Mountain Project Logo

Inquery about a certain climbing practice with regards to belaying the 2nd up

Original Post
Orphaned · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jul 2007 · Points: 11,560

I've now seen the following practice more than once, and so I wanted to query the climbing community for their opinion on it.

What I've seen is the leader reach the top of a pitch, set an anchor, put themselves on that anchor, then belay the 2nd up directly off their harness. What do you think of this practice? Would it not be better to redirect the climber's strand through the master point?

Of course, there are many different ways to bring a 2nd up, and there are advantages/disadvantages to each way, but I want to focus on just the particular case mentioned above. Why would you try to belay the 2nd directly off the harness? Is this a legitimate rigging? (I don't think so, but maybe I'm wrong.)

What makes this situation even more dubious in my mind is that some of these leaders had slack in their tie-ins to the master-point. If their belay became loaded, they would be thrown off stance, I'm sure.

Anyhow, what do you think? I was belayed as a 2nd this way yesterday, and I tried to be as polite and tactful as I could be about offering my thoughts on the matter, but, unfortunately, the conversation didn't go as well as I'd hoped. I was the junior climber in this case, and it wasn't my place to question or criticize the leader.

Em Cos · · Boulder, CO · Joined Apr 2010 · Points: 5

First, it is every climbers place, right, and responsibility to question the practices of their climbing partners. Your lives are in each other's hands, and you should both welcome double-checking each other and opportunities for learning from each other. You should be respectful, and say something like "Hey I've never seen this done this way, it seems like it might not be as safe, can you explain why you do it this way?" and hopefully their response will be something like "Good question! Here's why..." or "Wow, good point, I'll have to do some more thinking/research about this"

As to your question, there are hundreds of ways to set up a belay and which are the best will depend entirely on the situation (gear availability, rock quality, time pressure, abilities of each climber) and on how you personally choose to balance your priorities (safety, speed, comfort, gear usage). Not knowing the exact situation you two were in it is impossible to comment on why your partner may have used this set-up or whether there might have been better options.

So speaking generally, one reason to belay directly off your harness may be if you have a gear anchor with some marginal placements and you want to minimize the force on your anchor. The idea is you have a (hopefully) great stance and if your second falls you will take most or all of the force of the fall without transferring that force to your anchor. Belaying directly off the anchor puts all the force of their fall onto the anchor, and belaying off your harness with a redirect to the anchor puts additional force on the anchor as the masterpoint is taking the load of the climber and yourself - I'm not great with physics but from memory it's something like 1 2/3 the weight of the climber? Maybe someone else can chime in on that.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526

Harness belays and, before that, hip belays were standard for a good half-century. If the belayer knows what the hell they are doing (something that cannot be assumed) there is no problem with such belays. If the belay tie-in is slack (not a good sign, because there is no reason for it to be), then the harness belay is still ok if the belayer understands the ancient art of bracing. (Look for grey hairs...)

Personally, I use a variation of the harness belay 90% of the time. The variation has two aspects. (1) The belay tie-in is snug with no slack at all in it. (2) The belay device is clipped to the belayer's rope tie-in knot loop, not to the harness belay loop. The effect of these two conditions is that the load of a second falling is transmitted directly to the anchor via the belayer's tie in and does not put opposing forces on the harness that tend to make holding a fallen climber uncomfortable for the belayer.

Is this better than redirecting? For me, yes, in many ways.

1. The anchor only gets approximately half the load it would get from a redirected belay.

2. The system works fine when the anchor is remote from the belayer, in which case there are a number of practical problems with the redirect belay.

3. The system works fine when the anchor is very low (the belayer sits down in this case).

4. With the belay device in front of the belayer at hip level, rope handling is faster and more sensitive, hence more effective, and is considerably less tiring. This is especially true if the second is moving fast and/or if the belayer is belaying two seconds climbing simultaneously.

Is this ever a bad option?

With hanging belays, you have to redirect.

Frankly, with today's equipment, I don't think there is any good reason to redirect the belay for the second unless you have a hanging belay. Either use the modified harness belay described above if the stance allows facing out or belay direct off the anchor with a guide plate.

Bill Lawry · · Albuquerque, NM · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 1,812

"With hanging belays, you have to redirect. "

Why? Maybe I'm a rock, but I can't imagine why a redirect would be mandatory even if having to escape the belay.

Bill Lawry · · Albuquerque, NM · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 1,812

"... the difficulty one might have in keeping a 180 degree angle between the climber strand and the break strand in the case of a fall. "

I routinely belay a second off the harness. In my experience, max breaking ability is not compromised. But I could be forgetting first experiences at working to get the configuration down for a given set of circumstances. It has been about ten years.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Bill Lawry wrote:"With hanging belays, you have to redirect. " Why? Maybe I'm a rock, but I can't imagine why a redirect would be mandatory even if having to escape the belay.
Hanging belays typically oblige the belayer to face the rock, so the redirect is the most natural thing for the position. Belaying off the harness without redirecting in a hanging belay might expose the belayer to some strange and unpleasant twisting loads.

spencerparkin wrote:The main problem I saw with belaying directly off the harness is the difficulty one might have in keeping a 180 degree angle between the climber strand and the break strand in the case of a fall. If that's difficult to do...
Stop right there. It isn't difficult to do, its trivial. That said, with a harness-position belay, you don't keep the rope at 180 degrees when taking in, any more than you would keep it at 180 degrees when pumping slack to the leader. In both cases, there is a rope management position and a lock-off position, and the belayer moves between them depending on the demands of the moment. Being able to do this goes under the heading of "basic competence."
tenesmus · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2004 · Points: 3,023

Spencer, stop posting stupid shit like this in the Utah forum. It belongs somewhere far, far from here. Put it in the general climbing section in the "I'm unable to think things through on my own" thread.

Fiona Dunne · · Lynchburg, VA · Joined Aug 2008 · Points: 56

I believe Freedom of the Hills cautions to keep your tie in on the same side as your brake hand when belaying a 2nd up directly from your harness. You're likely facing down while belaying, and if a fall pulls all your weight onto your tie-in, you may be rotated so you're facing the rock. You want that rotation to naturally pull the brake strand away from the load strand, rather than rotate you into an un-braked position.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Fiona Dunne wrote:I believe Freedom of the Hills cautions to keep your tie in on the same side as your brake hand when belaying a 2nd up directly from your harness. You're likely facing down while belaying, and if a fall pulls all your weight onto your tie-in, you may be rotated so you're facing the rock. You want that rotation to naturally pull the brake strand away from the load strand, rather than rotate you into an un-braked position.
If you use the technique I described, you don't have to worry about any of this and the belay is more comfortable and more secure to boot.

What's not to like?
will smith · · boulder · Joined Jan 2008 · Points: 35

W T F you mean there is another way than off your harness, beats the shit out of hip belays.

Dela Rig · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2013 · Points: 0

Yes... belaying the second up with your device connected directly to the anchors :)

Tom Nyce · · Flagstaff, AZ · Joined Nov 2010 · Points: 45
spencerparkin wrote:Okay, here's what I'm talking about... See page 49 of "Rock Climbing Anchors, A Comprehensive Guide" by Graig Luebben. Lots of good information here.
I don't have that book. But I have "Advanced Rock Climbing" by Long and Luebben. In that book, the first sentence on page 99 is "Usually, you'll belay directly off your harness."
Personally, I'm one of the guys mentioned above (the ones with grey hairs, lol). I've climbed since 1977, and presently climb (trad only) about 30-45 days a year. I belay off my harness while tied to gear anchors that I build, and prefer my belayers do the same (assuming they know what they are doing). If they are more familiar with other methods, and the situation is amenable, using the method you they are most familiar with is usually the safest though.
rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
spencerparkin wrote:Okay, here's what I'm talking about... See page 49 of "Rock Climbing Anchors, A Comprehensive Guide" by Graig Luebben. Lots of good information here.
You can view this page by going to the book's listing on amazon.com and typing "belay off the harness" into the search box labeled Search Inside This Book.

The page describes the various possible twisting loads on the belayer belaying off the harness in the traditional way. Luebben is apparently unaware of the method I described, that avoids these problems most of the time.

I learned this method years ago on rec.climbing from Chris Harmston, at the time a BD engineer and one of the most technically astute commentators on climbing ever. The technique is fairly common in the UK, see for example ukclimbing.com/articles/pag… .

Luebben also says that harness belays complicate belay escape. Well, you might think you can't beat a guide plate for that, since you can just walk away from it. But if you have to unweight the guide plate as part of the rescue, the situation is just as complex (or, if you wish just as simple) as escaping a harness belay. Our brethren across the Pond are more enthusiastic about harness belays than we have become, so are naturally more inclined to explain how to escape them. See for example ukclimbing.com/articles/pag… , but note that the belayer is using the "rope loop" harness belay I've been advocating, not the "belay loop" harness belay.
Ty Gregory · · Salt Lake City · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 115

here is what you do biatch!

how to belay

Rocky_Mtn_High · · Arvada, CO · Joined Apr 2010 · Points: 230
spencerparkin wrote:Great video on that 2nd link.
A couple of points about the video on escaping the belay:

1. A mule knot and Munter-mule-overhand (MMO) are good to know in rescue situations. I first use a mule knot to tie off at the belay device, which might be a bit easier than their method if you have a small belay biner. (The mule knot is really quick with a bit of practice, and comes in handy for taking pictures.)

2. If you need to escape the belay, I would use an MMO to attach the klemheist loop biner to the anchor, tied with the end of the brake strand (which comes off the belayer's clove hitch at the anchor). Next back up the klemheist with a slack loop of the climbing rope tied to the anchor, transfer the weight onto the klemheist, remove the rope from your belay device, and finally tie another MMO onto the anchor (using the slack loop of the rope). After removing the remaining slack, you can now release the klemheist to return your second's weight back to the climbing rope, and, importantly, you now have the option of lowering your second, if necessary.

@rgold: I really like the idea of using the rope loop when belaying off the harness -- thanks for the tip.
rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Rocky_Mtn_High wrote: I really like the idea of using the rope loop when belaying off the harness.
Yes, and leave the device there when the second takes over the lead. Having the device on the rope loop for leader belays means that if there are big leader fall forces, they will be transmitted to the belay anchor (via the energy-absorbing rope tie-in) rather than creating twisting and tearing loads on the harness. In fact, this is the context of the original comment by Chris Harmston.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Northern Utah & Idaho
Post a Reply to "Inquery about a certain climbing practice with…"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.