Belaying accident and aftermath

Jake Jones wrote: I would say I've caught upwards of a few thousand falls now on a Cinch. No close calls, no complaints.

Jake, you seem like a competent guy. Surely you can understand it isn't just a matter of quantity (which is easy to achieve and probably more relevant to product durability), but more importantly diversity. A dozen people with hundreds of collective catches will test the device in way more diversity scenarios than you'd have encountered.

Overall the information, if you wish to subscribe the DAV's review, does not bury the cinch nearly as much as you represent. Interesting to actually look at the table in the last link.

Since you fancy DAV literature, feel free to sample below:

alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu…

alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu…

alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu…

Oddly enough found human error number one problem - hmmm?

Could the cinch be better? Sure

Could the grigri be better? Sure

Should most people be belaying with either? Likely no. Seems like tube devices would still be preferred, but guessing that this would not get rid of all accidents either. The problem, as mentioned before, is that the larger number of people climbing will reflect a larger incidence of accidents by virtue of the increasing population.

Not everyone should be engaging in the sport, any more than some people should just never handle guns, drive motorcycles, or go snowboarding. That is just life.

Most of the time, I see that things like this are due to user error. Only in very very rare instances they are not. Our imprecision of terms works against us as well. For instance, the first poster said that this belayer was "Experienced". What does that word mean? Has the person been climbing for 40 years, regularly or for 6 months? I would assume it should mean that they have practiced and trained enough so that they are damned good at this skill, belaying. Yet they dropped a person and failed to do their job, for whatever reason. Was it due to the fact that maybe they were NOT really experienced with 6 months of previous climbing or did the device somehow fail?

The way to minimize these kinds of accidents is to train and practice extensively. A climber who has read the manual, repeatedly watched the video and worked one one one with an expert training with this device and then practiced it a lot might be not be considered experienced and capable with it (despite being so) whereas a climber who did none of those things yet had been climbing 5 years and just picked one up and figured it would just work might be called "experienced".

The solution is that one becomes a better belayer by training to do so, just like becoming a better climber by training, while staying updated on new methods, tools and techniques. Speaking of which, the factory has changed the way they teach users to properly use this tool. I'm doing it the way they showed when I bought it, which is wrong now as it turns out.

Oh, and frank minunni, no reason to act like an annoying fuck. Greg's post was spot in abiet abbreviated and abrupt. Any chance you can stop being a douchbag for even a short while? Thank you.

T Roper wrote: and he even visited the site not too long ago Malcolm Daly

To be fair he hasn't worked there for a number of years

Paul Hassett wrote:Overall the information, if you wish to subscribe the DAV's review, does not bury the cinch nearly as much as you represent. Interesting to actually look at the table in the last link. Since you fancy DAV literature, feel free to sample below: alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu… alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu… alpenverein.de/chameleon/pu… Oddly enough found human error number one problem - hmmm? Could the cinch be better? Sure Could the grigri be better? Sure Should most people be belaying with either? Likely no. Seems like tube devices would still be preferred, but guessing that this would not get rid of all accidents either. The problem, as mentioned before, is that the larger number of people climbing will reflect a larger incidence of accidents by virtue of the increasing population. Not everyone should be engaging in the sport, any more than some people should just never handle guns, drive motorcycles, or go snowboarding. That is just life.

paul are you "arguing" to "be right"?

heres the google FU translation of their conclusion on the cinch

Cinch: for experts only

Seven accidents when backing up the
Lead climber one year are frightening.
All operating errors.
They lie in the complex operation
of the device well founded: Since the
RCA has no spring, you can
only spend rope, if you
the device "open" holds. The straight
Cable Pass reduces friction
almost to zero.
Hazards: Already the change of
Location of the device may malfunction
lead. If you hold the device
as specified in the manual,
can, despite keeping the
Brake hand principle fail (see
Declarations in DAV Panorama 3/10).
When draining the friction is very
low, an additional deflection
the brake cable is recommended.
Conclusion: Very complex device with hidden
Operation pieces and therefore
high accident potential. Only for
Experts.

notice how they say VERY complex device with HIGH ACCIDENT POTENTIAL and recommended ONLY FOR EXPERTS

please remember this is an accident thread .... if you want to start one about arguing about the cinch either restart one of the many old cinch threads ... or start a new one

Looks like the information from DAV supports that the cinch may be more prone to user error and therefore should be only used by advanced belayers.

Personally, I certainly won't go out to buy one.

Billcoe wrote:Oh, and frank minunni, you are an annoying fuck. Greg's post was spot in abiet abbreviated and abrupt. Any chance you can stop being a douchbag for even a short while?

Not a chance. Especially when the judgemental black and white are involved. Anyone who posts such self-righteous statements can't complain if they get it back.

What I am "arguing" about, is that the overall reactionary tone of responders condemning a singular device does not represent the root of the problem, nor focuses on the nature of the accident. Damning a singular device just illustrates that this community is filled with "experts", who are only moments away from suffering significant catastrophe due to the high-stake risks inherent in this sport.

Further, it is somewhat tiring that you have repeatedly cited these largely esoteric articles as evidence to back up your "argument" which you seem intent on driving home. Realistically, it is not as though the grigri received shining accolades from the study you reference, and yet you don't seem quite as excited to decry that device.

Why not suggest it should also be used by only experts as well, as these were the findings from the same group?

I, like several others, have brought up the point that self-proclaimed experts, despite their pre-climb rituals that may resemble safety and expertise, are in fact not actually experts in using the devices they and their climbers depend on - as highlight by the first article link I put up.

T Roper wrote: and he even visited the site not too long ago Malcolm Daly

Malcom is no longer with Trango.

Paul Hassett wrote:What I am "arguing" about, is that the overall reactionary tone of responders condemning a singular device does not represent the root of the problem, nor focuses on the nature of the accident. Damning a singular device just illustrates that this community is filled with "experts", who are only moments away from suffering significant catastrophe due to the high-stake risks inherent in this sport. Further, it is somewhat tiring that you have repeatedly cited these largely esoteric articles as evidence to back up your "argument" which you seem intent on driving home. Realistically, it is not as though the grigri received shining accolades from the study you reference, and yet you don't seem quite as excited to decry that device. Why not suggest it should also be used by only experts as well, as these were the findings from the same group? I, like several others, have brought up the point that self-proclaimed experts, despite their pre-climb rituals that may resemble safety and expertise, are in fact not actually experts in using the devices they and their climbers depend on - as highlight by the first article link I put up.

paul sounds alot like yr ignoring the conclusions of the DAV and launching into personal attacks ...

sad you do so on an accident thread ...

regardless the actual data and DAV article, as well as how to inspect and replace the pin is now up for the OP and others to see ...

MPers can draw their own conclusions from the actual articles, data, and inspection steps ... rather than just personal attacks and rants

have fun chasing yr own tail ...

im off to breed a few beahs

From DAV article:

The Grigri is like the top dog
the semi-automatic with the
the broadest distribution. Substituting the
Number of accidents in relation to the frequency of use,
is no Grigri
Runaway.
Hazards: The device is prone to operator error
due to the human
Reflexes both the cable outputting
as when draining: There was
some accidents by holding the
Blocking mechanism when outputting rope
and by the startle response,
the drain lever completely
follow through.
Without brake hand on the rope solves the
Unit with small falls and a lot
Rope friction is not sufficient, because for triggering
the blocking mechanism a
Spring resistance to be overcome
got to. Correct operation
is complex and unintuitive.
Conclusion: If you experience when draining
and operating the device according to the
"Gasworks" method (see DAV Panorama
3/10) is the equipment for Experienced
and experts recommended.

Have fun doing whatever you are alluding to, and when you are done, perhaps you can re-read the same article you keep citing.

By the way, because we disagree and I don't immediately accept you argument, does not make this personal. I actually enjoy reading a number of your tips, but you are in danger of believing everything you say is true. Don't do that - it limits your ability to see the bigger picture and learn new things.

Paul, honest question: have you used both devices? If so, how much and have you used them on a variety of different ropes?

bearbreeder wrote: paul sounds alot like yr ignoring the conclusions of the DAV and launching into personal attacks ... sad you do so on an accident thread ... regardless the actual data and DAV article, as well as how to inspect and replace the pin is now up for the OP and others to see ... MPers can draw their own conclusions from the actual articles, data, and inspection steps ... rather than just personal attacks and rants have fun chasing yr own tail ... im off to breed a few beahs

man o man, complaining about attacks that didnt happen then attacking, wow this thread is getting good! thanks bearbreeder!

paul ... if you had read my previous post on other threads you would know that i am NOT a big fan of ANY assisted locking device for beginners ...

or to make up for lack of basic belay techniques

and ive stated repeatedly that the grigri is NOT a beginner device

however the cinch is one level more complicated that even the grigri as at MINIMUM you need to

1. inspect it to make sure the pin is not worn out ... even a somewhat worn grigri or ATC would hold with less friction theres still a bend in the rope and the wear is more even ... with a cinch you go bye bye if that single point is worn down, especially on thinner slicker ropes ... this is NOT well known

2. you should be using the "modified" belay technique as shown by the DAV and now trango ... quite a few folks dont know or ignore this as shown on this thread

3. this is regardless of how good your "brake hand" is ... theres no bend in the rope ... if the pin fails the brake hand wont do diddly squat

whether folks care about what the DAV says or the new recommended belay technique ... or if they even care to know about the seriousness of the pin wear .... well thats up to them

MPers are free to ignore anything they want or do whatever they do

its quite funny that youre the one whos going off after i posted up FACTS about the USE, TESTING, DATA and INSPECTION of the cinch .... i never said not to use one ...

one should simply be aware of the issues thats been WELL KNOWN for years if one does use one ...

personally if anyone ever wanted to belay me on a cinch i would inspect the pin personally and make sure they use the "current" belay method ... and that they are indeed an "expert" belayer, not just some guy with a fresh belay card who spend his gift card at REI

anyways ... off to breed bears as amazingly ive hit the post limit for the day !!!

again my suggestion for you is to start a new thread on the cinch .... but MP seems to have a habit of personall attacks and rants on accident threads ...

CSProul

Yes - own and have used both. As mentioned earlier, was a late hold-out for grigri, as really didn't like original and never found it terribly intuitive to use.

In terms of non-tube devices, have used cinch for at least 2 years on rope diameters ranging from 10.5 - 9.2. What I consistently noticed, was that compared to partners using the grigri, I rarely had issues with short roping, and had consistently fast/easy feeding. My only gripe with the device was with lowering, which the grigri 2 is definitely better at.

Grigri 2 - finally decided to learn the device, as has become the standard, and wanted to be able to use it in case I ever had to. I still found learning curve harder, and if you are actually trying to use the device as featured in the videos/posters, it is actually quite hard to feed fast enough without locking up until leader is several clips up. By that I mean feeding tube style instead of thumbing the locking mechanism down.

I read your earlier post, and can see why you would not have liked using it for longer rappels, particularly with heavy loads given my experience with lowering - it could get a bit fast/hot.

Like I have said, I don't believe either device is perfect, and could use further design iterations (not sure why neither is). I prefer the feeding of the cinch, and despite the fact that it can lower quite quickly, would not consider it inferior nor inherently more dangerous than other similar devices. I am aware that the instructions have changed, but can tell you that I have tried to fail this device, multiple times today in both configurations, and am not able to do so. That being said - it is not a good device for people who are not really paying close attention, and in all fairness, I used a lot of devices - including the figure eight - prior to using non-tube devices.

Hope that answers your questions.

Excluding the occasional unforeseen catastrophe, the only way devices like the cinch or the gri-gri will fail to catch is if the user prevents it from doing so (i.e., by touching it, manipulating it, or messing with it when it should be left alone to function as it was designed).

Unfortunately, the ONLY way one can use the cinch is by continuously holding it. As per the instructions, it is impossible to pay out slack without having your hand on the damn thing. Even with your hand is on the rope, the rope is moving in a straight line, making it very difficult to stop the fall. I was explaining this principle to a friend years ago while holding a cinch, and at the same time a cinch-loving friend snuck up behind me while I was holding the device and yanked on the leader end of the rope to try and "prove his point". What actually happened was 6 feet of rope zipped through the device and my hand giving me a pretty nasty rope-burn.

I think everyone can agree that ANY belay device is prone to human error. However, considering that the cinch is the only device that must be always held open for it function, it seems that there is much more room for human error to creep in. At the very least you can teach someone to use a grigri without manipulating the cam (with practice). You can't say the same for the cinch.

Paul Hassett wrote:CSProul Grigri 2 - finally decided to learn the device, as has become the standard, and wanted to be able to use it in case I ever had to. I still found learning curve harder, and if you are actually trying to use the device as featured in the videos/posters, it is actually quite hard to feed fast enough without locking up until leader is several clips up. By that I mean feeding tube style instead of thumbing the locking mechanism down.

I don't understand, in all the posters and videos of the grigri2 they use the thumb to feed slack quickly. The new quick feed method should not cause locking and feeds plenty fast. Faster than an ATC IME, but not quite as fast as a Cinch

Completely agree with you - that method does work. I guess my issue with it, is that ideally you should be able to feed the rope without holding down the cam, as also detailed in both the videos and posters. In essence, you have to "defeat" the device to feed quickly, which I would suggest is a design issue in and of itself. The whole reason to not consistently belay with your thumb on the cam is that it places the leader at risk should they fall. That being said, I can generally use the tube method once more rope is out.

bearbreeder wrote:paul ... if you had read my previous post on other threads you would know that i am NOT a big fan of ANY assisted locking device for beginners ...

A Gri-Gri in a beginner's hands doesn't make the belay safer. In the gym last night, an inexperienced user threaded the Gri-Gri backwards and didn't notice until they tried to lower the climber. Scary...

Paul Hassett wrote:CSProul Yes - own and have used both. As mentioned earlier, was a late hold-out for grigri, as really didn't like original and never found it terribly intuitive to use. In terms of non-tube devices, have used cinch for at least 2 years on rope diameters ranging from 10.5 - 9.2. What I consistently noticed, was that compared to partners using the grigri, I rarely had issues with short roping, and had consistently fast/easy feeding. My only gripe with the device was with lowering, which the grigri 2 is definitely better at. Grigri 2 - finally decided to learn the device, as has become the standard, and wanted to be able to use it in case I ever had to. I still found learning curve harder, and if you are actually trying to use the device as featured in the videos/posters, it is actually quite hard to feed fast enough without locking up until leader is several clips up. By that I mean feeding tube style instead of thumbing the locking mechanism down. I read your earlier post, and can see why you would not have liked using it for longer rappels, particularly with heavy loads given my experience with lowering - it could get a bit fast/hot. Like I have said, I don't believe either device is perfect, and could use further design iterations (not sure why neither is). I prefer the feeding of the cinch, and despite the fact that it can lower quite quickly, would not consider it inferior nor inherently more dangerous than other similar devices. I am aware that the instructions have changed, but can tell you that I have tried to fail this device, multiple times today in both configurations, and am not able to do so. That being said - it is not a good device for people who are not really paying close attention, and in all fairness, I used a lot of devices - including the figure eight - prior to using non-tube devices. Hope that answers your questions.

Thanks for the answer. My experience has been similar. A couple of my personal observations with both devices:

1) I'm going to agree with HJ (I never thought I'd say that out loud) on one point. You should be in a position to catch a fall even if the cam should fail to lock or be impaired. With a Grigri, as BB pointed out, there is still some friction and in a standard braking position, such as that learned from using an ATC, you are more likely to stop a fall and to activate the locking mechanism. I don't believe this to be the case with a Cinch. If the mechanism were impaired, a standard braking position would still have a fairly straight rope path and provide little friction. You can see this with both devices if you hold the cam open and try to lower using your brake hand (I don't recommend doing this with a live partner).

2) I too believe the Cinch feeds much better and you are less likely to short rope anybody with one. However, this is definitely not the attribute I look for first in a belay device. After sufficient practice, I have learned to feed rope out effectively and quickly with a Grigri while keeping my brake hand on.

3) I think that the vast majority of the time, if there were no hand on the brake-side rope of a Grigri, it would still lock up (I am not recommending that anyone actually do this). I don't believe this to be true for the Cinch

4) Where I have reason to pause with the Cinch is your assertion that "it is not a good device for people who are not really paying close attention". First off, I could say the same thing about every device. The implication being that if you really pay attention everything will be ok with the Cinch. Of the failures I have read about and have been told about first hand, the failures have been idiosyncratic. Meaning the belayers could not identify why they had failed to lock the mechanism and claim they had done nothing different. Not that were paying any less attention, but they really didn't know. I've never heard that to be the case with a tube-style device, and only once heard that with a grigri. One case was a belayer who I have/had complete faith in. One of the better that I have climbed with. He had a Cinch fail to lock and had a climber fall significantly farther than desired before it did lock, and claims his hand was on the rope. He could not figure out why. Sure it's a second hand anecdote, but it really made me worry about it. That, coupled with my being dissatisfied with it's lowering/rappelling made me switch to the Grigri.

5) I'm willing to bet that most accidents with either the Cinch or the Grigri involve lowering. The Cinch is much less forgiving here.