OHM 2

Bad Leader Fall Resulting in serious climber injury. 

On Thursday September the fifth. My climbing partner (6,2 - 180) and I (5,8 - 120) were at Johnny’s wall in the red river gorge. 

This was the 5th day of our trip and we have climbed together for over a year. The only thing different in set up for this trip was the use of an OHM 2 on the first bolt when he climbed to prevent him falling further than needed as a goal of the trip was for him and I to progress into harder grades.

The climbs we wanted warm up on at the tectonics walls were taken so we went further back down the trail. To Johnny’s wall. We climbed 59” drillbitch to warm up and we both cruised it. After completed we moved one climb right to Bethel.

I lead the climb first and pumped out roughly 3 moves past the last bolt. Took a normal fall, rested and finished route without issue, and lowered to ground. 

My buddy set up to lead the climb and we stick clipped the ohm to the first draw. He lead up the climb looking solid and making it to same point of last draw. He shook out and continued on to the chains. 

As he neared the chains, waist probably 3ft away from draws hanging on the anchor, he fell. In most cases I am pulled off the deck. I had a small drooping J of slack on my end, but when he fell the ohm took immediately. The slack on my end didn’t fully go into the system until after he had been stopped.

With the overhang at the top he got the pendulum in addition to the hard catch of the ohm. Resulting in a smack into the wall which he immediately assessed as an injury that would require stitches. 

I lowered him off the climb, he patched his injury, and we were assisted by a nearby party to get our gear and get him out. It took about 30 minutes to fully gather everything and begin the hike out.

He walked out with a stick and his pack. Ascending an impressive amount of stairs for the condition. We went to emergency room where he had to get stitches and he discovered that the knee cap was also fractured.

We looked and saw report of at least one other weird fall from the chains on that route. I cannot help but feel responsible as the belayer. Was not at all anticipating the ohm to behave that way and am also unsure if yarding out additional slack would have actually gone through the ohm device. Also unsure if removing the device entirely would have helped at all either, while the catch would have been significantly softer it would have been a lot closer to the deck.

*** in looking around online I feel like the fact that I was standing 7 feet away from wall and directly inline with first bolt are important details. I was also using a gri gri + in lead mode and we were climbing on the blue bd 9.9 rope.

Curious on any feedback of things I could have done better or differently my buddy is okay but I feel terrible.

I have used all of the various "resistance" devices.

The Ohm 2, by far, is the worst of all for harshness of the catch.  I only used it in the gym, and only used for a short period of time before selling it on.  In that short time, variation in belay position didn't help at all and for my comfort (~250 lbs vs 160) I didn't care to continue the experiments.

That detail aside, the Ohm 2 feeds incredibly smoother than the original version, and doesn't "catch" anywhere near the same amount.

What you didn't mention is how many other falls, and in what conditions, you had previously caught with the Ohm 2 in the system.  Had you tested it out in the gym, or with a practise fall beforehand?  Had you used an Ohm 1 and assumed it to behave the same?

I'm sorry to hear your experience with it, and wish your climbing a speedy recovery.  As a data point for comparison I can confirm the catch is incredibly harsh.

What you didn't mention is how many other falls, and in what conditions, you had previously caught with the Ohm 2 in the system.  Had you tested it out in the gym, or with a practise fall beforehand?  Had you used an Ohm 1 and assumed it to behave the same?

Very excellent point. We had tested the device a bit. He fell off this one 10b and it was a soft catch and he stopped just above a large ledge that if we were not using ohm he would have hit from me being pulled up. I have never used an ohm or similar resistor device before though so I will also acknowledge a great deal of potential responsibility on my end there. 

The largest tested fall though was likely no bigger than 15 total feet and the fall that resulted in injury was closer to 25-30. I think it’s also important to note that I was standing closer to 14 feet and far to the right of the ohm in this “test” fall.

I'm not experienced with falls this big, but if the fall was 25-30 feet, shouldn't there have been enough rope in the system for a soft catch not to be necessary anyway?

I have a lot of time being belayed using the Ohm 1 and if it makes you feel any better, I don't think there is anything you could have done differently belaying.  It may have been prudent to test the falls a little more extensively but oh well.  I have 70-75 pounds on my partner and it generally catches me pretty hard.  Glad your friend is ok.  I do think the Ohm is worth using, but the climber definitely has to be prepared for a harder catch

Never used the ohm 2, but I belay with an ohm often. You absolutely should not be giving hard catches as a belayer on an ohm. As a lighter belayer, we're used to not having to do much, or anything, to give a soft catch. With an ohm, you DO have to be an active belayer, and treat your falling partner (who is heaver) as if they were a lighter climber. That doesn't mean pay out a "J" of slack, it means JUMP. 

Caleb Mattson wrote:

I do think the Ohm is worth using, but the climber definitely has to be prepared for a harder catch

2nd this.

I had about 50 lbs on my son, we used the original ohm. The catches will almost always be hard, regardless the amount of slack you have from your belay device or how far you're standing from the wall. From my personal experience, I've found that steeper climbs will also make the ohm cinch down. Edelrid designed it that way so that the climber doesn't fall too far after the rope starts zipping through it.

The climber using the ohm just has to be prepared for a jolt & has to know how to fall safely. 

Not your fault.

All these replies make me feel like the ohm kinda sucks and is much worse than a pack with some rocks in it. Anybody want to explain the other side here since it clearly gets a lot of usage?

I love the Ohm 1! I'm 110kg so invariably have 30 to 50kg on my belayers. The type of rope is important - old fluffy ropes give a very hard catch. The angle the rope makes through the Ohm directly determines how hard the catch is. So generally its a good idea for the belayer to stand away from the wall when I'm low down with a risk of decking, and closer to the wall when I'm higher up. I do expect a hard catch and try fall accordingly. I used to hate leading in the gym (the routes are dead straight so there's very low friction in the system). I'd often jerk my belayer up to the first bolt - just awful. The Ohm changed the gym for me.

There's a lot to be said for a backpack of rocks or a ground tether if used correctly. I'll usually do this climbing trad when the Ohm isn't appropriate. For a ground tether the belayer needs to know what they're doing and maintain tether tension while still giving a soft catch (if appropriate). Can be done, just a particular nuance.

I find the Ohm demands less of the belayer. The belayer wrinkles are anticipating clips, and remembering to wiggle the Ohm loose after a fall. But most of the success of the Ohm is up to the climber - pulling up slack slowly to prevent Ohm engagement, and good fall trajectory anticipation / situational awareness. I view these nuisances as a small price to pay for piece of mind against decking. The Ohm 1 is very tricky to clip in the correct orientation. I haven't tried an Ohm 2, but the swivel seems to address that problem.

Luke Lalor wrote:

All these replies make me feel like the ohm kinda sucks and is much worse than a pack with some rocks in it. Anybody want to explain the other side here since it clearly gets a lot of usage?

I don't think it's wise to say "the ohm" without recognizing the two versions are radically different.

Part one -- does the Ohm suck?

The Ohm 1, in my experience, is a lot more convenient than a pack full of rocks.  More convenient than a sandbag in the gym.  But, awkward in how quickly it grabs when pulling the rope to clip.

The Ohm 2, in my experience, is not.  It's good at everything except the one thing that's needed.   xkcd.com/937/

Part two -- why would you use something like it?

I don't use the Ohm any more.  I use the Zorro.  Why do I use it?  It's convenient, comfortable, lets the belayer stay fully active (not tied in place to a sandbag) and means I don't need to bring my backpack full of rocks to the gym any more.

My belayer is able to keep me off the ground regardless of whether I use it, but it's way more comfortable with some extra friction in the rope.

If I'm dragging them up the wall on a slabby route it's particularly unpleasant.  I won't deck, but it's no fun for the belayer and closes the door on me being able to project the route.

Hector P wrote:

The Ohm 1 is very tricky to clip in the correct orientation.

I replaced the dogbone on mine with a DMM thick bone.  It says "DMM" in huge letters on one side, and I had the device set so if I could read the letters, it was the right way around.  Problem solved!

Luke Lalor wrote:

All these replies make me feel like the ohm kinda sucks and is much worse than a pack with some rocks in it. Anybody want to explain the other side here since it clearly gets a lot of usage?

I'd agree that it is kind of a pain.  When possible I try to get heavier belayers if I'm planning to work a route so I don't have to deal with some of the Ohm's annoyances.  Like people have said above it's significantly more convenient than a pack with rocks, especially if you are decent with a stick clip (I also pretty much never have issues hanging the Ohm in the correct orientation, probably because I just stick clip it up and down every time).   I can use the Ohm any time I want to instead of having to empty my pack and forage for rocks (if there are any available).  And it does what it's advertised to do incredibly well.  In my situation it's more to protect the belayer from being smashed into the wall/first bolt and it works great.  I've definitely been short roped by it, but even in my most desperate clips I don't think I've ever blown the clip due to the Ohm.

I don't know, I kind of like my ohm. Yeah it's annoying sometimes, but less so than yeeting my belayer into the 1st bolt and my belayer appreciates it more than having to drag around a sandbag. 

I'm thinking about replacing the quicklink with one of the edelrid or petzl micro swivels. Maybe best of both worlds between the 1 and 2?

Adding to c c  comments - smaller belayers are used to not doing anything when belaying, they really need to make adjustments when added friction device is used.

Edelrid published video covering hard vs soft catches. This video demonstrates soft catch using Ohm1 - go to 1m27s if time stamp gets messed up

My anecdotal experience is that thicker ropes make it worse. I will only use any of these devices with an 8.9-9.4

amarius wrote:

Adding to c c  comments - smaller belayers are used to not doing anything when belaying, they really need to make adjustments when added friction device is used.

Edelrid published video covering hard vs soft catches. This video demonstrates soft catch using Ohm1 - go to 1m27s if time stamp gets messed up

Wish they would actually show what the “active belayer” is doing with the ohm in the system, and what they did to produce the “adequate belayer training”

I also REALLY want to know how many times this was replicated, and what the error bars are on those measurements.

I find it really interesting that they are testing the system when the belayer is the same weight as the dummy being dropped, rather than lighter.

I would also love to know how much variation there is, when this is not a straight up/down rope path, when the belayer is standing in different places,  and with different lengths of free fall, too.

Lena chita wrote:

I would also love to know how much variation there is, when this is not a straight up/down rope path, when the belayer is standing in different places,  and with different lengths of free fall, too.

I suspect engineers/crash test dummies wanted to minimize degrees of freedom, they limited number of variables. In this case they set up low friction fall scenario in order to emphasize harshness of hard catch. Since they wanted to measure force on anchor, they had to use 1 draw at the top; since they considered using added/high friction scenario, they had to have 1 more bolt. If they used weight heavier that belayer, soft catch might've become 1st bolt limited - even now belayer flies to the 1st bolt. BTW, I saw a reference somewhere that simulant rigid mass produces harsher impacts on top gear than floppy equivalent weight human. I remember one of my belayers complaining that I fall heavy! ;)

Agree that having at least 3 catches for each case would've been more interesting.

Agree with C C and amarius. Lighter belayers need to learn how to actually time a catch on the Ohm and not rely on their normal method of leaving a soft J and not moving...which does not mean giving extra slack, it means dynamically feeding rope on a fall.

If this were a heavier belayer who hurt a lighter climber by not giving a dynamic belay, this advice would be unanimous. 

I have noticed that the hardness of an Ohm catch differs a ton with how much slack the belayer has out below the Ohm before a fall, and with the angle of the second bolt. This variance and several  smashed toes on hard catches made me ditch my Ohm for a Zaed which has been a lot more natural. 

I appreciate the feedback from everyone. In low angle terrain in addition to the ohm as well as inexperience with the device. I elected not to jump. However, I do feel like if I had jumped despite personal impacts it would have resulted in a different situation. Concluding in my personal and majority responsibility for this event. Thank you all for your feedback and experience!