|
Post by jimnelson on Feb 16, 2013 13:54:41 GMT -8
Currently the Seattle Basic Alpine Climbing Course has a set-up in the basement where a sandbag is substituted for a climber. In the past we have located the belayer approx, 15' horizontal distance from the sandbag. From the bag, the rope went straight up to the ceiling thru a pulley, back to the ground thru a pulley, then horizontal to the belayer.
We're currently in the process of locating anchors in the floor near the sandbag (not under the bag). Moving the belayer toward the sandbag makes a lot of sense based on how we climb. Think of the sandbag location as the wall or mountain.
Moving the belayer towards the climb has raised a couple of additional questions.
1) Should the belayer be sitting or standing?
2) Should the belayer be tied-in tight to the anchors in the floor?
|
|
|
Post by geneyore on Feb 17, 2013 5:29:29 GMT -8
Good questions!
|
|
|
Post by Tony Tsuboi on Feb 18, 2013 11:13:08 GMT -8
It will be more common to belay from a standing position. IMO we should teach from that scenario. Position and stance are important. because we teach from the alpine scenario, the belayer will be anchored. There, it'll be important for the belayer to be inline with the anchor. Stance should be one foot forward and braced for a fall. Regarding being taut to the anchor, this is a practice that has a big downside. Catching a leader fall while taut to the anchor dramatically increases the impact force on the top most piece of pro that catches the fall. I know the Mountaineers have traditionally taught students to be taught to the anchor to keep them from loosing the brake. Personally, I think it's far more important for the belayer to be attentive, inline to the direction of pull and prepared to catch a fall with proper stance and position. The energy absorbtion of being tugged forward is a good thing. From this perspective, the tie-in to the anchor is more about keeping the belayer secured and from tumbling off the mountain. www.facebook.com/#!/notes/tony-tsuboi/belay-lecture/10151520560122578
|
|
|
Post by jimnelson on Feb 19, 2013 17:39:20 GMT -8
I looked at your link and wanted to understand the "inline with the anchor" part better. Anchor Belayer Climber.
Many times the belay anchor is located in front of the belayer, maybe chest height or so, if there is that nice option. Trying to understand the importance of the the inline component?
|
|
|
Post by nicklyle on Feb 20, 2013 11:23:19 GMT -8
The importance of lining things up has to do with preventing the belayer from being radically relocated and possibly losing grip on the belay in catching a fall. Imagine your hand being rammed into a sharp corner. When to be on a taught leash to the anchor and when to add some dynamic catching to the belay are a judgement call, which sometimes might be too sophisticated for a beginner. Practicing catching harder falls helps give the student a sense of how they get pulled around by the forces involved. How about students testing catches both with taught and loose tether to anchor? With reasonable forces, doing it both ways will be educational. Nick
|
|
|
Post by gregggagliardi on Feb 28, 2013 14:43:17 GMT -8
Students should practice with the belay anchor in front of them as well as behind them. Front belay anchors are common rock climbing anchors, especially in multi-pitch rock climbs. Along with this practice, students need to learn a belay escape technique that works with both set-ups; MMOH (Munter Mule knot Overhand) to tie off the device and with a second tie-off to the friction knot on a MMOH and final tie off to the anchor with another MMOH. The advantages are: (1) a common technique that will work with all belay escapes (including belays off the anchor master point learned in the intermediate course) (2) flexibility for conversion of the system to a lower or raise for subsequent rescue. In this latter regard we would do well to consider a question that one basic student asked me after he successfully escaped a seated belay (anchor behind him) using the method taught in Freedom: What do I do next? Given his current state of skill his options were obviously limited to somehow getting additional help for the injured, hanging, hopefully still conscious rope leader. Hopefully another rope team with folks who know small party rescue would be within shouting distance.
Gregg J. Gagliardi
|
|
|
Post by jimnelson on Feb 28, 2013 15:38:39 GMT -8
The location of the anchor definitely changes a belay escape scenario. The above ground level location for one.
Are we practicing this with the less likely belayer location? Not that we always have the option, but assuming good anchors at both heights; what is a good belay anchor location height wise? Is it different for belaying a leader or second?
I'm going to work on getting my MMOH nice and tight to the anchor, because my working space is likely to be limited. Thanks Gregg!
|
|
|
Post by loniuchytil on Mar 6, 2013 22:11:11 GMT -8
1. As a lead climber I want my belayer always standing so that they can move in the event that something falls at them from the route, so that they can adjust as needed to the lead climbers position. Also if the leader falls they will have some input as to how soft or hard the catch would be and they would not be pulled across the ground on their bottoms with no control over where the are going. If you are belaying the follower this is a different senerio and sitting would be more appropriate. 2. The only situation I would allow for myself to be anchored into the floor would be if I was on the edge of a ravine or some feature that I might get pulled off and into or if I was up on a tower and might get pulled off during a lead fall. These are the only times I can imagine that this would be needed??? I always want to ability to give a dynamic belay and be able to move out of the way of the falling climber or anything else coming at me from above.
|
|
|
Post by gregggagliardi on Mar 7, 2013 10:08:26 GMT -8
A lot of leaders feel the same way. Belayers ought to feel the same way once they know the fact. Escaping the belay with MMOH knots is the way to go since it allows the belayer to stand and move well away from the anchor regardless of whether it is behind the belayer or in front of the belayer.
After the first pitch the second belay position can even be set-up well below the the main belay anchor for the second pitch. The belayer needs only a small anchor to secure their position below the main anchor. The leader's first piece of pro above the belayer (the main anchor) is literally the the first piece of pro for the second pitch. John Long would call that anchor the Jesus nut; Craig Connally presents it in his book under the heading "the importance of number 1".
Here is the importance of setting it up this way (when it is possible to do so)
Assume that the belayer is secured 10 ft below the main anchor and the leader clips the main anchor and falls 10 ft above the main anchor. This would be at worst a factor 1 fall. If the leader falls on 10 feet of rope 10 feet above the belayer who is located at the main anchor this is now close to a factor 2 fall, some of which are forceful enough to pull out the entire main anchor.
The same principle works with belaying the leader on snow and ice belay anchors, which are often less bombproof then rock anchors
|
|
|
Post by nicklyle on Mar 16, 2013 9:08:08 GMT -8
An additional reason for making the main anchor double as the first clip for the leader is that the pulley effect will put maximum loads on this first piece of pro in the event of a lead fall.
|
|
|
Post by dougsanders on May 16, 2013 9:58:19 GMT -8
The original question related to basic alpine climbing instruction in the Clubhouse basement.
With respect to sitting or standing, I support teaching both.
The standing position is most common for top-rope belays at course outings, also at the Clubhouse exterior south wall and climbing gyms.
On alpine climbing the basic student will encounter sitting belays and needs to know how to do them. The sitting position will be encountered on multi-pitch routes, flat benches, flat summits, low 'roof' belay locations, edge locations, and for the sitting hip snow anchor. On long or strenuous climbs sitting allows rest.
With respect to tying in tight to floor anchors, I am not sure if the question has to do with 'tying in tight' or 'floor anchors?'
The student is primarily learning the mechanics of belaying and arresting a fall. It is stressful and takes practice. The floor anchors are a bit more in line to the applied force to the belayer than wall anchors.
The basic student needs to be tight to the anchor.
More advanced climbers can be taught situational variations. The Climbing Code says we anchor all belays. We teach SRENE anchors. The basic student memorizes these. Deviations, mixed messages, are likely to lead to cognitive dissonance ultimately undermining one or more of Freedom's/Instructor/Mountaineers credibility.
|
|
|
Post by jimnelson on May 17, 2013 10:05:23 GMT -8
mostly I agree. regarding tight to the anchor, not so sure. What about belaying a leader? Maybe we should rethink whether we should be teaching basic students to belay a lead climber for steep rock climbing?
|
|
|
Post by gregggagliardi on May 20, 2013 15:42:55 GMT -8
What can we realistically expect basic climbers to be able to do when they are belaying a leader on a multi-pitch climb ? I don't think they learn to do much more than respond to and follow climbing signals and catch a fall. As it currently stands, they are only taught to escape the belay and tie off a fall if they are seated with the anchor behind them. If the anchor is in front as it is on many climbs, or they are standing at some distance from the anchor, they won't know how to escape the belay and tie off the leader. Of course, as competent belayers, they should be asking a deeper question: now that I have caught the fall what should I do next? Escaping the belay and tying off the leader is only one option and it is a deadly one if the leader is unconscious and supported by nothing more than the harness. If the other climbing teams are 1 to 2 pitches above or below the team with the fallen climber (common on basic rock climbs), what should the student belayer do? What if it is noisy and no one is carrying a radio? Perhaps our basic students need a lot more training than we give them; or alternately we need to restrict basic rock climbs to just those very simple rock climbs that require only the very minimal skills that the student has learned.
|
|
|
Post by jimnelson on May 21, 2013 13:23:56 GMT -8
"What can we realistically expect basic climbers to be able to do when they are belaying a leader on a multi-pitch climb?"
I would want them to understand the differences between belaying a leader, and belaying a second (or top-rop).
The Seattle Basic Course is teaching them that a belay is a belay. At least that's my sense. How does a belayer who is tied in tight give a dynamic belay?
Fine if they are guided clients, but I don't see how we are teaching them what we say we are teaching. Competent to belay a leader for a multi pitch alpine rock climb.
Also a belayer who is tied in tight may have difficulty dodging falling objects, or moving to a better position? In Seattle the belayer has been taught that they must be sitting, which also makes it difficult to move quickly.
|
|
|
Post by nicklyle on May 21, 2013 19:23:56 GMT -8
The awkward truth is that it takes a while to learn all the subtleties and various techniques that make for a skilled belayer. There is also a wide range of experience and ability among students. You have to start somewhere. Basic climbs are easy for some, hard for others. Sometimes a basic student is paired with an experienced mentor. Sometimes they may find themselves belaying a green intermediate rope lead. The truth is that one cookie cutter curriculum will not be perfect for everybody and every situation, and it will take time for a new climber to get the experience they need to understand the contexts where various techniques will fit best.
While it makes sense to keep things relatively simple for beginners, simple should never degenerate into simplistic. I believe that one should teach students to do things the way a skilled climber really does things.
Belaying a leader who might be in danger of a factor 1 fall, particularly if the belayer is in danger of being jerked off their stance, is a time the belayer needs to think about keeping a taught anchor. In another situation, with lots of rope out and pro in place, a more dynamic catch or the ability to dodge rock fall might be more important than a taught anchor. Either way you can often get the best compromise with a standing belay, allowing the belayer the ability to move around with the possibility of keeping a taught line to the anchor at the same time.
The belayers best body position is always situational, depending on the location and design of the anchor, the need to see other climbers, ease of rope handling, the size of the belayer, the nature of the terrain, the need to shelter the belayer, etc. The beginner will learn all of this in time, by climbing with good mentors.
I learned to climb with hip belays; body position was critical in those days! Sitting down often made the most sense with a hip belay. Using a belay device gives the freedom to use a much wider variety of stances with the ability to let the energy of a fall flow right through to the anchor.
I guess the question I would ask is: are we teaching Basic students the techniques we would use if we were in their situation? We should be.
|
|