Best way to secure yourself to a natural anchor with only the rope?

ViperScale wrote:You should be jailed for taking a new climber on free soloing 5.0 or harder route. Maybe you climb so hard now you don't realize what that is like for most new climbers.

We had a rope, which we used whenever we or he felt it was necessary. Also, I didn't mean to imply that my friend is a total gumby. He knew what he was committing to and was comfortable with it.

Marty C, that looks like a nice clean way to do it.

keithconn wrote:Quietly start sobbing. Curse myself for being on the top of a cliff with no gear. Quietly start sobbing again.

haha this!

Mike Marmar wrote: We had a rope, which we used whenever we or he felt it was necessary. Also, I didn't mean to imply that my friend is a total gumby. He knew what he was committing to and was comfortable with it.

If you brought a rope specifically for the purpose of belaying your friend through tough sections, why wouldn't you bring anything to anchor or belay with? Once you're carrying a rope, is the addition of a few lockers really that burdensome?

My other two friends had a harness and gear. I didn't bring anything. It ended up being easier for me to just belay than get the rope over to my friend with the gear so that's what we did. Given the terrain, it was a reasonable and safe choice.

Mike Marmar wrote: We had a rope, which we used whenever we or he felt it was necessary. Also, I didn't mean to imply that my friend is a total gumby. He knew what he was committing to and was comfortable with it.

Um, it's probably a good idea to remember that new, inexperienced climbers don't have a sufficient experience base to understand what they are committing to and and don't know enough to assess their comfort level.

ViperScale wrote:You should be jailed for taking a new climber on free soloing 5.0 or harder route. Maybe you climb so hard now you don't realize what that is like for most new climbers.

I've taken new climbers to solo that route. If they're competent people, they'll handle it just fine, regardless of climbing experience.

Austin Baird wrote: I've taken new climbers to solo that route. If they're competent people, they'll handle it just fine, regardless of climbing experience.

Probably not really a 5.4 / 5.0 grad climb than.

ViperScale wrote: Probably not really a 5.4 / 5.0 grad climb than.

Actually, it is. In fact here on MP it's listed as 5.5.

Our grading system isn't really very good for climbing. If every single 5.5 move is right after a big ledge with stuff in the way to block falling and rolling off than it could still be 5.5 but not really be "5.5"

Mike Marmar wrote:My other two friends had a harness and gear. I didn't bring anything. It ended up being easier for me to just belay than get the rope over to my friend with the gear so that's what we did. Given the terrain, it was a reasonable and safe choice.

Well in that case, it sounds like you weren't really in the scenario you stated - in other words, you weren't stuck with no option but to anchor and belay with nothing but a rope, you could have waited for your friends to bring the other gear over, etc... but you chose to do this because it was, in your words, easiest to do and a reasonable and safe choice in the situation.

Oh Mike, Mike, Mike ... your probably regretting staring this post at this point!

Sounds like a good time climbing and good little climbing puzzle. Good exercise in figuring out knots and the like.

keithconn wrote:Oh Mike, Mike, Mike ... your probably regretting staring this post at this point!

Haha, as far as internet abuse goes, this is pretty mild. At least everyone seems well intentioned too =)

ViperScale wrote:Our grading system isn't really very good for climbing. If every single 5.5 move is right after a big ledge with stuff in the way to block falling and rolling off than it could still be 5.5 but not really be "5.5"

That's a patently ridiculous statement.

Marc801 wrote: That's a patently ridiculous statement.

If you think our rating system is great you likely have not climbed in alot of different areas. I always start climbing easy in new areas to see how their grading compares to where I normally do.

Talking major differences in areas where I am falling on 5.10s in one area and on sighting 5.12 in another???

ViperScale wrote: If you think our rating system is great you likely have not climbed in alot of different areas.

I don't think I've ever seen a more presumptuous reply.

I've been using the "Connecticut Hitch" lately to connecticut myself to natural anchors. Quick and easy to do, especially handy if I'm short roping/pitching and want a bit more security for myself when forming some sort of quick belay for my second after a short 5th class move. Does require a carabiner though which is the one downside compared to a bowline on a bight. However this is adjustable regarding climber's distance from the anchor once tied. It also doesn't require running around the tree multiple times such as the tensionless hitch- All you need to be able to do is toss a bight around the tree.

ViperScale wrote:You should be jailed for taking a new climber on free soloing 5.0 or harder route. Maybe you climb so hard now you don't realize what that is like for most new climbers.

jailed for this, but half-rape should be a thing, eh?

just pointing out your wildly differing ethics...

Hey N Nelsen

Never heard of the CT HITCH. Seems pretty cool. My only question is there any info on stressing a carabiner like that? I set it up and noticed that the long axis of the carabiner is being stressed/compressed/torqued or what have you, in an unusual way with the ropes.

Just a thought.

keithconn wrote:Hey N Nelsen Never heard of the CT HITCH. Seems pretty cool. My only question is there any info on stressing a carabiner like that? I set it up and noticed that the long axis of the carabiner is being stressed/compressed/torqued or what have you, in an unusual way with the ropes. Just a thought.

I appreciate your critical eye Keith, this orientation pinches the stock of the carabiner in the same manner as it would in a belay device. This style of hitch is actually superior in maintaining the tensile strength of the stock than say a clove hitch where the hitch gets its strength from the friction of the material around the stock but with the added reduction in strength because the carabiner itself is being "loaded." A CT hitch only wraps around the stock, basically in a pinching action, but the carabiner is not actually loaded in any traditional fashion.

I think another reason this looks funny is because we're used to often seeing carabiners loaded onto the spine in a cross loading scenario- I wonder if the carabiner was oriented 90 degrees to the left if it's look better.