|
shakylegs
Feb 5, 2004, 8:39 PM
Post #1 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2001
Posts: 4774
|
Following Amber_c's advice, bought and read JL's & JM's "Big Walls." Query: when using hooks, do they stay there until they're cleaned? Don't they come off easily? Or do you simply retrieve them as you would your bottom ascenders once you've clipped into your higher piece?
A certain scholar tells me that they'll pop once they're unweighted, so why not try to retrieve them?
|
|
|
|
|
jhump
Feb 5, 2004, 8:46 PM
Post #2 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2002
Posts: 602
|
Hooks may be used for pro in dire situations, usually duct taped to the feature. Small hooks are very likely to fall off when unweighted, but mondo hooks draped over big flakes will likely stay put with some tape. In general, the "hooker" retrieves the hook as soon as she is onto the next hook or other pro, because leaving it behind serves no point, and it may be needed later on in the pitch (or the next move).
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Feb 5, 2004, 8:53 PM
Post #3 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
In reply to: In general, the "hooker" retrieves the hook
Hey! I prefer odalisque!
|
|
|
|
|
shakylegs
Feb 5, 2004, 9:03 PM
Post #4 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2001
Posts: 4774
|
Jhump, thanks. Mac, would that mean a meretricious odalisque?
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Feb 5, 2004, 9:37 PM
Post #5 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
No, I'd say more . . . waggish.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Feb 5, 2004, 9:50 PM
Post #6 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
the few hook moves that i've done, i've back-cleaned the hooks immediately after getting off them (which is rarely soon enough).
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 5, 2004, 10:05 PM
Post #7 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
Ok, i was slightly appalled when I first read your post. Then I checked your profile and noticed you are from Quebec- So you probably speak french- which explain's the poor terminology.
Hook's may well be the easiest peice of climbing gear to understand. It doesn't get any simpler than putting a peice of curved metal on and edge, over a flake, or in a hole and then standing on it.
If you know anything about direction of pull and weighting/unweighting then hooks are even simpler!
jhump did a fine job explaining.
But I'll also say this probably(yeah probably) the only time you will leave a hook and call it pro is when you aren't going to get anything else! You wouldn't leave a hook to reduce the length of a fall one body length!
The place's you'll leave one are on full pitch's of hooks, or a pitch with some really good hooks and some really crappy heads. I'm talking really A4+ crap- dig?
Hooks are fun!
josh
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Feb 5, 2004, 10:15 PM
Post #8 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
Aaaggghhh...I can't believe I'm doing this......too much editing of text today, I apologize in advance.
Flamer. You write that you were appalled upon reading the original post, and then proceed to write like this...
{Hook's may well be the easiest peice...} Hooks, not Hook's. Every 's' does not require an apostrophe. Doe's'nt it 'seem 'strange when I place apo'strophe's in word's unecce'sarily?
{The place's you'll leave one are on full pitch's of hooks} Man, it hurts, it hurts!! IT HURT'S!!
Really, no disrespect. But come on. It's pretty 'simple if you con'sider why apo'strophe's are u'sed in the fir'st place. Sorry, it's been a long day filled with text, hunting for minor errors. No one cares, and I am ashamed for bringing it up.
|
|
|
|
|
shakylegs
Feb 5, 2004, 10:17 PM
Post #9 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2001
Posts: 4774
|
flamer, huh? which word or terminology led you to believe that i can't express myself properly?was it because i said "clean" instead of "back-clean"? but yeah, i do speak french, as well as a few other languages.
and, you're correct, jhump explained everything quite well, so i have no idea why you needed to iterate.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Feb 5, 2004, 10:21 PM
Post #10 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
Not that I'm doing this much, but...Cam hooks in the right situation (a realatively tight placement) can be decent pro.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 5, 2004, 10:23 PM
Post #11 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Aaaggghhh...I can't believe I'm doing this......too much editing of text today, I apologize in advance. Flamer. You write that you were appalled upon reading the original post, and then proceed to write like this... {Hook's may well be the easiest peice...} Hooks, not Hook's. Every 's' does not require an apostrophe. Doe's'nt it 'seem 'strange when I place apo'strophe's in word's unecce'sarily? {The place's you'll leave one are on full pitch's of hooks} Man, it hurts, it hurts!! IT HURT'S!! Really, no disrespect. But come on. It's pretty 'simple if you con'sider why apo'strophe's are u'sed in the fir'st place. Sorry, it's been a long day filled with text, hunting for minor errors. No one cares, and I am ashamed for bringing it up.
HAHA! No worries bro!
I wasn't talking about his grammar! I obviously have no place pointing out other people's grammatical errors!!
I was talking about him calling aiders(or etiers) his "bottom ascenders"- I simply assumed that the translation was screwed up. I wasn't even trying to be disrepectful towards him for being french! Simply pointing out a minor error in translation!
Of course now that he wants to get all aggro about it I'll say....STFU FRENCH Noob!!!
josh
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 5, 2004, 10:25 PM
Post #12 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Not that I'm doing this much, but...Cam hooks in the right situation (a realatively tight placement) can be decent pro.
She's totally right!
I have a buddy who took a daisy fall onto an INVERTED cam hook and it held!
BUT!! Like Melissa I ain't doing it much either!!
josh
|
|
|
|
|
shakylegs
Feb 5, 2004, 10:48 PM
Post #13 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2001
Posts: 4774
|
wow, okay, now i get it. it was ascenders. okay, my bad. my apologies. even more embarrassing that etriers is french.
milles pardons.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 5, 2004, 11:28 PM
Post #14 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: wow, okay, now i get it. it was ascenders. okay, my bad. my apologies. even more embarrassing that etriers is french. milles pardons.
Ok fair enough!! Sorry about that whole Noob thing....
josh
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Feb 5, 2004, 11:52 PM
Post #15 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
I've taken several falls onto Cam hooks and they held with no problem!!!
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Feb 6, 2004, 12:30 AM
Post #16 of 16
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
In reply to: In reply to: Not that I'm doing this much, but...Cam hooks in the right situation (a realatively tight placement) can be decent pro. She's totally right! I have a buddy who took a daisy fall onto an INVERTED cam hook and it held! BUT!! Like Melissa I ain't doing it much either!! josh
.. i learned that you can tap them into place with a *soft* tap of the hammer ..
... i also learned that if your *soft* tap is not very *soft* you can easily fix them .. no problem though -- i worked on it for about 5 minutes, and it did come out!
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
|
