would not want to climb with you since I think that either makes you unlucky or careless.
How many days have you worn your helmet since you started climbing. Has it been every day that might explain such high numbers.
In reply to: "The bottom line is that I have seen a higher percentage of people with helmets doing stupid things specifically related to the supposed protection a helmet offers"
Im sure someone said the same thing when cams were first introduced those stupid people thinking that a cam would make a crack climb safer by allowing someone to run it out just a bit further
mmmm bored now think I might go and put my helmet on the ice is perfect
|
|
|
|
|
antigrav
Dec 19, 2004, 9:26 PM
Post #114 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2003
Posts: 215
|
The really, really amazing thing is that so many non-helmet-users are so occupied with the usage of helmets. It's almost as if it's not so singular an idea that helmet-use => carelessness => increased danger to helmetless climbers. Peculiar.
|
|
|
|
|
chrisparedes
Dec 20, 2004, 12:15 AM
Post #116 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2004
Posts: 211
|
You make good points, but that still does not change the fact that you are going to be more protected from unexpected events when you are wearing a helmet as opposed to not wearing a helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Dec 20, 2004, 1:08 AM
Post #117 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
Funny, talk all you want. Seem to be a lot less accidents 25 years ago when very few wore them. less climbers too...but climbers works their way through the grades and learn how to place and use gear.
|
|
|
|
|
coylec
Dec 20, 2004, 1:52 AM
Post #118 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024
|
In reply to: I am not convinced, not even for a minute, that I am safer climbing without a helmet than with. Doesn't mean I always wear one, as ultimate safety isn't always my goal. I just don't confuse convenience and comfort with safety and prudence.
After several helmet discussions being across the aisle from Mr. MilkToast, I believe we're on the same side here. Wearing a helmet is a personal choice, and a choice which should be with knowledge of what that decision entails. (DMT: If I'm mischaracterizing your thoughts, please correct me).
I'm a helmet proponent. I think that you should wear a helmet unless you've got the experience and knowledge to make a qualified judgment call not use a helmet.
Do helmets cause accidents? No. The choice of wearing a helmet or not the most important safety decision to make? No. It's part of a matrix of safety factors.
Perhaps I'm just lucky, but I've been hit by falling rock, I've had gear dropped on me, and I've had inverted falls. This doesn't include my propensity to knock my head into overhangs, and my clumsiness whilst walking. I've been struck in the head with a thrown rope (thrower didn't call "rope") and a basketball (gym climbing).
But, its your choice. You can choose between the increased margin of safety that a helmet affords or not. But if I'm first on scene after you've split your brain open 'cause you weren't wearing a helmet, I'll help patch you up, but I will tell ya you should have been wearing a helmet.
Oh, yeah -- this is a gem:
In reply to: Murphy's law is just waiting to accellerate towards your unprotected scalp at 9.8 m/s.
coylec
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Dec 20, 2004, 2:23 AM
Post #119 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Perhaps I'm just lucky, but I've been hit by falling rock, I've had gear dropped on me, and I've had inverted falls. This doesn't include my propensity to knock my head into overhangs, and my clumsiness whilst walking. I've been struck in the head with a thrown rope (thrower didn't call "rope") and a basketball (gym climbing).
dude, time to change partners or stop climbing all together.
|
|
|
|
|
coylec
Dec 20, 2004, 2:48 AM
Post #120 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024
|
Perhaps.
Only one of those accidents were caused by a partner (you know who you are :wink: ) and it was just luck of the draw.
I wear a helmet though ... so no injuries. :D [knock]
coylec
|
|
|
|
|
veritasmmv
Dec 20, 2004, 3:56 AM
Post #121 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2004
Posts: 72
|
if they're so highly unlikely events why did you list like 10 guys?
|
|
|
|
|
gunkiemike
Dec 20, 2004, 3:28 PM
Post #122 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2266
|
OK, the group therapy is working; the truth is coming out:
> For years, helmets were a pretty good sign of someone you didn't want to climb next to. Helmets and hexes meant *sierra clubbers*. Again, often someone to avoid.
These signs were verified as being good warning signs numerous times over many years.
"We should leave" was rarely even debated, we just did it.
>My general impression of a random *rc.com group* is that it is safer to run away. Like wearing a helmet times two as far as a warning sign.
(Emphasis asterisks added)
It seems you just don't like gumbie groups, period. No need to bring helmets into it.
Sadly, it takes longer to develop a sense of what the rope is doing as you drag it across a ledge, to be able to fumble for crux gear without dropping any, and to judge/test suspect handholds before pulling on them than it does to walk out of the store with a shiny new brain bucket. Give the gumbies time - if they stick with this game they will acquire the subtle points of climbing safety.
Realize that many of these same newbs may also want to climb hard, serious routes like their heros in the magazines. This also takes time, but notice that they already have all the gear trappings of a hard(wo)man. Is that hypocritical? I don't think so. It's just easier these days to gear up - for either safety OR upward progression) - than it is to gain experience and the judgement that comes along with it.
Not to flame, but be careful...you're becoming a bitter and jaded old climber.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 20, 2004, 4:02 PM
Post #123 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: I writing on this board today because a helmet saved my life - I fell off a horse and sustained a very serious concussion. Getting hurt should always be a major concern. Wearing a helmet can be a useful measure in that regard. However, it is far from being the most important step that you can take. Keep it's use in perspective. A helmet doesn't do much good if you break your neck.
A helmet can be a useful measure in regards to injury you say???
WOW! Now that is a SHOW STOPPER!!!111
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 20, 2004, 4:06 PM
Post #124 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I am trying to point out that wearing a helmet and then doing stupid unsafe things is to a large extent, hypocritical.
Then so is using a lead rope and then running it out 100 feet. Or using any semblance of safety equipment and then taking any chance whatsoever. All hypocritical?
Bull shit.
Wearing a helmet is NOT, to a large extent, or to any great extent AT ALL, hypocritical.
You are flat out wrong.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Dec 20, 2004, 4:12 PM
Post #125 of 149
(9106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Thanks, but you only explained what happened in those situations, not why the climber was not at fault. In each case, it is clearly the climber (or belayer) who shares fault. ... Yes, by all means, wear your helmet, but judgement and common sense are what provide the most safety. Well it certainly isn't clear to me that they were at fault--and I was there! The idea that one "shouldn't" fall in certain situations is not real clear. Sure experinced climbers understand and respond to "should not fall" situations but I have seen solid 5.11 leaders fall on 5.8. I have seen "tested" holds break. Come on there is lots of objective danger. And of course, good judjement is most important--but wearing a helmet does not negate that--that's my point. Since you brought it up, for those three cases you mentioned, 1) Climbing at a location where rockfall is likely 2) Belayer in line of rockfall, possibly not paying attention; climber standing on a loose hold. 3) Climber falling where he shouldn't; possibly inadequte protection for a traverse You seem to want to absolve the climbers of any responsibility, but clearly they share some of the fault. With a little bit better judgement, even risk in situations of high objective hazard can be minimized. I agree with your point that wearing a helmet doesn't negate having good judgement, but its difficult for me to then understand how you could dismiss the climbers' responsibility in your three original anecdotes.
I guess I'm having trouble articulating.
1) Rock fall is "possible" anywhere there are rocks. How did you make the judgement it was "likely" since you have no idea where it was.
2) Almost not worth answering. as you have no idea of the situation. Multi pitch trad routes often have limited choices for setting up a belay and the "possibility" of rock fall.
3) the fall was well proteced and the move was some 3 number grades below the climbers normal lead level. But he fell. By your standards there would be no need for a rope when climbing below your lead level.
And I never said the climber bore "no" responsibilty. What I said and what I still say is that stuff happens and even with a carefull, well trained climber there are still going to be bad events and to my mind a helmet helps
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 20, 2004, 4:14 PM
Post #126 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
I also wear a helme much more frequently these days for my wife and kids.
Its hard to insist on your kid wearing a helmet if you don't.
And yet, as almost any parent will instinctively understand, there is one sound in the world that no parent ever wants to hear... the sound of a child's head hitting something hard.
That sound... the sound of a child's skull smashing into a rock...
Think about that sound the next time you are climbing without a helmet.
The sound of a child's head thudding that terrible, deadly sound.
I never, ever want to hear that sound, not from my children, not from any mother's son either.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 20, 2004, 4:15 PM
Post #127 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Sorry for that uncool mistaken refrence to Russ raffa. Who was the gunks climber that got killed by rockfall on the Eiger??
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 20, 2004, 4:52 PM
Post #128 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
Eiger north face... hehe. I'd doubt many of the helmet people discussed here would have balls to try it. And if they did they wouldn't succeed or would get killed. The easy 1938 line is graded mere ED2. The 1800m of it have been soloed in four and a half hours. Can't be that bad, can it.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 20, 2004, 5:29 PM
Post #129 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: Eiger north face... hehe. I'd doubt many of the helmet people discussed here would have balls to try it. And if they did they wouldn't succeed or would get killed. The easy 1938 line is graded mere ED2. The 1800m of it have been soloed in four and a half hours. Can't be that bad, can it.
Wow, you manage to confuse climbing skill, luck, and fortitude with good safety procedures all in one short paragraph.
What's a "helmet person", anyway? Some of the best climbers I know wear helmets, and some of the best climbers I know don't wear em.
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 20, 2004, 5:45 PM
Post #130 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
"Helmet person" is someone who wears a helmet and thinks he/she is safe because of it. The root of this rant.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Dec 20, 2004, 6:08 PM
Post #131 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
So what does that make a non helmet person? Someone who does not wear a helmet because they are too cool for that and feel that they are a safer climber because they are so cool :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 20, 2004, 6:32 PM
Post #132 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Eiger north face... hehe. I'd doubt many of the helmet people discussed here would have balls to try it. And if they did they wouldn't succeed or would get killed. The easy 1938 line is graded mere ED2. The 1800m of it have been soloed in four and a half hours. Can't be that bad, can it.
So... were you wearing a helmet when you sent the north face of the Eiger?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Dec 20, 2004, 6:46 PM
Post #133 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Sorry for that uncool mistaken refrence to Russ raffa. Who was the gunks climber that got killed by rockfall on the Eiger??
Wrong again. Not rock fall. It was anchor/rappel failure. It was Kevin Bein.
|
|
|
|
|
cactusjack
Dec 20, 2004, 6:51 PM
Post #134 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 27, 2004
Posts: 62
|
Dam# it! "Helmet Person"...what the heck. I love the amount of ileducated stero-typing going on. Makes sense to me why some of you don't wear a helmet,...it called flawed logic.
Look we wear helmets because stuff falls from above. Yes some people wear helmets, and think it makes them supper man. However, there are quite a bit more hard core climbing people in the sport 8+ years, who wear helmets, because they've seen what can happen to others around them.
If you choose not to wear one, don't go spreading flawed logic to get others not to wear them.
Once again, I work with brain injury, and buddy when your on the can and can't wipe your as# because you can't move half your body. Don't say we didn't worn you!
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 20, 2004, 8:33 PM
Post #135 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Show me anywhere that I have advocated that anyone discard the use of a helmet.
=-=-==-=
RE: the guy who doesn't think I have seen 10 to 20k falls.
I concentrated on sport climbing for maybe eight years out of the twenty. Four or so years full time. Somewhere around 1500 sport climbing days when you put it all together. That is an average of ten falls a days. Taken, belayed, witnessed? sure thing.....
Re: the dangerous climber part. Maybe so, I have free soloed 5.11 and bouldered highball V5.
=-=-=-=-=---=-=-=-=-=--=-==--=--=
RE: The guy who thinks being afraid of stupid gumbies and not liking them is the same thing. Whatever.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
My contention is that following the practice not letting other people (and climbing partners) drop things on you virtually eliminates the threat of rock fall. (That sounds like an endorsement of a stricter safety protocol to me.)
For most people in most areas, the risk from natural rock fall is virtually nil. Things rarely just fall out of the sky. (Helmet use is almost universal in situations where there is a high incidence of natural rock or icefall.)
If you climb with people that are careful enough to approach keeping to the rate of rock fall that they create comparable to that of natural rock fall, then you will again, be much safer.
The risk for getting hit by natural rock fall in on par with winning the lottery. For the most part, you control that risk by limiting the amount of time you spend exposed to that risk. (more time equals buying more tickets) Take a lesson from the alpine crew. This is how you deal with objective danger.
Now lets look at rock fall risk from climbing below other parties, or even worse, with a climbing partner that drops rocks on you. Would anyone argue that there is not a significantly increased risk level from climbing underneath another party as compared with the threat from natural rock fall?
=-=---=-=-=-=-
Finally, more stats.
There were 11 rock fall accidents last year in the US.(reported to anam) Around ten percent of all climbing accidents for the year and on par for average number of incidents per year. Every one of them was caused by climbers. During the same time period, the overall injury tally was cut in half. (1986-2003) (1986 was around 230 accidents, 118 total for 2003,)
So, people are getting better at not getting hurt, but they are not doing as well in regards to preventing rock fall injuries. So half as many injuries, but the same number of rock fall incidents. This seems to support my observations. (I was surprised to find that the over all accident rate had actually gone down. That is encouraging, but it is in contrast to what I sometimes see at the crags,)
In the last 50 years of climbing in Australia, there were 3 fatalities from rock fall.
=-=-=-=-==
RE: dingus,
Yes, the person who runs it out for a hundred feet on fifth class terrain with a rope and climbing partner is a hypocrite. (or stupid, as you wish)
So is the guy that buys a gun for self defense and then plays Russian Roulette with it.
And, so is the person that buys a helmet and then behaves in a stupid and unsafe manner.
There is a right and a wrong way to use a helmet, and it is capable of being misused, and it often is.
]=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
End of story for me. (I hope)
Have fun
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 20, 2004, 8:56 PM
Post #136 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Sorry for that uncool mistaken refrence to Russ raffa. Who was the gunks climber that got killed by rockfall on the Eiger?? Wrong again. Not rock fall. It was anchor/rappel failure. It was Kevin Bein.
And it was on the Matterhorn, not the Eiger.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
Dec 20, 2004, 9:27 PM
Post #137 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Sorry for that uncool mistaken refrence to Russ raffa. Who was the gunks climber that got killed by rockfall on the Eiger?? Wrong again. Not rock fall. It was anchor/rappel failure. It was Kevin Bein. And it was on the Matterhorn, not the Eiger. Curt
And Kevin was wearing a helmet. He always did, after hitting his head in a climbing fall in the Gunks, an accident that left him with periodic epileptic seizures.
|
|
|
|
|
tuna
Dec 21, 2004, 12:36 PM
Post #138 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 28, 2004
Posts: 188
|
Equally important, and a sine qua non for future attempts, are the new plastic crash-helmets. Noichl's party as well as Diemberger and Stefan reported that during murderous volleys of stone-fire they were glad to crouch down under the full protection of their helmets. Stefan's had a great dent in it from a falling stone and but for its protection he would probaly not be alive now. But in spite of all security measures, the North Wall of the Eiger remains one of the most perilous in the Alps.
So in 1958, the twentieth year after the first ascent, brought yet another success. It showed too that there are many ways in which the dangers of the Face can be minimised. THE MOST IMPORTANT AND ABSOLUTELY INDISPENSABLE REQUISITE IS OUTSTANDING SKILL AS A CLIMBER; BUT THAT ALONE IS NOT ENOUGH.
Quoted from The White Spider written by Heinrich Harrer describing the 15th accent of the North Face in 1958 by Kurt Diemberger and Wolfgang Stefan.
|
|
|
|
|
adnix
Dec 21, 2004, 7:26 PM
Post #139 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 584
|
Routes on Eiger:
http://www.alpinist.com/...ng-notes/note/10020/
The Slovenian route hasn't seen a second ascent since nobody knows where the line goes. On the picture it's only an estimate and probably wrong. You generally have to choose between harsh conditions (=cold) or frequent rock fall (=warm).
|
|
|
|
|
takeme
Dec 29, 2004, 8:07 PM
Post #140 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2003
Posts: 367
|
I don't have anything to add to the debate, such as it is, but I remember reading a funny story Pat Ament wrote about climbing with Kor. Apparently Kor was dragging the relative newbie Ament up some new climb in the Black Canyon. When Ament reached the belay after following a pitch, Kor suddenly became enraged, picked up a bunch of rope, hurled it against the cliff, and shouted, "Where's you're hard hat? Noone climbs in the Black Canyon without a hard hat!". Ament wrote that he was so terrified by this outburst that he failed to notice that Kor wasn't wearing one either.
Wish I could remember where I read this, or what the name of the story was--the whole piece was great.
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Dec 29, 2004, 8:21 PM
Post #141 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
.. umm ... helmet wearing seems to be yet another touchy subject .. it boils down to experience and being able to make the call of when it is a required piece of equipment or not.
if the climb is steep, and not alot of people above you -- leave the helmet..
if the climb is not very steep and people might be above you .. get the brain bucket.
for example.
when i climb at five open books in yose. I DO wear my helmet ..
when i climbed tangerine trip this last fall .. I DID NOT wear a helmet. . no point in wearing it when the whole route overhangs, and everything falls away from the wall.
.. isnt' that what the original poster was saying .. that you shoudl THINK about what you're doing.
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
killer_crag_move
Dec 30, 2004, 6:22 AM
Post #142 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 21
|
I like your name.. alpneclimber.. thats great.. and your sitting here trying to justify why you shouldnt wear a helmet...
you my friend.. are a fucking idiot I guarntee in your years of climbing, you will have one time..just one time you wished you wouldve been wearing a helmet. and that my friend, is all it takes.
Shut up, really. Anyone who actually takes the time to read that long post of idiocy is just as big of an idiot as the author.
WEAR A HELMET FOLKS. Especially if your a bigwaller, alpinist, trad'r..
sport climbers, i wont tell you to wear a helmet because i usually dont when i sport climb. normally all i bring with me when i sport climb is my shoes, a nalgene bottle and a power bar.
-s-
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 30, 2004, 6:28 AM
Post #143 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: I like your name.. alpneclimber.. thats great.. and your sitting here trying to justify why you shouldnt wear a helmet... you my friend.. are a f---ing idiot I guarntee in your years of climbing, you will have one time..just one time you wished you wouldve been wearing a helmet. and that my friend, is all it takes. Shut up, really. Anyone who actually takes the time to read that long post of idiocy is just as big of an idiot as the author. WEAR A HELMET FOLKS. Especially if your a bigwaller, alpinist, trad'r.. sport climbers, i wont tell you to wear a helmet because i usually dont when i sport climb. normally all i bring with me when i sport climb is my shoes, a nalgene bottle and a power bar. -s-
Hey fucktard,
I have climbed with alpnclmbr1 and he is trying to make a very valid point here. Helmets alone do not make you safe--good judgement does. Clearly this is something you are lacking. STFU.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Dec 30, 2004, 7:06 AM
Post #144 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Pretty sure that is drkodas.
Here is my response
Drkodos=scottcody=hugepedro
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 31, 2004, 12:08 AM
Post #145 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
IT would kill Kodos to wear a helmet unless it were absolutely necessary. He would puke trying to get the words, "always wear a helmet ", out of his mouth. I don't think that is him.
|
|
|
|
|
esallen
Dec 31, 2004, 12:47 AM
Post #146 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2004
Posts: 304
|
There is no way I'll have time to read all of the above posts, but I think the point is well-taken: Don't assume wearing a helmet automatically makes you a "safe climber." I try to clime as safely as possible; my helmet merely provides some added protection.
|
|
|
|
|
killer_crag_move
Dec 31, 2004, 8:49 PM
Post #147 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 21
|
[Edited]
The jist of Curts post's.. people are stupid, unexperienced and think a helmet makes them safe. wow, i summed it all up in 3 sentences instead of writing a novel.
[quote="curt"]In reply to: Hey f---, I have climbed with alpnclmbr1 and he is trying to make a very valid point here. Helmets alone do not make you safe--good judgement does. Clearly this is something you are lacking. STFU. Curt
although i agree with a few points curt makes, there are still a few things I certaintly don't agree with. I guess curt climbs on solid rock where the only way a rock can get knocked off if is his partner grabs it and throws it at him.
I dont know why i bother with these forums. damn insomnia
who the hell ever said wearing a helmet makes you safe? OF COURSE GOOD JUDGEMENT MAKES YOU SAFE.
wearing a helmet is good judgement. especially if your climbing some tallas ridden fiasco.. like The Diamond or any big wall for that matter. There is no need for a helmet in a gym or on some little boulder somewhere. Helmets are not really setup for fall's, just direct hits from the top, for projectiles. Thats why they sit on the top of your head the way they do.
"you should'nt bring a helmet cuz youll drop it" right, it shouldnt leave your head.. anything can be dropped.
"dont wear a helmet cuz its not rockfall your worried about.. its a figure 8 falling" ooook
"we test all of our rope placements to make sure it doesnt knock anything off" right and umm, what happens when you fall and the swinging motion totally just messes that all up. honestly, you have to much time.
"Dont climb under people" sometimes you just can't help it. it sucks when you get stuck under some noobs from kansas but thats just part of the game. what if they are on top, unseen and start to rap off while your climbing up? ive seen this happen all to many times.
Like i said, helemts are not really there to protect you if you deck. thats why they offer little to no protection to the side of your head.
Ill post a picture of what my retired helmet looked like after eating a mishandled draw by by my partner.
Shit happens, no matter how hard you try or how experienced you are.
Edited to save board space.
|
|
|
|
|
harihari
Jan 3, 2005, 1:49 AM
Post #148 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2004
Posts: 182
|
In reply to: I have seen a connection between wearing a helmet and taking lead falls. (particularly on 5.9's and under) The helmet crowd tends to forgo the idea of climbing within your limits. (Is anyone going to deny that the modern crew falls more often. Is anyone going to claim that is because falls are safe now?) The bottom line is that I have seen a higher percentage of people with helmets doing stupid things specifically related to the supposed protection a helmet offers. And these are the same people that supposedly have a higher standard of safety. That is just wrong. You use a helmet safely and I am fine with it. Safety devices are great as long as they don't make you more unsafe.
Great post. Some points--
a) increasing the safety of an activity leads to increased risk taking. This (the theory of "risk homeostasis") has been very well documented by Gerald Wilde, a researcher at Queen's University in Canada, and by others. In one classic study, Wilde looked at a German fleet of taxicabs and their rate of accidents over one year. Half the cabs were retrofitted one year with ABS, while the other half (who were due to be retrofitted one year later) during the study period remained with their original equipment. The results? The drivers of ABS-equipped cabs had a much higher rate of dangerous driving behaviours than those of the supposedly less-safe non-ABS cabs. Why? Because the ABS cab drivers "knew" that the ABS woudl "take care" of risky behaviours, and so they increased their risky driving behaviours.
Wilde has found this kind of behaviour in lots of other places. You can read one story here:
http://www.drivers.com/article/164/
b) I've seen two accidents involving head injuries. Neither climber wore a helmet. In both cases, the climbers were in over their heads grade-wise, and both made some poor choices. However, in both cases, a helmet would have saved massive head trauma. One guy would have died if there hadn't been plenty of help around.
c) Your body can recover froma broken arm. Head trauma is incredibly complex, and affects every other part of one's life. The risk isn't worth it. I got a Petzl Meteor. Weighs nothing, well ventilated. I never climb without it.
d) It's called "accident" cos it wasn't planned.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 25, 2005, 9:46 PM
Post #149 of 149
(9637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
this msg is just to bump an excellent post
I once saw a sticker on a motorbike (we're talking motorbiking, not mountaineering.... motorbiking, where one really needs a helmet, where a helmet makes plenty of difference, and where the chances of hurting someone else are relatively low compared to the chances of hurting oneself and the passenger) that read: "Always wear a helmet. Always ride as if you didn't."
|
|
|
|
|
|
