Quick summary: I climb with a skinny French guy who weighs about 40 pounds less than me. When I lead, he wants to belay me directly off of the anchor (usually two good bolts) to avoid the PG-13 violence you see in this video:
So, here is a potential belay setup based on the last few minutes (starting at 5:38) of the previous video. What do you think?
Some initial comments/observations/questions to get it started... --The 7mm cord is doubled compared to the single loop in the French video, so all the knots are doubled and "the thing" is massive. Using a single loop, or even dyneema would make "the thing" way less bulky. (Dyneema typically not an issue when rope is always in the system.) Is doubling the loop overkill? --That's a bowline-on-a-bight on the blue locker forming the Master Point (MP)--and the blue locker should be through all 4 loops (I think it is...optical illusion maybe?) --Clove hitch on the silver locker and adjusted to remove slack going to MP bolt. --Belayer cloved into MP via the HMS biner; guide mode belay off of same MP --The extra cord is tied with a figure 8 rather than just leaving it dangle--could that loop potentially be a second MP? (Or would that potentially load the bowline incorrectly?) --When there is a third bolt, the extra cord could be clove-hitched to that third bolt instead of that figure-8 thing. --You can carry these over the shoulder with the biners--everything at-the-ready to anchor-in once at the next belay station. (You will need one for each climber.)
Procedure: --When the second arrives, he/she clips (cloves) into MP with their own locker. --Leader takes apart the guide mode belay and racks up for next pitch. Second sets up to belay the leader. --On the next pitch, leader is belayed off of the bowline MP loop with a locker and... GriGri, ATC-type device, or Munter hitch. (Which is preferable in what situations?)
The main objective of all this is to avoid having the belayer get jerked around excessively in a lead fall and potentially losing control. I weigh 185 and my niece weighs about 95 pounds--I can't imagine doing a multi-pitch with her without perfecting something like this for when I lead!
Let the critiques fly...point out what I'm missing...Thanks!
Fairly new to climbing and have often wondered why people don't belay lead climbers off anchors. I figured it had to do with managing the device with more ease. Interested to follow this discussion
z t
·
Jun 6, 2019
·
Spokane, WA
· Joined Dec 2011
· Points: 1,167
leader is belayed off of the bowline MP loop with a locker and... GriGri, ATC-type device, or Munter hitch. (Which is preferable in what situations?)
I've called this the banshee belay, note sure if that's correct. Two good bolts, no problem.
One note: I'm not sure a ABD like the Gri is the best choice for a direct anchor belay. The ATC or Munter is a good option but just remember that the ATC's brake strand will need to be redirected until the leader places quality gear.
Like anything in climbing, appropriate tool/technique application is everything. Your issue with having a weight difference is a good example of where this technique can help.
That’s some awesome conglomerate! I’ve been contemplating this scenario for multipitch with my much lighter daughter. Seems like Munter is the way to go both for braking power, ease of use and, if swinging leads, no need to rearrange belay device.
z t
·
Jun 6, 2019
·
Spokane, WA
· Joined Dec 2011
· Points: 1,167
Munter, gloves, hell you could even add a third hand if you really don't trust your belayer.
Perhaps a stupid question - if you trying to fix a large weight disparity and you have bolts - why not do it the same way you might in a single pitch sport climb by using an edelrid ohm? It's heavy to carry up a multipitch I suppose, but if it's a shorter mulitpitch it seems like an option?
CW - That bowline on a bight is a very different knot than the bowlines in that video. It won't/can't roll on itself.
SL - plenty of gear or mixed gear/bolts climbs with bolted anchors. I guess you could have the belayer hang 6+' below the anchor and clip the Ohm to the anchor as your first piece but that would probably be a real PITA in a lot of situations.
The setup the original poster is proposing is apparently extremely common in Europe and has been extensively tested, at least with a Munter hitch belay.
Daniel, This is a common, and traditional, approach in some parts of Europe, with the belay device replaced with a Munter. Banshee belays and belay rigs are well covered in my book. A few of things to add though. 1. Direct belaying of the leader using a belay device is less well tested in terms of number of falls held by each of the devices on the market. So any unexpected issues have not had time to be exposed. Maybe there isn't any. 2. If you climb on a single, make sure you can belay fast through the device in guide mode. This can be hard with a fat rope and with a high belay - the leader will be pissed if you can't give slack as they run up some 5.6 3. If the route is hard for them the leader needs to know giving "tight" might not be fast. 4. Mark sure the belayer can not be hit in the teeth by the rig in the event of a fall 5. If using a Munter, holding practice falls might be a good idea. And gloves.
I like the setup too. One concern I've read is that belaying off the bolts will create a harder catch and more stress on the protection in the event of a fall.
And...I agree about the Grigri. We tried it for belaying the leader off the bolts just the other day and it wasn't very convenient for the belayer, although it worked. Our idea was that the leader would still get caught (hopefully) even if the belayer was knocked out. Yes, it would likely cause a harder catch and stress on the pro but on a bolted route not really an issue.
I also agree about the Munter likely being the way to go--with gloves.
Darin - The conglomerate is at Montserrat, near Barcelona. Something like 4,000 routes here. It's an amazing area. As to the knot, I'm pretty sure I tied it the same way as the French guide did in the video. Maybe because I tied it on two strands instead of one that it looks different??? Yes, I hear it is common in Europe although I haven't climbed with anyone here in Spain yet that uses it. It was a French partner who brought it up. Maybe it's a France-Germany thing?
Simon - I do have an Ohm and have used it on single-pitch sport when the belayer was a lightweight...but, it is indeed pretty heavy to carry up a multi-pitch. Plus, for it to be fully effective, it helps that the belayer be very slightly offset from that first piece where the Ohm hangs. If there is a direct line for the rope up through the Ohm to subsequent bolts and the climber, it won't fully engage. Anyway, that's as I understand it. That means, on a multi-pitch, with no way for the belayer to move, it might not always have the alignment you want. Not a bad idea, though, in some cases.
David - Lots of feedback from you--thanks. One question about your fat rope in guide mode comment--it seemed to imply the idea of belaying the leader off the bolts in guide mode. Is that what you meant? Getting hit in the teeth--definitely something to look out for. When we tried it the other day, the belayer was generally leaning on his tie-in rope so well back from the bolts. The Munter with gloves--great idea to do some practicing--especially with my 95-pound niece!
Andrew - I agree about the possibility of a harder catch in some cases. But, it may depend more on the device used (ATC, Munter, Grigri), as opposed to the mere fact of belaying off the bolts. In fact, if I remember, in some of those French tests they found pretty low forces when belaying with the Munter off the bolts. Anyway, where we are planning on using this is on modern bolted routes so stress on the pro shouldn't be a big deal.
One of the videos on belaying off the anchor show that belaying off the achor actually reduced peak forces in the system. Although not discussed in that video the issue is the sudden stopping of the belayer by his tether to the anchor is added to the force the leader is applying to the system. So the tether length is important to the forces on the system, either it has to be short enough to prevent the belayer from accelerating too much or long enough that gravity has slowed the belayer down before the tether stops him.
So, as usual, it is hard to decide what is best.
As I recall, Jim Titt's posts on braking power of various belay devices shows the munter hitch's braking power is very high. So if you need gloves using the munter hitch you need gloves for every other belay device you use.
Dave's online book, Chapter 12 definitely has a lot of detail: http://multipitchclimbing.com/ Thanks, Dave. I have your site/book on my Favorites list--never realized that was you! TONS of great info there.
I'll repeat a question I had earlier: In that photo I posted at the beginning of this thread, can I use the loop made by that figure-8 on a bight as an additional master point? I can't think of why not, but I am no expert.
Dave's online book, Chapter 12 definitely has a lot of detail: http://multipitchclimbing.com/ Thanks, Dave. I have your site/book on my Favorites list--never realized that was you! TONS of great info there.
I'll repeat a question I had earlier: In that photo I posted at the beginning of this thread, can I use the loop made by that figure-8 on a bight as an additional master point? I can't think of why not, but I am no expert.
I can't think of any problem with that, and it gives the follower a more comfortable place to clip in so that they aren't right on top of you. You might also want to try just using the rope if you only have one follower. I really like the "Yosemite Anchor":
It makes for a super-quick set up (especially on sport climbs), and you could always add an alpine butterfly to the far end of it if you want another point for the follower to clip into.
Here what could go wrong with a grigri or ATC straight off a banshee belay.
The cam of the grigri could get pressed against the rock preventing locking. You can orient it to hold an up pull or a downward pull without the cam being pressed against the rock...but not both.
With an ATC...a fall right off the belay will result in minimal braking. Because both the brake and leader rope will be pulling down. In this case a redirect is needed. A redirect might work for a grigri too.
As on the originsl thread, more examples with bolts, gear and bolts with rings. Your ideas seem overly complicated to me.
And as I said on the original thread: Its not a franch technique. On the contrary ENSA tested it recently, while its considered the traditional technique in Zwiss, Austria, Italy, Germany, Czech Republic
I’ve been using this setup for a while: I use an Edelrid 120 cm Aramid sling pre-tied with bowline on a bight and I carry it bandolier style with a small locker. I like that Edelrid sling because #1, it’s strong. #2, it won’t melt. And #3, it’s really hard to cut.
Just like in the ENSA video (Should You Change the Way You Belay) I clip the bowline on a bight to the primary bolt, clove my rope to the bowline loop, then clove the Aramid sling to the second bolt. Now I have three power points: the bowline loop, the trailing loop off the secondary clove hitch AND by using the two strands that span between the bolts I have an equalized “quad” power point.
On the way down I use that pre-tied Edelrid sling as my descent system. Girth it to my belay loop (or use a locker), tie an overhand about 8”out for my rappel extension and use the leftover as my tether to the anchors.
Malcolm Daly wrote: On the way down I use that pre-tied Edelrid sling as my descent system. Girth it to my belay loop (or use a locker), tie an overhand about 8”out for my rappel extension and use the leftover as my tether to the anchors.
You seem to like cloves (who doesn't?)--how about cloving your rappel extension?
Back in the days of "old" (when we taught the hip belay, and when ropes were far less dynamic than today, especially the old, retired ones we used for dynamic belay practice!) the belayer was taught to always have a tie-in (not necessarily the MAIN belay point) that was pretty-much tight and tied behind you, just so that the violent "upliftings and swings" shown in the video didn't occur. I continued teaching this even after the "ATC" devices were adopted. (With a tie-in behind you it is also easier to tie-off a fallen leader and "escape the belay", but that's not taught anymore either.)
But today, teaching this idea seems to have gone out of style, except (maybe) when the leader outweighs the belayer by some arbitrary amount (I usually see "40 lbs"). Let's see...a 160 lb leader falling 10 ft generates 1600 ft-lbs of force. The rope can absorb some of this, lets say half, even 3/4ths, but the force on the belayer is still far greater than his/her weight. Why is it expected that the force from the falling leader isn't going to move the belayer?
Does anybody know why this idea of having a tie in behind the belayer went out of style?
Perhaps the most interesting finding in the video, at least for me, was the fact that more force was placed on the leader when the belayer was "whipped into the wall" than when the belay was directly off the anchor. The finding surprised the experimenters, and surprised me too. Does this explode the idea of the "soft catch" that is practiced today by many? As far as I know, this idea of a "soft catch" is the only reason given for not tieing in the belayer (on 1 pitch climbs).
There’s also a Canadian video out there (Vimeo, I think), so google ACMG and direct belay.
The ENSA video gets lowest peak forces with a Munter on the anchor, but important: they intentionally let rope slip through the Munter. This is explained in the article accompanying the video.
As far as I know (chime in here, Mal), no one recommends using a plaquette in guide mode for a direct belay. In fact, most manufacturers recommend NOT using guide mode. Further—-if using a plaquette, you MUST redirect it until the leader clips a piece! Otherwise, zero stopping power and the belayer cannot stop a fall!
I’ll post the ACMG video when I’m home and not typing on this thing...
rgold
·
Jul 23, 2019
·
Poughkeepsie, NY
· Joined Feb 2008
· Points: 526
As far as I know, the load-reducing properties of the direct anchor belay have only been clearly established for the Munter. The reduction occurs via slippage of the Munter, but typically does not involve slippage of the rope through the belayer's hand, although gloves are mandatory in case this happens. The point is that the brake hand should be far enough away from the anchor point to allow a foot or two of rope pull through the anchor under tension. The brake hand (or hands, because with this set-up the belayer can brake with both hands) gets pulled to the anchor, but the fall is typically stopped by the time the hand arrives at the anchor and further rope slippage does not occur. The CAI has videos I've posted elsewhere of various people stopping factor 2 falls with steel weights with this method, so there is no question that it is up to the severest tests.
Putting a Grigri or other brake-assisted device directly on the anchor will result in significantly higher anchor loads and seems to me to be a really bad idea. An ordinary ATC-type device can be used, but the operation is awkward and it has to be specially rigged to work in the factor 2 situation. That rigging makes pumping slack to the leader more difficult, and the typical protocol involves unclipping the extra redirection biner once the leader has clipped good pro. But this means if the leader falls and pulls the "good" pro, the belayer will not be able to stop the resulting factor 2 fall. The Munter, on the other hand, works in all configurations and automatically adopts its high-friction configuration if the dreaded factor 2 actually happens.
People speak of the Munter twisting ropes, and this may be true if it is used for rappelling or lowering (opinions differ and there is commentary about keeping the strands parallel), but I don't think it is an issue with ordinary belaying, when the rope isn't under tension. I used a Munter on my harness as a belay system for a few years BITD and never noticed any twisting beyond what I'd guess was normal.
All in all, if you've got two good modern bolts and are climbing with a single rope, belaying with a Munter directly on the anchor seems to me to be the best method by far, and arguably the only really good method if there is unprotected leading off the belay. (You do, however, lose the ability of the system to stop a fall if the belayer is knocked out.) Be sure to use one of the Euro rigging methods like the banshee belay (equalization is pointless), in which the Munter carabiner is attached to the anchor with a very small loop---you don't want the carabiner flying up during a leader fall catch. Although you can't choose the bolt position, the belay position should ideally allow for a foot or two of rope between the normal brake hand position and the Munter carabiner, to allow for the pulling of slack through the biner under tension.
To reference another thread, the direct Munter belay allows you to almost instantly tie off a fallen leader or second with a Munter Mule, rendering the entire process of belay escape and load transfer irrelevant.
When loaded, the Munter revolves around the carabiner and so emits a bit of slack. The leader who wants "take" might be a bit annoyed by this, but that's life with this system.
(And yes, the idea that this is a "French technique" is a slap in the face for the Eastern European climbers who have been using the direct Munter belay on the anchor for at least 20 years. ENSA has just caught on and my guess is most French climbers have not changed their ways...)
Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
