For those of you who use a cordelette, and let's not turn this into a 'just use the rope vs cordalette debate', how do you tie it?

Flemish/figure 8 bend
Flat overhand
Double Fishermans/Triple fishermans for thin/slippery chord

I know some of the advantages/disadvantages would be being able to tie & untie the knot but I usually don't untie mine.

If anyone can give some reason for one vs the other that would be great, thanks.

I use a double fishermans on my 6mm cord.

A overhand knot works great just dress it well and have tails about 8 inches long. This way it is easily untied if you need the cord to ascend a line, tie around tree, tandem rappel when descending with a bag or hurt partner. If you rap with this knot there is no reason that you shouldn't tie a cord this way.

I prefer stiffer cord for my cordelette. It's tied permanently with a double fishermen's.

If you don't want to untie it, triple fisherman's. It'll get relatively welded after a few uses

I keep mine racked loose and if I need to tie it shorter I use a flat overhand with a second one as a backup.

Why limit yourself with a perma-tied cordelette? If you need the extension to set a master point over a lip the flexibility of an easy-to-untie knot (flat overhand) far outweighs the pros of the triple fisherman's. (and I actually can't think of any pros) ((Except MAYBE real slippery cord))

FLAT OVERHAND

Double strand configuration: If you had a perma-tied cordelette Submitted By: Dylan Weldin on Feb 12, 2013

Single strand configuration: Notice the extension of the master point. ALSO: the reduced V-Angle Submitted By: Dylan Weldin on Feb 12, 2013

I have a triple fisherman's on my 7mm cord

double fisherman's on 7mm cord. but considering switching to 6mm in the future for less bulk on the harness

I use two over hands with a bit of tail. The danger of the overhand is that it can roll, but the second one keeps the first one from rolling.

I like the 2 overhand system because its easy to untie. I used to use a double fishermans, and I never untied my cordelettes but when I started untieing them, I started finding them a lot more useful.

EDK

Why tie it at all? Ok someone is going to tell me its not a cordelette if its not tied.

I rack it same as if it was tied. If I need to use it as an anchor, I tie a knot, but this not is where I need it. If I need to use it to ascend or some other non-typical use, then no knot to untie.

An AMGA guide showed me this trick.

Truck13

At the belay you tie a knot to make the masterpoint. Why not use the same not to make the masterpoint and close the cordelette?

To be fair, the guide that taught me this firmly believed in using the rope to make anchors and primarily used his cordelette for other things. Maybe it depends why you carry a cordelette.

Truck13

Truck13 are you referring to having the cord tethered (ends tied together via double/triple fishermans for most) or un-tethered (cordellette with ends untied)?

If I know ill be at an area where my anchor placements will be far apart having the cord untethered is convienent; if say at the Gunks for example, I`ll have my cord tethered (ends tied together) because most of my anchor placements will be close together.

Is this what you were referring to? Just another way to say it?

Yes, untethered as you said it.

Truck13

Agreed. At the request of the OP, I won't diverge into reasons that "just using the rope" is a better idea. There are good reasons sometimes to use a cord. If you're not swapping leads, if you have more than one follower, etc. Situation dictates. I am of the opinion though, that if you have a "closed" cordelette, you slap that mother into two or three pieces, orient it in the anticipated direction of loading, tie a knot and you're done.

I'm having a little trouble picturing what you're saying. You're saying to carry the cord untied and to incorporate the loose ends in the master point knot, right? This seems like it would take a little more time, having to line everything up so that the loose ends are included in the master point. Then again, I've never tried it. If it's already tied, you can clove the knot close to the middle piece, then just pull the rest into loops- etc. I suppose it's as you suggest, it depends on what you're used to and why you're carrying the cord in the first place. I'm still of the opinion that if you're carrying a cord specifically for anchoring purposes, it make things a little quicker and easier to already have the loop closed. YMMV.

We are on the same page. Pick what works for you. Try it, maybe you'll like it. If not nothing lost.

Truck13

Jake, picture 2 pieces of gear in a horizontal crack 2ft apart (an example of untethered use) and 1 piece about 6-7ft away and up higher. The average tethered (tied) cord couldn't accommodate all the pieces BUT if you untether the cord you can tie a figure 8 on a bight in one end, attach to the far anchors biner then a clove or another 8 in the other end and clip that to the other (far left or right or farthest up or down in the order of anchors) extreme THEN just run the middle of the cord through the middle anchors biner, pull down as usual to build a master point and bring the system together.

Its useful to be able to use cord tethered and untethered for sure. Same redudancy and mster point, just different ways to construct with cord.

Gotcha Stoned. I thought about that. Instead of a double strand running from each piece, you only have a single strand. Makes sense. It threw me off when Truck said "Why not use the same not to make the masterpoint and close the cordelette?" which means to me that he's incorporating the untied ends into the master point, but still has two strands running from each piece. That's the way I picture it at least.

Another thing to consider is that most people, if they rig this way, will have enough cord to do so in a reasonable amount of space- about 20-30ft (without a shitload left over). If you were to tie that and make a closed loop out of it, it likely would not be enough to build an anchor with 3 pieces unless they were really really close together. Conversely, I think I use a 40 or 50 ft piece of cord tied in a closed loop, and it works perfectly for three pieces- even if they are some distance apart. To each his own I suppose. Certainly less weight if you're only using single strands coming from each piece (half the cord necessary). It still boils down to knowing a method, sticking with it, and becoming proficient at it so you don't spend unnecessary time dicking around at belays.

Jake Jones

Sorry to throw you off. If the pieces are close, I do tie the ends into the masterpoint knot, resulting in two strands to each point. If they points are far apart I do it as The Stoned Master described.

"It still boils down to knowing a method, sticking with it, and becoming proficient at it so you don't spend unnecessary time dicking around at belays." YES!!!!!!!

Everyone needs to have their go to method. Being comfortable with alternative methods is important for unusual events.

Truck13

"-Me and my partners never swap leads, we normally agree that 1 person will lead the climb"...

^^^

What's the reasoning behind that one?...

different question:
how do you store your cord during climbs? I feel like when I climb with one it turns into a mess.