Called out by a guide for my rap technique

Mark Berenblum wrote: But good to hear the retraced bowline with a backup was very unlikely to fail in this scenario. There does seem to be a lot of unwarranted concern among climbers about bowlines, whereas sailors use them without backups for just about everything.

You absolutely cannot use a bowline for any climbing purpose without some kind of finish or backup knot.  This seems to create what I see as a pointless semantic objection.  Call  the entire configuration of "bowline plus finish" by another name if any occurrence of "bowline" is so distressing!

rgold wrote:

You absolutely cannot use a bowline for any climbing purpose without some kind of finish or backup knot.  This seems to create what I see as a pointless semantic objection.  Call  the entire configuration of "bowline plus finish" by another name if any occurrence of "bowline" is so distressing!

I'm going to start calling it the "Mariners' Death Knot". That should put folks' mind at ease.

Gunkiemike wrote:

I'm going to start calling it the "Mariners' Death Knot". That should put folks' mind at ease.

Perfect. MDK.  All problems solved.

rgold wrote:

Perfect. MDK.  All problems solved.

Murder Death Knot

The climbing at Minnewaska State park, The peterskill, Ski-Minnie, whatever you want to call it -  is out door glorified gym climbing.
The chalked holds are almost luminescent, so stand out like plastic holds.
The top is flat and clear of any thing loose. If I remember correctly, the Pine trees there are some of the oldest living trees.
I thought there was a ban on using them for anchors? I haven't been there 18 yrs, but the 3 or 4 good leads are worth waiting for.
IvanG (Bo-Hiss) added some excellent boulder problems, & it was off to the races as far as it was,
it was re-development. We had been climbing there for decades;  it was the site of platform camping from the '50s-70s.
In the hopes of shedding some light on the kind of place it is;  think Mount Woodson, but laid out all in a line of huge square blocks.
 So pillars  that form chasms that you climb out of with ladder-like horizontals, not nearly any vertical cracks?
(Golden Dreams & what 10 others?) & 40 in height.

BillS wrote: That anchor looks too complicated and overthought to be safe.

Only 28 posts? seems a bit light if there is no name attached to the weekend guide  at ski-minnie.

 but it drew me in too

I just finished,

 BillS, Read through this whole thread , 

There will be a test, 

If you cant make sense of a simple set up, find Carnegie Hall

How do you do that , you might ask:

(Practice, practice, PRACTICE!)

now I'm gonna go take my own advice, this is sending season, go get some!

not that it matters but I've been an 80% full knot bowline rider for decades.
Always finish your knot when climbing, or anytime -Life- hangs on it.
*20% of the time, a Fig.8 (18%*programs, guiding, & 2% indoors)

eli poss wrote:

The other reasons climbers have so much concern about the bowline is because it seems this generation of climbers (on average) has become quite averse to different and/or new ideas.

Good point since the bowline is a totally brand new idea.

Greg D wrote:

Good point since the bowline is a totally brand new idea.

That and of course its a new phenomenon for climbers to doubt the bowline. 

rgold wrote:

You absolutely cannot use a bowline for any climbing purpose without some kind of finish or backup knot.  This seems to create what I see as a pointless semantic objection.  Call  the entire configuration of "bowline plus finish" by another name if any occurrence of "bowline" is so distressing!

How about bowline with Happy Ending?

lucander wrote: Don’t sweat it. Just another opinionated New Yorker flexing.

Is New York like your Los Angeles?

Ring loading tests. I never really realized that ring loading made all of these knots so susceptible to slipping!

As many people pointed out, in any scenario that involves a single person hanging from a knot, the knots shouldn't come undone. That being said, this is definitely something to avoid unless there really isn't another option. There are plenty of tried and true ways to set up anchors that don't provide nearly as much opportunity for failure.

Tim Stich wrote:

How about bowline with Happy Ending?

8.5/10, will do!

Good opportunity to remember KISS.... Keep It Simple, Stupid. Not that OP is stupid. But simplicity is safe. It's never fun to get called out, especially if you know you have a safe setup, but it's also important for people to speak up if they believe someone is in danger provided they do it in a polite manner. Seems like there are good lessons all around here.

Greg D wrote:

Good point since the bowline is a totally brand new idea.

new or different. In other words, even slightly different than what they learned at the gym makes them scared.

If you know how to tie the knot, you know how to tie the knot. If you don't then you think it sounds to sketchy
to learn. The same can be said of leading, or all climbing. If you don't know what you're doing, this could be the day-
YGD

oh why not save it here this is a ridiculous thread any way
So Mobez,  Im at my favorite crag,  It takes a stout walk to set the TR, as Im rapping, A tree falls across Rt7 taking out a pole.
FAWK! There is a lawn maintenance truck, tooling down the highway at +60mph, it screeches as it tries and fails to stop, getting jacked sending 2 riding mowers into the on coming lane of traffic.
Time for me to leave, quick, before they close the road - The rig is still set up there, rain is forecast, I'm like a country song.

meh, i have always thought the bowline is kind of a lame knot.  the only people that i ever see using them are the boffins that want the world to know they aren't using a figure 8.  usually these folks are toprope drytooling in the gym while wearing rollerblades.

single bowline + stopper = perfectly fine knot

if you're worried about cross loading:

Cross load test of common climbing knots

https://vimeo.com/40767916

Interesting conclusion:
fig. 8. = single bowline + stopper

In all these TR anchor threads I'm constantly amused by the fascination of tying a knot around a tree. I've never done this in 45 years. Looped sling, girth-hitched sling, length of rope with a pair of fig-8s clipped together - sure, all of that and then some; but actually tying a knot, on multiple trees, and also creating a masterpoint with a BFK? Oh hells no! Talk about adding unnecessary complexity.

Alex Temus wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf0wZRxNcQ0

Ring loading tests. I never really realized that ring loading made all of these knots so susceptible to slipping!

Forgetting about the tail-pull tests which have no relevance to any climbing application (or any application at all that I know of), the so-called Dutch Navy or Cowboy bowline went to the limit of the pulling machine without a backup knot, as did the bowline on a bight without a backup knot, so referring to "all these knots" is pretty misleading.  Combined with the previous referenced video in which a bowline backed up with an overhand knot went to the limit of their pulling machine, no bowline variant used in an appropriate climbing configuration (eg the MDK) is any more problematic than a figure 8 when it comes to ring loading.

slevin wrote:

Most climbers operate using "best practice", many use "marginal practice", and still others enter the "dangerous practice" zone, where they're in imminent danger. Where on this continuum was the OP's setup? And did it require intervention?  

Most experienced climbers would agree that we have a responsibility to intervene when we encounter a climber in imminent danger. 

But when (if at all) should an experienced climber intervene when encountering someone operating in the "marginal practice" zone, i.e. not in imminent danger but doing things that are sub-standard or increase risk, or even when we see a "teachable moment"?

Probably every experienced climber has pondered this question. I think the answer is both personal and situational.

As a recreational climber, if I were to intervene every time I saw some marginal practice, I'd be continually distracted, get a lot less done, and probably create conflict at some point, even if I'm on my best behavior and with the best intentions.

As a climbing guide/instructor, if I were to intervene every time I saw some marginal practice, I'd be distracted from focusing energy and attention on my guest's experience and safety. (Although I may use the example as a teachable moment with my clients.)

With that said, once making human-to-human contact at the crag, there is considerable nuance to these scenarios that is often lost in on-line forum "discussions". 

I confine myself to the "imminent danger" category and perhaps some marginal practices that seem to me to be very marginal indeed.  I am always polite, but still get some level of hostility about half the time. This is in spite of never calling out anyone in a public way.  I always go up to the person in question and speak to them out of earshot of their partners and other bystanders.  Having made a good faith gesture, I'm outta there after that; I'm not going to argue with anyone who is convinced everything is ok.

I've used what I consider bad practices as "teachable moments" for people I'm climbing with.  Again, I try to do it in such a way that is just between us and is not a public condemnation masquerading as instruction.

There do seem to be people who are eager to impose their knowledge and standards on others, for whatever psychological benefits they get from the intervention.

I would say that describes most of the people on here.