Fallen Climber on Bastille Crack 8/21/2010

Does anyone know how the climber that fell off the Bastille Crack today is doing? He fell moving off the flake on P1. Looked like his pro didn't hold and he decked. Emergency response was quick. Sending prayers his way.

Yes, I was on the NW Corner and saw him fall. He fell from the slippery crux on the Bastille crack and pulled out 2 pieces, the highest of which was placed in the large flake to the right of the actual crack. I couldn't tell if the pieces slowed him down as he fell or if they just popped...in any event, he hit the ground pretty hard. The rescue folks were there within 15 minutes...quite impressive, even if he was actually laying in the road. I hope he is doing OK and will allow the climbers themselves to discuss injuries if they so desire.

Best wishes to the fallen climber. That foothold is slick as hell. Tall people can reach gear into the main crack system and stem above that move but I'm not sure what the lower limit on that is. Hope everything turns out okay and glad rescue could be there so soon.

Noticed the dried blood at about noon... Looked like a lot of it. I hope he is ok!

donald is recovering at a boulder hospital with a broken pelvis and a couple other injuries. He is expected to make a full recovery. long but full recovery. thank you all for your thoughts and concerns.

Best to Donald - that's a scary move.

I haven't climbed the Bastille yet, but what gives with the zippering pro? Is everyone placing nuts?

Curious as this is the 3rd (?) serouis injury in the past few years on the BC due to zippering pro.

Scott McMahon wrote:I haven't climbed the Bastille yet, but what gives with the zippering pro? Is everyone placing nuts? Curious as this is the 3rd (?) serouis injury in the past few years on the BC due to zippering pro.

WARNING: SHAMELESS BETA
i have climbed the bastille more times than i can count and have "coached" several people on it when breaking from 5.7-8 as a good start in that range. the caveat i ALWAYS emphasize is place a peice BEFORE trying the move into the crack. it isn't (very?) height dependent (i am barely 5'9" and 1 guy i climbed with did it who is maybe 5'6"-ish). the thing is the 1st peice you get is not comforting and many skip it. the 2nd peice is often behind the huge flake. under a large force (i.e.--a fall) this flake will expand and your well placed cam can fall right out. a stopper might be better, but don't trust it for the crux move. simpy reach across, plug something into the crack, THEN commit to the moves. there is no reason most people (can't speak for the really short) can't do the crux with a virtual top rope.

this is a problem in a lot of eldo rock that i think "gets" 1st time climbers there. you can make a text book gear placement, but if the rock flexes it will come right out. i also believe this is what has made the 1st 30-40' of werk-supp so notorius. there are placements, but i doubt most would hold under force.

glad to hear Donald is going to be ok! while not as severe as your injuries, i am nursing a broken foot from a climbing fall earlier this season and it is rough but persevere and you will be back at it before you know it!

Best wishes to Donald on a full recovery.

Scott McMahon wrote:I haven't climbed the Bastille yet, but what gives with the zippering pro? Is everyone placing nuts? Curious as this is the 3rd (?) serouis injury in the past few years on the BC due to zippering pro.

Where you stem across from the big hollow flake to the actual Bastille crack, the crack is not very uniform. The crack widens as it goes deeper into the formation. I place a .5 or .75 inch cam at this point, I've climbed with others that place a stopper. You need to take the time to be sure that your placement is in a spot where it won't walk deeper into the crack and becomes useless. If you look into the crack you'll see multiple nuts that have fallen into the abyss.

PhilMo has a bit of a point; the crack can be weird there. Still, as Timt says, that's where the good placements are; not back right in the flaring flake. I used to place a large cam in the flair and it might have held. But step/leaning left to the actual crack is where solid placements can be had.

EDIT: Of course I extend best wishes to the injured climber. I think this bit of discussion about climbing the route safely is a worthy add on that may help a learner who reads the thread.

Shawn, I have zero bravery as a climber and I find myself looking for routes which have cruxes I can place pro up above. I have always been intimidated to climb this due to the attention this route draws, glad to know that at least it fits my style.

This thread is also making me think twice about relying on flakes for protection, especially with cams. I am not sure to what extent I do already but I will be more mindful going forward.

I hope Donald comes away without lasting injury.

Note that the route description here on MP has some great photos, clearly showing the wingspan needed to get gear in before leaving the flexi-flake.

Bob Packwood wrote:Best wishes to Donald. What a greasy pitch. GREASY!

Yeah. This strikes me as one of the climbs I am familiar with that has been most impacted by traffic. Thirty years ago it was already getting polished by hundreds of hands; now it is much, much smoother. I would rate it solidly in the 5.8 range now. Most folks can get a comfortable stem with left foot at the base of the crack; using the opportunity to place reliable pro. The mistake you see a lot is using gear in the hollow flake without a long enough sling. With the angle of the crack, (relative to the plane of the face), this is a recipe for disaster. This is not a beginners lead.

Rick Blair wrote: This thread is also making me think twice about relying on flakes for protection, especially with cams. I am not sure to what extent I do already but I will be more mindful going forward. I hope Donald comes away without lasting injury.

Hoping the best to the injured climber as well.

• Note that cams and nuts work in the same way - by transferring downward force to outward force. Don't think that by placing a nut you're always going to solve the flexing-flake problem.

Price wrote: *Note that cams and nuts work in the same way - by transferring downward force to outward force. Don't think that by placing a nut you're always going to solve the flexing-flake problem.

While this is partially true, it is also of note that a nut is a much better choice than a cam in an expanding flake due to the fact that the friction between the rock an the nut helps to limit the expanding action. In a cam the only limiting friction is between the cam lobes and the axel, which is virtually non existent.

edit to add: best of wishes to the injured climber.

Freaky place to peel, best wishes to Donald definitely. In terms of the fall spot, my take is he fell on what I consider the crux, namely that grease-slick left foot hold to pull up into the flake on the right - not the reach/step across to get in the BC proper. Am I off on that understanding? The pro for the stop across is pretty bomber I think (.5), it's the pro protecting that move up to the flake that's dicey. I had my foot skid out on that grease hold once a couple years ago and I swear 50 hairs swan-dived off my head right then and there, while another 50 instantly went gray. Spooky spot.

Again best to wishes on the recovery.

Showing "normal" cam low and good nut behind the flake. I always move over pretty low.

Erik W wrote:Freaky place to peel, best wishes to Donald definitely. In terms of the fall spot, my take is he fell on what I consider the crux, namely that grease-slick left foot hold to pull up into the flake on the right - not the reach/step across to get in the BC proper. Am I off on that understanding? The pro for the stop across is pretty bomber I think (.5), it's the pro protecting that move up to the flake that's dicey. I had my foot skid out on that grease hold once a couple years ago and I swear 50 hairs swan-dived off my head right then and there, while another 50 instantly went gray. Spooky spot. Again best to wishes on the recovery.

Interesting, Erik. When David mentioned crux, I guess we all just translated it to our own view of the crux. Now that you mention it, that step up to the flake might be the most tenuous move of the climb. I usually place a #1 Metolius under the flake, but always wonder how far the rock would expand in a fall.

But reconsidering now, I think folks' first impression was probably right. You have to be over the step and up on the ledge between the flake and the crack in order to place gear where the flake is "large" as David describes.

Sorry if this is thread drift, but I think relevant to avoiding a fall on this climb.

What to people think about the claim above:
[While this is partially true, it is also of note that a nut is a much better choice than a cam in an expanding flake due to the fact that the friction between the rock an the nut helps to limit the expanding action. In a cam the only limiting friction is between the cam lobes and the axel, which is virtually non existent.]

Seems to me that with a cam at least you have a hope that the cam will expand with the expanding flake, and stay in. Whereas a nut might conceivably catch higher up the wedge of the nut, but you have much less room for error. My hunch is a cam would be more forgiving?

Either way, seems like flakes are sketchy pro when a groundfall is the consequence.

From where I was standing, he had already committed to the crack...ie stepped left and perhaps was thinking about protecting there in the crack proper when he fell. His last piece was approximately in the same spot as the top piece shown in the photo above, and was therefore below him by a few feet and off to his right side. He would have generated some force by the time his fall came onto the stopper.

Bummer. That is indeed a tricky and greasy section. I hope he has a full recovery.