Anchor building with the rope

Ted Pinson wrote:

Tut, Marc, Rich...please stop pretending the DMM Pivot doesn’t exist.  It pretty much invalidates all of your concerns with Guide Mode, aside from maybe Rich’s about getting a poor belay (never noticed that problem, but to each his own).  No munter/Prussik required, safe and gradual release...what’s not to like?

ROFL. Is this a valid argument?

DMM Pivot represents, what, 1% of the Guide Mode belay devices in existence so not a problem???

C'mon man...

Ted Pinson wrote:

Tut, Marc, Rich...please stop pretending the DMM Pivot doesn’t exist.  It pretty much invalidates all of your concerns with Guide Mode, aside from maybe Rich’s about getting a poor belay (never noticed that problem, but to each his own).  No munter/Prussik required, safe and gradual release...what’s not to like?

I've never, ever seen one in use in the wild.

Marc and King Tut, if you guys don't back up their raps with a Prusik or value assisted braking from guide mode, I see this as a difference in risk tolerance, not a disagreement on anything objective.

I use a ClickUp to belay the leader and a DMM Pivot in guide mode to bring up followers (about 75% of the time) so most of my belays are with assisted braking. But I'd let people belay me without assisted braking, so it's definitely a nice-to-have for me rather than a requirement.

David Kerkeslager wrote:

What I don't value are inexperienced climbers that think assisted anything is gonna save somebody, necessarily. Belayers are gonna save a leader from their fuck ups.

I am a firm believer in my Gri-Gri for the **convenience** it provides and the multi-function it possesses belaying, rappelling and ascending ropes. Very useful tool.

But I don't kid myself that it makes climbing safer.

Don't confuse risk tolerance with competence. People use modern gizmos to mask incompetence. If they were competent they would know all they were gaining is convenience, not a better belay.

David Kerkeslager wrote:

I use a ClickUp to belay the leader and a DMM Pivot in guide mode to bring up followers (about 75% of the time)...

So you're lugging around two belay devices in the Gunks? You need to learn how to go lighter.

Marc801 C wrote:

I've never, ever seen one in use in the wild.

It’s all I use for Guide mode. ;). I don’t get why more people don’t trade in their ATCs for them...they’re not even that expensive and solve the biggest problem with Guide mode devices.

I'll see if I can find a chunk of rope in the morning and post some pictures. I'm in rock springs right now for an interview and don't have any kit with me.

The foundation knot is the bowline WITH a bight.

The two point version is pretty quick, the three point can be a bit fiddly.

King Tut wrote:

ok, in the interest in being less of a curmudgeon...

1. Lowering with a standard tuber (no guide mode)...requires nothing more than the device.

2. Lowering safely in guide mode requires prusik backup and a method of applying enough force to release the auto-lock...None of this is "simple" and people have been hurt or killed (?) during the process. You better hope you have everything handy when the batteries fail on your headlamp in a snow storm and you need to lower your partner more than a few inches...Lowering your partner should not require "self rescue" knowledge or kit FFS.

People are becoming dependent on something, imo, that they really don't want to be fucking with (or even understand) when the chips are down. The VAST majority are going to be learning on the fly how to do it and likely precisely when they don't have the time to do so.

Less is More. Use simpler and fewer tools and the number one cause of climbing accidents will be reduced: Not getting off the Climb and back on the ground.

1. Lowering in guide mode without a prusik is perfectly safe in the hands of a competent belayer, despite the AMGA demonizing the practice. We don't throw on a back-up when lowering a leader or even belaying, so there is no need for one in lowering from guide mode.
2. All people climbing multipitch ought to be carrying a basic self-rescue kit and be armed with basic self-rescue knowledge. If not, they have no place on a multi-pitch climb, and those who don't should not be used as form of reasoning against the use of guide mode.
3. Please don't blame the gear or technique for the mistakes that incompetent users make. Instead blame the incompetent climbers for being stupid out it the mountains.
4. Please don't hate on those who can give a good belay in guide mode and are prepared to deal with complications associated. I have weighed the pros and cons of using guide mode and have made my decision. Clearly you have made a different decision, but I respect your decision nonetheless. I expect the same respect for my decision, but perhaps I'm setting the bar too high for the internet.

I own a DMM Pivot and have used it and am not convinced it invalidates all concerns.  Maybe with the right ropes?

I am not doctrinaire about guide mode.  I don't use it much, but if most of the following criteria are met I'll use it:

1. The best stance for the belay is standing up and facing the rock.
2. The anchor is bomber and at a good height.
3. The stance does not place the device out of reach.
4. The local environment contains no features that could interfere with the device's operation.
5. There isn't already excessive rope drag.

Marc801 C wrote:

So you're lugging around two belay devices in the Gunks? You need to learn how to go lighter.

Meh, I'll worry about weight when weight is the thing preventing me from sending stuff I want to send. It's hardly the limiting factor for me right now.

Rich, possibly.  I’ve used it with ropes from 9.4-10 and haven’t had any problems.  Lowering from Guide mode was smooth and felt a lot like a Grigri.

eli poss wrote:

1. Lowering in guide mode without a prusik is perfectly safe in the hands of a competent belayer, despite the AMGA demonizing the practice. We don't throw on a back-up when lowering a leader or even belaying, so there is no need for one in lowering from guide mode.

I don’t understand your point here.  Lowering from Guide mode is VERY different from lowering a leader, as you are above them and don’t have the mechanical advantage of a slingshot belay.  It can be difficult to hold a second’s weight in this way, and the on/off nature of the release makes it susceptible to losing control, which has led to several accidents.  Would you put in the redirect and/or the munter?

Ted Pinson wrote:

I don’t understand your point here.  Lowering from Guide mode is VERY different from lowering a leader, as you are above them and don’t have the mechanical advantage of a slingshot belay.  It can be difficult to hold a second’s weight in this way, and the on/off nature of the release makes it susceptible to losing control, which has led to several accidents.  Would you put in the redirect and/or the munter?

Thread drift pet peeve:  This is an incorrect use of the term 'mechanical advantage'.  

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_advantage_device:

Consider lifting a weight with rope and pulleys. A rope looped through a pulley attached to a fixed spot, e.g. a barn roof rafter, and attached to the weight is called a single pulley. It has a mechanical advantage (MA) = 1 (assuming frictionless bearings in the pulley), moving no mechanical advantage (or disadvantage) however advantageous the change in direction may be.

In fact, with friction MA < 1.

King Tut wrote:

What I don't value are inexperienced climbers that think assisted anything is gonna save somebody, necessarily. Belayers are gonna save a leader from their fuck ups.

I am a firm believer in my Gri-Gri for the **convenience** it provides and the multi-function it possesses belaying, rappelling and ascending ropes. Very useful tool.

But I don't kid myself that it makes climbing safer.

Don't confuse risk tolerance with competence. People use modern gizmos to mask incompetence. If they were competent they would know all they were gaining is convenience, not a better belay.

I worked on a software product for a few years which modeled fatigue in humans as measured by lapses in attention. Lapses were measured by measuring reaction time: you watch a screen, and 20 times, a light will come on, at which point you press a button (this is called "simple reaction time" in psychology terms).  A lapse is defined as a measured reaction that takes longer than 2 standard deviations outside the person's reaction time. For me that means around 180ms versus around 500ms. Lapses in attention occur 2-4 times out of 20 trials for well-rested individuals, with the simplest of tasks, and for literally everyone, without exception, with lapses increasing in both frequency and severity with fatigue.

Note that in 500ms a climber falls about 2.45m--more than enough to break something. And that's for a fairly limited lapse. Lapses can be much longer, especially when tired.

Also note that this is simple reaction time: performing a simple task (pressing a button) in response to a simple stimuli (a light coming on). Reaction time is MUCH slower for more complex tasks (such as pulling rope into brake position) and complex stimuli (such as your climber falling).

Lapses occur in all studied groups I know of, including highly competent groups such as NASA astronauts and Olympic sprinters (the latter being a group that excels in reaction time).

I've seen my own data on my own reaction time and my own lapses, and am perfectly content saying that (like every other human) I suffer from lapses of attention. As such, I can use all the help I can get when I'm trying to catch a falling climber. I also feel safe belaying and being belayed with an ATC, but I feel safer with assisted braking.

If you don't like assisted braking, assuming competence, you're capable of safely belaying by most people's standards. But unless you somehow don't have the same attention lapses that every human ever tested has, there's a good chance your competence won't come into play for ~500ms or longer, and you're safer having something there that might catch during that 500ms.

Nobody is saying competent belaying isn't important, obviously it is.

EDIT: For nerds who want to see data, most of the publicly-available data is on PVT.

eli poss wrote:

1. Lowering in guide mode without a prusik is perfectly safe in the hands of a competent belayer, despite the AMGA demonizing the practice. We don't throw on a back-up when lowering a leader or even belaying, so there is no need for one in lowering from guide mode.

This is really an apples-and-oranges comparison. The braking mechanisms while lowering the leader and lowering in guide mode are not the same.

Xam wrote:

Thread drift pet peeve:  This is an incorrect use of the term 'mechanical advantage'.  

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_advantage_device:

Consider lifting a weight with rope and pulleys. A rope looped through a pulley attached to a fixed spot, e.g. a barn roof rafter, and attached to the weight is called a single pulley. It has a mechanical advantage (MA) = 1 (assuming frictionless bearings in the pulley), moving no mechanical advantage (or disadvantage) however advantageous the change in direction may be.

In fact, with friction MA < 1.

Sorry. :/ What would you call it, then?

Xam wrote:

Thread drift pet peeve:  This is an incorrect use of the term 'mechanical advantage'.  

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_advantage_device:

Consider lifting a weight with rope and pulleys. A rope looped through a pulley attached to a fixed spot, e.g. a barn roof rafter, and attached to the weight is called a single pulley. It has a mechanical advantage (MA) = 1 (assuming frictionless bearings in the pulley), moving no mechanical advantage (or disadvantage) however advantageous the change in direction may be.

In fact, with friction MA < 1.

Unless you're actually using a friction-less pulley in your toprope anchor, the slingshot belay method does convert the climber's weight to less tension on the belayer's side than belaying from above using the Guide belay method. Thus the slingshot belay method has a higher AMA. Just because a system theoretically has a mechanical advantage of 1 does not mean the real-world system does. Actual mechanical advantage less than one is still actual mechanical advantage; just look at third-class levers, where the increase in output distance is the usefulness of the machine.

eli poss wrote:

1. Lowering in guide mode without a prusik is perfectly safe in the hands of a competent belayer, despite the AMGA demonizing the practice. We don't throw on a back-up when lowering a leader or even belaying, so there is no need for one in lowering from guide mode.

I have zero need to convince you of anything.

However, you may want to read your instruction manual before you kill someone.

William P wrote:

Unless you're actually using a friction-less pulley in your toprope anchor, the slingshot belay method does convert the climber's weight to less tension on the belayer's side than belaying from above using the Guide belay method. Thus the slingshot belay method has a higher AMA. Just because a system theoretically has a mechanical advantage of 1 does not mean the real-world system does. Actual mechanical advantage less than one is still actual mechanical advantage; just look at third-class levers, where the increase in output distance is the usefulness of the machine.

Fair point.  I still think the use here is a misuse of the term mechanical advantage that might be attributed to a colloquial understanding of the what the term may or may not mean.  It is fairly common for climbers and others to consider a change in direction for the sake of convenience (biomechanical or other) to be mechanical advantage when it is demonstrably not.  

But hell, I have been wrong before and am willing to concede that mechanical advantage less than one for a lowering action can be considered mechanical advantage.  I stand corrected.

Ted Pinson wrote:

Rich, possibly.  I’ve used it with ropes from 9.4-10 and haven’t had any problems.  Lowering from Guide mode was smooth and felt a lot like a Grigri.

I don’t understand your point here.  Lowering from Guide mode is VERY different from lowering a leader, as you are above them and don’t have the mechanical advantage of a slingshot belay.  It can be difficult to hold a second’s weight in this way, and the on/off nature of the release makes it susceptible to losing control, which has led to several accidents.  Would you put in the redirect and/or the munter?

Yes I always use a redirect when lowering in guide mode, even if I'm only lowering a foot or two.

Accidents occur because of the seemingly on/off nature of guide mode breaking. I don't trust myself, or any human for that matter, to be able to reliably control the amount of friction to a reasonable degree every time. Thus I prefer to rely on the friction of traditional tube device braking which is relatively consistent. 

You're right that one may not have the same level of friction as lowering from a slingshot setup but with lowering in guide mode you should have no less friction than belaying a leader. 

If you don't have enough friction to lower a climber with your belay device, then you have no business catching a whip with it either. And yet we don't see people using a friction hitch when belaying a leader with an ATC guide or reverso. 

If y'all want to use a friction hitch that's fine, but I've never come close to losing control of the belay when using a commonly accepted rope diameter and belay device combination. And if I ever encounter a situation where I want more friction then I can add a munter hitch on either the redirect or my harness.

Using a friction hitch backup is cumbersome for anything other than rapping and won't work in all cases. I prefer to treat the root cause of losing control of the belay, which is inadequate friction