Pacing gear placements

I've been leading trad climbs for a little longer than a year or so (I started in the 90s, stopped and had kids, and now I'm free so I make climbing a priority... wooo).  

I'm mostly leading around 5.8 or so, and I took exactly one fall on gear last year (on a 5.10 at indian creek... so not hard to feel okay about evaluating a placement).  If I'm on a top rope, I can usually climb around 5.10- clean without rehearsal, so there's generally no reason I shouldn't be onsighting stuff at this level.  My current goal is to get comfortable leading sub-5.10 trad here in SW Colorado, cause most of the things that I'd like to do this year are at that level.  I feel like if I can get to that level this year and fall a bunch sport climbing, then next year I ought to be able to push my trad grades closer to what I'm physically capable of climbing without hurting myself.

I've been trying to get better at figuring out what a good placement looks like without whipping on stuff, mostly by a combination of aid climbing and looking at as many placements of my partners as I can... but my partners are generally onsighting this easy stuff, too.  

So I don't feel great about trusting gear, and most of my thought process while I am climbing is arranged around not falling.  This feels like it makes me much slower than I need to be... the same moves on toprope are much, much faster.

I've noticed that I tend to run stuff out on easier moves, but when I get to a stance I end up placing several pieces... looking down at the 15 feet or so between myself and the last piece of gear makes the failure of a single piece seem really, really bad.  So i end up putting in a pair of pieces at the same time... that's the main element of my question.

That multiple placement thing doesn't line up with what I've seen other folks do, but I'm mostly going off of either climbing with people who are around my skill level or pictures of folks I see on the interwebs.  So I have been questioning that practice.  

I don't think there are clear answers to what I want to know beyond just leading a lot and gaining first-hand experience, but still...  I'd be stoked on advice about some things (these are maybe different ways of asking the same question):

- is placing redundant pieces like I do just wasteful and paranoid?
- how do I evaluate how to pace placing gear?
- am I better off sewing up easy sections so when I get to something harder I am not building a nest of placements, or
- is climbing until I am at a move I'm not 99% certain about and then placing a couple of pieces a reasonable strategy?

Good questions, John, and like you said, a lot will become clearer as you lead a lot more.  But if you're collecting opinions of various trad leaders on the questions you posed, here's mine:

- is placing redundant pieces like I do just wasteful and paranoid?  --not necessarily, but it depends on A) how good the initial piece is and B) how good the options for placements are on the rest of the climb.

Regarding A), If you're placing a bomber piece and then backing it up with a psychological piece just 'cause you're nervous, then that may be wasteful.  However, in the early years you may not be good at evaluating how solid your placements are, and if you're in any doubt, placing a backup might be smart.  The best thing to do is just get better at knowing if your placements are good and being able to trust them.  It's been said before by many, but aid climbing or even just mock-aiding is very good for that.  Put your weight or even bounce on a bunch of pro and you'll learn quickly about what makes placements solid.  A mentor helps with this, too, if you can find one of those.  If your second/partner is more experienced, ask them to evaluate all your placements as they're cleaning.

Regarding B), If you're placing a nest of gear when you can see that the next 10-20 feet of climbing offers plenty of solid-looking gear placement options, then yes, that's wasteful.  But if you're taking advantage of the one good opportunity you can see for a ways, then no-- you might be building the nest that will hold a longer fall if you're forced to run it out above.  Again, you may not yet feel confident in your ability to judge good gear options from below, but that also will come with mileage, and in the beginning it's ok to err on the side of placing more often even if you find out later there were more placement options above you.  It's never a bad thing to be on one of those pitches where you feel like you could have placed gear anywhere you chose (but it doesn't mean that you failed if you didn't take advantage of every single placement option-- sometimes there are just more than you need; it's fun to see pictures on MP of the same pitches I've done and see how differently other climbers have protected them, and how solid each of our choices might well have been; more than one way to skin a cat...)

- how do I evaluate how to pace placing gear? -- Do you mean how far apart to space gear placements?   If so, I think one answer is generally that placing closer is more important in the first half of each pitch than in the second (which is why I don't worry as much about using up precious gear in the first half of the pitch).  I try to go for every 8-10 feet (or approximately every 1-1.5 body lengths) right off the ground/belay and gradually relax that spacing as I go.  The more rope is out between you and your belayer, generally the lower the fall forces will be and the greater the chance that even a larger fall will be softer and safer, so you can afford to run it out a bit more.  Still, in my opinion, you should avoid unnecessary runouts just because you're further out, so I still generally place pro every 15-20 feet if I can all the way to the end of the pitch.  Another answer has to do with whether the terrain is easy.  If the difficulty drops waaay down, I will stretch out to 20 feet or more between placements, but often that has more to do with the angle or type of terrain than the strict difficulty rating.  A vertical or overhanging 5.4. (like in the Gunks, say) gets just as close placements as any "real" climbing pitch anywhere, whereas I have run it out 80 feet on 5.6 terrain in the Flatirons (but that's just the problem in the Flatirons- finding pro).  I have also run it out further on blocky, jutting terrain where rope drag from too many or awkwardly spaced pro could be worse than a longer but clean fall on good gear.  That's why there can't ever be a hard-and-fast rule for spacing of gear placements.  

- am I better off sewing up easy sections so when I get to something harder I am not building a nest of placements?  -- I don't think you need to "sew up" easy sections, but I still place at reasonable intervals even on easy sections.  A longer fall, even one that is unlikely to occur, is still guaranteed to generate higher forces on gear and risk pro failure more than a short fall.  All other things being equal, gear that is evenly spaced along a climb is likely to do better under sudden fall forces than gear that is widely spaced and clustered.  Or rather, if the top cluster were to fail, you'd sure be better off if the next piece below was only a little ways further down instead of a long way down.  If placing gear when you don't absolutely need to on easy sections just to make sure you've placed something in the last twenty feet of climbing feels like you're "sewing it up," then yes, you should sew it up.

- is climbing until I am at a move I'm not 99% certain about and then placing a couple of pieces a reasonable strategy?  -- If you have arrived at said "harder" move and don't have any gear below you for the last 20 feet, then yes, a nest might feel better and not be an unreasonable strategy.  But if you've placed regularly spaced pieces even when you didn't have to, you might not feel so nervous that you have to build a nest of gear.  See how that works?  One way to think about this is to say you should never pass up a particularly good placement opportunity, even if it's on easier terrain (unless you are literally surrounded by good placement options and can't go wrong).  If I place gear when I can place it in spots where it is very obviously bombproof, then I feel relaxed knowing at least that one placement cannot fail, and I climb better.  If I passed up a great placement spot on easy terrain and arrived right before the Hard Move, only to find a shallow, flaring crack or a bunch of loose flakes, I'd sure wish I had gotten something in back at that failsafe spot.  I might even downclimb back to the good placement.  Also, I'm sure you've heard the general idea about placing before and after each hard move.  As I lead harder trad, that has helped me think about when I need to place.  I concentrate on placing when I'm on terrain where it is less taxing to place, and then I try to move quickly and efficiently through the hard move above (even if that is exactly when I am thinking "Oh man, I might fall off here; I wish I could place a piece right here").  As soon I get to a place where I can rest again, even if it's not really a rest per se but instead just a little bit easier than the hard moves I just did, I look to place again.  Thus, I generally concentrate on placing gear when the terrain is easier, rather than looking to move through the easier stuff without having to stop to place gear.  Besides, if you felt gripped when you placed a piece because you waited until the climbing was hard to place, then your second is going to get worked trying to remove it in that spot...

A final few thoughts, since you mentioned looking at how other people were spacing their gear:  1) no two climbers are likely to place gear in exactly the same spots on the same pitch, as one person's reasonable runout is another person's terrifying suicide pitch (and that's OK); 2) many beginning leaders are too cavalier about the solidity of their own gear placements, but on the other hand if you don't trust your placements, it's time to practice with them on the ground or on mock lead until you do; 3) be wary of the trap of thinking that climbing quickly through sections by not placing adequate gear is "efficient."  Speed in mulitpitch trad climbing comes from efficiency of anchor building and at belay changeovers, not from climbing fast.  In general, trad climbing is slow and deliberative, with most of your time on each pitch spent fiddling with gear, just like you described.  That's not climbing too slowly if it means you're building safe systems for you and your follower.  The efficiency will come when you've placed your #6 DB Stopper so many times that you can eyeball a crack and tell it's probably a #6 and not a #7.  But you're still going to take your time when your fiddling that nut into the crack to find its perfect little seat...

Hope that helps.  Happy climbing!

Josh,
Your extremely thoughtful and informative reply to this question goes above and beyond and is very appreciated. As a newer trad climber, I have the same questions. I plan to reread your answer a couple times to fully digest it all. A sincere thank you! 

Thanks so much Josh!
That is super helpful indeed
As another newish trad leader, and another Josh, let me add a few thoughts:
1. Maybe it goes without saying but depending on beta, assessment from the start, or just how the pitch unfolds, the question of “protecting the pitch” vs “protecting the move” is something that I think about a lot. Is there one clear crux?  A ledge to avoid?  Are you climbing a continuance crack, or are you searching for pockets, running it out between placements?
2. Have you taken practice falls on a variety of placements on TR mock lead?  This can be a super helpful exercise 
3. I think it might be good to mention that you could back up the first piece, for example if you extend your first placement (and make it multi-directional) to reduce zippering potential, you can place a second, non-extended, piece just above to reduce the ground fall potential created by the extended first piece

1. I'm also fairly new to trad climbing (year or so) and will say that I've become more comfortable with a solid nut placement than I expected. I like cams. They make sense and I use them, but if I need the mental comfort of a bomber piece I have gotten to where I reach for nuts more. They obviously don't always work the best in those spots so I still will use the cam if necessary but nothing gives me warm fuzzies more than a good chock. With that said, I will place a small nest for comfort at times when using cams. 

My recommendation would be mileage. Back off to 5.6 or 5.7 and climb a lot of routes. Adopt a no fall approach, then after 25- 30 routes move up in difficulty. This way you can concentrate on gear. You will be able to eyeball a crack or pocket and intuitively pick the ideal piece for that placement.
     This is an old school approach, not popular these days. This allows you to gain experience safely. By the time you start pushing your limits, you will have lots of experience, with confidence to boot.

Josh covered it pretty well. The only thing I'd add is to consider what you'd hit if you fell at any particular point, and make a decision whether or not to place protection there accordingly.

That’s a good point - you never know when a foot might slip.  Worth considering both the likelihood AND the consequences of a fall at all times.  I’ve had this conversation with myself before: “sure, you probably won’t fall here, but if you do, you’re dead.  Are you ok with that?”

I remember finding a trad clinic video early on that was very helpful to me.  The phrase the guide used (which I’ve heard repeated often) was “two between you and the ground.”  It’s not always possible, but it’s a good rule to use when you can and might help with your “nesting” question.  Think about the consequences if each piece should fail.  If your crux piece fails and you have another piece 10’ down in clean fall terrain (no nearby ledges), then you’re probably fine; but, if it’s your first piece after a 20’ run out and you’re about to make a move you’re not 100% confident of, then yeah...back it up for sure.  Also, don’t be ashamed about psychological pro...if placing another piece means you’re that much more likely to commit to the move, then it’s worth it IMO.

Jay Dee wrote:

1. I'm also fairly new to trad climbing (year or so) and will say that I've become more comfortable with a solid nut placement than I expected. I like cams. They make sense and I use them, but if I need the mental comfort of a bomber piece I have gotten to where I reach for nuts more. They obviously don't always work the best in those spots so I still will use the cam if necessary but nothing gives me warm fuzzies more than a good chock. With that said, I will place a small nest for comfort at times when using cams. 

It's good to hear that you can appreciate the difference between a nut placement and a cam placement. Many newbs don't really get that as they should.

Instead of placing a couple of (probably bomber, but in my head psychological) pieces in a row and clipping them individually, I like equalizing them like a little anchor and clipping the masterpoint. Practicing this also helps for when you need to have pieces interacting with each other to keep them in place (e.g., keeping in place stoppers place in oppositely flaring cracks.)

Ryan Mac wrote: Josh covered it pretty well. The only thing I'd add is to consider what you'd hit if you fell at any particular point, and make a decision whether or not to place protection there accordingly.

Totally agree!  Remember, the "G / PG / R / X " ratings don't necessarily correlate with the length of a fall, but with the probability of getting hurt (and how badly) if you do fall.  A 10ft fall onto a ledge can be "R" (although most will not rate it as such ) while a 100 ft fall into space or down a steep face can be "G", although the latter is normally much more scary...both the face and to take.

Along these same lines I have a saying "5.7 climbers don't die on 5.7's, they die on 5.2's." (It was created years ago, when 5.9 was "hard" and only the elite climbed 5.10; but you can change the numbers to suit your situation. ) 

  Of the two climbers who I knew personally who died in a climbing fall while climbing (as opposed to rap-failures, avalanches, etc) both died on falls well below their grade level. Somehow, for me and I'd suspect others too, there's a "casual-ness" that creeps in while roped-leading a climb, say, 5 grades below your leading limit, that doesn't creep in if you're free soloing that same piece of rock. Indeed, of the few, very few, totally unexpected leader falls I've taken (and there aren't many ) more than half were while leading easy climbs while not paying attention; the last was caused, for example, by sand on my foot that I didn't realize was there, pick up on a 4-inch ledge.

  So consider your surroundings while leading, and be conscious of "casual-ness" .  

John, it sounds like your goal is to work toward leading at or near your limit. In general, there's few hard and fast rules. Josh gives a lot of good info. I'll take issue with one statement, though, or at least offer a different perspective. The suggested spacing (8-10 ft down low, 15-20 higher up) doesn't resonate with me. Of course, Josh stated those were just general guidelines, and every climb (and climber!) is different. But, if we're talking about working toward leading near your limit, I'm envisioning a climb with one or two cruxes at or near your limit, and often, a lot of climbing within a couple number grades of the crux section. On climbs like that I'm placing gear closer than 8-10 ft down low and closer than 15-20 up high unless the grade drops off dramatically up high (or, conversely, starts with a long easy section).

For example, let's say the climb is an 80 foot 11a with some 5.9 down low, a crux section from 35-45 feet, and then some 9/10a above that. I'd say my pieces are likely to be closer to 5 feet apart down low (this is a completely personal preference, but since I do a lot of bouldering I tend to be pretty comfy bouldering up a little ways, but then my first couple pieces will be close together). Then, in an ideal world, double up before the crux at the last decent stance and, if possible, climb through to the next decent stance, whether that's mid-crux in a sustained section, or above a shorter crux. Finally--especially since I'm likely tired from climbing at my limit--there is no way I am spacing it 15-20 feet on the last part on 10a or even 5.9. Maybe if it eases off to 5.7 or so. And it's worth keeping in mind that the flip side of lower fall factors up high is that you are also going to fall further with more rope out.

It certainly differs depending if you're climbing in the mountains, the Flatirons, the Gunks, Indian Creek, overhanging, slabby, something to hit, all air, intermittent seams, splitter crack, lightning storm coming in, single pitch, ten pitches, fav belayer, new partner, etc etc etc. It may also differ if you simply decide you want to enjoy leading on gear but don't want to be pushing your limits at all, though I would say in that scenario it's even more important to place gear frequently as you will inevitably learn less about what gear is going to hold. But I mention this just so you don't get the idea that Josh's suggestions are necessarily "normal" spacing on climbs that will be at your limit.

I also place more gear than I used to when I was younger (I started climbing seriously in the late '90s). I've tried to eliminate needless large runouts even on easier terrain, and I double up pro more often. Seemingly bomber pieces can fail. If you're spacing 15-20 feet and whip and one piece fails you're suddenly looking at an absolutely monster whip with likely bad consequences in many cases.

I like Charles' modifications to my initial length estimates:  the closer to your limit, the closer the gear spacing should probably be.  I guess you can tell I do a lot more moderate "adventure trad" than leading at my limit...  ;)

No worries, Josh. I've also become pretty conservative over the years. Even on moderate adventure climbs these days--the rare occasions I still do them--I find myself overprotecting a bit. I did the Culp-Bossier a couple summers ago, about 20 years after the first time I did it and probably placed twice as much gear. Of course, this resulted in a slower ascent, which has its own dangers, but fortunately the weather was stable that day. 

Mike Palasek wrote: My recommendation would be mileage. Back off to 5.6 or 5.7 and climb a lot of routes. Adopt a no fall approach, then after 25- 30 routes move up in difficulty. This way you can concentrate on gear. You will be able to eyeball a crack or pocket and intuitively pick the ideal piece for that placement.
     This is an old school approach, not popular these days. This allows you to gain experience safely. By the time you start pushing your limits, you will have lots of experience, with confidence to boot.

Oh man, where is the abundance of these awesome 5.6/5.7's in the PNW? I'm a new trad leader near Portland and have been doing some 5.7s and 5.8s but would love to put in some miles on lower grades to try different things out. 

Never been to the PNW. My 'home' crag is Seneca Rocks, where there are many classic lines from 5.2 on up. Hope a local can help you with this.

Thanks for all the ideas and good responses.  That's super helpful.

Hitting some of the points made:

- to the point about "easier" mileage: I feel pretty good with leading the 5.8s I have been doing, and there's really not a lot of easier stuff at the crag I've been climbing at (there is maybe 1 60' 5.6).  So I don't have a lot of choice on that front

- to the point about about getting too casual with stuff: I mostly have been of the mind that if it doesn't look casual when I do it, I shouldn't do it... and if it feels totally casual when I do it, I probably shouldn't do it.  So, I mostly try to climb as if I were soloing stuff at all times.  The last time I backed off a climb, it was only a single 5.5 free move, but I was on one of the fisher towers, with a 00 peanut and a wire bolt hanger between me and a 60' fall onto a ledge... I don't feel bad about that retreat, though in retrospect if I knew how to bolt I might have just replaced the manky hangerless bolt I was on and gone for the moves.  The difficulty for me is that so much of this is dumb risk taking: it doesn't matter how I protect anything if I pop off the first 10' of most of what I climb. :D. A lot of what I've been struggling with in leading things is suppressing the feeling that I'm gonna die if x number of things goes wrong in the next 5 minutes, and that seems like a "good" thing to suppress because it's generally not a wholly rational fear and that feeling really gets in the way of progressing up the rock

- I agree that nut placements generally feel way more bomber than small cam placements... though I feel best when I have a really good #1 C4 cam...

- I haven't found a really good mentor here yet, but my partners and I do a lot of evaluation of each others' pieces, pretty much every pitch.

- to the point about modulating number of placements based on difficulty, that makes sense

- I have never really been sure what it means to protect a climb versus protect a move... I tend to think of the climb as a series of moves.  I understand protecting the follower on a traverse, but beyond that I could use some clarification

I think that my takeaway is that I will

a) continue to double up on placements when a failure of hard-to-evaluate piece would be catastrophic, cause that's not just an irrational fear
b) try to place more gear even where I don't think I am going to fall
c) start to climb stuff that is a little closer to my limits but place a lot more gear and perhaps try to get okay with falling in better protected spots ( I dunno if I can quite bring myself to fall on mock leads on toprope)

That b part kind of leaves me with more questions.  I think that part of what I am ruminating over comes from starting climbing in the 90s with people who had, maybe a set of nuts a 5-7 cams and some hexes.  I'm generally climbing with maybe 2-3x the gear on my harness than most of the people I know owned in the 90s.  I think that a lot of the climbs I am doing with a double rack (extending into many more sizes) were put up by folks using a much smaller amount of pro.  So that makes me wonder if I am "doing it wrong", but that's just a feeling I'm going to have to sit with for a bit.

Jared Willis wrote:

Oh man, where is the abundance of these awesome 5.6/5.7's in the PNW? I'm a new trad leader near Portland and have been doing some 5.7s and 5.8s but would love to put in some miles on lower grades to try different things out. 

WA:  Icicle Creek, Castle Rock, Vantage, Royal Columns in the Tieton.

OR:  Northern Point and the Schoolroom at Smith.  

BC:  Many at Squamish, inc. Smoke Bluffs and Sugarloaf.  

Most of these are popular; in the 21st century it's often best to aim for moderates on weekdays to avoid getting in other parties' way and vice versa.  Also, I've read several accident reports where new trad leaders felt rushed or pressured while leading and bad stuff happened.  Learning to lead on gear is heady enough without lots of other people around.  and now there is the whole social-distancing thing....

The OP got a lot of good info from this thread.   One thing I'd re-emphasize:  overprotect!  The "2 between you and the ground" is a minimum.  Many new gear leaders try to emulate the spacing of single pieces that they see good climbers use.  An experienced leader is much safer with fewer solid placements than a less seasoned leader with less judgement about any of them.  Many developing leaders underestimate how far they might fall and what they might bash into on a low-angle pitch.  
Find a partner whose rack supplements yours and carry more gear than you need.  You won't get into trouble on a moderate by toting a couple of extra pounds, but you might by not placing ample gear.

Ways to learn how good your gear is, without whipping into the unknown:
-aid climbing on toprope (you will body-weight every piece, and can arrange to clean your own placements)
-following someone else's lead while directly weighting the pieces, inspecting them, and then cleaning the just-weighted piece
-Having a more experienced gear climber follow your lead and critique pieces and the system.

John Reeve wrote

I found your post very interesting. I couldn't tell if you were talking about multipitch trad routes or cragging.  Here are my thoughts, which are more philosophical than practical. 

I'm mostly leading around 5.8 or so, and If I'm on a top rope, I can usually climb around 5.10- clean without rehearsal, so there's generally no reason I shouldn't be onsighting stuff at this level.  

Why would you think that?  On a top rope you are typically not carrying gear, placing gear, or looking down to assess fall potential, or looking up to assess gear placement and rest spots. Tr like this and see if you are still onsighting 10-  

most of my thought process while I am climbing is arranged around not falling.  

Welcome to the club and maybe that’s as it should be.  Some people have the attitude that no fall is ever safe. I’m not in that camp, but falls have different consequences in different circumstances. So in my own mind, I do two kinds of climbing, climbs where I want to challenge myself mentally and physically, and climbs where I want more just the joy of climbing movement. 
I challenge myself on things where I think it’s mostly “safe” to take a fall, and for me that’s sport routes and single pitch crack routes where I can somewhat assess the gear and fall line from the ground. In these situations I can always figure out how to back off if I feel like I’m facing a risk that I don’t want to face. 
On multipitch trad routes, the risk equation is so different. There are potentially very different and life altering consequences to falling, and to moving too slowly. So I personally choose grades for this situation where I feel like “I just will not fall at this grade”. My climbing style is different. More like I’m soloing and and pleasantly surprised to find I have gear and a rope when the climbing gets a bit thoughtful. 
So the challenge type of climbing supports the joy of movement type climbing, in that the former gets me stronger and fitter so it ties into the grade of the latter. You have to decide for yourself if this kind of philosophical distinction of types of climbs makes sense to you. 

I've noticed that I tend to run stuff out on easier moves, 

Because in your mind you are safe and will not fall, but when you don’t have to run something out and you have plenty of gear, it’s worth throwing a piece in here and there. Lots of A in NAC reports cite insufficient gear by experienced climbers on easy ground. 

but when I get to a stance I end up placing several pieces... So i end up putting in a pair of pieces at the same time... that's the main element of my question.

I do this all the time if there has been a long runout from the last opportunity to place gear. But more often if the placements are small or the rock suspect. 
So I guess my bottom line message is: use your TR practice differently on occasion to more accurately simulate what you wAnt to do, and build your confidence and technical skill and level in lower risk situations. 

John I see you posted while I was typing...
You echoed some of my thoughts in your post. 

In addition to all the good advice already given, it also sounds like you could just work more on making a lot of placements and feeling confident in them. If you REALLY feel the need to place two piece of gear right next to each other then it seems like neither one is probably that good. Or else you're just being overly nervous. Maybe place one and then look up for the next REALLY GOOD placement instead of making two crappy ones?

My own strategy is to run it out a bit on easier ground and then place frequently in tougher spots. Remember that there's a trade off in both speed and, more importantly, energy spent every time you stop to fiddle around with gear.