Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Porkchop_express
Trad climber
Gunks, NY
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 07:03pm PT
|
Hey MisterE,
I looked at the knot you mentioned- that is very clever! I would like to try new things like this but I have to get more confident with various tricks before I start mixing them in on climbs.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 08:01pm PT
|
I've never seen anyone use it.
Of course in Yosemite, it's not very common to worry about the anchor failing. Seems like an issue for sandstone and ice climbers.
PEace
Karl
|
|
Zander
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 08:16pm PT
|
I use the equalette most of the time. It is much more adaptable than the cordalette because you can reach pieces that are farther apart than with a cordalette tied with a loop of similar size. So for me that means it is also faster. If instead of tying it in a loop if you leave one side with two ends with loops it is more adaptable still. You chuck in your three or four pieces and you hold the center point where you want it and tie in the farthest away piece with one of the loops, then the farthest piece on the other side, etc.
IMHO the defect with the equalette is that there is limited redundency at the power point. If one of the strands at the power point breaks or is cut the biners there can slide along the strands in either direction. Sure there are knots in the way but... If the pro on one side should also blow you are not tied in at all. I have thought of some ways to put more loops in the middle but it just hasn't seemed worth it.
The cordalette knot is also just too bulky. I'm sticking with the equalette.
Zander
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 08:28pm PT
|
I know people like this stuff and if it works for you that's the key.
But for me it's all just so much encumbrance.
When I am trad climbing on clean rock, I carry six to eight slings, use them judiciously on lead, use the remaining slings in the anchor, often tie-in directly with the rope at the anchor.
Pure old-school.
I never have trouble with anchoring.
My main concern is that the leader is free as possible of dangling jive: it seems I'm always jumping into some wide crack on lead and I just don't want that junk getting in way. I also like to be light on lead.
Get up, get in, top out, get down.
This ain't no disco.
But that's just me.
Less is more.
|
|
Porkchop_express
Trad climber
Gunks, NY
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 08:51pm PT
|
So if you just use slings, do you use multiple slings on one anchor, or just equalize a long sling? If the latter option is the case, how do you make it work when placements are farther apart?
|
|
Zander
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:01pm PT
|
Hi Tarbuster,
I have started to tie in with the rope more and more. It is fast and easy.
But
My understanding is that one of the main reasons, after equalization, you tie in with a cordalette or equalette is so that if you have an emergency and you need to escape the belay you don't need to rerig the whole belay. So I try to keep that in mind. Maybe you, Largo and others with more experience can comment on that aspect of the belay setup.
Take care,
Zander
|
|
G_Gnome
Trad climber
In the mountains... somewhere...
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:02pm PT
|
I'm 100% with Tarbaby on this issue. I see people spending so much time equalizing 3 perfect cams that each are good enough to hold any fall that they end up benighted. What kind of way is that to climb? Make it simple, make it fast, make it safe. The only time I worry about all that equalization crap is if my gear is marginal, and avoiding marginal gear is my top priority so that means I don't belay off marginal gear very damn often.
|
|
wildone
climber
GHOST TOWN
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:06pm PT
|
You just said a mouthful Tarbustier. I couldn't agree more. As previously mentioned, I belay off my "stance" 90% of the time, treating the anchor primarily as a backup. The other 10% of the time, I'll do like Doug and use my reverso for an extended, comfortable belay.
I carry a 20 foot piece of cord, and am judicious with my use of double and single length 8mm slings, just in case. Simple as hell, is the name of the game on my anchors, and if I have the options of two "dumptruck" pieces in separate systems and one "finagley" piece, I'll eliminate the finagely piece and just go with two. Of course, this also depends on the difficulty of the terrain I just crossed, and the ability of my second. But I digress. I guess, for me, there is no "rule", and I just choose the simplest, quickest, most failsafe anchor I can.
I've used an equalizing 8, but that's as complex as I'll go.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:10pm PT
|
Good questions.
I mix and match and QUICKLY: a long sling here, a bit of extra rope there for that third piece that's a bit of a ways away, this cam links to that nut, maybe with just one extra 'biner to get them equalized (push/pull the cam a tad to tighten things up),
Then double 'biners (reversed/opposed) where I clip to them both (again, if necessary, rope goes out to the third piece, maybe on a clove pitch, I cinch it tight to equalize with the other two pieces) DONE.
Always pretty darn well equalized whatever the case.
Analytical, Adaptive, Artful.
Rarely do I get all of the pieces with a single sling. My slings are shoulderlength only; no double runners.
The belay escape!!!
I can teach it, you are going to have to sue me if I can't effect one to save your asss...
To my mind these more complicated anchoring systems: cordalette, equalette, leatherette (kidding), are more about big walls due to complex anchoring and hauling, alpinism and the like.
|
|
MisterE
Trad climber
My Inner Nut
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:21pm PT
|
Agreed - the sandstone is a bit more finicky, Since leaving the solid rock of the West, I really find equalizing to be a larger issue.
That being said, I usually don't use a 3-point anchor unless the two pieces are not A1
Erik
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 09:31pm PT
|
No packs: maybe, MAYBE the second will have one)...
No locking 'biners.
No nut tool!
Haha: a nut tool is like a dagger, waiting to stab you on a pendulum fall, and in-gloriously while FOLLOWING. (Plus they make a very unaesthetic, clanking noise).
Modern climbers often lack nutcraft skills: put it in nicely but don't fully set it real hard. The follower needs to employ some ingenuity to remove nuts; don't just yank straight up on it immediately. Coax it out.
MAYBE carry a nut tool on a devious, nut intensive, super committing very long route were gear attrition could be an issue.
Maybe a second rope; maybe double rope technique.
|
|
wildone
climber
GHOST TOWN
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:17pm PT
|
Roy, baby. You're missing the point of the nut tool. Mine has paid for itself 100 times over in cleaning very nice booty cams!
Maybe I've used one on a nut 2 or 3 times!
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 22, 2008 - 10:18pm PT
|
Fact is, when I used to trad climb a lot, I usually tied in with the climbing rope. I always made sure - so far as I could - that the individual pieces in the anchor were totally bomber, so equalization wasn't a big issue.
But when I'm writing a book for beginners, I can't be so cavalier, nor can I trust beginners to set good primary placements. Add to this the tests that Sterling did (plus Rich Goldstone's mathmatical model, which the testing bore out) that shows a cordelette does not eqaualize worth a sh#t if the arms are of diferent lengths (virtually always), and we had to start looking for other rigging systems to recommend.
It all gets to be a bit much, given my background (started off in '70 with pitons). I sometimes feel like saying: Just slot a few good pieces, clip off with the lead rope and get on with it.
And as mentioned, I too usually belay off my legs (given a good stance), and whenever possible, weight the anchor very little.
Two things about this whole anchor discussion that stand out after all these threads about this and that: first, a factor 2 fall in the field doesn't generate nearly the same forces as it does in the lab (for various reasons - mainly flex and give in the system), and two, hard falls directly onto a belay anchor are exceedingly rare.
If I've learned anything from all this writing and studying of anchors, it's that the top piece of pro is the most important thing in the entire roped safety system. If you're wanting the belay anchor to save the day (to serve, so to speak, as the top piece of pro), you're going about it all wrong.
JL
|
|
MisterE
Trad climber
My Inner Nut
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:28pm PT
|
I have always wondered about the sliding .vs tied-off cordalettes.
Never liked the tied-off's, body shifts in uncomfortable stances always threw the weighting way off. I always am willing to trust my multiple pieces over shifting weight on to one piece.
Of course, with the newer belay devices, one can belay directly off the anchors, which changes the load.
The sketchy lead on a sketchy anchor equalizing issue is another matter altogether, static or dynamic?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:29pm PT
|
"But when I'm writing a book for beginners, I can't be so cavalier, nor can I trust beginners to set good primary placements."
Copy that JL!
What about that widget that Trango sells?
It's like a preconfigured thingalette.
Not necessarily as a direct solution to suit your goal, but as an aspect of the discussion...
|
|
wildone
climber
GHOST TOWN
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:38pm PT
|
John, great last post. I very much appreciate the small insights you give as to what systems you use in the field as you have millions more pitches under your belt than I. I'm sure, writing an educational book intended for intermediates is a daunting task indeed.
Whether I use an equalette or not is not a measure of your success with the issue in my opinion. You ask some hard questions and I appreciate the time and energy you've put into the subject, and all the discussion it generates here. This is why I love this place.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:41pm PT
|
I totally get the challenge of the O. P.
The minimalist old-school stuff is fairly like riding bareback.
Sure you have to teach expediency, but not at the risk of reduced inclusiveness and inconsistent success with all the variables which your student or reader will present in the face of their attempts at executing a system. (This is probably going to happen with the artful old-school approach AND with the staid somekind-of-alette approach, but probably less so with the latter).
The prescription must have a consistent format and provide great flexibility, all the while grounded in a simple recipe.
Rube Goldberg it is dadeo … for beginners.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 22, 2008 - 10:41pm PT
|
"The sketchy lead on a sketchy anchor equalizing issue is another matter altogether, static or dynamic?"
An experieneced climber will very rarely face a situation where A), the best individual placements you can get in fashioning the anchor are themselves piss poor, and B) the leader must run the rope off a sh#t belay anchor and can't get a decent nut or any pro in for X amount of feet, risking a whipper directly onto the sh#t anchor (I've faced this situation numerous times but ALMOST NEVER on climbing where I thought I might fall).
I think the above was the situation when that team got cleaned off the DNB a few years back - crap anchor and no pro just above. Anyhow, I think that here and perhaps (I don't actually know) only here is where SRENE and complicated rigging techniques are absolutely called or.
JL
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 10:59pm PT
|
If you're wanting the belay anchor to save the day (to serve, so to speak, as the top piece of pro), you're going about it all wrong.
That pretty much captures it, now how you convey that to a neophite in print?
Not a clue!
|
|
ben_heavner
Trad climber
Anchorage, AK
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2008 - 11:13pm PT
|
Hi JL -
I've been climbing a few years now, and have a couple editions of your anchors book. I've dinked around with the equalette, but end up coming back to simpler things when I'm leading.
I did think the most recent edition of the anchors book really suffered from the loss of pictures of lots of anchors and your discussion of relative merits. There was so much equalette theory that lots of the pictures of "this is a good placement" or "this is not" were cut.
For a beginning leader, I think lots of pictures to study are more important than lots of text. Please bring them back for the newbies!
-bh
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!