When did the soft catch become a thing?

Emil Briggs wrote:

You may not think you did but there is no way you developed a large horizontal velocity component into the wall on a vertical section without pushing off. It may not have been conscious but if you didn't push off you would fall right next to the wall and it would be impossible to generate a high velocity into the wall.

Fear not citizen, your theoretical conjecture does not phase me for I live through experience and climb on more than two to three star mods

Corey Flynn wrote:

Fear not citizen, your theoretical conjecture does not phase me for I live through experience and climb on more than two to three star mods

I'm not quite sure what the point of your post is but any time someone claims the laws of physics don't apply to them it's probably not worth engaging with them. And yeah in my day job I'm physicist and sometimes I've even been known to climb stuff other than 2 or three star mods.

I have learned something from this thread - the phrase, "beer-muscled." Other than that, just a lot of bickering.

Señor Arroz wrote:

Soft catch, as a concept, doesn't apply to TR at all. On any TR you already have so much dynamic rope in the system that the catch is going to be cushy, regardless. 

Senor, respectfully, ponder a biggish roof, especially in a gym, where there isn't so much rope out and probably a fall into space. Even with a top roped climber, I'm still hoping to keep their face from whacking if they fall just above the edge. Just not taking that slack in, then cranking it in quickly when they are up a bit, is all I'm thinking of. Or, a top rope where a sideways pendulum is possible, closer to the top. I've reversed course, on top rope, when I realized that dihedral next door was where I would end up. But if I had stupidly continued, my climber might have been able to lengthen the short leg and lessen my pendulum. Noob asked about this once, long ago, pendulums. 

Best, Helen

Señor Arroz wrote:

No. That sounds like you're leaping off the wall, which is different and sounds much more voluntary than falling. If you're "spiking" back into the wall after leaping backwards off a vertical wall  or on slab that's on you, not your belayer.

But think about this for a bit: You're falling alongside a dead vertical wall | but it also has things sticking out of it }  Gravity pulls you straight down. Is it better to fall farther and potentially connect your face or some other body part with a big rock or plastic hold sticking out? Or is it better to just stop?

Two things: 

I am genuinely curious if you have seen any climbers who have had their foot slip and consequently fall straight down in an awkward manner (potentially behind the rope)? I have seen this on more than one occasion as falling straight down leads to more things to run into and harm you.

I also find your post a bit contradictory as you seem to allude to the fact that falling straight down is more beneficial, yet you also give the very reason so many of us extend a leg when they fall. I find it hard to believe that when you fall you do not instinctively kick off the wall to avoid rock features, holds, etc (as you mentioned). This is the type of "leaping" I am referring to...

Corey Flynn wrote:

the best example I can think of for why "dynamic"(lol) catches are appropriate for vertical terrain is back when I was working on a route called Beethoven´s 5th in boulder canyon. The climb is roughly 75 feet tall with a start that is slightly less than vertical and in the low 5.11 range with funky pro leading to dead vertical terrain where one can place some solid gear before having to run it out approximately 15 feet through a v6/7 boulder problem. On my first lead attempt I was nervous about falling and hitting the lower angle terrain towards the bottom and instructed my belayer to take in as much slack as possible in the event that I come off in the crux. Fall I did, about 20-25 feet and then aggressively spiked the wall almost breaking my left foot and losing my big toenail in the process. I hobbled around for about a week or two before things started to heal. On my next session out there I reluctantly instructed my belayer to give me a dynamic belay/soft catch/jump whatever in the event of a fall and sure enough I came off again while staring at the chains. This time the fall was much farther, around 30-35 feet and I came tight in the slabbier terrain near the start but I hardly came into the wall, did not injure myself and was able to give another attempt and send that day. This still applies to vertical routes in the more moderate grades, Le boomerang, blackwalk, and genesis in eldo and cheap date at Lumpy come to mind. I actually fell off blackwalk back in the day wayyy above my last piece (bolt or gear cant remember) and my belayer (shoutout to alex shainman) had the presence of mind to throw out more slack so I would MISS ledgey terrain. Tight catches in the vertical realm are arguably more dangerous than in steep/overhanging situations Mr. Arroz.

This sounds like a terrific example of you, as climber, and your belayer making smart choices about a specific section on a specific climb. Great job. I'll never argue with that. What I think Kevin raised this topic about and what I have argued against is the boilerplate advice (which is currently being handed out left and right at climbing gyms and learn-to-sport climb clinics) that EVERY catch must be "soft" and that it should be a standard practice for belayers to always hop or step into the catch. See my post up-thread about a climbing coach teaching parents, many of whom had never even lead belayed before, to leap into catches  to "protect" their young climbers.

You should do whatever you think best and wisest to stay safe in any particular situation. I can also point to situations where you should very deliberately "hard catch" someone falling off an overhanging climb. That doesn't negate that soft catches are nice on many overhanging climbs.

FrankPS wrote: I have learned something from this thread - the phrase, "beer-muscled." Other than that, just a lot of bickering.

Beer muscled is middle aged farts. Old guys have an unfortunate physiologic process happen where their formerly nice butt migrates to the front. Sad, butt true. 

Well. Climbers are an exception. They're all ripped as hell hunks, to my eyes, anyway!

Best, Old, but not dead, H.

Señor Arroz wrote:

This sounds like a terrific example of you, as climber, and your belayer making smart choices about a specific section on a specific climb. Great job. I'll never argue with that. What I think Kevin raised this topic about and what I have argued against is the boilerplate advice (which is currently being handed out left and right at climbing gyms and learn-to-sport climb clinics) that EVERY catch must be "soft" and that it should be a standard practice for belayers to always hop or step into the catch. See my post up-thread about a climbing coach teaching parents, many of whom had never even lead belayed before, to leap into catches  to "protect" their young climbers.

Well geez, every thread ever, it comes down to blind dogma versus pay attention and be willing to think! Or, worse yet, converse!!! OMG! YGD!!

Best, Helen

"It's no longer enough for you to merely save my life. You must give me a gentle massage as you do so, or I will bitch and whine."

This is from Senor Arroz on pg.2.  I second his perspective.   Calling it a "catch" is cheesy to begin with.  The reality is, falls happen so fast, there isn't time to perform actions or do anything coordinated/complex.  Whatever rope is out, whatever the leader did/did not do, it's too late, just perform your function to not drop the climber.  Keep it simple.

Did soft catch come more into practice with the arrival of GriGris and harder sport routes? I do not recall hearing the term back in the 90s when we were doing trad with with ATCs.

Russ Keane wrote: "It's no longer enough for you to merely save my life. You must give me a gentle massage as you do so, or I will bitch and whine."

This is from Senor Arroz on pg.2.  I second his perspective.   Calling it a "catch" is cheesy to begin with.  The reality is, falls happen so fast, there isn't time to perform actions or do anything coordinated/complex.  Whatever rope is out, whatever the leader did/did not do, it's too late, just perform your function to not drop the climber.  Keep it simple.

Your going to get it now Russ...

My motto: "Pay attention, do your job"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNTKXrJMDFE

Attentive Follower wrote:

I'm sure you'll get some likes for this post but it doesn't address the OP's question or the bigger issue: the proliferation of bad belaying advice that is "a thing" these days.

There's really no evidence on this thread that old guys participating are not interested in learning or are closed minded. You've emphasized that strawman a few times while ironically lecturing about humility. The old guys have provided clear explanations of the different situations, the risks involved, and how one should adapt their belaying accordingly. Information that is useful.

Most of the disagreements with the old guys have been longwinded gibberish, or a personal anecdote about an injury that is always somebody else's fault.

Your post, while sorta sounding inspirational, does not help anybody climb safer. You don't offer any actionable advice and, as others have pointed out, the terminology you are using is sloppy if not just plain wrong. The impressive ticks on your resume do not compensate for the low quality of your arguments.

I agree that humility is a good thing. You should try it yourself.

Thanks for your input. Perhaps you can use your real name and offer concrete examples of your claims if you want to earn any credibility and respect from the community.

I have offered very actionable suggestions, and you can feel free to act upon them. I have suggested that belaying well is a complex task that requires experience, attentiveness, and responding in different ways to different situations. The best way to learn to belay well is to go climbing, rather than bickering about philosophy and semantics on internet forums.

Your argument, while it sounds reasonable at first glance, actually seems to be a bunch of longwinded gibberish upon close inspection. What you are really attempting to express is that you haven't the foggiest clue about what you are talking about, that my carefully formulated arguments make you uncomfortable, and that you take issue with others who have roundly defeated your (admittedly unsound) logic.

I am using very precise terminology and have offered concise, well-defined, and empirically-supported suggestions to inform the reader. Feel free to point out any examples that are misconstrued if you feel it will benefit our understanding of the subject.

Quite frankly, if you do not have personal experience that can contribute to this discussion, you can feel free to refrain from contributing. Those personal anecdotes that you seem to scorn are our life experiences. Those are the lessons we learn from that have shaped the person we are today. Without those anecdotes, we would all be clueless gumbies. Your apparent lack of understanding of physics (as has been noted several times), dearth of climbing experience, and surplus of personal jabs are not furthering this discussion in a meaningful way. I believe that the "old guys" and I will do just fine without your fanboyism. I have considerably more respect for Senor Arroz and Buck Rio, despite our disagreements, than I do for your propagation of armchair dogma. The "old guys", Corey, many of the contributors, and I have many things in common. We speak from experience. The fact that we are still climbing is a testament to practicing safe belay and climbing practices.

I will mention that I learn new techniques and ideas all of the time, even from climbers younger than myself. It is always good to have a new trick to add to the repertoire.

Perhaps you can contribute to the climbing community in a meaningful way rather than expressing unfounded and frequently unhelpful opinions hundreds of times in forums. Here are some actionable suggestions. Please let me know if I need to elaborate. Donate to the Access Fund and ASCA, replace aging anchors, pick up trash,  build trails, open new routes, teach clinics, write guidebooks, volunteer for SAR, or learn how to be a competent climber so you can mentor others how to climb safely. As some of us have pointed out, there are many beginner climbers who don't know how to climb safely. Why don't you adopt a gumby and show them how to do it yourself?

These are all ways that the "old guys" and some of us not so old guys contribute to help the climbing community. As much as we might disagree about certain issues, we have a mutual respect for each other and we work for our common interest. When you put your money, time, and effort where your mouth is, then we will listen to you. Until then, I will unambiguously exercise my freedom of speech as you have exercised yours. I tire of your worthless spamming on these forums when others have meaningful, experience-based information to contribute. Put up or shut up.

Juan Vargas wrote: m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNTKX…

Holy crap - that sound!

Juan Vargas wrote: m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNTKX…

That was a bad belay...nothing to do with a soft catch IMO... needed more line in the system, since there didn't appear to be any danger of decking. Besides that belayer was standing too effing far away from the base IMO.

Buck Rio wrote:

That was a bad belay...nothing to do with a soft catch IMO... needed more line in the system, since there didn't appear to be any danger of decking. Besides that belayer was standing too effing far away from the base IMO.

That video was an extreme example of a hard catch, so totally related to the topic no?

Juan Vargas wrote:

That video was an extreme example of a hard catch, so totally related to the topic no?

Is there anyone in this thread who has argued against a soft catch on overhanging terrain with a danger of swinging into the wall? 

Juan Vargas wrote: m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNTKX…

That is an example of when you are built like a toddler and invert. 

Juan Vargas wrote:

That video was an extreme example of a hard catch, so totally related to the topic no?

Not really...I'm sure I would be able to find someone trying to get cute with a soft catch and letting their partner hit a slab, or a ledge, or the ground...totally situation dependent. To be honest, I hardly ever sport climb, I just am not into the scene that much. I would rather be in the mountains, or Eldo for that matter.  When you are out of sight of your belayer, a soft catch doesn't really come into play.

Dave K wrote: These climbers pushing limits in the 70s, 80s, and 90s were not regularly busting their ankles because they were getting spiked. How did they make it without the soft catch being a thing?

But look. It made them all OLD now!

Soft catch is the elixir of youth!