|
gds
Dec 14, 2004, 5:53 PM
Post #126 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
In reply to: This is situational. The probability of running into anyone under the age of 47 at any of Curt's favorite bouldering areas is infinitesimal. The young hotties stick to overhanging limestone and problems with holds. -Jay
Jay- you are showing your age and inexperience in this area. There are plenty of 47+ hotties--my wife included!!!
|
|
|
|
|
rangertau
Dec 14, 2004, 5:53 PM
Post #127 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 50
|
Just insanity. Just like free-soloing. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 14, 2004, 6:00 PM
Post #128 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Curt,
Again, I've used this technique for lowering loads on job sites for years - it's fine there as there is always a constant load on the rope and no one's life is on the line. Again, for the reasons I stated this is patently unsafe as a belay method in all but idealized conditions - if you lose your balance or your foot slips for any reason you will not hold a fall, period.
Dingus,
Again, I'm not dinging Curt on creativity or initiative, only on the technical merit of the technique. I don't agree with the analogy to an alpine boot/axe belay - the boot in that instance locks/secures the anchor - it isn't the anchor. Again, the foot is an inadequate anchor by itself secured soley by stance/weight with no recourse if you lose balance. I'm not attacking Curt's experience or capabilities either, simply stating that, in this case, the technical merits of the proffered technique are lacking to such a degree that I don't believe it should encouraged in anyway - let alone proffered as any kind of legitimate "new belay technique". To be completely honest I'm surprised you'd encourage this kind of thing from a purely technical perspective - the motivation and initiative, yes, the resulting technique no...
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
Dec 14, 2004, 6:01 PM
Post #129 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
Great thread Curt. I'm sure you're loving every minute of it! I love the number of people responding to this like it is supposed to be THE way to belay not understanding that it is just one more trick in the bag. :D
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 14, 2004, 6:10 PM
Post #130 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: To be honest I'm surprised you'd encourage this...
I don't think I encouraged it at all. I said it was a good rope trick to know.
Scenario: bunch of climbers at a crag are top roping, sharing ropes and belayers. Some dude starts up a line, gets a little ways up and oops! No belayer (THAT's never happened!). The secure climber is suddenly sketch and screaming "I'm going to fall!"
Now I know of a VERY FAST way to make them at least a tad safer than they were when the rope was laying on the ground.
I doubt I would use this on purpose, but in my case (like the vast majority in this thread I'll warrant), I didn't have this rope trick the day before yesterday as I didn't know about it.
I equally appreciate your cautionary notes. Thanks.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 14, 2004, 6:11 PM
Post #131 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: At this point, I have infinitely more experience with this belay method than you do. Curt that would be incorrect. comparing your experience to ours (0 for us) is undefined. any number divided by zero is undefined.
I'm sure what Curt meant was, "At this point, the ratio of my experience with this belay method to yours approaches infinity as yours approaches zero," but he was just being curt.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
superdiamonddave
Dec 14, 2004, 6:16 PM
Post #132 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2002
Posts: 443
|
Curt,
Are you too much of a wimp to use a hip belay? It doesn't hurt that bad if it is done correctly. The "foot method" is going to get somebody killed. Sheesh! It doesn't take a genius to see the faults in your new "method". I don't see that there should EVER be a need for this method.
Attn: all newbies,
Please DO NOT try this "foot method". It is not a proper method of belaying. It is just an experiment from a climber that should know better than to post something this absurd. What a Moron.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 14, 2004, 6:28 PM
Post #133 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
superdiamonddave,
You were doing alright until you got to this part...
In reply to: What a Moron.
Curt may be a lot of things, but that he isn't...
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Dec 14, 2004, 6:35 PM
Post #134 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
WOW, what a flame explosion!
Just a few points:
1. Unlike a few people are claiming, this shoe belay method was not proposed as a replacement for better, safer, more modern methods, it was given as a last ditch resort for when you want something rather than nothing, and touted as being more comfortable than a hip belay.
2. The shoe belay was NEVER given as a method for lead belay or anything other than top roping and simple lowering, over short distances, in a situation where you don't have anything else.
3. The difference in no experience and some experience may not be so easy to quantify, but it ought to be clear that some is way better than none.
4. These old guys knew about the bowline on a coil, but I kind of think a tied harness in the end of the rope would be better, if there was enough rope to do this. I don't know how many turns they put in the Bowline on a coil, but it woudl take about 6 feet of rope to do a minimal tied harness, and Curt already said there was barely enough rope to do the coil and shoe belay.
5. This point has been made but people seem to keep on missing it, so one more time, these guys were faced with highballing or taking this shoe belay or a hip belay. They decided the shoe belay worked fine. Now, given the choice of a possible 25-30 foot fall without this belay, or a standard top rope dangle with this belay, which would you take? Which do you think is safer?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 14, 2004, 6:37 PM
Post #135 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: So, as Curt pointed out, he has infinitely more experience than most of us with it. (And, by the way, Curt, "infinity" can easily be written. There's a even symbol just for it: a rotated "8" that looks like "oo".
...which reminds us about an interesting mathematical property of the word "n00b." Note that in its preferred spelling, the inner two characters of the word "n00b" are zeros. These symbolically indicate the experience level of the n00b. However, it is no coincidence that the alternative spelling of "n00b" is "nOOb." In this spelling, the inner two characters are actually the ASCII representation of the infinity symbol (the sideways "8"). This spelling is known as the "reciprocal form of the word n00b," so called because, in the limit, the reciprocal of 0 is infinity. In it's reciprocal form, the infinity symbol (OO) indicates (in a multiplicative sense) how much more experience an expert climber has compared with the nOOb.
Now, back to the flamefest...
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
slcliffdiver
Dec 14, 2004, 6:39 PM
Post #136 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 489
|
In reply to: Body belays are tried and true, but lowering someone with a body belay sucks--big time.
Here's the part I don't get. If body belaying for a slingshot top rope with your right hand do you turn your left hip toward the wall bend your left leg and run the rope under your buttocks around a lower than your right hip pointer? It's how I learned fast, simple (if you can body belay well) and not uncomfortable enough to worry about. Arguments that your method might be safer (haven't tried it) in reality are more convincing to me than the way I do it is uncomfortable or difficult to belay well. I'm not saying I'll buy it just it's the only thing I can think of besides messing up your purdy prahna pants. I'm not saying I recommend this to the population at large and I'd only trust someone now that I knew was proficient with body belays in general (it's dependent on not letting slack build up at your hip in order to be safe). It's just that I'm a bit confused about how you ended up feeling you needed a new belay method. Has this way I do it been proven unsafe (relative I know) and I missed the memo? Has the mistress worked you over just before and you were too sore? I also thought the sling comment was a red hearing but you cleared that up. BTW I learned this from a couple of people that I'm pretty sure started climbing in the 60's one may have started in the 50's. But I haven't used it much over the last 5-15 years (I'm lousy with long term time perception) so it really is possible I missed something.
I figure one of four things will happen:
I'll find out what I was doing went out with dynasaurs for good reason.
You'll learn something.
We'll find out you don't like aluminum marks on your prana's.
You've got some baby soft cheeks.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 14, 2004, 6:48 PM
Post #137 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Scenario: bunch of climbers at a crag are top roping, sharing ropes and belayers. Some dude starts up a line, gets a little ways up and oops! No belayer (THAT's never happened!). The secure climber is suddenly sketch and screaming "I'm going to fall!"
Now you have me wondering (from a technical/execution perspective) if faced with that scenario, which would be faster to establish: a hip belay or stepping on the rope and picking it up.
hip belay: you'd have to step up to it (say with it on your right), grab it with your right hand, pull down or pick up some slack, step right one step, grab it with your left and pull it under your ass, and lean left into it to establish the belay.
foot belay: you'd have to step on it, reach down and grab the rope (or it will just run under your foot), stand back up, establish a solid stance, and take in any slack.
Without going through the exercise I can't say which would take longer, but the "take in any slack" would be mandatory with the foot belay for it to be effective and not necessary with the hip belay, so to some extent how long it took would be dependent on how much slack there was. In the scenario you mention there would probably be a significant amount of slack so I'd still probably go for the hip belay. My other concern would be with a person's ability to establish a solid stance after bending over to pick up the rope in an emergency - that is actually a big transition to stabilize.
Possibly a useful trick, but that is a far cry from a "new belay technique".
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Dec 14, 2004, 6:52 PM
Post #138 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
Guys, this has got to be a spew. S9, dude. Good job.
How is a hip belay uncomfortable to lower someone? As long as you’re wearing long pants and a shirt it’s really nothing. When I first started climbing in the early 70’s body belays were all we had and we were using an old Goldline at the time – much rougher than modern ropes. It’s certainly not as “comfortable” as using a belay device, but it’s certainly not painful – especially for top rope. Body belays are a very stable way of working. Consider - IF the rope came off your foot you’d be left with the rope in one hand. There is no way I’d agree to be belayed that way. Even a shoulder belay from above would be better.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 14, 2004, 7:03 PM
Post #139 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: dont bite my head off or anything for this post because i am a newbie. i didnt really see one in the pic but if it was me and i had forgotten my belay device i would have just put a couple wraps around the nearest tree.
Running a rope around a tree to belay is considered unethical in climbing because it damages the tree. It's not good for the rope either.
The standard method of belaying without a belay device is the hip belay, which should be in every climber's bag of tricks.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
telemarkist
Dec 14, 2004, 7:07 PM
Post #140 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2003
Posts: 182
|
if I had some gear I wouldn't do this, nor would I teach someone I didn't know so that I could get a belay. that said, can I go next curt?
if you have to move fast? I can see the potential of pulling the climber off.
if you lose your balance? so what? you're still hanging on to the rope right?
a little background on what can be done without a belay piece, long ago I took a huge fall in tuolmne, my belayer(thanks nick), freaked by the rope piling up at his feet, bailed on the belay piece and grabbed the rope and stopped me at just 30 feet, should have been much worse..... was it right? I would say no, but it saved me that day.
I'd be more concerned about grinding rocks into the rope than being dropped.
as for lowering on a coil..............harsh, maybe getting dropped would be less painful
|
|
|
|
|
thinksinpictures
Dec 14, 2004, 7:29 PM
Post #141 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Posts: 447
|
I know alpnclmbr1 already said what I'm about to say, but due to his high postcoust I suspect that he's probably seen by most of the other people on this thread as either one of curt's close friends or at least part of the rc.com "inner circle." That may be true or it may not; I have no idea. Personally, I've never met curt, and I'm pretty sure that he's shot me down on this site at least once or twice, but...
I would feel safer on a foot belay from him or someone with his level of experience than I would on an ATC or Grigri belay from 95% of the people on this site.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 14, 2004, 7:36 PM
Post #142 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
With regard to a hanging a long time or lowering a significant distance on a coil wrap - turn upside down, drop/cross your legs (like an inverted sitting position to lower the center of gravity and achieve a stable position), and stay that way until you are back on the ground. This way the weight will go from your diaphram to your hips which will be sore, but you'll be breathing.
|
|
|
|
|
superdiamonddave
Dec 14, 2004, 7:53 PM
Post #143 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2002
Posts: 443
|
In reply to: superdiamonddave, You were doing alright until you got to this part... In reply to: What a Moron. Curt may be a lot of things, but that he isn't...
I read all 9 pages in this topic in hopes of finding that this is all a joke or a troll gone bad. If Curt is seriously trying to use this method or trying to convince others to use it, then yes, he is not using good judgement. I don't like name calling anymore than the next guy, but if the shoe fits... This topic should have never been posted as "New belay technique". It is dangerous and sooooooooo WRONG!
It's not even worthy to go into ANYONE'S bag of tricks. If new climbers want to learn something useful for emergencies, then practice the hip belay under the watchful eye of a knowledgeable "old schooler".
|
|
|
|
|
glowering
Dec 14, 2004, 8:30 PM
Post #144 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2002
Posts: 386
|
The method has potential merit in the original situation described (attentive, experienced belayer, while top roping boulder problems) but to present it as a "Very Safe" "New belay technique" is irresponsible.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 14, 2004, 8:53 PM
Post #145 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Well, after 10 pages, I guess it is time for a confession--of sorts.
I started this thread, not as a true troll per se, because the belay does work. I can show it to you, I can teach you how to do it--and you will then see that it does work.
However, because this belay method has probably never been seen by most climbers (much less used) I also knew that this thread would elicit many negative responses. As such, I thought it would be an interesting sociological experiment to see how many climbers would fall into each of two categories.
The first group would read the original post with an open , if somewhat skeptical mind, find it to be an interesting if unconventional idea, ask questions of someone who has actually belayed by this technique, and then accept the answers. The second group would immediately dismiss the idea as dangerous or bad for some reason--in spite of having absolutely no first hand knowledge or experience with the topic. People in this group would have already made up their mind on this subject, independent of any input by people who are experienced in using this belay technique--in other words, those who are most qualified to speak on the subject.
Its been interesting and I suppose the mix turned out about as I expected. jt512 was certainly correct in his prediction to me that my post would draw the n00bs out in force.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
allan_thomson
Dec 14, 2004, 8:59 PM
Post #146 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 596
|
Looking at the pictures there is absolutely no way I would use that belay technique. It is just too unstable, and a greater chance of it either unbalancing you, or the rope slipping from under your feet. At least with a body belay the rope won't slip.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Dec 14, 2004, 9:17 PM
Post #147 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
does jt512 insist that you use two hands when lowering him using this method?
I thought his absence was conspicuous here . . .
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 14, 2004, 9:24 PM
Post #148 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: does jt512 insist that you use two hands when lowering him using this method? I thought his absence was conspicuous here . . .
Huh? He has posted three or four times in this thread already. :wink:
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 14, 2004, 9:33 PM
Post #149 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: does jt512 insist that you use two hands when lowering him using this method? I thought his absence was conspicuous here . . .
I think you mistakenly assumed that I woud conclude that this method is dangerous. In fact, I have almost no opinion on the subject, since I haven't tried it. Looking at the pictures, I couldn't see anything inherently horrific about it in the circumstances in which it was used, namely, an improvised belay method for a fairly benign situation: top-roping a low-angle highball boulder problem.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
robmcc
Dec 14, 2004, 9:34 PM
Post #150 of 345
(28356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 2176
|
Your fine little sociological experiment failed to account for one group.
In reply to: ... I also knew that this thread would illicit...
Elicit. Not illicit.
English dorks rule.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
|
