The Bowline strikes again!

TWK wrote:I don't even know the name of the knot I've tied in with for >30 years.

I don't know the name either. Maybe a "swami knot". But, what he showed you was a standard way of tying into a swami or Whillins, BITD. I remember using it before I switched to the double bowline.

See the GPIW 1975 page 31 figure 19.

home.comcast.net/~e.hartoun…

Check your knot....

I have had a partner anchor a rope in with what I call a 6.5 ....

to tie this start a figure 8 but do not fully follow the first 8.. only go 1/2 way back.

The beauty of this knot is that it will hold... for a little while, I was able to start jumaring and got about 15 feet up, when I started going the wrong way! I yelled 'WTF'... and stopped going down. Partner said OK come on up. This knot slipps some, but its easy to hold the tail and stop it from sliding.... thats what they did for me.
When I got to the anchor, He showed me what had happened and what he did to stop me.... I said "lets bail"

I always tied into a swami belt with a figure eight. .... BITD
Climbing is pretty simple, no.

Thanks a lot for the examples of incidents involving figure 8 tie-in knots. To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the cause of JL's accident was not user error. I completely agree with that as the root cause of the accident.

My point, and yes csproul it is conjecture and my opinion (this is a discussion forum!), is that it's easier to screw up a bowline than it is a fig-8. The best knot is the one both you and your partner are comfortable with, know how to recognize and finish it.

Ryan Williams wrote:Do you really tie in this way? I'm not sure what I'd say if my partner wanted to tie in that way. I guess I have no reason to argue but...

Yeah, I have to agree with you, but, yes, I really tie in that way. My reaction when I first saw it was similar to yours. Then the guy took the knot apart, showed me how to tie it, and demonstrated its reliability by taking a limited deliberate fall.

I don't really see how this knot can cause problems, but . . .

Famous last words.

wivanoff wrote: I don't know the name either. Maybe a "swami knot". But, what he showed you was a standard way of tying into a swami or Whillins, BITD. I remember using it before I switched to the double bowline. See the GPIW 1975 page 31 figure 19.

Yep, that's it--the Swami Knot or the One-and-a-Half-Fisherman's Bend.

I've never seen failure tests on it, but it must have been pretty popular after the "best knot" endorsement in the '75 GPIW catalog. Can't say I've ever heard of it failing . . . but I never knew what it was called before today.

Well, I've never heard of anybody decking off of a swami loop, so I figure that's probably the safest knot.

camhead wrote:It has nothing to do with the knot. This is like the number of accidents in which a belayer panics and holds down the brake of their device, and the next thing you hear is "gri gri malfunction!" Repeat after me... USER ERROR.

Exactly. Magazine companies are known for spewing out loads of bullshit by unqualified editors to get people to buy their magazines. This one is no exception. That article is pure utter crap and completely false. A properly tied and backed up bowline is perfectly fine. The key so to just make sure you actually tie it. While it is true that the bowline is inherently more risky because it is easier to mess up and not notice, trad is also inherently more risky than sport, yet we dont see people saying trad is the bringer of death, now do we?

20 kN wrote: Exactly. Magazine companies are known for spewing out loads of bullshit by unqualified editors to get people to buy their magazines.

So they should of checked with MP first since MP is the definitive place for all that is fact and proper. Except for the buying part, I think you can say the same happens on MP everyday, all day.

20 kN wrote: trad is also inherently more risky than sport, yet we dont see people saying trad is the bringer of death, now do we?

I don't know the facts on this one so this is only my unsupported opinion, but I would speculate that I read more accidents in sport and TR environments then I do in trad environments. I don't know how to justify that one is riskier then the other, but It seems that more beginners and folks with less experience in general flock to the sport wanking arenas.

20 kN wrote: ...trad is also inherently more risky than sport, yet we dont see people saying trad is the bringer of death, now do we?

I've actually heard that several times, by otherwise rational people who were just 100% sport climbers.

(not-so-funny) story: Several years ago, a friend of mine was killed when a tat sling he was rapping off of broke. A week later, I mentioned to another friend that I was going to go climb a single pitch, g-rated, bomber gear, splitter crack. He looked at me in shock, and said, "Are you serious? Trad? After what happened last week?"

Some people are just kind of clueless.

skiclimber wrote: beginners and folks with less experience in general flock to the sport wanking arenas.

You've got that right, brother. And gyms; don't forget about gyms.

Gym conversation:
"Hey, you wanna go up to the Leap next weekend?"
"Um, not really. I've never really climbed outdoors."

WTF? You live 3 1/2 hours from Yosemite, and 1 1/2 from Tahoe, and you've never climbed outside? You really mean "I've never REALLY climbed."

troll-1
herd of sheep-0

I don't think reporting true facts about actual conversations with gym climbers is trolling. The guy was actually an employee in the gym, "teaching" others how to "climb".

He had never placed a piece of pro in his life, or climbed a real rock with the sun and sky above him, and yet, there he was, showing others the safe way to tie in.

As said in "A Stance of Wonder", "I think you've got this all wrong."

Although rare, this kind of accident is preventable. I always tug hard on my knot before I leave the deck and at most clips (sport or trad) I also tug the belayer side of the rope. This not only gets slack out of the system, it reassures me that I have a good knot.

A couple months ago on the MProj someone posted a video made by a German guy about how a bowline could 'invert' and basically turn into an overhand cinched onto a straight section of rope, if I remember correctly. I couldn't get it to 'work' when I was playing with my rope but its a mechanism of knot faliure we haven't been mentioning. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
Apologies for staying on topic.

skiclimber wrote: I don't know how to justify that one is riskier then the other, but It seems that more beginners and folks with less experience in general flock to the sport wanking arenas.

come to squamish ... the smokes bluffs is almost all trad ...

youll see the most newbies there in canada on a good sunny weekend ... and every gumbie mistake you can think of ...

as to mister long ... i bet he was distracted by the sight of hawt yung lulu encased flesh when he was tying in ;)

Jon Rhoderick wrote:A couple months ago on the MProj someone posted a video made by a German guy about how a bowline could 'invert' and basically turn into an overhand cinched onto a straight section of rope, if I remember correctly. I couldn't get it to 'work' when I was playing with my rope but its a mechanism of knot faliure we haven't been mentioning. Anyone know what I'm talking about? Apologies for staying on topic.

The problem happened with the Yosemite finish. The turn for the Yosemite finish somehow had to get inside the turn(s) for the bowline, and then the knot capsized into something else.

In the study we finished recently, there was only one accident in 14 years in Boulder County from a knot coming undone. The climber got distracted when tying his figure of eight.

The lesson there.... although it is rare, climbers can forget to finish their knot, whether an eight or bowline. There are a lot of potential hazards to climbing, and most of the time we do a good job at minimizing them. Paying attention while tying into that life saving line, whichever knot you choose, seems to be the message in these incidents of knots "untying".

rockymountainrescue.org/Cli…

rgold wrote: The problem happened with the Yosemite finish. The turn for the Yosemite finish somehow had to get inside the turn(s) for the bowline, and then the knot capsized into something else.

Thanks rgold i found it.

youtube.com/watch?v=1dj5Y3h…

Easy to replicate with a sloppy knot.

Note that the rethreaded bowline cannot be untied in the same way:
mountainproject.com/v/10747…
This knot is as redundant as a figure 8 with a "yosemite finish" (tail tucked back towards the harness), in that both require three loops to untie before becoming structurally undone. I would argue that the "rethreaded" bowline therefore does not require a stopper knot, while a double bowline (two rabbit holes) and single bowline require a stopper.

If some one had forgotten to finish a double figure eight to tie in , would we be having this same conservation? All knots require a learned sequence, some more than others.

The point is, don't get distracted when you tie in. Create a ritual and adhere to it , to the point that it becomes muscle memory, then STOP, and check it.

People have injured themselves because they forgot to clip in to an auto belayer, dam sure that wasn’t the complications of the knot!

I may be compulsive, but when i approach a climb, i always use the same ritual, sit down, clear my head, put on shoes, tie in, and dam, after 35 years I can still fouk it up and head up a climb without my rack!

What is missing in this conservation is the responsibility of your partner, who should take belaying as a serious obligation and expect the same from you! Human nature dictates that we will all screw up at some point . I know how trite the buddy system sounds, but redundancy reduces the likelihood of system failure.

I’ve had my ass saved by good partners, so I keep my eyes open, and mind attentive when i hold the dull end of the rope.

Ryan and TWK, I've used that knot you described. It was called a Baxter knot by the guy I learned it from; no idea why. I've climbed on it a few times, used it a lot to tie down stuff I didn't want to move. Hasn't failed; I've hung on it though I haven't fallen on it. (Hell, I hate to fall, period.)

Rolf, amen to your observation about partners paying attention. I've had my arse saved by such people, and returned the favor several times. Even with rituals and procedures for everything we do, or maybe especially with them, it's still easy to get complacent and fuck up for the last time.

Responsible, attentive belaying (there isn't any other kind, or you're soloing) should include a check of your partner's set-up as well as your own. If they get pissy about it, fine. They'll be alive to be pissy, won't they?

If you don't know what your pard's tie-in should look like, tell them you don't know and ask them to show you. At the very least, they'll have another look at it and you'll learn something in the process.

Communication...