Good alternative to a fixed eye carabiner on staggered open systems

Saw this video on YouTube and he points out a good use for these anchors made by Raumer. Can anyone think of any reason this wouldn’t be the optimal system? Prevents the unclipping problem if the top bolt fails and is still an open system as long as the threads don’t lock up.

https://youtu.be/UTqtcMhEF4k look at around minute 8

Why not just have two bolts side by side, with links and hooks? These offset anchors are trendy, but they don't really make sense in open systems. Even in closed systems, the entire vertical anchor setup feels like a fad, there's really no good reason for it, and a lot of reasons to just use horizontal setups - especially since horizontal setups have been the standard in the U.S. for decades, and messing with the standard setup of a life safety system like anchors should have a VERY strong reason for change.

Greg Barnes wrote:

Why not just have two bolts side by side, with links and hooks? These offset anchors are trendy, but they don't really make sense in open systems. Even in closed systems, the entire vertical anchor setup feels like a fad, there's really no good reason for it, and a lot of reasons to just use horizontal setups - especially since horizontal setups have been the standard in the U.S. for decades, and messing with the standard setup of a life safety system like anchors should have a VERY strong reason for change.

I agree completely. I only use vertical anchors when the rock requires it due to bad rock quality. I figure this is probably better than the two mussy system in the vertical.

I might be of a different opinion but I agree with the bad rock comment. I don’t think it matters. There are some environments where the rock forms in horizontal bands so placing two bolts horizontally means that if the rock fails the whole anchor would fail.

The main reason I think vertical makes sense is in perma draw environments. If there is a perma all the way up the route there is no reason to clip two bolts at an anchor since you are redundant already and the anchor can just be chain from one bolt to the other. So it saves on hardware costs since you only need one mussy/lower off. The higher bolt can also be placed for a future perma, extension or linkup. Psychosomatic and technorigine are prime examples of how the anchor is kinda in the way because there are three chains/cables hanging in space (when it could be one mussy, a chain between two bolts and a perma.

I think vertical anchors are trendy for a reason. The principle has been proven across the pond for decades. 

I’m a convert from traditional horizontal anchors for single pitch stuff**most of the time**. Rams horns and a lower backup captive eye carabiner is amazing.

Greg Barnes wrote:

..... the entire vertical anchor setup feels like a fad, there's really no good reason for it, and a lot of reasons to just use horizontal setups - .....

Vertical anchors do not twist the rope as like horizontal anchors are prone to do. 

Alex Morano wrote:

I agree completely. I only use vertical anchors when the rock requires it due to bad rock quality. I figure this is probably better than the two mussy system in the vertical.

On a similar note, I often found the vertical setups to be better in the horizontally bedded sandstone of the SE. Even if the rock seems bomber, I always felt better knowing both bolts weren't in the same "basket" (potentially loose block) so to speak.

That said, my go-to is the simple setup as Greg suggests (but not with single rings -- I agree that twists the shit out of ropes, and can be harder to pull). However, I tend to tailor almost every anchor as needed to fit the spot in which they are placed, with the end goal of having two clippy things side by side.

Mr Rogers wrote:

I think vertical anchors are trendy for a reason. The principle has been proven across the pond for decades. 

I’m a convert from traditional horizontal anchors for single pitch stuff**most of the time**. Rams horns and a lower backup captive eye carabiner is amazing.

Problem is that you can still have the follower move back and forth and if the rope runs across the lower backup captive eye carabiner, it can clip in, leaving the system non-redundant. Like this (but with a rams horn up top):

Double J wrote:

Vertical anchors do not twist the rope as like horizontal anchors are prone to do. 

That's really not a good enough reason to mess with basic anchor setup.

Greg Barnes wrote:

Problem is that you can still have the follower move back and forth and if the rope runs across the lower backup captive eye carabiner, it can clip in, leaving the system non-redundant. Like this (but with a rams horn up

Raumer quick link as posted first should help

Other reasons for staggered anchors include less chain which is cheaper lighter. Galvanized chain leaves stripes on the rock killing lichen.

Greg Barnes wrote:

That's really not a good enough reason to mess with basic anchor setup.

So what is the advantage of horizontal?

I have seen that posted before about the potential failure mode. I have tried my damndest to recreate it on various anchors, horn, carabiner setups and couldn't get it to happen. Not to say it can't.

On a similar note have been top roping on mussy hooks, flicked my my looser rope around a feature it was stuck on and found it unclipped one of the hooks by looping over the nose and un clipping like a back clip. Should we not use mussy hooks anymore?

"Equalized" vert is my standard for my own routes. Staggered vert really is my 3rd/ last choice. I love the simplicity of the single pigtail. Especially with the not shown glue ins with chain from BP.  Like Nathan mentioned, horizontal spacing needs to be big to be certain you won't create fractures in quartzite and sandstone. That means long extensions or rope twist.

That equalized vert setup is really nice, and definitely appropriate in certain circumstances - namely when you are concerned about horizontal fracture planes, and you have lower traffic routes (or someone frequently changing out worn pigtails).

However, the standard in the U.S. is two horizontally positioned bolts. This is what climbers are used to. That alone is a VERY good reason not to use vertical setups in general - we have all seen how often gumbies screw up even basic setups.

A major advantage of horizontal setups (to answer Jim) is that climbers just throw one quickdraw on each bolt and lower off. The last climber cleans. This is standard practice in the U.S. and done thousands of times daily. Another advantage is that at very high traffic crags, single point lower-offs get worn down very quickly. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not enamored with horizontal setups - I have placed vertical anchors, and I would be arguing for vertical setups if vertical anchors had been the standard for the past 50+ years in the U.S. and someone was trying to popularize horizontal setups. But "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a good summary of the current "fad" of vertical anchor use in the U.S.

Edit to reply to Mr. Rogers below (dumb MP posting rules...):

Mr Rogers wrote:

This seems like a silly reason to not do something.

What? That makes no sense. It's an excellent reason to not do something - if the alternative is having confused climbers messing up their anchors and someone getting hurt or worse.

Simple question: assume a newer climber is used to getting to the anchor of a sport route, clipping 2 draws into the horizontally setup bolts, and lowering off. Now that same climber, with zero experience with other anchors, gets to a vertically setup anchor. They have 2 short quickdraws left (yep, lots of newer climbers have zero extra draws and nothing else). What do they do? Is their follower well protected when top-roping, or is the follower relying on a single carabiner with a who-knows-probably-ready-to-unclip backup?

Again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Well with lowereing the standard , which is a very new thing that people are learning, there are lots of broke anchors around. Adding length to horizontal anchors has become a signficant part of my rebolting work. Vert is here to stay also. Wont take that long for people to become accustomed to it.

Greg Barnes wrote:

That equalized vert setup is really nice, and definitely appropriate in certain circumstances - namely when you are concerned about horizontal fracture planes, and you have lower traffic routes (or someone frequently changing out worn pigtails).

However, the standard in the U.S. is two horizontally positioned bolts. This is what climbers are used to. That alone is a VERY good reason not to use vertical setups in general - we have all seen how often gumbies screw up even basic setups.

A major advantage of horizontal setups (to answer Jim) is that climbers just throw one quickdraw on each bolt and lower off. The last climber cleans. This is standard practice in the U.S. and done thousands of times daily. Another advantage is that at very high traffic crags, single point lower-offs get worn down very quickly. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not enamored with horizontal setups - I have placed vertical anchors, and I would be arguing for vertical setups if vertical anchors had been the standard for the past 50+ years in the U.S. and someone was trying to popularize horizontal setups. But "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a good summary of the current "fad" of vertical anchor use in the U.S.

This seems like a silly reason to not do something. If it's something you would be advocating if it was not for, its the way its been done, it seems like maybe the vertical anchor should be the new standard for the next 50 years perhaps....
....Its not like we have euros falling off sport climbs when they come to the US because they aren't used to horizontal anchors and visa-versa.

Edit:
Greg,
is there evidence that vertical anchors are more dangerous other than personal opinion? I understand your personal preference, but I firmly believe it if they are so confusing and dangerous we would hear about it.... instead there is more and more vertical/offset anchors being put in daily.
Why do you think that is?
Because we're all just trending to that style without thought? of course not.
I find in most single pitch applications the vertical anchor (with horns) to be superior for a menagerie of reasons and I did not come to that conclusion blindly or hap hazardly.
I will agree to disagree, of course if you have some sweet sweet data to share to back up your stance, I would love to read it.

I also want to make it quite clear, I put in plenty of horizontal "classic American" anchors too, they have their place in the bolters quiver without a shadow of doubt.

I will finish off this edit with some props to you, I think you have done an immense amount of work that helps keep climbers safe and I respect you for that immensely. Thank you for your work.

I would be far more concerned with a gumby not knowing how to use a pigtail than getting stumped by a vertical setup.

Jim Titt wrote:

So what is the advantage of horizontal?

Hanging belays on a multi pitch routes (sometimes). Imagine the junk show if El Cap belay anchors were vertically oriented and all that shit was hanging from one point. 

We are talking about single pitch lower-off anchors.

I agree with Nate and Greg. Horizontal is less of a cluster to clip into, and probably more encourages people to use their own draws for the majority of top roping or lower-offs, until being ready to clean the anchors. The only advantage I can see of vertical vs. horizontal is the options for quality rock to put the bolts in to.

Why are people so worried about equalizing bolts like they do a trad anchor, anyway? Those things are individually more bomber than the knot you're tied into. 

Maybe people from Europe are more stoked on people constantly top-roping and lowering off the fixed hardware?

Captive eye large thick SS quicklink seems nice, but not worth the extra money to me. 

I originally was leaving my anchor's lower quicklinks loose so climbers could unscrew them, drop their rope in, and descend. Then crap like dirt started to get in them; and they couldn't open or tighten easily anymore. Then another developer shared his reason for tightening all his bottom quicklinks: citing an incident where a quicklink unscrewed open (basically a single quicklink being rappelled during canyoning). Though very rare to happen to 2 quicklinks on an anchor, The fact I'd get back to my anchors and see a QL not tighten all the way and requires a wrench to tighten it was all the more reason to just firmly tigthen all the QL. So I just followed suit at this crag and tighten down all my quicklinks. I seek more economical anchor styles where a bight can be passed through. SS carabiners are nice for convenience, but cost more money. 

I like consistency at the current crag I'm developing at, and us small group of developers coooperate with each other to see that it is so. We primarily seek to make horizonal anchors, (and it's probably 95% of all the anchors I've come across in the country of Taiwan I'm living in that have anchor horizontal anchors...which I don't know how the hell is possilble that developers are seriously finding "safe" "perfect rock" to pull of horizontal anchors all the time...it makes me want to ask them questions).  Pretty much all our sport climbers carry just draws. If they arrived at a Fench-style/staggered bolt/vertical anchor, then all sorts of weird non-ideal stuff starts happening.  So I spend the extra money on SS 316 chain to have all the bottom mallions/rings equalized so there is always point for them to toss their 2 opposed quickdraws in. Once they start getting the additionally the surprise unequalized vertical bolts, then the additional time to bring slings, or carry locking quickdraws or whatever starts come into play....all in all...it amounts to more time spent at an anchor with beginners questioning the "safety" of lowering/rappeling off a single point, even though it's backed up. 

There's still even questioning about the safety about vertical anchors (made equalized to a single point) because most climbers haven't come across a beefy single 10mm stainless steel ring and see it as a single point, rather than 2 bolts/rings/mallion/etc, even tough they're being belayed on 1 carabiner, one rope, etc.  I suppose it's more of a matter of education and exposure to these sort of anchors, but beginner outdoor lead climbers and other less experienced climbers are still lacking in this regard. 

So here's how my anchor decisions go: Seek horizontal anchor bolt placements. And if they're too far away for each other (like +30cm), add some chain to each bolt so the angle is reduced when they toss on their QDs.  And if the rock quality doesn't lend to horizontal anchor bolts, then vertical bolts it is. And then I'll add whatever measure of chain necessary to get the bottom mallions/rings equalized with each other. 

 But the crazy thing is is I will still overhear beginner outdoor climbers (while at the anchor) yell to more experienced climbers what to do because the bolts are at different heights. 

So yeah, it's either cater to the beginners and majority of climbers here expectation to arrive at a horizontal anchor, or to an anchor where there is some equalized horizontal point ----And in the end, they setup their anchors faster, and clean the routes faster..and don't need to yell on spot to other experienced climber what the heck to do .

 I personally am slowly making an effort to educate the climbers about what to do when they come across vertical anchors (that aren't equalized in any fashion), and install few at some crags. But yeah, I don't think I'll reach the majority of climbers here. 

The reality is each country has different access to certain types of hardware. And most developers have a budget. If the local climbing community wants special hardware beyond the safe/sufficient hardware the developer is installing/replacing, they better be forking up some donations then. But yeah, I beileve developers should still be sensitive to the mentaility of the local climbers and cater to that. But it would also be productive to expose them to new things too that they might encounter in other countries.

Examples of my anchors:

Left side: most climbers know what to do  vs    Right side: climber's haven't learned to trust a single bomber anchor ring yet (combined with a 10mm mallion tightened down w/threadlocker,)