|
nepaclimber
Jul 10, 2007, 4:08 PM
Post #26 of 36
(1263 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2007
Posts: 56
|
my friend did let him know and i knwo about the extended runners rule that back clipping isnt a problem but still there is that .0001 % chance that it the back clip in the runner could come out some magic way and either result in a deck or just a much bigger fall then you anticipated, either way not a desireable out come
|
|
|
|
|
fulton
Jul 10, 2007, 4:23 PM
Post #27 of 36
(1253 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
I don't mind a challange, but I do try to avoid "risk." I place alot more gear than most people I climb with. All climbing is an adventure, and I've never been able to live up to "when in doubt, run it out." My personal montra is more like "When in doubt, puss out and go sport climbing."
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jul 10, 2007, 4:25 PM
Post #28 of 36
(1250 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
It's been implied, but the major issue I see is the necessary transition from a supervised environment to more independent decision-making. Most new climbers are extremely reliant upon more experienced partners (or more formal instruction). They'll double-check everything, go by the book (sometimes literally), and usually have a second set of experienced eyes on everything they're doing. While they'll start taking on some responsibility for rigging toprope anchors or other tasks, it's after they've demonstrated competence. In my mind, the big dangers are improper instruction, insufficient supervision, and trying to transfer limited skills and knowledge in new areas. I consider a climber at intermediate status when she starts making decisions and functioning as a fairly equal partner. It's at this point that she might start branching out from more experienced partners, pushing limits, taking on route selection and trip planning, etc. You need to have some gumption in order to start calling your own shots, and sometimes a bit too much bravado gets in the mix. Maybe a new climber pushes placement and technical limits at the same time, has an issue with routefinding, just gets gripped on a heady lead, etc. I think almost all of us make some of those mistakes as a part of the learning curve. As far as concrete examples, I'd say pushing technical limits while still getting comfortable with gear and systems has injured its share of people. While they're not necessarily killers, poor route selection (due to length, route finding, etc.) and lack of efficiency (slow leads and change-overs, etc) cause their share of problems. When you start adding up the many mistakes an intermediate climber can make, they can have serious consequences. An intermediate climber doesn't always see or acknowledge the warning signs, allowing problems to compound. It's easy to see how an intermediate team to select too ambitious a route, bring inadequate food and water, and get in a position where they're either benighted or bailing when bonked. I think it's more a matter of mileage or the depth of your bag of tricks rather than your technical limit that is relevant. Moving from one type of climbing to another brings new challenges (toprope to leading, rock to ice, free to aid, etc.). An experienced sport climber could be an intermediate trad climber and a n00b to ice or aid.
|
|
|
|
|
wmfork
Jul 10, 2007, 4:43 PM
Post #29 of 36
(1228 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Posts: 348
|
majid_sabet wrote: curt wrote: majid_sabet wrote: ...Most Yosemite victims are experienced climbers, 60% have been climbing for three years or more, lead at least 5.10, are in good condition, and climb frequently... So, that's your definition of an "experienced climber" then? Curt I did not write this curt but leading a 5.10 climb in yosemite is not that easy. I've never been to the valley (that'll change next month) but I started trad leading in Eldorado Canyon, certainly not considered a soft place. I lead an easy 11 pitch and was leading a few mid to hard 10s within the first month. That certainly didn't make me experienced (more capable than average perhaps). Many gifted climbers are leading far hard than I may ever able to lead within their first year of climbing. So, don't confuse ability with experience.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jul 10, 2007, 5:25 PM
Post #30 of 36
(1195 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
I been involved with reading and analyzing climbing accident reports since1999 and I know people who are involved with investigating some of the most unusual accident reports for more than 25 years. The problems are much bigger than you guy think, I mean I love to contribute in to this post due to my extreme interest on this particular subject but I just do not know where to start . for now, you guys are on the right track.
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Jul 10, 2007, 5:29 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Jul 10, 2007, 5:59 PM
Post #31 of 36
(1161 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
wmfork wrote: majid_sabet wrote: curt wrote: majid_sabet wrote: ...Most Yosemite victims are experienced climbers, 60% have been climbing for three years or more, lead at least 5.10, are in good condition, and climb frequently... So, that's your definition of an "experienced climber" then? Curt I did not write this curt but leading a 5.10 climb in yosemite is not that easy. I've never been to the valley (that'll change next month) but I started trad leading in Eldorado Canyon, certainly not considered a soft place. I lead an easy 11 pitch and was leading a few mid to hard 10s within the first month. That certainly didn't make me experienced (more capable than average perhaps). Many gifted climbers are leading far hard than I may ever able to lead within their first year of climbing. So, don't confuse ability with experience. I guess I wouldn't call Yosemite 5.10 moderate (not talking about slab or offwidth), but, then again, I don't lead 5.11 trad. It's all relative....I have a buddy who leads 5.8 in the Valley and 5.10 in Eldorado Canyon (I've never been there), but he hasn't been trying to press grades too much in Yosemite either, so I'm not saying that EC 5.10 is Yosemite 5.8 or anything because that would be pure ass-talk. For a good introduction to Yosemite, I'd (unoriginally) suggest Nutcracker, 5.9 variation or After 7, but they'll probably be hot as bejeezus when you come around.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jul 10, 2007, 8:04 PM
Post #32 of 36
(1137 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
jt512 wrote: The probability of having a serious accident is a function of the amount of risk you take and your ability to cope with that risk. The beginner climber can't competently handle much risk, but he is unlikely to take much risk, so his accident probability is low. At the other extreme, the advanced climber can cope with a high degree of risk, and he is not only willing to take high risks, but to seek them out; hence, his accident probability is greater than that of the beginner. In between, you have the intermediate climber. He has some experience under his belt, and so starts to push his limits, but he tends to lack knowledge of where his limits are and to sense where he is merely being challenged versus where he is really getting in over his head. Thus, he is the most likely of any climber to run into a risk situation that he cannot safely resolve, and to end up in an accident. Jay I think this is right on the money, and perfectly put, Jay. Trophy! Another way to look at this is: after the climber fledges from the nest, what kills the intermediate climber? And even stranger, what keeps the advanced climber from getting the chop? The long-term, the advanced climber - has three things the intermediate climber doesn't. 1 - She understands her own limits, and knows the situations she can put herself in and those she can't. So even though she does some very hard stuff, she almost never gets in over her head, because she knows herself, and knows how to guage her abilities against the rock, weather, etc. 2 - She's seen a lot of competent people get the chop over the years. These add up over time, and on a deep emotional level that accident statistics don't. This makes her more conservative, and also keeps her from getting in situations where she might wind up in deep shit. 3 - The smallest factor is that the highly experienced climber has a few more skills than the intermediate climber. So on the rare occasion when she does get in over her head, she has a slightly better chance of getting out safely. The key to surviving those middle years (which I'm smack dab in the middle of, by the way!) is to fill up your bag of skills before your bag of luck runs out. "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake GO
|
|
|
|
|
cchas
Jul 10, 2007, 8:45 PM
Post #33 of 36
(1115 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2005
Posts: 344
|
zealotnoob wrote: nepaclimber wrote: he back clipped 2 of his 4 clips, scarey right, worst of all he didnt know what back clipping was Educate the man, but don't be too hard on him...when you're clipping to extended runners all the time (aka Gunks climbing) you don't have to care about back clipping. WTF!!! Climbing 8 yrs an doesn't know what a back clip is.... Peter Darmi wrote in Alpinist of individuals with 1yrs experience, but experienced 20 times (ie: they've climbed 20yrs but still don't know their #$$ from there #$$). Funny thing, everyone makes fun of noobs, but there is nothing wrong with being a noob, if you are honest with yourself about it. Its the intermediate climbers who are all of a sudden "experts" that I see get into the most trouble. That attitude I see getting people into trouble. ..... Heck, after 33yrs of climbing, and at a decent level, I still consider myself learning....
(This post was edited by cchas on Jul 10, 2007, 10:30 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
devkrev
Aug 13, 2010, 2:48 PM
Post #34 of 36
(983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 933
|
irregularpanda wrote: As my time climbing has grown, my attention to various accident reports has also grown. Being a moderate climber who crags, trads, and tries to free as many grade IV and V climbs a summer, what do you guys think about this? I'm sure I'm not the only guy who love trad and is pushing 5.10's out there on the internet. Summerprophet wrote: "Statistically (although from 1994) the chances of an Experienced climber dying or being seriously injured is higher than that of a beginner. The Highest risk group of all? The intermediate. The study went on to hypothesise that the new climber has enough sense and fear to triple check everything, and is methodical about ensuring partners check each other ect. The experienced climber has done the routine so many times that is automated. Experienced climbers tend to botch the double checks and assume that their partner is without error. The intermediate climber has all the bad habits of the experienced climber and the lack of skill that comes with time. This leads to the highest risk rate." Anyway, here's the point: Aside from belaying errors and rappelling off the end of the rope during poor visibility at the end of a long day, what are the most common judgment errors that exist to kill the moderate climbers? You can't quantify experience with years spent climbing. Something that we seem to be talking a lot about is how many years folks have been doing our thing. But ultimately, I think its important to remember that how often you climb in a year is definitely more important to consider. If I climb at the gym once a week, and go top-roping once a week, and don't lead anything, how much experience do I have? Our sport has become so disjointed (sport, trad, bouldering, top-roping, gym) that its really hard to consider someone's experience level. How often do you hear people talking about "outdoor rock climbing" now? What about those folks who just ride the coattails of the stronger/more experienced climbers and are really more interested in the social aspect of the sport?
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 13, 2010, 3:05 PM
Post #35 of 36
(954 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
Sure, this is three years old, but here's my take. If people are getting in fatal accidents as intermediates, they can't do so as experts. Intermediates act as a buffer of fatalities for experts. (As well as a combination of a relaxed attitude with less experience.) It is similar to how MP.com thinks they're inherently nicer to their noobs. Well, fools, if RC wasn't acting as a buffer, you'd be up to your necks in the same questions over and over and over and over too.
|
|
|
|
|
devkrev
Aug 13, 2010, 3:23 PM
Post #36 of 36
(933 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 933
|
spikeddem wrote: Sure, this is three years old, but here's my take. If people are getting in fatal accidents as intermediates, they can't do so as experts. Intermediates act as a buffer of fatalities for experts. (As well as a combination of a relaxed attitude with less experience.) It is similar to how MP.com thinks they're inherently nicer to their noobs. Well, fools, if RC wasn't acting as a buffer, you'd be up to your necks in the same questions over and over and over and over too. Crap, I guess thats what I get for using the search function!
|
|
|
|
|
|