Anchor safety

Quick question for you cheeky fallas.
Top down belaying. What is the consensus on having the ATC attached to only 1 of the 2 anchor points on a sport route, using a binder,rather than setting up a full equalised anchor setup?
I was climbing with an experienced climber of 20 years a while back and knew nothing of systems at the time, still trying to figure it all out

If it is attached to the other bolt/in the system I think fine, if it is just floating out there by itself I would be a bit creeped out by it. 

It's hard to tell based on that impressively-low-quality photo. The important question is: do you trust the bolts? Are you climbing in an area where bolts are generally known to be solid, where fixed gear is actively maintained, on a well-trafficked route? It is fine to trust a single bolt, if you feel that it is trustworthy, but it is prudent to back it up with the another bolt or piece of gear if you can.

All climbing safety best practices come down to risk assessment. Solid gear and redundancy are far more important than equalization in my book.

I posted this image in the other recent anchor thread. I think this is fine with solid bolts:

https://cdn2.apstatic.com/forum/118844.jpg

It’s pretty reckless to make the choice for your partner to attach their life support to a single point of protection, when there is a second one available literally inches away and ready for use.

It’s not about whether you trust the bolt. (If you don’t trust them even using two might not be wise). Bolts can and do fail, it’s  not always possible to tell that one might fail just from visual inspection. That’s why redundancy matters, that’s why it’s standard for belay/rap anchors to have two bolts. What does it gain you to use only one?

Levi Smith wrote: Quick question for you cheeky fallas.
Top down belaying. What is the consensus on having the ATC attached to only 1 of the 2 anchor points on a sport route, using a binder,rather than setting up a full equalised anchor setup?
I was climbing with an experienced climber of 20 years a while back and knew nothing of systems at the time, still trying to figure it all out

I would think that anytime you belay someone from an anchor, the belay device should be in the master point (or at least the shelf) of the anchor. This ensures that both anchor points are being utilized to protect the follower. If your partner is not doing so, he/she is either lazy or unaware of the importance of redundancy. Two perfectly good bolts next to each other, plenty of time to set up, so there is no reason to not belay off both. Will that bolt fail? Probably not based on the looks, but what happens when you go up a route with less then perfect bolts, old wobbly cold shuts, or a trad anchor? Your partner needs to fix this habit, or don't climb with that person. 

I'd recommend getting 20ft of 7mm for a cordelette to build a quad anchor to belay off of if you are going to be doing a lot of multi-pitch or top belaying.

Levi Smith wrote: Quick question for you cheeky fallas.
Top down belaying. What is the consensus on having the ATC attached to only 1 of the 2 anchor points on a sport route, using a binder,rather than setting up a full equalised anchor setup?
I was climbing with an experienced climber of 20 years a while back and knew nothing of systems at the time, still trying to figure it all out

It's fine but there's no redundancy. One long sling with a knot and BOOM, redundancy.

It is standard operating procedure in a lot of Europe to belay the leader directly off a single bolt with a connecting sling making the other bolt a backup.  If there is something (rope, cordelette, slings) connecting one good bolt to the other, then it is ok to hang the belay device on a single bolt.  You have redundancy but the possibility of an extension if the primary bolt fails.  If that's what's in place, here (the picture is indecipherable) I wouldn't worry about it with good bolts.  That said, it is so easy to rig things so that the belay load is distributed to both bolts that there isn't much excuse for not doing that.

I do this regularly on multi-pitch routes with [high quality] bolted anchors. As long as the two bolts are connected in some way its redundant but not equalized.

First, using my rope, I clove into each bolt in series. If the bolts are 8" apart I have 8" of rope between them.
One biner is always an HMS. I also clip the top ring of the ATC guide into this HMS biner. Right beside the clove hitch.
Then I load the followers rope into the plate. Making sure the brake biner is away from the wall.

The above photo somewhat represents what I do. Instead of a draw I use another locker and I clip the ATC directly into the HMS. If a draw if required to depart the belay I'd just clip it to one of the lockers.
This is system is fast and requires absolutely minimal gear [2 locking biners]. What is essential when using this method is that you are able to assess the quality of the bolts.

Thanks for all the feedback and apologies for the photo. I like the classification of anchor building as a risk assessment for each situation. In addition to that setting up a redundant system is easy enough, so why not. Exactly what I needed to hear.

rgold wrote: It is standard operating procedure in a lot of Europe to belay the leader directly off a single bolt with a connecting sling making the other bolt a backup.  If there is something (rope, cordelette, slings) connecting one good bolt to the other, then it is ok to hang the belay device on a single bolt.  You have redundancy but the possibility of an extension if the primary bolt fails.  If that's what's in place, here (the picture is indecipherable) I wouldn't worry about it with good bolts.  That said, it is so easy to rig things so that the belay load is distributed to both bolts that there isn't much excuse for not doing that.

Stop copying me.

Eli W wrote: It's hard to tell based on that impressively-low-quality photo. 

Upvote for the impressively low quality photo thing, its like the op watched a video of their climb on a CRT tv from the 80s paused the video and then took a photo of it from across a dark room at an angle.  Impressive!

rgold wrote: It is standard operating procedure in a lot of Europe to belay the leader directly off a single bolt with a connecting sling making the other bolt a backup.  If there is something (rope, cordelette, slings) connecting one good bolt to the other, then it is ok to hang the belay device on a single bolt.  You have redundancy but the possibility of an extension if the primary bolt fails.  If that's what's in place, here (the picture is indecipherable) I wouldn't worry about it with good bolts.  That said, it is so easy to rig things so that the belay load is distributed to both bolts that there isn't much excuse for not doing that.

Your right it is easy to equalize it. 

If I'm building the anchor for progress on a multi-pitch route and satisfied with the bolted anchor in series [like I posted above]. Why would I be concerned about distributing a TR load?

There are a 100 ways to skin a cat and I use different anchors depending on the situation. I don't rig an anchor the same way on a newly bolted Gunks anchor as opposed to a 1/4" rusted spinner J-Tree anchor.

Should you Change The Way You Belay is a great video from ENSA, the French National School of Skiing and Mountaineering.

This got me thinking a lot about how I set up and belay at bolted anchors. Rather than cloving in direct to the bolts as shown above I use an anchor sling as shown in the ENSA video. I use a 120cm x 6mm Edelrid Aramid sling (Really hard to cut and doesn’t melt) into which I have tied a bowline on a bight in one end. I carry this bandolier style and use it as my anchor sling in the way up and as my rappel extension and tether in the way down. I gets used at literally every belay/rappel station.

As many have pointed out above, your bolts have to be perfectly bombproof.

Climb safe,
Mal

Tradiban wrote:

Stop copying me.

You're irresistible; I can't help myself.

What are the two (climber?) rope strands going over, top middle? Is there a draw between the anchors? And, is the belayer attached to something on the right? Yeah, photo sucks, but looking at the shadows helps. Four strands (two ropes) I'd be more inclined to think they know what they're up to, wisely or not.

OP, IMO, as a beginner, it should always be okay to respectfully ask what's what, if your partner isn't thoughtful enough to tell you. Mine all have, so far, briefly, but clearly. It's your neck, too, after all. Besides, people usually like to share, and it's an opportunity to learn something.

Best, Helen

rgold wrote: It is standard operating procedure in a lot of Europe to belay the leader directly off a single bolt with a connecting sling making the other bolt a backup.  If there is something (rope, cordelette, slings) connecting one good bolt to the other, then it is ok to hang the belay device on a single bolt.  You have redundancy but the possibility of an extension if the primary bolt fails.  If that's what's in place, here (the picture is indecipherable) I wouldn't worry about it with good bolts.  That said, it is so easy to rig things so that the belay load is distributed to both bolts that there isn't much excuse for not doing that.

Many anchors in Europe seem to be designed to discourage the use of both bolts.

Attentive Follower wrote:

Many anchors in Europe seem to be designed to discourage the use of both bolts.

True---they are mostly arranged so that one is higher than the other as in the pic posted by rocknice2.  The belay device goes on the lower one and the upper one backs it up without the possibility of any real extension.  This is certainly the rational way to set things up, but I don't think the motivation was to discourage rigging a distributed load, although that may be a practical consequence.

Sorry, its anathema to me to carry three lockers to belay a second. Never gonna happen.

If it's a fast and light mission then it's an ATC off my harness. If it's a convenience mission, then GG.

More lockers is a newbie's solution to everything it seems.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:

Sorry, its anathema to me to carry three lockers to belay a second. Never gonna happen.

If it's a fast and light mission then it's an ATC off my harness. If it's a convenience mission, then GG.

More lockers is a newbie's solution to everything it seems.

FWIW that's only two lockers for belaying (the green ones), the others are for anchoring. The way RocknIce described it, he actually only uses one additional locker for belaying.

Vaughn wrote:

FWIW that's only two lockers for belaying (the green ones), the others are for anchoring. The way RocknIce described it, he actually only uses one additional locker for belaying.

You dont need lockers for anchoring. Tie in twice always. 

In the example pictured two cloves on regular biners is redundant and safe.

Then you don't need 3 lockers.