Gym Top Ropes with pre-attached belay devices

ViperScale . wrote:

Would you prefer special, slow, stupid, challenged, or what other word?

Intead of "retarded" how about using "viperscale"?

Like, "This woman was such a "viperscale" she couldn't even tie her own shoes.

Ted Pinson wrote:

Actually, they tend to be highly educated and trend toward math/science and engineering.  Climbing isn’t a cheap sport.

Climbing is probably one of the cheapest activities I do, and if all you do is top rope / sport / boulder it is really dirt cheap. Trad climbing has a high start up cost but once you get all your gear it is what maybe 500$ or less a year in gear that gets replaced. Scuba diving requires dive gear which isn't to bad and last a while but requires getting to dive sights which means a boat or paying someone to take you out to it and isn't cheap. I have a jeep and go off-roading alot and that isn't cheap. Sky diving is like diving the gear isn't to terribly expensive but requires a plane (well I guess you could base jump to avoid it but that has it's own issues). Skiing I guess is pretty cheap once you get the gear if you have a local area to ski since year passes aren't to bad.

Tradiban wrote: Intead of "retarded" how about using "viperscale"?
Like, "This woman was such a "viperscale" she couldn't even tie her own shoes.

Go for it! I would feel special if everyone started using my name like that.

ViperScale . wrote:Go for it! I would feel special if everyone started using my name like that.

We are of the same ilk sir!

Ted Pinson wrote:

Actually, they tend to be highly educated and trend toward math/science and engineering.  Climbing isn’t a cheap sport.

Ha, maybe for the Midwest you could be correct!

Stagg54 Taggart wrote: I would say that about real climbers.  Gym climbers?

Yes.  Gyms usually start around $70 on the cheap end and can be over $100.  That means the clientele tend to be affluent and well educated.  While in today’s society it’s cool to tear down people for being successful, I would say both of those things tend to correlate fairly well with “brightness” and that the average climber (yes, even gym climber) is “brighter” than the rest of the population.

ViperScale . wrote:

Sky diving is like diving the gear isn't to terribly expensive but requires a plane (well I guess you could base jump to avoid it but that has it's own issues). 

I don't think you have looked at equipment lately...a basic rig will be at least $7,000. That doesn't include an AAD or other miscellaneous gear you will need, plus the bus fare to altitude. 

I recently sold my 13 year old rig (container, main and reserve) for $3500.  Each dive in Baldwin WI will cost you $25 to 13k, and most people do multiple dive a day.

I started climbing in a "birthday party gym" with a set up like you describe in the opening post. I developed a love of climbing there and carried it on to other gyms where one has to tie in and provide their own belay device. Then I started climbing outdoors with a more experienced mentor. Now I live in a mountain city in Ecuador (that I chose largely because of climbing opportunity) and climb exclusively outdoors.
If there wasn't an easy access gym near my home in the flatlands of Indiana I never would have discovered climbing and would be poorer for it. Some people start climbing on pre-rigged toprope and become trad-climbing, route-establishing, trail-maintaining "real climbers". It does happen. Others go to the gym once in a while with their kids and get some good exercise and have fun and don't get in the way of people who are experienceing climbing in a more traditional way.
If someone climbs in a pre-rigged gym and then goes outdoors expecting things to be the same way then that's on the individual, not the gym.

What we're really talking about here is the question: "Is there an adverse effect of pre-rigged belay devices and climber-end attachments on outdoor climbing?"

Right?  Because if that's not what we're talking about, then no one should give a shit.  If there isn't an adverse effect on outdoor climbers and climbing, then it doesn't matter.  Liability that threatens access outside for everyone could be an issue.  If we're talking about one gym being gumbified, and so that climber from said gym doesn't know what to do in a gym that isn't gumbified, then that's the gym's problem and realistically doesn't affect people much- except for seeing some untrained, unwitting soul get mangled, which might ruin your day.

So the real question is, does this gumbification translate to access issues outside?  And if so, how?  I don't know of any rubric for measuring that, and the majority of access/revocation issues come from misuse that isn't born from liability/injury concerns.  I don't have exhaustive knowledge, so please feel free to correct me in true "you don't know anything at all" snarky MP form.  

To my knowledge, areas have been closed because of change of ownership for private lands, change of policy for public lands (which are motivated by a variety of things like erosion, bolt wars, defacing, litter, not following stated policy, etc.).  Now, if it is determined in some verifiable way that the lack of education on the most basic and rudimentary of climbing skills has an adverse effect on access outside, then we can start getting our underwears in a bunch.  As of right now, I see it as a non-issue.  YMMV.

Actually, I think it is an issue in the gym. Being always clipped into a ground anchor is dangerous  if not needed by a gross difference in weight, as you can't move around to belay well or get out of the way of other falling and swinging climbers, trip on the stupid things or  get clunked by a combo steel biner and GriGr, etc.  

don'tchuffonme wrote: What we're really talking about here is the question: "Is there an adverse effect of pre-rigged belay devices and climber-end attachments on outdoor climbing?"

Right?  Because if that's not what we're talking about, then no one should give a shit.  If there isn't an adverse effect on outdoor climbers and climbing, then it doesn't matter.  Liability that threatens access outside for everyone could be an issue.  If we're talking about one gym being gumbified, and so that climber from said gym doesn't know what to do in a gym that isn't gumbified, then that's the gym's problem and realistically doesn't affect people much- except for seeing some untrained, unwitting soul get mangled, which might ruin your day.

So the real question is, does this gumbification translate to access issues outside?  And if so, how?  I don't know of any rubric for measuring that, and the majority of access/revocation issues come from misuse that isn't born from liability/injury concerns.  I don't have exhaustive knowledge, so please feel free to correct me in true "you don't know anything at all" snarky MP form.  

To my knowledge, areas have been closed because of change of ownership for private lands, change of policy for public lands (which are motivated by a variety of things like erosion, bolt wars, defacing, litter, not following stated policy, etc.).  Now, if it is determined in some verifiable way that the lack of education on the most basic and rudimentary of climbing skills has an adverse effect on access outside, then we can start getting our underwears in a bunch.  As of right now, I see it as a non-issue.  YMMV.

Well, I have no stats and no metrics.  But it seems to be a pervasive impression that a certain number of gym climbers show up outdoors without the appropriate preparation for that environment and then get into "situations,"

My take on that impression, to the extent that it has any validity, is not to make the gym more like outdoors, but rather less.  This would make installed Grigris and auto-clipping carabiners a good thing. (Mandatory ground anchors, not so much.  But moveable weight bags for kids and light people might be a good idea...)

Certainly an experienced climber can cope with such things without breaking a sweat, so why isn't this a universal benefit?

Almost anybody that climbs extensively outdoors will have run into the Boy scout troop/church group that has a semi-functional climber that wants to climb with the kids. They usually hog easier routes in very popular areas. I have a strong suspicion that many/most said semi-functioning climbers have taken some classes at the local gym on belaying and possibly building anchors. (see Devil's Lake TR Cluster F&ck thread)

Many will also have brought the kids group to the gym to "learn" how to climb and belay. They rarely progress beyond the top rope or auto-belay area.

But if the gym has a fixed GriGri policy, they really won't be learning anything, and the outing trip is going to be a rude wakeup for someone, hopefully not fatally, because I guarantee they won't all have GriGri's.

(Real) climbers will tend to notice the manky or over-engineered anchors that are being constructed, and completely miss the frightful belays being given by the gaggle of pre-pubescent (almost always) boys. Break hands off of the rope, rope through belay device backward etc...I saw one kid belaying another by just pulling, with both hands, the rope above his device, then grabbing the break strand and pulling it through his ATC, taking both hands off the break to pull more rope.  The TR setup had too much friction and he couldn't pull in slack with just one arm. There was probably enough friction that a fall wouldn't have killed the kid climbing, but I got out of there as soon as possible.

Didn't read this whole thread...but

1. Having worked at a gym where every rope had a grigri and we/ I taught the lead class with ATC's there was never a problem. Was always funny to watch people who were so use a grigri instinctually reach for the cam lever area when they started to lower. They'd always still have their brake hand down though.
2. Saying the belaying on grigri's won't lead to people learning proper technique is dumb. That's down to the teacher.
3. Gyms + Grigris are not going to bring down outdoor climbing
4. Gym insurance policy requirements are a hell of a thing, luckily you don't have those outside
5. Chill out trad dad's and agro sport climbers, there are other ways to enjoy our vertical endeavor 

People are crazy hostile in this thread. The number #1 guideline is don't be a jerk. 

rgold wrote: Certainly an experienced climber can cope with such things without breaking a sweat, so why isn't this a universal benefit?

I climbed in a couple of gyms that had GriGris attached to ground anchor. Those gyms did not have carabiners for clipping. 

Here is what I observed:

- stiff gym ropes combined with two-wraps-around-pipe TR anchor set-up made for a really difficult belay
- the fact that belayer was not allowed to remove GG from the ground anchor and place it on the belay loop made keeping the rope out of climber's way impossible
- placement of GG at fixed height above the floor, higher than I would've preferred, made for awkward belay. Adjustment was not possible, per management policy
- randos were still messing up belays

Ted Pinson wrote:

Yes.  Gyms usually start around $70 on the cheap end and can be over $100.  That means the clientele tend to be affluent and well educated.  While in today’s society it’s cool to tear down people for being successful, I would say both of those things tend to correlate fairly well with “brightness” and that the average climber (yes, even gym climber) is “brighter” than the rest of the population.

Again. You are conflating book smarts with common sense. Not the same thing.  It is possible to have a college degree, make lots of money and still have no common sense.  I don't know how that is tearing someone down for being succesful.

ViperScale . wrote:

Sure have and it is all over the place. Our gym has biners on all the top rope (changed from tying in probably less than a year ago) but you still have to put your own belay device on currently. I have taken dozens of new climbers from my gym and taught them to do stuff outside but rarely do the really stupid people who have trouble in the gym end up going outside. I have seen stupid people at crags before who didn't know what they were doing so don't get me wrong stupid people will go outside but such is life and you can't hold everyone's hand, some of these are people who have never even been to a gym.

Heck even in the gym I ignore most of the rules and get yelled at all the time for doing things I am not suppose to like belaying while laying down / sitting. I know most of the staff who are climbers and they never yell at me but the staff who don't know anything about climbing tend to yell at you because they don't really know the difference between people who know what they are doing and the rules they are told to follow.

Laying down while belaying in the gym?  

Trevor Taylor wrote: People are crazy hostile in this thread. The number #1 guideline is don't be a jerk. 

You must not read a ton of MP forum threads.  This one feels like a great big hug compared to some of the stuff in the last month.

To the OP:

I recently questioned a similar policy at our gym with the manager.  At the end, the answer he gave me was quite blunt.  

"The gym is a private enterprise and we will run it as such.  if we feel we can enhance the safety and experience of the majority of the users, new and experienced, with [this] policy, we will do so realizing some may be against it.  They are free to leave and join as they like.  It sounds like you seek an outside experience in the gym.  We are not trying to recreate an outdoor experience nor hold any responsibility for behavior our users exhibit outside.  Indoor and outdoor climbing are two completely different things and have almost nothing in common these days besides the word "climbing".  We will offer classes for those who wish to learn to rappel and other outdoor climbing safety practices."

Moral of the story, take it or leave it.  At least you get a GriGri to use.. we had to buy our own.  They don't care what people do outside and assume no responsibility.  I guess we can blame capitalism or start a new gym and do it better.

Hard to imagine that someone could be "into climbing" without wanting to plug gear or climb el cap some day. Nobody could possibly simply enjoy climbing in the gym with no other climbing goal in mind. How dare the gym dumb down our precious sport for the majority of their patrons who don't care to climb outside? IMO this all started when people started tying in with a fig-8 follow through. These gym gumbies couldn't tie a bowline in the time it takes for their code to compile. What a tragedy for climbing.

Every time someone drops the "climbers a cut above" mantra I appreciate that there are threads like this to remind us that there are dicks and elitists in climbing just like in any other social circle. Climb on.

rgold wrote:

Well, I have no stats and no metrics.  But it seems to be a pervasive impression that a certain number of gym climbers show up outdoors without the appropriate preparation for that environment and then get into "situations,"

You're right.  It is a pervasive impression.  It is a pervasive impression because it happens a lot.  You've seen it, I've seen it, plenty of people report it and the occurrences seem to be growing in number and not abating.  

However, that doesn't really speak to what I said.

What I'm asking is how some inexperienced climber getting into "situations" affects others adversely, other than witnessing accidents.  Certainly that is a negative affect, but I'm more referring to getting access threatened or closed.  One might say that rescues is one way that happens.  Judging by the rescues that seem to be (I'm reluctant to use "frequent") more regular at areas like Taquitz, the Flat Irons, and others, and that the areas are still open, says that there really is no penalty as far as access regarding inexperience.  The same applies for injury.  I think there is a pervasive impression that people getting hurt and rescued threatens access, but I can't think of a single area off the top of my head that was closed for fear of liability because too many people were getting hurt/requiring rescues.  That's not to say that there are none.

I can think of areas that were closed because of petty bolt wars, irresponsible land management, and other reasons outside perceived danger or fear of liability, which often overlap.

All I'm saying is that when a lack of skill/training/knowledge is pinned to getting areas closed, then it's more ok to get in an uproar about gyms contributing to that by dumbing everything down in order to avoid liability and "grow the sport" and garner as much market share as possible.  I think what I posted originally may have been perceived as a diatribe against pre-loaded gri gris and locking biners on the climber's end.  It wasn't. I couldn't care less.  Until it reaches the point where it can be directly attributed to outdoor areas closing.  Then I'll be more vocal than most.  Trust me.