Do you belay w/ gloves? Should I?

rgold wrote:

The pictures posted by ViperScale don't illustrate the technique most experienced climbers used for belaying the leader. The rope was passed around the hips and the leader's side was clipped to a carabiner on the swami belt, so it couldn't be unwrapped no matter which side the fall occurred on.   But we always did our best to stand off to the side (left side if right-handed) of the fall line with a shoulder against the wall; this way you only had to pivot 90 degrees to be facing outwards.    In my case, there was no pro in yet and I knew the instant the leader's foothold broke that he was going for the big ride, so I was able to turn around and face out before the jolt hit.

In the good old hip belay days, climbers continually attended to the belayers body position and bracing---as a matter of necessity.  Modern techniques and equipment have virtually eradicated the necessity for this type of awareness, except perhaps for certain alpine situations.

I recalled a carabiner in the belay system but couldn't remember where.  Havent used a hip belay in many years, but that was for a follower.  

Mark Paulson wrote: Sport, no. Trad, yes.  Back when we used ATC's regularly for sport belaying, we'd often use gloves (especially on multi-day trips) just to keep as much skin on our hands as possible.  Now, with auto-blocking devices, we usually only bust them out when it's sub 50 degrees.  That being said, my partner climbed the first six pitches of Crimson Chrysalis without taking his gloves off.

Two of the three rope through ATC incidents I know of were in a gym, on top rope. The money catch for me last year was a trad lead outside.

The gym is one that has people actually learn to belay and tie in. The rope goes up and over an anchor, no friction wrap, so I assume even less friction (maybe lots less?) than outside, where you'd always have the equivalent of a carabiner at the top of the rope.

The poor lady in the gym had her hand bit bad. She went airborne, but hung on. Grabbed the rope with her other hand, yanked her brake hand out, and lowered. I merely got a mild nip, just kept going. The second time, mentioned above, a sloppy piece of glove was in the device (I had hacked off the finger tips), and no problem.

Best, OLH

I’m sitting here waiting for the Rich Goldstone Memoir to hit the shelves of Amazon so i can click PURCHASE. Thanks for all you contribute. 

rgold wrote: I posted the following comments on Supertopo seven years ago, so some of the references to belay devices are quite out of date.  The basic argument is the same and has been the same almost since my first days of climbing 62 years ago.  I did a little editing to keep certain other things up to date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If  you haven't gotten burns, it is most likely because you haven't had to catch a really severe fall, which in fact extremely few people ever have to do. Yeah, I know all about climbing N years and never getting burned.  I'll see most people their N and raise them a few.  But all it means that none of the falls caught transmitted much more than about 1200 lbf  (5.3 kN) to the belay, because most climbers grip strength does not exceed 120 lbf and most belay devices don't multiply this by more than about 10.  (Note: both numbers can be considerably less---your device might multiply by 5 or even less, depending on rope characteristics and diameter, and there is probably a wide range of grip strengths among climbers.)

If and when (and I hope it never happens) you get an impact above 1200 lbf, there will be rope slippage through the belay.  This has been tested and demonstrated over and over again by the European alpine clubs.

In addition to friction in the system that prevents high loads from reaching the belayer, there are other variables, such as rope diameter and belay device type.  In tests done by Mal Daly a few years ago, a Metolius BRD (probably the highest-friction device out there) required a touch under ten lbf to hold a 160 pound load on 9.8mm rope, while an old-style Reverso (one of the least adequate devices ever made) needed about 45 lbf to hold the same load.  Obviously, the Reverso guy, whose device multiplies his grip strength by about 3, is going to have rope burns long before the BRD gal, whose device multiplies her grip strength by about sixteen.

Update: assisted braking devices don't have an associated force multiplier.  Of course for low-impact falls no braking force from the belayer is required, but after a certain threshold, the belayer has to brake, and the force multiplication curve levels out considerably faster than that for an ATC-XP.  This means that the assisted braking device will ultimately require more grip strength than the ATC-XP.  and the grip strength requirements will exceed human capability sooner with the assisted braking device than with an ATC-XP.

And grip strength itself is a variable.  It is quite variable in the general population; presumably climbers are, at least after years of climbing, at the upper end.  But that doesn't mean there aren't substantial differences.  Light people can perform on climbs at the same level as much heavier people even though the lightweights have much lower grip strength.  But the lower grip strength will show up in the belay context, which is absolute rather than relative.

I have caught a factor-2 fall, but it was with a hip belay and an 11mm rope, a combination that might have provided more friction than we currently get with most belay devices, which are designed and purchased more because of their rope-handling characteristics than their force-multiplying factors.  (For example, how many of you own a Metolius BRD...I rest my case.)  

Because I learned to climb in the Pleistocene era, I have caught scores of falls in the UIAA test range with the rope running through a single biner and no other sources of friction. Of course, a weight was used for these belay tests, making them more severe than a corresponding human-body event for the same weight.  Still, anyone who has had this experience would never assert that all falls can be stopped without rope slippage, or promote the fallacy that rope slippage represents, de facto, some kind of failure on the belayer's part.

One of the jokes about attitudes towards belay-device friction is that people seem to grasp the fact that if they do a single-strand rappel on a 9.8 mm rope, they had better double the biners to create more friction.  That would be more friction for holding body weight.  What reasoning process admits this fact and then pretends that the same device with only a single biner is going to hold ten times body weight with no slippage?  

My experience from back in the day and my understanding of modern-day equipment---which simply cannot stop severe falls without slippage and indeed includes that fact as part of its advantages---persuades me to use belay gloves.  (Feel free to call me all the inappropriate names you wish.)  I know the probability of needing their protection is extremely low, and that many climbers have full careers without ever getting burned.  But I dislike the idea of being unprepared for possible adverse scenarios that occur on most trad climbs, scenarios that would result in in rope running.  Burns are bad enough and may be far more than a minor first-aid event, but the potential for losing control of the belay is even worse.

I've climbed for the same N years (N=62 in my case) without ever getting hit by a rock.  If I used that as an argument for not wearing a hard hat, I'd be jumped on.  Belay gloves are in exactly the same category as hard hats, and yet people are comfortable offering the same type of argument for not using them. Sure, you'll probably never need them, but if you do and don't have them, the consequences may be severe indeed (e.g. 1 month for new skin to form and one year for hand to fully heal).

Only on mtn proj can someone write a dissertation on belay/rap gloves. 

Marc H wrote:

Only on mtn proj can someone write a dissertation on belay/rap gloves. 

Considering his profession, he's probably rather familiar with dissertations. ;-)

Best, H.

For rapping, definitely want gloves for smoothness, control and heat barrier. I have not had to stop any big falls, but like gloves for loweringt, again for smoothness, control and heat barrier. BTW - use to use ATC, now MJ2.

I don't follow this. I would think that the camming action of the assisted braking devices ( I'm thinking Grigri) would take over past a certain threshold. My first thought was that a Grigri would be a good solution to the danger of losing control of your brake hand. Help?

One of the jokes about attitudes towards belay-device friction is that people seem to grasp the fact that if they do a single-strand rappel on a 9.8 mm rope, they had better double the biners to create more friction.  That would be more friction for holding body weight.  What reasoning process admits this fact and then pretends that the same device with only a single biner is going to hold ten times body weight with no slippage?   

So is one possible solution to potential high impact falls to lead belay w/ two biners? Do people do that?
( I know, why should I care what everyone else is doing?   )

And OLH, I'd love to see those videos you mentioned.

Marc H wrote:

Only on mtn proj can someone write a dissertation on belay/rap gloves. 

And we are thankful for it whenever people share actual real knowledge and experience.

Mostly around here we get a parade of people that have no experience whatsoever going on and on and on about things they don't understand but they read the Petzl brochure last night.

I think of  the Grigri as an autolocking device and think it belongs in a different category than the assisted-braking devices, which would be the Smarts, Click-Ups, Juls, the new BD Salewa knock-off, etc.  The Grigri doesn't slip until something like 7 kN, none of the assisted braking devices come anywhere near that threshold.  They (mostly) lock at much lower loads but start to slip long before a Grigri would, and once the rope is running through them their braking characteristics appear to be worse than an ATC-XP.  The downside of Grigris is hard catches that load the system with considerably higher loads than ATC-type devices.  Those devices are expected to slip and that slip, if it is managed, has advantages, but you need gloves for that.

Two carabiners will increase the friction of most plates and should probably be used---especially with thinner ropes---far more than it usually is.

Marc H wrote:

Only on mtn proj can someone write a dissertation on belay/rap gloves. 

Only on mtn proj do you get comments from people who haven't even read the first line of what they're commenting on.

Andrew Hess wrote:
And OLH, I'd love to see those videos you mentioned.

Dropped the link in the gear forum. You'll have to sort through the vids yourself....my lawn needs mowing!

I'll drop a photo here, though. These gloves work great, especially for my small hands and stubby fingers. Note the reinforced part is just where it is perfect for climbing purposes.

Best, OLH

rgold wrote:

The pictures posted by ViperScale don't illustrate the technique most experienced climbers used for belaying the leader. The rope was passed around the hips and the leader's side was clipped to a carabiner on the swami belt, so it couldn't be unwrapped no matter which side the fall occurred on.   But we always did our best to stand off to the side (left side if right-handed) of the fall line with a shoulder against the wall; this way you only had to pivot 90 degrees to be facing outwards.    In my case, there was no pro in yet and I knew the instant the leader's foothold broke that he was going for the big ride, so I was able to turn around and face out before the jolt hit. In the good old hip belay days, climbers continually attended to the belayers body position and bracing---as a matter of necessity.  Modern techniques and equipment have virtually eradicated the necessity for this type of awareness, except perhaps for certain alpine situations.

As much as we disagree on the gloves / rope slipping in falls thing, this is entirely correct. Pretty much all the typical pictures and illustrations you see upon googling 'hip belay' are nonsense and I'd never let anyone belay me that way.

For those of you that like to belay with gloves, any other recommendations beyond the one Helen gives above for particular types of gloves? 

Optimistic wrote: For those of you that like to belay with gloves, any other recommendations beyond the one Helen gives above for particular types of gloves? 

Its not rocket science any leather work glove will do. In the climbing industry the full leather are ideal if you want something nice.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:

And we are thankful for it whenever people share actual real knowledge and experience.

Mostly around here we get a parade of people that have no experience whatsoever going on and on and on about things they don't understand but they read the Petzl brochure last night.

+1

I've been learning a ton from several people on this forum, in particular Rich. Thank you! 

Optimistic wrote: For those of you that like to belay with gloves, any other recommendations beyond the one Helen gives above for particular types of gloves? 

Forgot to mention, those are real leather, from a local sporting  goods store and  inexpensive. Faux leather from places like Walmart. Gardening type gloves with the rubbery crap for grip are, well, crap. The stuff just melts.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

Rope slippage on top rope isn't a function of any type of natural behavior of the device, it's a function of poor belaying.  There is no reason that you should have sufficient forces involved to cause rope slippage through an ATC on TR, period.

Kyle, I disagree with you, and this is dangerous for you to say. I know it happens. Period. Light belayers, heavy climbers, very little friction. Please be open to learning, sir. I am, YMMV.

Best, really, Helen

EDIT TO ADD: Look, put an ATC on your harness. Lock the brake hand down, hand, not upper arm, one handed. Get someone else to pull two handed on the climber strand. Try this with others at the gym. It isn't hard to pull the rope through, bringing the belayers hand up toward the device. Just the brake position and hand position won't hold. This is where many will be when about to give slack, and for much of their time belaying. 

Old lady H wrote:

Kyle, I disagree with you, and this is dangerous for you to say. I know it happens. Period. Light belayers, heavy climbers, very little friction. Please be open to learning, sir. I am, YMMV.

Best, really, Helen

He's right helen, i've been pulled half way up the wall top rope belaying someone double my weight i had 0 slippage i just ended up as a barely sufficient counter weight, with proper belaying there shouldn't really be any dynamic loading on the belayer.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:

Its not rocket science any leather work glove will do. In the climbing industry the full leather are ideal if you want something nice.

Actually I bought some nice-looking leather gloves from Lowe's, but they didn't work out all that well (sort of clumsy to use)...which is why I asked the question. 

Optimistic wrote:

Actually I bought some nice-looking leather gloves from Lowe's, but they didn't work out all that well (sort of clumsy to use)...which is why I asked the question. 

Ah, in which case I thought the Metolius belay gloves were pretty sweet. Much nicer fit and smooth leather for easier rope handling. Fingerless.

If I was euro-boy munter/figure 8 guy and/or super into a "dynamic and soft catch" I would go with the full finger protection for a little more burn protection.

There is a place for that in climbing.