Bowline for Master Point Knot?

Ryan Williams wrote:I just spent two weeks climbing multipitch trad routes, up to 15 pitches long, and I don't own a cordelette. Just sayin...

Ryan,
I will admit to newness here...I get it and have used the rope when we are swapping leads, but if you are leading all the pitches, what is your modal method for swapping at the anchors when the 2nd comes up? Do they then build an anchor for themselves while you are racking?

Just curious.

Jake Jones wrote:If there are two bomber bolts for the anchors, you simply clove into a quickdraw to each bolt. Go from your tie in knot, to a clove in one draw, leave a bight that you can tie a knot in (this works for top belaying or a redirect point for belaying off your harness), then clove into the other draw on the other bolt, then clove into a locker on your belay loop. When the follower gets up, he does the same thing. While the leader was belaying, he should have been lap-stacking if at all possible. Take that stack, and flip it 180 degrees (so that the the bottom of the stack is now the top) onto the follower's tether, put the leader back on belay. Leader pops his draws off the bolts, belayer takes all that excess slack out, and you're ready to roll. Now, if you're building your own anchors, this setup can be a little more complicated and you have several options. At this point, I usually break out some slings or a cord. The downside to this is that A) you're not using the rope except to attach to a master point, and B) you'll need enough cordelette/slings for the anchor you're being belayed from, and also the one you have to build at the end of a pitch. I'm sure you could come up with some contrived way of just using the rope for a gear anchor when you're not swapping leads, like maybe adding an alpine draw (or an extra alpine draw) to each piece so that the follower can anchor in a similar fashion when he arrives at the belay, but that also requires extra gear and you're starting to delve into the clusterfuck realm at that point honestly. Someone else might be able to chime in with an efficient way to "just use the rope" when you're not swapping leads on gear anchors, but I haven't found one yet. I've found that it works best when swapping leads, or when there are bolts at the belay stations. YMMV. Hope this helps.

That system would be my absolute last choice. Sure, using the rope as an anchor is a cool trick if you need to but it reduces your options infinitely if the second is struggling, gets hurt, you have to suddenly bail, etc. it sounds like you've devised a way that is fast and comfortable to you which is fine. At the same time the cons outweigh the pros for most everyone and the speed savings of 2 quick draws cloved over an anchor with say 2 extended alpine draws with a master point actually sound non existent to me.

Again, there's nothing necessarily dangerous or outrageously wrong about your setup. There are just better methods for people to learn first, then if they want to switch to ultralight rigs like yours they can choose to do so once they understand what they are giving up.

Jake Jones wrote:If there are two bomber bolts for the anchors, you simply clove into a quickdraw to each bolt. Go from your tie in knot, to a clove in one draw, leave a bight that you can tie a knot in (this works for top belaying or a redirect point for belaying off your harness), then clove into the other draw on the other bolt, then clove into a locker on your belay loop. When the follower gets up, he does the same thing. While the leader was belaying, he should have been lap-stacking if at all possible. Take that stack, and flip it 180 degrees (so that the the bottom of the stack is now the top) onto the follower's tether, put the leader back on belay. Leader pops his draws off the bolts, belayer takes all that excess slack out, and you're ready to roll. Now, if you're building your own anchors, this setup can be a little more complicated and you have several options. At this point, I usually break out some slings or a cord. The downside to this is that A) you're not using the rope except to attach to a master point, and B) you'll need enough cordelette/slings for the anchor you're being belayed from, and also the one you have to build at the end of a pitch. I'm sure you could come up with some contrived way of just using the rope for a gear anchor when you're not swapping leads, like maybe adding an alpine draw (or an extra alpine draw) to each piece so that the follower can anchor in a similar fashion when he arrives at the belay, but that also requires extra gear and you're starting to delve into the clusterfuck realm at that point honestly. Someone else might be able to chime in with an efficient way to "just use the rope" when you're not swapping leads on gear anchors, but I haven't found one yet. I've found that it works best when swapping leads, or when there are bolts at the belay stations. YMMV. Hope this helps.

Thanks for the responses Jake and Bryan; I guess that I should've been more clear. I can and do use a cordalette for multi pitch. I've been practicing w/ using the rope in the manner that Eli Helmuth shows in his video (I'm speaking about gear anchors here). My question is how those that are religiously rope-only deal with block leading without a cord? Not trying to start a flame war or debate--I'm certain that its an area that reasonable people can reach different conclusions. I was just wondering.

Well, yer not gonna die, but the sliding-X has been tested rather extensively at this point and it doesn't do a better job at equalizing while introducing the potential of anchor extension. And if the anchor in question is a three-point anchor, there is no sliding system that is any good at all. So if logic is still a valid criterion, then no, the sliding-x method is not "better yet."

Can you back this up? I haven't read the third edition of John Long's climbing anchors, so maybe something knew came up. But in the tests done by Sterling rope in the second edition, the sliding x was significantly better than the cordelette at equalization, and anchor extension was shown to be not a big concern if you use extension limiting knots. No need to sidetrack the main conversation of this thread, just a reference to where you got that information.

That said, I haven't tied a cordelette in at least two years, and I trad climb extensively.

Matt Roberts wrote: Thanks for the responses Jake and Bryan; I guess that I should've been more clear. I can and do use a cordalette for multi pitch. I've been practicing w/ using the rope in the manner that Eli Helmuth shows in his video (I'm speaking about gear anchors here). My question is how those that are religiously rope-only deal with block leading without a cord? Not trying to start a flame war or debate--I'm certain that its an area that reasonable people can reach different conclusions. I was just wondering.

Can I ask why? I just watched his video:

Eli Rope Anchor

and it seems infinitely slower. I understand that if you're swinging leads and you are super fast at building that anchor it could become efficient. I just don't see how equalizing all those clove hitches will ever be faster than a triple length sling or cordalette? Again, I have to point out that if there is any kind of a rescue needed the belayer is stuck in the system which sucks. If you're partner climbs up to lead the next pitch and can't pull the crux, lowers back to the anchor, only to dive into a cluster to make the change over. As well as what you said, if you plan on leading the whole route yourself it's a terrible nightmare of unbuilding and rebuilding the entire anchor at every transition.

If this is a novelty that people are playing with then that's fine. Maybe you are trying to go super light on easy terrain? What's the motivation behind all the energy that goes into figuring out this system? Again I'm going with cool trick but poor functionality in the long run. Is this more about avoiding the cordalette?

I'm not a big fan of the cordalette either. I'd love to eliminate it from my rack since it's a little bulky and unruly at times. Lots of people seem to be trying to avoid it on this thread. The new spectra cordalettes are a little less bulky but my plug FOR the cordalette is that more than anything I see it as an expendable tool on a climb. It's no big deal if it gets damaged, has to be bailed off of, cut up for medical use, used to build a litter, there are just a million uses for that rats nest that ends up on my hip. Plus, it falls in line with the KISS principle.

Only way i can see this being any use is if you expect some super knot cinchin'

Matt Roberts wrote: My question is how those that are religiously rope-only deal with block leading without a cord? Not trying to start a flame war or debate--I'm certain that its an area that reasonable people can reach different conclusions. I was just wondering.

Hi Matt, it's simple, we carry 3 "magic" carabiners. The leader places the pieces and she ties in with clove hitches (at the pieces if they are within reach, back at the harness on a locker if they are not). When the second arrives he clips one of his magic carabiners to each piece underneath the leader's. He then clove hitches in just like the leader but keeping his rope under hers at all times. Job done. (The magic carabiners are only magic in that having them to hand at the from of the harness speeds the process up.)

I have timed this process, and compared it to the time taken to use a cordelette. There is no difference. In part this is because of the time taken to uncoil and re-coil the cordelette.

I hope that helps.

Nick Smolinske wrote:Well, yer not gonna die, but the sliding-X has been tested rather extensively at this point and it doesn't do a better job at equalizing while introducing the potential of anchor extension. And if the anchor in question is a three-point anchor, there is no sliding system that is any good at all. So if logic is still a valid criterion, then no, the sliding-x method is not "better yet." Can you back this up? I haven't read the third edition of John Long's climbing anchors, so maybe something knew came up. But in the tests done by Sterling rope in the second edition, the sliding x was significantly better than the cordelette at equalization, and anchor extension was shown to be not a big concern if you use extension limiting knots. No need to sidetrack the main conversation of this thread, just a reference to where you got that information. .

The issue with a sliding-X is as follows. I always have difficulty explaining this, but hopefully it will make sense. The question to ask is when a sliding-X might be better than a powerpoint. Imagine a load of 10kN, with one arm of the X able to take 9kN and the other 4kN. Each arm of the X will receive 5kN. The arm that can take 4kN will blow, the other will receive the full 10kN and also blow.

If on the other hand one arm can take 12kN and the other 4kN, one will blow and the other will save the day, but then it would have if a powerpoint had been used.

A little playing with the number shows that a sliding-X only makes sense under a very rare set of situations, viz:

1. any single arm cannot take the whole force.
AND 2. the weaker arm has at least half the strength of the stronger.

This is a rare combination. Unless the X has perfect equalisation the range of possibilities is even narrower.

Against the X is that even with limiter knots, when one piece blows the de-stabilisation is greater than with a power point.

Does that all make sense?

Jake Jones wrote: My main reason for using the rope, especially on bolted anchors is adjustability. Sometimes, depending on the cordelette you bring, you're limited by its length on how far from the pieces you can get, or how you can position yourself.

Limited in what way? I always build an anchor and then just clove in with the rope to the masterpoint. This makes my position and length whatever I want.

Basically I think we all just need to spend a day climbing together so everyones system can be run side by side. Probably the best way for us all to learn, get sorted, and understood!

I think taking the time to learn as much as possible is a good philosophy. Next time I go sport climbing I'll try to leave the anchors at home. No promises tho!

Nick Smolinske wrote:Well, yer not gonna die, but the sliding-X has been tested rather extensively at this point and it doesn't do a better job at equalizing while introducing the potential of anchor extension. And if the anchor in question is a three-point anchor, there is no sliding system that is any good at all. So if logic is still a valid criterion, then no, the sliding-x method is not "better yet." Can you back this up? I haven't read the third edition of John Long's climbing anchors, so maybe something knew came up. But in the tests done by Sterling rope in the second edition, the sliding x was significantly better than the cordelette at equalization, and anchor extension was shown to be not a big concern if you use extension limiting knots. No need to sidetrack the main conversation of this thread, just a reference to where you got that information. That said, I haven't tied a cordelette in at least two years, and I trad climb extensively.

The problems is that the tests don´t seem to have been as extensive as they could have been and things were missed. Others including myself have subsequently gone further and the two main conclusions are:-
Sliding systems are much worse at sharing the force than was assumed (to the extent that some three-point systems give no force whatsoever on one piece).
Extension is far more of a problem than was recognised and in the wrong situation will cause equipment failure. Adding extension limiting knots is effectively worthless since either you tie them so close that the anchor cannot equalise or so far apart so that the extension becomes a problem.

Neither system distributes the force across the pieces in any satisfactory way so all we can do is ensure that the pieces are good and arranged redundantly with minimum extension so either a cordalette, the rope or the more traditional collection of various slings are the way to go.

People on this thread I would climb with judging by the comments:
1) David Coley.

End of list.

Jim Titt wrote: The problems is that the tests don´t seem to have been as extensive as they could have been and things were missed. Others including myself have subsequently gone further and the two main conclusions are:- Sliding systems are much worse at sharing the force than was assumed (to the extent that some three-point systems give no force whatsoever on one piece). Extension is far more of a problem than was recognised and in the wrong situation will cause equipment failure.

Good information, thanks. It seems like it all comes back to what I really got as the core lesson of John Long's book, which was to put in bomber gear (bigger being better, all other things equal) and avoid factor 2 falls at all cost. I'd be interested in seeing a writeup of yours and others' testing, has it been published?

The only other situation in which I would wonder about the use of sliding anchors would be for belays on traverses and the possibility of a swinging load. (the equalette, not the sliding x itself, because of the "clutch" effect described in Long's book) Again, bomber gear should deal with that possibility. Has anyone done more swinging load testing?

"A little playing with the number shows that a sliding-X only makes sense under a very rare set of situations, viz:

1. any single arm cannot take the whole force.
AND 2. the weaker arm has at least half the strength of the stronger.

This is a rare combination. Unless the X has perfect equalization the range of possibilities is even narrower."

That makes a lot of sense, thanks.

Jesus christ's bleeding nipples, how the hell did this subject reach 3 pages?

Here is the proper progression.

-OP asks original question

-First answer - it's ok but you should use your rope

-OP are you sure?

-Yep

-Second poster - my mentor told me to blah blah blah

-There's your sign

-I'm sorry. I'll use my rope.

Fin

nicelegs wrote:Jesus christ's bleeding nipples, how the hell did this subject reach 3 pages? Here is the proper progression. -OP asks original question -First answer - it's ok but you should use your rope -OP are you sure? -Yep -Second poster - my mentor told me to blah blah blah -There's your sign -I'm sorry. I'll use my rope. Fin

So the progression is to immediately ignore the original question and go off on your own agenda? Thanks for clarification.

Rob Gordon wrote:People on this thread I would climb with judging by the comments: 1) David Coley. End of list.

the best description yet for sure but honestly I feel like he has just given away tricks of the trade to a bunch of n00blets. how is the owner of the cordalette factory going to feed his kids now?

There are unfortunately loads of possibility with offset loads , the main ones being is the belay loaded with the belayers weight or not and does a protection piece to one side hold or is the fall directly onto the belay. The situation changes during the route unless the leader never places any gear which makes things doubly difficult but if you built a sliding anchor which can cope with both vertical loads and horizontal the potential extension is enormous and the forces much higher than normal as the belay has to cope with stopping a moving belayer as well as the faller.
Personally I think the "clutch effect" was simply an invention to allow the removal of results which were inconvenient and further testing would have shown this to be the case, you can test with systems which eliminate any possibility of the rope jamming and still see appalling results!

How about the following technique? Much smaller knot.

Separate the strands into two groups of three such that you can nest your hand between the two groups. Note that some strands will overlap.

• Note that the two strands from each protection point must be in opposite groups. If done correctly, when you grasp the three strands in the palm, you can rotate your wrist and the strands will move with you.

Tie a slip hitch into the bundle of (overlapping) loops that resulted from this grouping.

• After the slip hitch, before the final step, you can adjust the strands in the resulting loop for better load distribution among your three pieces.

Use the slip hitch to create an inline BoB.

This sure looks cuter.

Adding cordage to the work bag to play along!

Thank you Eric for suffering the slings and arrows of innovation.

Everyone realizes the benefits, including the haters.

Thank you for being a mensch, windexxx.