Mountain Project Logo

How do YOU ensure your belayer is competent?

reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
Healyje wrote: Again, you can claim the physical prowess that goes along with the current ratings, and, if that were the only thing that defined climbing, then you could say it's evolved. But climbing is a lot more than that.
The equipment improvement (and bolt protected routes) have simply allowed climbers of today to pursuit physical prowess aspect of climbing more freely than BITD. Of course that's not what climbing is all about, but that's the yard stick separating the good climbers from the very best. And today's climbers are better in the physical prowess aspect, just as BITD climbers are better in the risky mitigation aspect. Different times calls for different things.

Healyje wrote:The bright spot in it all is even John Gill couldn't have foreseen the enormous popularity of bouldering (of course he did it without pads)
Given John is a former gymnast, I'm sure he'd have no issue using one if it was the norm. Besides, he thought it was perfectly fine to practice highballs on TR. That's not to say he wasn't way better than today's boulderers in mitigating risk, but it was pretty much required in his time.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
reboot wrote:The equipment improvement (and bolt protected routes) have simply allowed climbers of today to pursuit physical prowess aspect of climbing more freely than BITD. Of course that's not what climbing is all about, but that's the yard stick separating the good climbers from the very best.
Well, sure, if sheer difficulty in the absence of all other factors is what's 'best' to you. I personally find difficulty for it's own sake boring as snot and always have despite managing to climb routes in the mid-70s that are now uprated to .12 or .13. It's a one-dimensional measure which doesn't say much about how good a climber is from my perspective.

reboot wrote:Different times calls for different things.
Not really about different times, it's more about a demographic now dominated by sport climbing. Again, I don't consider a climber good or elite until they cross-over and perform at a high level of trad.

Tim Lutz wrote:I do give the pioneers of the sport respect, lots of it. But the mantra BITD was: 'the leader does not fall'. Well, leaders fall all the time now, even on trad.
That was a pre-70s mantra from my experience. Everyone I knew and climbed with and saw in at home, in the Gunks and in Eldo were falling all the time and taking big falls at that. Do you think all those Gunks and Eldo lines got put up onsight? Rarely. It's just not a valid argument.

Tim Lutz wrote: So, given that say 10 people were lead climbing on a given summer day in Valley circa 1976. And they most likely weren't going to take a fall.
Can't speak to the Valley in '76, but the Gunks and Eldo were stacked with people and you could hear 'falling' being yelled almost as often as you here 'take' being yelled today, so that one's out the window as well. I know I held endless lead falls in the mid-70s and lots of long ones at that and there was nothing unique about that among climbers who were climbing reasonably hard.

Tim Lutz wrote:Now let's say there are 100. And now multiply that by all the climbing happening now, everywhere, sport and trad on a given day. There are going to more accidents just by the numbers. I am not arguing that there isn't bad belying happening at crags. I've seen it, more often than I would like. A car with a drunk driver on a road in Wyoming isn't likely to hit anyone, but in traffic in LA, they will. So, comparing BITD belaying accident statistics to now is really apples and oranges.
I disagree as I'm talking about percentages of the total demographic - then and now. And as a percentage of the demographic, an orders of magnitude higher percentage are being dropped now as opposed to then.
frank minunni · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined May 2011 · Points: 95
Healyje wrote: Everyone I knew and climbed with and saw in at home, in the Gunks and in Eldo were falling all the time and taking big falls at that. Do you think all those Gunks and Eldo lines got put up onsight? Rarely. It's just not a valid argument.
i have to agree on this point. In the 80s falling on lead, especially when putting up a new line was common practice. I was involved in some and despite gear being pretty sketchy at times, no one ever got dropped.
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385
Tim Lutz wrote: I do give the pioneers of the sport respect, lots of it. But the mantra BITD was: 'the leader does not fall'. Well, leaders fall all the time now, even on trad. So, given that say 10 people were lead climbing on a given summer day in Valley circa 1976. And they most likely weren't going to take a fall. Now let's say there are 100. And now multiply that by all the climbing happening now, everywhere, sport and trad on a given day. There are going to more accidents just by the numbers. I am not arguing that there isn't bad belying happening at crags. I've seen it, more often than I would like. A car with a drunk driver on a road in Wyoming isn't likely to hit anyone, but in traffic in LA, they will. So, comparing BITD belaying accident statistics to now is really apples and oranges.
I get you.

I wasn't really trying to compare the two in any way other than the unknown adventure aspect. The OP topic of "how you would ensure your belayer is competent" made me think of what the pioneers did. I'm not saying not to do a bit of research and education first because we have this all available now, but would this have been something that the pioneers discussed on a forum or would they have just gone and done it? These people were not stupid they just didn't need the reinforcement of the interwebs to figure out how to ensure you have a competent belayer.

As far as injuries go, well, this will be something humans will be working on forever. We make mistakes, get complacent, etc. - it does not matter the activity. Add more people to the mix and the probabilities only move up. I agree.

Sure there is skill involved. I know we have more advanced gear. There is plenty of information everywhere for how to do this or that, but the only way you know someone is competent at something is for them to do it. We can discuss all we want here about what is right or wrong as a belayer, but you will never know until you do.

The falling is the new adventure I guess, and with it will come injuries - especially with larger numbers of climbers having easier access to this sport/recreation. I would have to believe that there was falling before today's times though.
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
Healyje wrote: Again, I don't consider a climber good or elite until they cross-over and perform at a high level of trad.
But today's climbers are...maybe only a small portion of the population, but the standard for traditionally protected routes are rising, and it isn't taking them a lot of time to make the transition. Are they as solid at their physical limit as climbers from BITD? Of course not, but does that matter since they have such a higher physical limit? I guess that depends on who you ask.

But you know what though? I do not know a single climber performing at a high level of trad (say 5.14a RP or above) who would trivialize the accomplishment of an equivalent sport grade level. Because they know what it takes to achieve the latter, and it isn't easy.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
reboot wrote:I do not know a single climber performing at a high level of trad (say 5.14a RP or above) who would trivialize the accomplishment of an equivalent sport grade level.
I don't trivialize it either; I simply consider it a 'two dimensional' affair with trad being the fully 3D equivalent. There's nothing trivial about climbing hard routes, even on TR. I personally just don't find clipping bolts that compelling of a deal and would rather TR and not be distracted by the clipping and really just focus on the movement. Also, TR on overhung lines is eliminates the hanging so you have to figure things out while climbing or you're out of there - i.e. it's actually harder than hanging your way up a route.

BigFeet wrote:Add more people to the mix and the probabilities only move up. I agree.
Well, then and now, and last time I checked, there's still only one person on each end of the rope. The raw number of roped pairs having accident doesn't by itself tell you anything about the probabilities; only the percentage of the total demographic does. And there is nothing made up about the fact that, on the basis of a percentage of the total demographic, that it's virtually raining climbers today compared to bitd.

BigFeet wrote: We make mistakes, get complacent, etc. - it does not matter the activity.
These kinds of statements / attitudes are a serious impediment to change in climbing. It represents a capitulation to and acceptance of a kind of statistic defeat - "oh well, people get dropped all the time, what can you do about it".

This is the essential difference between now and then - no one and I mean no one accepted belayers dropping as just a cost of doing business. The fact that people accept and ignore it today until it happens to them borders on frightening and it should frighten everyone here.

BigFeet wrote: Sure there is skill involved. I know we have more advanced gear.
Grigris aren't 'advanced', just different and more complex. Different mainly because holding falls was a secondary design goal behind holding hanging climbers. Meeting those two design goals drove the complexity and in the gap between those them lies the [behavioral] seed of a majority of dropping.

BigFeet wrote:The falling is the new adventure I guess, and with it will come injuries - especially with larger numbers of climbers having easier access to this sport/recreation. I would have to believe that there was falling before today's times though.
If by 'falling' you mean belayers dropping climbers, then no, it was virtually unheard of. That's the issue.
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385
Healyje wrote: Well, then and now, and last time I checked, there's still only one person on each end of the rope. The raw number of roped pairs having accident doesn't by itself tell you anything about the probabilities; only the percentage of the total demographic does. And there is nothing made up about the fact that, on the basis of a percentage of the total demographic, that it's virtually raining climbers today compared to bitd.
Well, then, there were not as many climbers as compared to now. It tells all about probabilities. A probability is an assumed outcome and not an actual fact. The assumption is that if there are more blue marbles than red marbles in the bag then the probability of picking out a blue marble is increased. It does not mean it will happen. One person on each end of the rope, but are there not more one person on each end of the rope now?

Healyje wrote: These kinds of statements / attitudes are a serious impediment to change in climbing. It represents a capitulation to and acceptance of a kind of statistic defeat - "oh well, people get dropped all the time, what can you do about it". This is the essential difference between now and then - no one and I mean no one accepted belayers dropping as just a cost of doing business. The fact that people accept and ignore it today until it happens to them borders on frightening and it should frighten everyone here.
This is a fallacy in your thinking. Because the statement was made does not mean that there is an ignorance of the situation. There is no capitulation to a mindset of "oh well" - far from it. All it is, is an acknowledgement of the reality. If we can't do anything about it why are there discussions here about it? Why are there companies trying to find a way to stop it? It is ridiculous to think people excuse being dropped as just the "cost of doing business".

Healyje wrote: Grigris aren't 'advanced', just different and more complex. Different mainly because holding falls was a secondary design goal behind holding hanging climbers. Meeting those two design goals drove the complexity and in the gap between those them lies the [behavioral] seed of a majority of dropping.
Ok, you got me here. Let me see if I have this straight. A Grigri, as you say, has more than one function to its design - is complex. Compared to a hip belay, a Munter on a carabiner, or simple ATC the Grigri is not an advanced tool? I have to agree with the bold type statement I quoted above, for a more complex device can lead to problems for those not aware of the intricacies of said device.

Healyje wrote: If by 'falling' you mean belayers dropping climbers, then no, it was virtually unheard of. That's the issue.
No, I do not mean "belayers dropping climbers". You are picking out a statement that was in reference to another poster's response. You may want to reread that post comprehensively for the context. Partial post given below.

But the mantra BITD was: 'the leader does not fall'. Well, leaders fall all the time now, even on trad.

So, given that say 10 people were lead climbing on a given summer day in Valley circa 1976. And they most likely weren't going to take a fall.
- Tim Lutz.

I'm not trying to create an argument. I was just conveying my thoughts through this interweb talky thingy.

It is not raining climbers, but the potential for more issues is increased with more people involved than there were before. This does not excuse it, but in fact keeps you aware of it.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
BigFeet wrote: But the mantra BITD was: 'the leader does not fall'. Well, leaders fall all the time now, even on trad. So, given that say 10 people were lead climbing on a given summer day in Valley circa 1976. And they most likely weren't going to take a fall. - Tim Lutz.
Except that's not true at all. Not only that, but trad climbers back then weren't sport climbing on gear, they were actually falling.

BigFeet wrote:It is not raining climbers, but the potential for more issues is increased with more people involved than there were before. This does not excuse it, but in fact keeps you aware of it.
It is actually raining climbers and again it's doing so as a percentage of the total demographic so the size difference between the demographic then and now doesn't really enter into it on a statistical basis - i.e. for any random roped pair of climbers, the probability someone is going to get dropped is orders of magnitude higher today then bitd.
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385
Healyje wrote: Except that's not true at all. Not only that, but trad climbers back then weren't sport climbing on gear, they were actually falling.
I think you are responding to another posters response that I quoted in my post, hence the falling probability conversation.

Healyje wrote: It is actually raining climbers and again it's doing so as a percentage of the total demographic so the size difference between the demographic then and now doesn't really enter into it on a statistical basis - i.e. for any random roped pair of climbers, the probability someone is going to get dropped is orders of magnitude higher today then bitd.
I believe we are on the same plane, but looking at the issue from different perspectives. Per capita, the injuries in climbing related recreation was actually higher in the 1970s and 1980s. This is not necessarily relating to the Grigri, but the point is that accidents and injuries have always been happening and will continue to. The more people involved the more the probability of seeing dropped climbers, injuries, etc. summitpost.org/mountaineeri…

Quote from the article: "The highest number of accidents and fatalities occurred in the 1970s and 1980s, especially in Washington and California. This was a time when new routes were being put up and new terrain was being explored."
csproul · · Pittsboro...sort of, NC · Joined Dec 2009 · Points: 330

That's a statistic that you (Healyje) are pulling out of your ass.

don'tchuffonme · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 26
Healyje wrote: i.e. for any random roped pair of climbers, the probability someone is going to get dropped is orders of magnitude higher today then bitd.
No shit sherlock. When everyone was doing 30mph in Model Ts in the 30s there weren't a shitload of car crashes either. Add highways, exponentially more drivers, faster cars, etc. and you have a shitload more accidents.

Someone call Ripley's. We have a fucking revelation on our hands.

BigFeet wrote: "The highest number of accidents and fatalities occurred in the 1970s and 1980s, especially in Washington and California. This was a time when new routes were being put up and new terrain was being explored."
This can easily be explained one of two ways:

1. The people that conducted this study did not do so on ACID.

2. ANAM is wrong because he says they're wrong.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
don'tchuffonme wrote: No shit sherlock. When everyone was doing 30mph in Model Ts in the 30s there weren't a shitload of car crashes either. Add highways, exponentially more drivers, faster cars, etc. and you have a shitload more accidents.
This doesn't even remotely begin to hold water beyond the exponentially more roped pairs of climbers. Again, your odds any random roped pair dropping is orders of magnitude higher today.

Tim Lutz wrote: actual data, oh snap! but hey, OG Healyje never saw anyone dropped and didn't do any dropping himself, so these 'facts' must be gym sport wanker plot.
Those stats are an aggregation of alpine and rock accidents and without looking at the details of '76-78 you couldn't say what the cause was for that spike - likely a couple of bad alpine years, particularly so given WA is one of the main sources of the accidents. More telling is that 'inadequate belay' wasn't even tracked as a primary cause of accidents. And again, people back then weren't sport climbing on gear, they were actually falling and some would get hurt even when the gear held and the belay was good - it was part of the deal. But on belaying in particular you'd have to chart the same time period for the secondary cause of 'inadequate belay' to see that trendline.

And it's not just me, no one I know and likely none of the older folks here know of anything more than highly isolated cases of anyone being dropped whereas you younger folks more or less all have been, know someone who has, or have witnessed a drop. World of difference.

Tim Lutz wrote: Yoga pants!!!!!! (or the equivalent from 1978)
That would be white painters pants with a slight hint of the lycra wave set to come in the 80s...
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385
Tim Lutz wrote: Yoga pants!!!!!! (or the equivalent from 1978)
With the correct type of subjects displaying yoga pants, I could get behind a thread like that.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422

Lycra had the very occasional bright spot:



But those only came at an overwhelming cost:





The birth of sport climbing as much about fashion as bolts...
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385
Healyje wrote:Lycra had the very occasional bright spot:
Healyje,

Nice!

Healyje wrote: But those only came at an overwhelming cost:
You are the gentleman in giving something back to the ladies.
Old lady H · · Boise, ID · Joined Aug 2015 · Points: 1,374

Just a couple of twists to consider, between "then" and "now":

I'm guessing that many, if not most climbers BITD came to rock climbing from mountaineering, which was and is, sorta pricey. Coming from peaks and glaciers is far different than boulders to cliffs. Because of that, perhaps there is a significant drop in the age of climbers? No offense to anyone, but even 1 or 2 years can be a huge leap in maturity for many of us. And, most of us just don't think anything bad can happen to us, well, until it does. Which also often happens somewhere in the teens to twenties.

I do think this will turn around eventually, and gyms will either be inside playgrounds for adults, who are satisfied and have no interest in rock climbing as we think of it (ninja warriors), or, indoor training and learning centers for folks like me who want to push what we do outside as hard as we can.

I see this right now. We have a commercial gym in town, where the figure eight knots are pretied, you are given a cinch (??like a baby grigri) to belay, and there are auto belays. Camp Rhino is opening next week ( have to say it looks fun, just peeking through the windows this morning). And, my gym of choice, the nice folks at the local university. This gym requires you to learn to belay with an ATC, tie in properly, and is rigorous about your ability to belay before allowing you to be certified. They teach sport lead belaying, including good sized falls, teach classes, offer outdoor trips with instruction, etc.

As for the op, I would only trust someone I had personally watched for awhile, and had an idea not just of them climbing, but their personality. Don't use your seatbelt? Don't wanna climb with you. Not interested in my abilities? I'll belay you, but no thanks otherwise. Blind date to climb? Hmmmm. Different thread!

Best, H.

TBlom · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2004 · Points: 360

Wow... makes me think of this scene. Must be winter!

youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEi…

Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
Old lady H wrote:Just a couple of twists to consider, between "then" and "now": I'm guessing that many, if not most climbers BITD came to rock climbing from mountaineering, which was and is, sorta pricey.
Mostly people so inclined progressed to alpine rather than the other way around. Also, half of the serous alpine folks I've been around have been somewhat sketch rock climbers taking way too many unconsidered risks and doing it on a lot of less than desirable placements.
M Mobley · · Bar Harbor, ME · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 911
Healyje wrote: Mostly people so inclined progressed to alpine rather than the other way around. Also, half of the serous alpine folks I've been around have been somewhat sketch rock climbers taking way too many unconsidered risks and doing it on a lot of less than desirable placements.
Holy shit more stats. Funny stats because I've known MANY MORE alpine/trad climbers turn into sport/gym climbers than the other way around. I dare to say you arent around all types of climbers very often, is that a fair statement?

I will agree about the sketch part though.
BigFeet · · Texas · Joined May 2014 · Points: 385

I only posted again because I thought Healyje had posted more pictures.

I'm just going to lay myself down on the coals and ask a question.

For all those that feel a good belayer are hard to come by, have the wisdom of proper climbing system and use, are as good as they say they are, and complain about it on a worldwide forum... why are you not teaching them?

Someone excited by our sport/recreation will be put off by an attitude of sorry, but not with you. Teach them.

So, you put off climbing that project, or whatever, for a couple of days or months because you are mentoring. At the end, you are assured your belayer is competent.

I don't believe you can completely judge how someone will conduct themselves with someone else's life in their hands when all you have seen is how he treats himself. Parents' and their children's interaction is but just one example of this judgement being incorrect.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "How do YOU ensure your belayer is competent?"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

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

Get Started.