Belaying Second in Guide mode - right or left?
|
i can't speak for the gi-gi (or is that the CAMP Ovo?) but the alpine smart feeds smoothly on my rope even though it is .3mm above the maximum range (the smaller ropes one is for 9.5-7.5mm and my rope is 9.8). just make sure you use a rounded biner such as the Rocklock or petzl attche. |
|
For those that are "serious" about killing other folks with "magic plates" |
|
These things seem to work just as well as the person using them. So spend some time learning all the ins and outs of how they work - when they are the best option - and when they are not. |
|
rgold wrote:Well I'm old but not cranky, as my essay would reveal if anyone could be bothered to read it. I love rob.com's hymn, but I own a Reverso, an Alpine Up, and a DMM Pivot (as well as a whole bunch of older gadgets) and use all of them in guide mode on occasion.Excellent essay - thanks for taking the time. I noticed that you did not mention the TRE. This is what I use, and like quite a bit. I'm curious as to why you have abandoned it, and what you prefer in its place (in particular for belaying on double ropes). Most of what I've read in this thread is entirely predictable. With one exception. It seems that many newer climbers simply never belay a second off their harness. Actually, this strange fact was brought to my attention in real life, climbing with new partners, and only reinforced by what I've read in this thread. This seems truly bizarre, since in nearly two decades of climbing, I've found that there are a ton of situations where belaying off my harness is far and away the best method of bringing up the second. And I say that as someone who regularly belays off the anchor, or (less frequently) redirects off the anchor. All three methods of bringing up a second are vastly superior in certain situations, and I can't imagine abandoning any of them, as it seems many here have done. Is it possible that some new climbers learned how to bring up a second in guide mode off the anchor, and so since that's all they know, they're blind to the situations in which it's inferior, or the problems it causes? One last thing - to HealyJ: I've personally witnessed many poor belayers. It's true that many more of them (nearly all) were Grigri users. I agree that the device itself can encourage bad habits. However of all the falls I've personally witnessed in which a belay error caused the climber to fall, every single one was a belayer using a standard tube-style devices of some kind. All were n00b belayers with poor technique. My takeaway from this is that some climbers take a significant amount of time to develop really solid belay techniques, capable of catching all falls. Most drops occur during this learning period, and most happen to tube-style belayers, simply because the Grigri will usually catch the climber even when the belayer screws up. This is precisely what then leads to better habits in the tube-style belayers over time, and worse habits in the Grigri users. But in terms of actual numbers, for me, tube style belayer-caused accidents win. GO |
|
GabeO wrote: I noticed that you did not mention the TRE. This is what I use, and like quite a bit. I'm curious as to why you have abandoned it, and what you prefer in its place (in particular for belaying on double ropes).I liked the TRE Sirius a lot. I didn't mention it because it hasn't been in production for years now. I stopped using mine because, as it wore, its braking abilities declined significantly. After struggling to hold a short leader fall, I retired it. I've never had another device whose properties changed so noticeably over time. Apparently, you have not had this experience. GabeO wrote:...in nearly two decades of climbing, I've found that there are a ton of situations where belaying off my harness is far and away the best method of bringing up the second. And I say that as someone who regularly belays off the anchor, or (less frequently) redirects off the anchor. All three methods of bringing up a second are vastly superior in certain situations, and I can't imagine abandoning any of them, as it seems many here have done.Absolutely right. GabeO wrote:Is it possible that some new climbers learned how to bring up a second in guide mode off the anchor, and so since that's all they know, they're blind to the situations in which it's inferior, or the problems it causes? I think this is quite likely. And perhaps some people climb in places with mostly bolted anchors that have been set up to facilitate guide-plate belaying, so they have no reason to expand their skill set. |
|
rgold wrote: I liked the TRE Sirius a lot. I didn't mention it because it hasn't been in production for years now. I stopped using mine because, as it wore, its braking abilities declined significantly. After struggling to hold a short leader fall, I retired it. I've never had another device whose properties changed so noticeably over time. Apparently, you have not had this experience.Interesting! Actually, I did, in a sense. Specifically I found that over time the force of the brake bar roughed up, and eventually piled up metal, in the line that the bar needs to travel to brake. Only by shaving/sanding this flat could I maintain the proper braking action on the device. They must have noticed this flaw, because for a while they produced a version that had brass sliders integrated into the bar, which eliminated this issue. I still have one left in good working order - the last of the three I've used since they came out. Not sure what I'll do next, when this wears out. Seems like the three devices I need to investigate (as of now) will be the Mammut Smart Alpine, Edelrid Mega Jul, and Alpine Up. GO |
|
Healyje wrote:Twice over the years I've arrived at a belay to find I was being belayed in 'guide mode' off the anchor which explained why the belay sucked so badly. Almost can't put into words how suck and ill-considered this is a practice in trad climbing, particularly on anything serious.I was there for one of them. I didn't think the belay was poor but was amused to watch as you arrived to see an equally skilled and experienced climber belaying you up autoblock directly off the anchor:-). You were a gentleman and didn't say anything, but I was watching you eyeball it as you climbed up since I knew your opnion. Haha. That was a good day. Healyjes advice is usually excellent. However, as has been noted already upthread there can be times where it is a significantly better option, and everyone should be making up their own mind on this. Back hurting (mine does that on occasion as well Rgold), a long way up on the Glacier Point Apron belaying 2 followers climbing on different skinny ropes (you need 2 ropes to get down) on excellent 3/8" anchors in super hard granite, guidemode/autoblock is the way to go. You've got to be managing the ropes as you belay so the ropes don't slide down and get stuck under a flake, and being in autoblock gives you the best shot at doing so while giving an excellent belay. Healyje is one of the most technically competent climbers any of you would ever tie in with (unless you are climbing with Rgold:-). I'm speaking as a person who has climbed for well over 40 years and guided for a bunch of them. His points about lack of skill leading to people getting dirted out is excellent. I had just started a very similar thread which received so many more off topic, various attack, and snarky comments than this one that I went back and tried to delete it. I suppose people who want to argue some of these points will get to learn the hard way for themselves. Sadly. I believe that it can be worthwhile to open your mind up to the points they are making, and not be ignorant and allow oneself to get distracted by things like the statistical probability of climbers getting dropped. That percentage, regardless of what it actually is, if just too goddamned high. Period. Move on to the actual points. |
|
Billcoe wrote:Back hurting (mine does that on occasion as well Rgold), a long way up on the Glacier Point Apron belaying 2 followers climbing on different skinny ropes (you need 2 ropes to get down) on excellent 3/8" anchors in super hard granite, guidemode/autoblock is the way to go.Back hurting. Not much to be done there and a good reason for guide mode if you know what you're doing with it. Two followers is another deal altogether and I have admit not caring much for that kind of threesome at all. Too slow and too much of a clusterfuck. Billcoe wrote:Healyje is...Thanks, likewise. Particularly appreciate the support on the point from someone who has had to directly deal with the consequences and deaths of nearby climbers multiple times. And as you say, it's easy to blow it all off as a rant about something that is, in the end, really just a statistical anomaly that only happens to other people. And the only thing more frightening than watching people do truly scary things is finding out they are impervious and immune to suggestion or advice no matter how diplomatically offered. [ P.S. Glad you jumped in on the bad belay thread I'm about tapped... ] [ P.P.S. Jim Anglin's belay wasn't the one I was talking about, though I wasn't on anything I had to work at so I don't know what that might have been like. Probably as good as it can be would be my guess. ] |
|
How do you know Healy thinks he's better than you? |
|
As much as I disagree with Healy's rigid, hard and fast rule about no guide mode, he's been pretty civil with his comments. Remaining cool under fire. And there's been a lot of fire! Good job, Healy. |
|
This topic can be summed up as: it depends. However, I "default" to guide mode. The benefit of only having the weight/force of the follower on the anchor is preferable to the weight/force of both climbers being applied to the anchor that happens with belays other than the guide-mode belay. |
|
Nick Sweeney wrote:This topic can be summed up as: it depends. However, I "default" to guide mode. The benefit of only having the weight/force of the follower on the anchor is preferable to the weight/force of both climbers being applied to the anchor that happens with belays other than the guide-mode belay.Not sure I really ever get this argument. If the belayer is hanging on the anchor, both of your weights come onto the anchor just like a re-direct. Sure, if you have a stance and the belayer is not weighting the anchor then the above is true. But does it really matter? Do you really care about the difference between the weight of one person vs. that of two? I should hope that your anchors can withstand a lot more than that! If the anchor is marginal, then I better have a good stance and I won't be belaying off of the anchor or a re-direct. I'll be belaying straight off of my harness. |
|
"I cited a reference with the worldwide gym directory link. Not really inventing them." |
|
Nick Sweeney wrote:This topic can be summed up as: it depends. However, I "default" to guide mode. The benefit of only having the weight/force of the follower on the anchor is preferable to the weight/force of both climbers being applied to the anchor that happens with belays other than the guide-mode belay.Not true. What I described as the "modern harness belay" only applies the follower's weight to the anchor, unless of course it is a hanging belay, so it is only the redirect that always doubles the load. Moreover, the modern harness belay applies the follower's weight mitigated by the belayer rope tie-in. If there is any kind of impact load because of slack in the follower's rope the anchor will better protected by the modern harness belay than by a direct belay. It follows that if one really cared about weight/force considerations, one would default to the modern harness belay. Jus' sayin' :) |
|
i know how to and have used all three methods and, in my limited experience, a direct belay is generally the most ergonomical. when my anchor is questionable, i exclusively belay off my harness because the load of the second goes through my squishy human body and my dynamic rope tie-in. |
|
All I can say is that I've learned a few things by reading this thread and appreciate those that had constructive contributions. |
|
If yr worried about force on the anchor then heres the way |
|
eli poss wrote: I wonder, however, if using one's body to absorb energy in harness belay could, over time, inflict damage upon said body. Could using a harness belay exclusively put unnecessary wear and tear on one's body that could, in 40 years, later cause issues such as chronic back pain?Nice try. My back pain (which is episodic but not truly chronic) dates back to a particular incident involving lifting a very heavy object more than forty years ago. None of the old folks I know who used hip belays for years ever associated them with any kind of injuries. And the modern harness belay leaves the belayer completely out of the equation just as the direct autoblock belay does. |
|
Bearbreeder: thanks for the old movies of belaying around the waist. Nostalgia for me. That's exactly how I was taught to belay. In regards to shark picture. Why even bother belaying when climbing on junk like that? Yer gonna die no matter what. |
|
eli poss wrote: Could using a harness belay exclusively put unnecessary wear and tear on one's body that could, in 40 years, later cause issues such as chronic back pain?I doubt it. Been climbing well over 40 years and used the hip belay exclusively for about the first 10. No back issues from the belaying. Have had back problems now and then but never from belaying. rob.calm |