Lost control of belay of the second on Rewritten, 3-31-12

Copperhead wrote: Ryan, I knowyou already know this, but I don't think three anchors is generally recommended because you are worried about the two being solid enough. It is more a good rule to guard against human error (and maybe equipment/rock failure), which happens even to the climbing gods. Let's say you are making an anchor and each individual piece is expected to be bomber (which it should normally be). Let's also say you are kind of a spacey guy and FU the placement 1% of the time. With two pieces you'll have the following chance of having a good anchor: 0.01^2=0.0001 (sketch anchor every 10000 pitches) With three pieces you'll have: 0.01^3=.000001 (sketch anchor every 1 million pitches) Now, regardless of the numbers chosen, three is exponentially more FU resistant than 2. Do you need it? Maybe not every time, but if you carry the numbers through to ultimate failure over a lifetime of climbing, you just might decide that the extra 10 sec to put in the third piece is worth the safety margin. After all, there is a reason why it has been a standard recommendation for so long. And 1/1mil sounds like a small number, but three people won the lotto last week at a 1/176 mil chance too.

Interesting way to look at it. Thanks for well thought out post. Believe me, you'll find me w/ three pieces just as often as with two. It all depends on about a billion things, one of them being how bomber my ass is on a particular ledge. It's often not that bomber and I'll put in that third piece, but other time I'm completely happy with two and myself.

That is one of the points that I have been trying to make: Me (155#) sitting on a ledge is plenty enough to catch my heaviest partner (185#) with no help from any additional pieces. If that is the case, I'm happy calling my ass a third bomber piece.

I think that is just going to be my answer to every question from now on: It depends on about a billion things.

JLP wrote: I generally agree with your point - his photo is indeed contrived - but it is interesting to note how straight it *can* allow the rope to run through it - when not being used in a laboratory... In contrast, a GriGri doesn't allow such a straight path for the rope. The cam on a GriGri also has a much more aggressive V slot, so it will provide more friction to engage the cam. Lots of very serious injuries out there from GriGris as well, though...mostly from users unintentionally holding the cam open...kind of like with this accident...

The cinch allows that straight path and many like it for that very reason. It makes feeding slack fast effortless, and as long as it isn't being jammed it still locks. The path a gri gri takes is better but as you stated, it usually doesn't stop a climber from getting dropped when the cam is held down.

JoeP wrote:Megagaper - the point I was trying to make, which I apparently failed miserably to make, was that contrary to AMFDM's claim, the Cinch with the brake strand correctly oriented, even when obstructed, should not create a straight rope path. And that even when obstructed, the belayer should be able to orient the brake strand such that the device should provide sufficient friction to arrest a TR fall. I've seen a TR fall arrested with a figure 8 when the brake strand was held vertical (essentially a 180 bend around a biner in that position), belayer got burned hands, but he held the fall. Do I think it's adequate to belay with only a single 180* bend, hell no. But we aren't talking about using an ATC, munter, etc., the issue is whether the Cinch in an obstructed position, with the brake strand oriented in the proper position will provide enough friction to hold a second in such an emergency. Hopefully, that clarifies the point I was trying to make. Edit - talking about belaying the second from the anchor as shown in ABMFB's pic.

Got it. Sorry to fly off the handle. But it sounded like you were saying something very... strange. Plus, I love the munter, so when somebody badmouths it - or even if I get confused and just think somebody is badmouthing it - I tend to get a little caveman.