Jorg Verhoeven whip

physnchips wrote:

Sooo, Jorg Verhoeven is "the media?" He is better than you at every single aspect of rock climbing, including experience and analysis. You're a nut.

My bad I didn't realize climbing.com was Jorg Verhoeven's personal website. I stand corrected!

He clearly states though in his post that he knew the dangers of putting a foot behind the rope and he was willing to take that risk (he also never said it saved him, unlike climbing.com that makes it sound like he would have died without it, just that it meant no injury at all). He did nothing wrong, I would say the only time it is stupid to put your foot behind the rope is when you aren't paying attention. He was clearly aware of the risk just like tons of other people who are clearly aware of the risk when they don't wear a helmet or make 50ft + runouts. 

As long as you understand what you are doing it is fine. No different than the tons of people who say climbers are retarded to taking the risk in climbing at all. Be award of the risk, make sure anyone part of your team aka climbing partner is aware of the risk that are being taken, and go have fun.

Just stopped in to make sure this wasn't going to be another unproductive helmet argument thread. Glad to see I was worried for nothing.

ViperScale wrote:

He clearly states though in his post that he knew the dangers of putting a foot behind the rope and he was willing to take that risk (he also never said it saved him, unlike climbing.com that makes it sound like he would have died without it, just that it meant no injury at all). He did nothing wrong, I would say the only time it is stupid to put your foot behind the rope is when you aren't paying attention. He was clearly aware of the risk just like tons of other people who are clearly aware of the risk when they don't wear a helmet or make 50ft + runouts. 

Jorg says, "this is why you wear a helmet while trad climbing... this is the time to thank [petzl] for making great helmets, so I only walked away with a freaked out belayer and a stiff neck." To which climbing says, "Thanks to his helmet, he walked away with just a stiff neck. The video serves as a great reminder to wear a helmet because accidents happen, no matter how experienced you are." I don't see anything about death or really any embellishment of the injury or potential injury.

Some people wear helmets to mitigate risk, and sometimes when the helmet is useful they tell others that you too can prevent a potential injury with a helmet if you so choose. You're being weird.

Its ok I am weird, I understand this.

I only ever said I think climbing.com sensationalized the story that someone else posted. They make it sound like it saved his life, they should have just said climber avoided injury with use of helmet not helmet saves climber. Sure I am being picky but I have seen alot of post like this and they are annoying. Climbing.com should be better than the media posting articles about climbing accidents who knows nothing about climbing.

physnchips wrote:

Jorg says, "this is why you wear a helmet while trad climbing... this is the time to thank [petzl] for making great helmets, so I only walked away with a freaked out belayer and a stiff neck." To which climbing says, "Thanks to his helmet, he walked away with just a stiff neck. The video serves as a great reminder to wear a helmet because accidents happen, no matter how experienced you are." I don't see anything about death or really any embellishment of the injury or potential injury.

Some people wear helmets to mitigate risk, and sometimes when the helmet is useful they tell others that you too can prevent a potential injury with a helmet if you so choose. You're being weird.

If you need a reminder that a helmet is safer then you should be shot (no trial, straight to execution).

ViperScale wrote:

...(he also never said it saved him, unlike climbing.com that makes it sound like he would have died without it, just that it meant no injury at all).

How do you get "...climbing.com that makes it sound like he would have died without it..."

from:

"Helmet Saves Jorg Verhoeven in Head-First Dream Canyon Fall

Watch as Jorg Verhoeven, who was freed the Nose and climbed V15, fall with a leg behind the rope, sending him headfirst into the wall. Thanks to his helmet, he walked away with just a stiff neck. The video serves as a great reminder to wear a helmet because accidents happen, no matter how experienced you are."

Yes, the helmet save him from something - they never implied he would have died without it.

Have you ever wondered why so many of your posts/threads wind up with a bunch of people telling you why you're incorrect?

ViperScale wrote:

Its ok I am weird, I understand this.

I only ever said I think climbing.com sensationalized the story that someone else posted. They make it sound like it saved his life, they should have just said climber avoided injury with use of helmet not helmet saves climber. Sure I am being picky but I have seen alot of post like this and they are annoying. Climbing.com should be better than the media posting articles about climbing accidents who knows nothing about climbing.

Once again, who gives a fuck. Welcome to the 21st century where almost all media is exaggerated and sensationalized. They are spreading a good message that might keep some people from getting injured. 

Oh and if you are expecting climbing magazine to uphold a good standard of journalism, you're seeing yourself up for disappointment. 

ViperScale wrote:

We will never know if he would have been hurt without it since he was wearing it. Honestly he would very likely been perfectly fine minus a headache without the helmet.

I couldn't agree more.  I've taken lots of hits like this with no helmet and...and...I...uh...

...hold on what were we talking about?

... Look a squirrel!  

physnchips wrote:

Sooo, Jorg Verhoeven is "the media?" He is better than you at every single aspect of rock climbing, including experience and analysis. You're a nut.

He is sponsored by petzl, and he posts about the soon-to-be released updated sirroco helmet saving his life...

Climbing "media" these days seems to consist of scrolling through sponsored climbers Instagram feeds and reposting the more interesting stuff....

mpech wrote:

He is sponsored by petzl, and he posts about the soon-to-be released updated sirroco helmet saving his life...

Climbing "media" these days seems to consist of scrolling through sponsored climbers Instagram feeds and reposting the more interesting stuff....

Uhhh...as opposed to mainstream media and it's careful, well thought out, fact checked, original pieces? Who would never just blindly "repost" something from a third or fourth or eighteenth hand source, or the social media rumor mill?

OLH (tongue so far in cheek it's sticking out her ear)

This video is interesting, if pointless to this thread.

My noobness is curious, putting aside the not so great belay (maybe her first time out, I'm thinking), the belayer at least cares and can probably learn, is that rock really something to be placing cams in? It looked like you could pull it apart bare handed. My understanding is that cams and crappy rock are bad. I could be wrong about both, hence the question.

Thanks! OLH

Old lady H wrote:

This video is interesting, if pointless to this thread.

My noobness is curious, putting aside the not so great belay (maybe her first time out, I'm thinking), the belayer at least cares and can probably learn, is that rock really something to be placing cams in? It looked like you could pull it apart bare handed. My understanding is that cams and crappy rock are bad. I could be wrong about both, hence the question.

Thanks! OLH

Cams tend to generate more force on the rock than the equivalent nut, but really any  gear placements in bad rock are suspect. The gear can only ever be as good as the rock around it

caughtinside wrote:

I think the seat belt is the smartest one, situation depending.

I dunno, for some climbers the condom might be a better choice ;) 

He probably would have survived without the helmet. 

My helmet is $140 and 7oz. Burrholes and the subsequent recovery (or lack of) are going to run at least a couple hundred grand. 

Maybe survival shouldn't be the only thing to measure the merits of a helmet by?

The scalp is so sensitive and important.

Just watched the video.  His head would have smashed pretty hard.