Belay accident with Trango Cinch

Yet it's still belayer error. Ultimately the device used in all of these accidents is of secondary relevance at best. Blaming technology because people don't know how to use it doesn't make the problem go away... people always want to blame the Cinch, blame the Sum, blame the GriGri, blame the ATC, whatever, but few are willing to take responsibility for user error.

You sure told me.

Your pseudointellectual academic citations without any foundation whatsoever prove what exactly?

Dustin Stephens wrote:Your pseudointellectual academic citations without any foundation whatsoever prove what exactly?

They don't prove anything. I never pretended to be an intellectual, pseudo or otherwise. I'm merely trying to clue you in to the fact that you might, just maybe, not be competent enough to evaluate your own competency.

I wouldn't think that would be a stretch, considering you presented a very well known Trango Cinch accident as a Gri-Gri accident, to show your side of the argument. When confronted with this knowledge, you first said it still proves your point then second got mad.

If I were to point at someone here who might lack the metacognitive ability to evaluate his own incompetency, who do you think I should point at?

Yourself perhaps? You have missed the point of this entire thread and should start over with a goal of comprehension in mind. This was caused by user error, the device is not relevant. The fact that a Cinch was involved in the DS accident and that the cause of the accident was essentially the same only strengthens this point. You "win" on the minor, and ultimately irrelevant, point of which device was being misused at the time. Congratulations, you can return to googling obscure academic trivia.

I pointed at myself 5 years ago. I took my Cinch that had caught hundred of falls and tried and tried and tried to make it fail. And I could not. Yet the accidents continue to happen. I tossed it out.

If I want to make a gri-gri fail, or an ATC for that matter, I know exactly what to do and exactly the conditions that will make that happen. The Cinch isn't so simple, atmospheric pressure, I don't know. It's perfect for a long time then someone is on the ground. I don't know what else to tell you.

I'm not blaming the device, clearly there is an error being made. When 99 people can make the same error and the 100th drops someone, it's a problem. It's not predictable so it can foster bad belay habits that usually cause nobody any harm. Things like the gri-gri, or the tuber I learned on, are simpler, you quickly learn what you can do and what you can't and move forward or receive further instruction from there.

Just because a device made it to the market does not mean it is without flaw. Why is that so hard of a concept to understand?

The Cinch, like all belay devises, works great when used properly. However, I am of the opinion that the Cinch requires a higher belay competency than any other belay device I have used. Too much room for user error. (disengaging the locking mechanism)

Dustin Stephens wrote:The Cinch did not lock because you were holding the rope firmly above the device, reducing load on the locking mechanism. Blame the Cinch all you want, but the same result would likely have happened with a GriGri, Sum, or any other "ASSISTED braking" device. Unfortunately, it doesn't really sound like you've learned much from your very lucky accident--classic example of why one must be exceedingly careful with who they choose to partner with. And above all, keep control of the brake strand and catch the fall with your brake hand no matter which device you use... even with the left hand error you made, you could have still caught the fall with your right hand more quickly if you had the brake strand under control.

Dustin is absolutely correct. The blayers left hand caused the Cinch to not engage its locking mechanism.

I'm glad nobody was seriously hurt.

Fair enough legs. No doubt it is not the best choice of the many out there. I use the Cinch for jugging, bolting, and toprope soloing that's pretty much it. It has never failed me in any context for many years, but it does seem to be an error-prone device for some people. And I did break the plastic handle on my first one and have to devise a rather elaborate rappel escape a few years back. But then I got another one for free shortly thereafter & it's great for development to keep from wearing out the Grig.

KevinK wrote:4. We use the GriGri 2 now. It was hard to get used to and still does not feed slack as easily, but lives are worth the $80 that we paid for it. My Cinch is gathering dust somewhere. If the Cinch works for you, great. Keep using it. And I'm not being sarcastic; use what you like. 5. What is all this "blame the victim" mentality with climbers?

Either your ropes suck or you don't know how to use the GriGri 2 properly either. Mine feeds great. Flake your rope to make sure no coils get in the way and you should be fine. (assuming you are following the manufacturers recommended belay technique)

Nobody is blaming any victims, only the belayer that misused their belay device.

nicelegs wrote: I took my Cinch that had caught hundred of falls and tried and tried and tried to make it fail. And I could not. Yet the accidents continue to happen.

You must be using it correctly. Not everyone does that.

Red wrote: . . . Nobody is blaming any victims, only the belayer that misused their belay device. If the brake hand was solely on the brake strand and neither hand touching the belay devise or the rope going from the belay device to the climber, this would not have happened.

Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding you, but when a user is making a "correct" use of the Cinch (as defined by Trango's instructional video, see link below), his brake hand is always touching the belay device and his other hand is generally on the rope from the device to the climber (it's on that part of the rope whenever feeding rope).

youtube.com/watch?v=lkOVssf…

Disclaimers: I don't own a Cinch (although I've used one many times, after reviewing the above video and noticing that many other users seemed to use whatever ad hoc method they felt like).
I now use a Grigri2 with the "new" technique. Don't want to say anything is truly idiot proof (and I could be the idiot some day), but it seems pretty hard to drop anyone with gg2 and new technique. When using a fat rope in particular, care must be taken to avoid short roping.

Red wrote:The Cinch, like all belay devises, works great when used properly. However, I am of the opinion that the Cinch requires a higher belay competency than any other belay device I have used. Too much room for user error. (disengaging the locking mechanism) Dustin is absolutely correct. The blayers left hand caused the Cinch to not engage its locking mechanism. Was your right hand solely on the brake strand of the rope or was it holding the Cinch as well? I've seen way too many climbers doing the latter, holding the device open as if they were needing to pay out slack all the time. If the climber falls at this point, they will be in for a longer ride than they hoped for. I'm glad nobody was seriously hurt.

Which way do you consider the proper method? The new upside down loading or the older method with the climber side coming out of the top?

Dustin Stephens wrote:Get in touch with Muir Valley people, they might be willing to release information. There was a fatality at the Dark Side a few years back from GriGri user error. Belaying accidents are very common here on a variety of different devices.

Dustin, the fatality at the Dark Side was with a Cinch. Trust me. That particular belayer was belaying me with the same Cinch two weeks earlier. And it was also technically user error.

However, Morgan Patterson is wrong in thinking that Gri Gris will still lock even if the climber-side rope is gripped. I've seen at least two accidents in which the Gri Gri "just didn't brake!" and the belayer had rope burns on their left hand.

In the end, here's my take on Cinches: Regardless of whether they are prone to user error, or are inherently dangerous, none of us can deny that Cinches account for a disproportionate number of accidents. I don't know why this is (most likely it's because most people assume that they work the same as Gri Gris), but just the numbers are enough to make me very skeptical of belayers with the devices if I do not know them.

When someone is juggling their grandma's fine china while skateboarding, and then drops all the plates, that's user error, too. But it was still a risky situation in the first place.

camhead wrote: However, Morgan Patterson is wrong in thinking that Gri Gris will still lock even if the climber-side rope is gripped.

Cam - that's not what I said, so of course it's wrong. I said firmly on the brake side, not the climbers side (climbers side = accident). The only way possible for the brake end to slip is if the cam was completely worn down in which case the rope guard would have likely been worn through and it would be blatant that the device was cooked. Or if you blocked the camming action, of course.

pfwein wrote: Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding you, but when a user is making a "correct" use of the Cinch (as defined by Trango's instructional video, see link below), his brake hand is always touching the belay device and his other hand is generally on the rope from the device to the climber (it's on that part of the rope whenever feeding rope)

Thanks for asking pfwein,
I misspoke, the brake hand can have the thumb and index finger on the "pivot point" and nowhere else on the devise. The other three fingers and palm should be on the brake strand of the rope. I have seen more Cinch users than not with their thumbs resting on the base of the release handle holding the Cinch open to pay out slack, even when none is needed.

As others have pointed out, we can determine the belay device was not used properly by the rope-burn marks on the belayers left hand. The left hand pays out slack and maybe gets a coil out of the rope, it does not grip the rope even the slightest amount between the belay device and the climber when catching falls.

On a side note, I've only ever seen one or two people actually load the Cinch with the break side up.

Another side note, I personally stopped using the Cinch once the Gri2 came out.

Gym accidents are just sooooo unfortunate. What a bad place to screw up.

Red wrote: Thanks for asking pfwein, I misspoke, the brake hand can have the thumb and index finger on the "pivot point" and nowhere else on the devise. The other three fingers and palm should be on the brake strand of the rope. I have seen more Cinch users than not with their thumbs resting on the base of the release handle holding the Cinch open to pay out slack, even when none is needed. As others have pointed out, we can determine the belay device was not used properly by the rope-burn marks on the belayers left hand. The left hand pays out slack and maybe gets a coil out of the rope, it does not grip the rope even the slightest amount between the belay device and the climber when catching falls. On a side note, I've only ever seen one or two people actually load the Cinch with the break side up.

I guess thats the point I'm trying to get at. Most people use the old loading method because it was what was standard for a long time when the device first came out. The fact they changed it would imply that it wasn't adequate for reliably locking up when using correct technique. They didn't publicize the change in recommended technique very well so the majority of cinch users I've seen still use the old method. I'm one of those people who swore by the cinch, until it failed to lock. I fed out slack using only my thumb and 2 fingers since it was so easy and smooth. I ended up with only burns on my brake hand so it wasn't from gripping the climber side. Thousands of catches and it only takes 1 to lose complete confidence. I use a GriGri2 now also.

Red wrote:Another side note, I personally stopped using the Cinch once the Gri2 came out.

Wow. Until now I thought you have stock in Trango or something. I had some time to think and revisit this when this thread got dug up again. Anyway, the error was mine in belaying, but not from grabbing the rope with my left hand - it was from me not clamping down on the brake hand.

See because I was aware of the fall and of the accident a week prior to my own, I actually changed the way I handled the device as the climber started falling. Instead of keeping my hand on the device and then shifting to the brake rope, I took my entire hand off and put it around the rope, but for some reason did not clamp down before the fall. I think I was depending on the Cinch to catch on its own and afraid of rope burns to my right hand. After a second or two and realizing what happened, I clamped down on my right which had a glove on (I know, illogical) and the fall was arrested.

I say that my left hand cannot have caused the accident because during a fall the left hand travels with the rope until the belay device does its thing, which means the left hand moves up only a bit. And there shouldn't be any ill-effects of that if the elbow is bent and the entire arm is allowed to move up a bit with the rope. I can see that it could be dangerous if someone tried to pull down very hard on the lead rope, but that's not what I did. Like you said, burn on the left hand is evidence of a failed belay, but it is not the cause (at least in my case).

The other thing is I was standing pretty much right below the rope without much slack and the Cinch was in a vertical orientation. Trango wants the Cinch to be horizonal so that it can rotate during a fall and maybe that helps to engage the device. They changed the instructions so the lead rope comes out from the bottom to emphasize this. I have read of at least one accident that said the fall happened right after a take, which means the Cinch was orientated vertically.

Since the Grigri catches so reliably, it can be easy to think of the Cinch as the same thing. But they are really not and I can see why now. The Cinch is not as forgiving and the brake hand has to be a part of the braking mechanism for it to function reliably. The brake hand is really not optional, and not a backup. Treat it more like an ATC and you should be fine. With that said, I'm not going back to it, but I hope that this information is useful in preventing accidents.

At the risk of being redundant, I'll chime in with my $.02 on the Cinch. It works great… until it doesn't. To a much greater degree than the GriGri2, it is prone to user error and incredibly unforgiving. The perceived advantages (ease of feeding out rope and size) that the Cinch had over the original GriGri were negated when the GriGri2 was introduced. IMHO, the GriGri2 is superior in every way AND more forgiving of user error than the Cinch.

To put it another way, I don't use a Cinch any more and don't want to be belayed by anyone that uses one. More importantly, I am VERY careful about who I let belay me and don't let random people or casual acquaintances hold the other end of my rope.

NC Rock Climber wrote:At the risk of being redundant, I'll chime in with my $.02 on the Cinch. It works great… until it doesn't. To a much greater degree than the GriGri2, it is prone to user error and incredibly unforgiving. The perceived advantages (ease of feeding out rope and size) that the Cinch had over the original GriGri were negated when the GriGri2 was introduced. IMHO, the GriGri2 is superior in every way AND more forgiving of user error than the Cinch. To put it another way, I don't use a Cinch any more and don't want to be belayed by anyone that uses one. More importantly, I am VERY careful about who I let belay me and don't let random people or casual acquaintances hold the other end of my rope.

Well said. These are my thoughts too.