Belaying Second in Guide mode - right or left?

coppolillo wrote:Wow, this guy is really off the mark. Safety? He'd prefer to double the fall forces on his anchor? .

I'd prefer a factor 2 fall directly on the anchor over straight onto my harness, baring a super sketchy anchor.

Not that you would ever see a factor 2 fall when bringing up a second...

Healyje wrote: Well, for one, you have way more faith in anchors (built or bolted and I've replaced about 74 bolted anchors and in 54 out of 74 both bolts were spinners. One anchor bolt broke just under the weight of the breaker bar while I was adjusting my leash).

2 HUGE problems with this logic.
1. You are advocating for belaying off of anchors you don't trust. That's a dumb move
2. You are actually putting more force on your "untrusted" anchors with a redirect.

Healyje = old dude stuck in his ways not realizing that new techniques can actually be better.

To OP's original question. No it's not going to matter unless there is some gnarly huge chickenhead that is going to grab the loop and hamper the belay device from moving.

Stagg54 wrote: Agree with your ergonomics part. Number one reason I use guide mode is that on long alpine climb, I can eat, drink, consult the guidebook and change layers, while still belaying all by taking my hands off. Unlike a gri-gri, it is autolocking. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this practice. Show me an accident where the reverso in guide mode was threaded correctly and someone fell and got dropped because the belayer didn't have his hand on the rope. Try and recreate a similar situation in your garage. You can't.

As you mentioned it is auto locking and in my world anything that operates automatically is subject to failure. You need to prove that in all and that means in an infinite amount of situations, in the real world not the garage, it will not fail. I'll rely on a backup knot, belay off my harness and redirect off a higher piece. If you are comfortable doing it your way be my guest. I'll keep it simple I just have to thread the rope through my device, lock the binner as I can belay right or left handed. On long routes I'll do what's necessary before I belay or after my partner gets there. I just belay when I'm belaying or I tie a backup Knot,

Healyje wrote:Yeah, there clearly must be some other reason why someone is being dropped by a belayer using a grigri every 15 minutes, 24x7 somewhere around the planet these days.

This has become like a mantra for you, but I've never seen you back it up with statistics to prove the absurd assertion that:

• 96 climbers per day
• 672 climbers per week
• 4,992 climbers per year

are being dropped by grigris.

Or maybe you just take it for granted that everyone knows you've got an axe to grind and are therefore indulging in gross exaggeration.

JL

Healyje wrote: Yeah, there clearly must be some other reason why someone is being dropped by a belayer using a grigri every 15 minutes, 24x7 somewhere around the planet these days. And let's at least be honest, there's a grigri on every harness not because it's a great belay device, but because it's a great hanging device.

Can't tell if this was just epic trolling or not. Fairly certain you're being serious...

saxfiend wrote:4,992 climbers per year are being dropped by grigris.

Hell, there's probably going on that many climbing gyms worldwide at this point given even Moldova and Malta have three apiece. But conservatively say there's half that number. Now add every sport crag in the world - easily thousands if not tens of thousands I'd guess.

One drop per year at each and you'd have way, way over 5k climbers being dropped per year. How many gyms and sport venues do you suppose go a year without anyone at all being dropped?

World-wide Rock Climbing Gym & Artificial Wall Listing

Poor, poor haelyge

This is a long essay that I feel is appropriate for a beginners thread on the use of guide plates. There is a lot to consider.

I think that Joe overstates his case, but so do many proponents of the plates. Guide mode belays have their uses, guiding obviously being one of them. They also have drawbacks, some of which can be dangerous. The advantages of plates in appropriate situations are relatively minor, so I've found it surprising that they have caught on they way they have. It seems as if they may soon become the default method for belaying the second, a perception in line with poster comments that they use the guide plate belay 99% of the time.

The primary advantage is hands-off belaying of the second. i suspect that if you absolutely had to keep a hand on the brake strand at all times, the guide plates would never have become anywhere near as popular. This is a bit peculiar, since all the manufacturers caution against hands-off belaying, but those cautions are treated by many as being delivered, with a wink and a nod, by manufacturers concerned about liability, and are frequently if not universally ignored. Famous climbers, in blogs and articles, tout the guide plate-conferred ability to put on and take off clothing, eat food, and rehydrate, while simultaneously belaying the second.

Some of the hands-off guide plate practices make sense in the context of long routes, especially in winter or alpine conditions, where added efficiency and speed trump the additional risks that may be incurred. And some people think there are no additional risks, as one can tell by reading the thread. It seems to me that there are two primary related risks. The first is that while enjoying various hands-off activities, the belayer is not taking in the rope, so slack accumulates and the second is exposed to short leader falls, causing greater than bodyweight impacts that will have to be held by the untended device. It is clear that the manufacturers don’t think the device is always going to be up to that task, but climbers seem to know better, even though they probably aren’t testing their devices under some of the bad conditions that are possible.

Another set of risks comes from using the plates when the route traverses into the belay, a circumstance mentioned explicitly by several posters. If there is pro along such a traverse, the load on the plate will be horizontal and there will be little or no braking action, a situation that could be catastrophic if hands-off techniques are being used. What if the route diagonals in to the belay? I don’t think we know whether there is a critical angle below horizontal above which the plates won’t grab. What if there is no pro and the second swings down directly underneath the belay? I don’t think we know how the plates perform in this situation either.

Even granting the utility of the plates for certain applications, the combined result of guiding practice, marketing, and famous-climber promotions is that the same techniques show up on sunny two-pitch crag climbs where there is little justification for adding any extra risks, no matter how remote they might seem. One result, I suspect, is that climbers in general are getting less and less experience with more traditional belays and so are more fearful of using them. This happened a long time ago with the now dead hip belay, which isn’t anywhere near as bad as many modern climbers believe and still has uses for parties moving rapidly on easy to moderate ground. The bracing principles that made hip belays viable are now lost knowledge.

When the plates are used outside their obvious realm of utility, they often contribute to the bad belays Joe mentions. Bad, not in the sense of danger (although there is some chance of that too, as will emerge later), but rather in the sense of not being in the spirit of the activity. (But maybe bad plate belays are changing the spirit of cragging and no one cares about this issue.) What I and Joe mean by bad belays are ones in which the second is continually pulled. In cragging situations where temporal efficiency is not a requirement, it used to be that people following a pitch wanted to actually climb it, rather than being supported by the rope all the way up. That constant tugging doesn’t have to happen, but avoiding bad belays requires a lot of attention from the plate belayer (more than for conventional belays), and the need for attention is precisely what the plate belay is praised for diminishing. The end result, in my experience, which I think is probably more extensive than Joe’s in this regard, is that bad belays are the norm with plates.

There are situations in which the bad belays transition from simply preventing the second from making a free ascent to something more unpleasant. There are times when the inability to step down because of the combination of a bad belay and imperfect communication has nasty consequences. One such circumstance is when the rope runs over a roof or overhang overhead. Another such circumstance occurs on traversing or diagonaling sections or pitches. In both these cases a fall may lead to hanging either away from the rock or, after a pendulum, on rock that can’t be climbed. Being pulled-on in such situations by a bad belay is simultaneously frightening and infuriating—I’m here to testify to that. Sure, the same thing could happen with an ordinary belay, but it doesn’t with anything close to the same frequency.

Its easy to avoid the constant tugging of bad plate belaying, but as mentioned above this requires attention from the belayer, and the requisite level may not be available. You can eliminate or at least diminish bad belays if you make your rope intake a very distinct two-step process: the non-brake hand lifts the second’s rope and gauges the second’s progress, endeavoring to leave a few inches of slack in the rope to avoid tugging. Only when more than a few inches of slack develop does the brake hand pull the lifted slack through the device. However obvious this may seem, I almost never see or experience a plate belayer belaying this way. Usually both hands are used in a coordinated motion to draw the rope through the device until there is no slack, and then the plate automatically locks it off.

The two-step intake process will alleviate a lot of bad belaying, but it doesn’t solve the problem of preventing the second from stepping or—heaven forbid—climbing down. That requires that the plate be released. Releasing a plate and paying out rope when the second isn’t actually hanging on the plate can be very tricky. (It can be tricky for other reasons when the second is hanging on the rope.) One hand is tied up lifting the plate, and the other hand has the contradictory task of pulling out slack and maintaining potential braking. It is hard and in many cases not possible to do both, so the belayer has to give up on braking while pulling slack through the device, with potentially catastrophic consequences if the second falls at the wrong moment.

A consequence of plate-belaying which is not an intrinsic problem with the plates themselves is what might be called “plate vision,” in which the belayer constructs an anchor that is in the best position for manipulating the plate, rather than the most solid belay anchor. I’ve seen two or three examples of this, one quite terrifying because of the poorness of the chosen well-positioned anchor. From what I’ve seen, the problem occurs when the optimal anchor placements are very low, perhaps at foot level on the belay ledge, and so inappropriate for plate-belaying, while being perfectly fine for a harness-type belay.

I’ve left lowering for last because most people already understand that plates suck for this and that various work-arounds may be required, both for unlocking a heavily loaded plate and for managing lowering friction, which goes from high to zero in a very small amount of plate rotation. In this regard the DMM Pivot is a step forward, and I think guides and other heavy plate users would be well-advised to switch to it, even though it does not totally eliminate all of the issues.

Unlocking a plate with a second hanging on it can be impossible if the rock around the plate prevents it from being tilted. A guide I know experienced this problem. The second was hanging in space and the plate was in a very shallow corner, perhaps two inches deep, and the fall pressed the plate against the corner wall; it simply could not be released (even biner pumping was ineffective). He had to carry out a full belay escape scenario that involved hauling the second up a foot or so to get the load off the plate, then completely removing the plate from the rope and substituting a Munter hitch. Of course, the best way to avoid this problem is to be aware of the potential and not use a plate belay in situations that could prevent releasing it, but foresight is not always 20-20, even for highly experienced professionals.

I think the concluding words should be about the modern harness belay, which isn’t really a harness belay at all and is, rather, another form of belaying off the anchor. In the modern form, the climber’s tie-in to the anchor is tight and the belay device is clipped to the rope tie-in loop rather than the harness belay loop. The effect of this is that belay loads go straight to the anchor via the belayer’s tie-in, so there are no loads to the belayer’s body or pinching from a harness subjected to opposing loads. The other advantages of the classical harness belay remain: sensitivity to the climber’s motions, the ability to safely and easily give slack for climbing down, better ability to keep up with climbers moving fast, and safe and efficient lowering if it is required. I might add that belaying two seconds simultaneously works just fine.

My advice to a beginner would be to strive for competence at all the belaying modalities and choose the one that truly fits the circumstances. Plates are useful, but are not a panacea.

Is everyone still arguing over autoblock these days? ... I thought that was passe

Its not like we have anything better to do than rant against the autoblock now ... Like climb

I lool forward to my fellow MPers on multi at belays wagging their fingers at folks who dare use the forbidden autoblock !!!

Of course in some places in the world theres this thing called rock fall thats a very real risk ... Canadian limestone (where i pulled off handsizes rocks on popular routes yesterday) im looking at you ...

Lets see how many pages we can get ranting against the autoblock in this thread ...

;)

Btw ...

- there is an easy way to feed out slack in guide mode with the atc guide if the climber isnt weighting the rope .... With the brake hand still on the rope

- and there are several lowering methods with the atc guide ... You can always create enough slack to transition to something else with the biner pump

- has anyone actually tested the dreaded "diagonal or horinzontal" autoblock belay here? ... I have theres certain cases in which it fails and otherea where it doesnt .... I suggest and going out to test it youselves with both one and two seconds (backed up of course)

NorCalNomad wrote: 2 HUGE problems with this logic. 1. You are advocating for belaying off of anchors you don't trust. That's a dumb move 2. You are actually putting more force on your "untrusted" anchors with a redirect. Healyje = old dude stuck in his ways not realizing that new techniques can actually be better. To OP's original question. No it's not going to matter unless there is some gnarly huge chickenhead that is going to grab the loop and hamper the belay device from moving.

Old dudes are always right, right?

bearbreeder wrote:Is everyone still arguing over autoblock these days? ... I thought that was passe Its not like we have anything better to do than rant against the autoblock now ... Like climb I lool forward to my fellow MPers on multi at belays wagging their fingers at folks who dare use the forbidden autoblock !!!

DAMN THESE YOUNG WHIPPERSNAPPERS TRYING NEW THINGS, BITD WE WERE JUST FINE WITH A GOOD STANCE AND AN OLD FASIONED HIP BELAY!!!

Healyje wrote: Maybe you can't, but I sure as hell can as I keep a constant, ever-so-slight tension on the rope so I can continuously feel what's happening and can tell pretty much exactly what they're up all the time to if I've climbed with them much at all. Ditto for an out-of-sight leader.

Absolutely nothing is stopping you from doing the same in guide mode.

Healyje wrote:Crikey, glad I'm not climbing with your partners. Unless you're taking a break on an route longer than eight pitches or move like molasses I much prefer to stay focused on the actual climbing, not dick around, move fast, and get up and off the the route.

Um... That was my point. Guide mode can help you move fast and get up the route. And of course I'm talking about climbing long multi pitch routes. Why would climbers be talking about food etc. On a couple pitch route!?

rgold wrote:This is a long essay that I feel is appropriate for a beginners thread on the use of guide plates. There is a lot to consider.

I completely agree with this.

I love the guide mode. But under no circumstances do I recommend that novices use it. I was having this discussion just a couple of weeks ago. There are lots of aspects to consider and I think you summed it up well.

I'm genuinely interested in the different ways to belay your second. When I learned to climb bigger multipitch, I thought you were limited to guide mode devices, a redirected munter or a gri off the anchor. If someone would please list a few of these I would like to do some research. Cheers

"He'd prefer to double the fall forces on his anchor?"

"Redirected belay from the anchor to harness puts 2-1 force on the anchor."

And so.... This gets repeated often, and it's pretty silly as we're talking about a top rope for the follower here. If you can handle 200 lbs, but 400 lbs is a risk to the anchor, then you have an anchor problem, not a problem with how the rope is running.

If redirecting the belay changes your opinion about the security of your anchor you need a new anchor, not a different belay method.

DavisMeschke wrote:I'm genuinely interested in the different ways to belay your second. When I learned to climb bigger multipitch, I thought you were limited to guide mode devices, a redirected munter or a gri off the anchor. If someone would please list a few of these I would like to do some research. Cheers

1. Standard belay off harness. No redirect. Personally I think this should be the FIRST technique taught. I use this whenever I don't use my reverso in autoblock. If you can brace yourself you can even do this without an anchor!
2. Belay off harness with redirect.
3. Belay off directly off anchor with device.

Stagg54 wrote: Agree with your ergonomics part. Number one reason I use guide mode is that on long alpine climb, I can eat, drink, consult the guidebook and change layers, while still belaying all by taking my hands off. Unlike a gri-gri, it is autolocking. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this practice. Show me an accident where the reverso in guide mode was threaded correctly and someone fell and got dropped because the belayer didn't have his hand on the rope. Try and recreate a similar situation in your garage. You can't.

^^^. Wrong. And this is exactly the mindset that healyje is referring to. There have been accidents with properly threaded auto blocks. One right before my very eyes. And there have been others too.

The most important part of the response to the OPD is that the device is oriented in a way that it cannot be impeded to orientate itself into locking. This is not a concern most of the time. But it is real critical when the routt traverses just before the anchor. In this case when the follower Falls the device must be able to swing and point to the last piece of gear without anything affecting it. this scenario becomes even more critical with a party of three. If the first follower reaches the anchor and hangs directly down on the device it is now left wide open to the other follower and will not lock. Anyone that Climbs with a party of three and an auto block device should be keenly aware of this.

Whenever you belay a second with an auto block device you should always pull The rope tight when you begin to belay to ensure the device can rotate into the proper direction.

Oh and all this about doubling the forces on the anchor. Um hello if you are already hanging from the anchor and you do a redirect you cannot double the forces they are the same. you hanging, your partner hanging. Yes there is a theoretical doubling on the specific redirect piece. But the anchor as a whole will see no difference in load with a redirect versus an auto block if the belayer is hanging on the anchor.

There are so many retarded things being said in this thread, but I guess I'm going to chime in. If anyone out there is actually reading this thread for a curiosity as to what to do, and not just arguing their opinionated b.s....

This quote below is a takeaway

Greg D wrote: The most important part of the response to the OPD is that the device is oriented in a way that it cannot be impeded to orient itself into locking. This is not a concern most of the time. But it is real critical when the route traverses just before the anchor.

An experienced climber might just figure this out for themselves, but it could be easily overlooked. I had to figure this out after the Thin Air traverse. It was very obvious to me and I forget whether I belayed off the harness or just belayed in guide, knowing it wouldn't lock. I could imagine there would be scenarios where it would be less obvious, and someone not keenly aware of this possibility, could get someone hurt.

Dr. Crankenstein wrote:An answer for the OP. I base my decision of which direction to point my belay device in guide mode on which side of me my second in going to approach. For example, if the pitch I just led traverses into the belay from the right I will set up the belay device to pull rope from that direction. Another more common example for me is belaying in a dihedral. Let's say it's a right facing dihedral. Unless there are face holds leading out to your right, the second will be approaching the belay on your left so you will want to orient your device to pull rope from that side. If you don't you will either have to deal with a rope cluster or flip the rope over you head as your second approaches effectively pointing your device in that direction in the end. The rope cluster that failing to do this will cause is very evident if and when your second begins leading the next pitch. I know it seems like a small issue but rope clusters are the biggest loss of time while multipitch climbing with a storm bearing down or angry people following you.

Makes sense...I'll definitely keep that in mind in the future! I was wondering if anyone else was going to address the original topic, lol.

As far as this argument...direct belays are guide standard (one of the videos I posted was done by an AMGA guide), so I don't get why anyone would ever argue against their use beyond the matter of simple preference. Nevertheless, there are other threads for that...

Kent Richards wrote: By "feels more like a normal toprope belay", do you mean that you're using your hands in the same way as you would for toprope belay (your "usual" hand on the brake, for example)? If so, that's a limitation. Learn to use both hands for different purposes, so that you can switch according to the situation. Set up the anchor and belay in the best configuration for the conditions, looking out for stuff getting tangled, biner gates or ropes being pressed against the rock in inconvenient or dangerous ways, rope crossing over rope or slings etc. And yeah, if the second is going to come up to your left, you'd usually point the plastic loop to the right, and vice-versa.

That's a fair point.

tradvlad wrote: I am sorry to hear about your friend. That is very unfortunate, but could have been prevented. I belay in guide mode 99% - All the of the pros and cons have been already stated. However, I never lower in guide mode. I don't think it is safe, as you pointed out. Here is a video to quickly convert a guide to lower, if you need to lower your partner for some reason. youtube.com/watch?v=JoZ-5xr…

That's actually a great idea. I do agree that lowering in guide mode (aside from rotating the binder if you're just inching a few feet) is dangerous, largely because it's so
rare that people have to do it that I'd venture a guess that most accidents are caused by not knowing exactly how to safely disengage the autoblock.

Sorry for the late stream of posts...was doing this "climbing" thing yesterday. :p