Ridiculous Climbing Gym Policies...Let's Hear Them

Artem Vasilyev wrote: For some weird reason the gyms in the Portland area all ban the yosemite finish as a follow through for your figure eight. You have to use a barrel knot. I personally don't use the barrel knot, because it's an inferior follow through compared to the Yosemite finish (makes the knot harder to untie after whips, and the follow through really interferes with clipping). I'll get a comment about it every now and then from a staff member - but I haven't had my lead card pulled yet.

Another gym I was at pulled my belay card three separate times for using the shuffle method while TR belaying (I wasn't trying to piss them off, I would reflexively and accidentally go back to this method since it's the proper TR belay method for taking in slack quickly). They would show up, ask me to immediately lower my climber, and would give me this look like I had just tried to kill somebody. It was a college gym and the kids pulling my card hadn't really ever climbed besides a handful of months at that particular gym. Was pretty annoying.

We already went over why the barrel knot is required.

The shuffle method is banned because while doing it people momentarily lose grip of the rope. If the climber falls during that period the rope will burn the hands and people let go completely. Seen it happen.

Tradiban wrote:

We already went over why the barrel knot is required.

The shuffle method is banned because while doing it people momentarily lose grip of the rope. If the climber falls during that period the rope will burn the hands and people let go completely. Seen it happen.

I hate the 2 handed gym method i had to learn but i find myself using it more often these days. It makes you have to bend a bit too far forward when taking in rope but it is the most solid method no doubt. 

Tradiban wrote:

Lol! I always loved to see people pull through a big arm length and then bend over to "cover" it. Short pulls my friends, short pulls. Duh. 

But that requires full attention and shit.

Marc801 C wrote:

We're  talking about climbing gyms in case you missed that!

But realistically, a lot of guys on the beach shouldn't be shirtless, either.

Why? The whole “no sport bras or shirtless climbing” thing is ridiculous.

sure, a lot of people aren’t looking all that hot without a shirt. And if this person were my friend, and ASKED my opinion of what was a better look for him, I might truthfully say that.

But just because I think someone looks better with a shirt on, doesn’t in any way mean that they should wear a shirt around me, if impressing me isn’t their goal. So, some pasty white guy with a bit of a beer belly and hairy shoulders took his shirt off while bouldering... why does it matter? Doesn’t bother me in the slightest. 

Lena chita wrote:

Why? The whole “no sport bras or shirtless climbing” thing is ridiculous.

sure, a lot of people aren’t looking all that hot without a shirt. And if this person were my friend, and ASKED my opinion of what was a better look for him, I might truthfully say that.

But just because I think someone looks better with a shirt on, doesn’t in any way mean that they should wear a shirt around me, if impressing me isn’t their goal. So, some pasty white guy with a bit of a beer belly and hairy shoulders took his shirt off while bouldering... why does it matter? Doesn’t bother me in the slightest. 

Enforcing a different dress code for different people based on gender (or perceived gender) can be problematic. Gyms and other businesses often choose to enforce that everyone has to wear a shirt rather than attempt to explain which nipples are acceptable and which are not and why, or (heaven forbid) allow everyone to be shirtless should they choose.

Artem Vasilyev wrote:

Why exactly is the barrel knot required over the yosemite finish? Both are easily inspect-able from a distance. The Yosemite finish is a better follow through knot. Furthermore, this is not the norm at most climbing gyms.

A barrel knot is most certainly easier to see from a distance than a Yosemite finish. A Yosemite finish does not back up and unfinished figure 8, a barrel knot does

For the second point - you're simply wrong. If thats what you think you saw, it was the belayer taking their hand entirely off the brake side - not them using the shuffle method properly. You keep full control of the brake hand as you retrace the rope. For example, you also pass the rope through your hand when you feed out slack while lead belaying. Why would the UIAA and Petzl recommend a dangerous method for TR belaying?

When you slide your hands along the rope you do not have full control. "Cover then slide" provides at least one hand with a full grip of the rope at all times.

Cover than slide is for noobs on top rope but for continuity sake extends to lead belay as well. The exception to the concept being while feeding the rope lead belaying, but that's just because it's a necessity. There's no way to "cover" while feeding the rope.

The shuffle method is simply the lazy method.

Debating these points is incredibly annoying. If your goal is be a troll then congrats, you've rustled my jimmies.

No troll. I just know a lot more about gym policies and the reasoning than you do.

Let’s be honest. When not in Yosemite using a Yosemite finish is just plain pretentious.

Artem Vasilyev wrote:

Something tells me you have no idea what a yosemite finish is. It creates an additonal friction hitch and backs up the knot. 

I use the yose finish myself and know it well. It's a fine way to finish a figure 8 but from a gym management perspective the barrel knot is better because it's easier to see and when a noob retraces a overhand knot on their harness the barrel knot will back that up better than a yose.
 

As for your second point, take it up with the UIAA. lol. To me, it sounds like you don't like hearing about methods that are not in line with your personal preference. I also think you are being dishonest with your account of an accident that you attribute to the shuffle method. 

The UIAA is just one one entity that offers their opinion on how to properly belay. My advice to you is to not blindly follow one entity's (UIAA, AMGA, etc) policy and think more independently. Regardless a gym can choose the method they like best and enforce that method. In fact, it has been an insurance requirement to choose one method to teach and enforce for consistency across the gym.   

The shuffle is an ok method but the "cover then slide" (PBUS) is better because it keeps one hand locked on the rope at all times.

No bullshit, I saw that accident happen a few times over the years. Climber fell while the belayor was sliding their hand up the brake side of the rope, the sudden jerk of the rope burned or perhaps more often surprised the belayor and they let go.

Seriously, the sake of your climbing partner rethink your lazy belay, it only takes once to mess someone up for life.

If I ever own a gym I will make everyone tie in by attaching a Beal Escaper to the rope clipped to their harness.   No Gumby hangdogging at my gym!  You weight that rope one too many times and that's it for you brosef.  We will let the boulderers have your gear if you fall so they can do some "real climbing" for their instas.

Really though, you have to remember that gyms are a business (and have liability concerns they have to at least pretend to mitigate.) and are only similar to "real" rock climbing like a leaf is to a whole plant. Get outside, talk to the owner, or find another gym.  

Also, wouldn't doing a Yosemite finish on a incomplete figure 8 just give you a finished figure 8? 

Forthright wrote:

Cliffhanger in Vancover, BC doesn't let you walk around bare footed or have your shirt off ever.   

Almost no climbing gym in the Vancouver area lets you walk around the climbing floor with bare feet.  Not Cliffhanger, not Base5 in Coquitlam, not any of the 3 Hive gyms, etc.

And I don't think any climbing gym in the Vancouver area allows you to be topless.

Tradiban wrote:

The UIAA is just one one entity that offers their opinion on how to properly belay. My advice to you is to not blindly follow one entity's (UIAA, AMGA, etc) policy and think more independently. Regardless a gym can choose the method they like best and enforce that method. In fact, it has been an insurance requirement to choose one method to teach and enforce for consistency across the gym.   

Not just the UIAA. This is now endorsed by everybody who knows a thing or two about belaying. The Alpine clubs from Germany, Austria, Switserland, Italy, France. Petzl has some good videos about this technique. I probably forgot a few.

This is now the new norm overhere in Europe. It is pretty ridiculous and highly annoying when a gym holds on to old methods because they don't know any better. But not much we can do about it (apart from complaining),  because it is their place and their rules.

Artem Vasilyev wrote:

I'm demonstrating it's legitimacy as a belay method - there are more than one organizations that teach it. The Canadian mountain guide association teaches it as well as, Petzl, Edelrid, and guiding associations across Europe. These are organizations full of highly experieced climbers who would not endorse a method if it were not safe. As far independent thinking goes, I am very particular about my belay methods and I carefully weigh pros and cons with each system. There are strong advantages to the shuffle and it is a gross mischaracterizarion to call it "lazy". I don't think you're trying to be objective and are simply trying to pick an online fight.

The PBUS is a fine method, but also clunky and inefficient. It can also be highly unsafe in scenarios where slack needs to be taken quickly. However, I'm not opposed to it and use it myself when it makes sense to (i.e. using an ATC on thin double ropes, as opposed to my usual single rope on a gri gri)

As far as your assumptions/accusation about me as a belayer, there is nothing more irritating than insisting somebody who uses a different climbing system than you will inevitably drop their partner. It's a sign of a keyboard chuffer imo.

Finally, I seriously doubt your claims. The shuffle method would not result in the rope sucking through the device if your climber were to fall as you are tracing your hand. This is especially true with a gri gri, for obvious reasons.

Hmmm...you seem to be bias to the lazy belay because you're not quite doing the PBUS correctly. Done correctly it's an excellent belay. Personally, I am proficient at both but prefer the PBUS for reasons stated above.

Bottom line is you need to follow the guidelines of whichever gym you are in regardless of your personal belay issues and bias. The rules are there for your and and your climbers safety and to allow the staff to efficiently and effectively keep the gym injury free.

If you need help with your PBUS belay post a video of yourself and I can give you some pointers on how to feed easier, etc.

Artem Vasilyev wrote:

I'm demonstrating it's legitimacy as a belay method - there are more than one organizations that teach it. The Canadian mountain guide association teaches it as well as, Petzl, Edelrid, and guiding associations across Europe. These are organizations full of highly experieced climbers who would not endorse a method if it were not safe. As far independent thinking goes, I am very particular about my belay methods and I carefully weigh pros and cons with each system. There are strong advantages to the shuffle and it is a gross mischaracterizarion to call it "lazy". I don't think you're trying to be objective and are simply trying to pick an online fight.

The PBUS is a fine method, but also clunky and inefficient. It can also be highly unsafe in scenarios where slack needs to be taken quickly. However, I'm not opposed to it and use it myself when it makes sense to (i.e. using an ATC on thin double ropes, as opposed to my usual single rope on a gri gri)

As far as your assumptions/accusation about me as a belayer, there is nothing more irritating than insisting somebody who uses a different climbing system than you will inevitably drop their partner. It's a sign of a keyboard chuffer imo.

Finally, I seriously doubt your claims. The shuffle method would not result in the rope sucking through the device if your climber were to fall as you are tracing your hand. This is especially true with a gri gri, for obvious reasons.

I think you are the one looking to fight. I bet you also got real mad when the gym employees pulled your card. Nobody has ever taken any privileges away from me at a gym and if Tradiban/Nick walked up to me and told me to belay a certain way at his gym I would do it with a smile. No big deal learning klunky yet safer ways of doing things.

Artem--the UIAA video and photo you linked describes the "hand slide" method, I believe, not the 'hand shuffle'--I think both you and Tradiban are arguing about this?--where you keep the break hand around the rope but 'ungrip' and slide up. This technique is definitely safe as long as the rope stays below the device. That said, if your gym prohibits it, its their prerogative.

The PBUS method, I believe, IS the "hand shuffle", at least thats what the UIAA describes in the paragraph below the video and photo:

This can be described as a “hand shuffle” rather than a “hand slide”. For this method both hands must be holding the tail end of the rope as the belay hand is moved back towards the device. In Canada this method is called “Stabilise and slide” (describing each hand’s function). In some countries (e.g. the UK), this method of belaying is taught to novice climbers, but research by DAV suggests that novices and experienced climbers keep better control of the rope using the method shown in this video for top-roping.

Maybe this argument is a failure to communicate.

That UIAA photo on the other hand:

If I got to the top of a climb and saw my belayer doing this I'd probably just walk up to him and slap that grin off his face before he could say UIAA...

Em Cos wrote:

Enforcing a different dress code for different people based on gender (or perceived gender) can be problematic. Gyms and other businesses often choose to enforce that everyone has to wear a shirt rather than attempt to explain which nipples are acceptable and which are not and why, or (heaven forbid) allow everyone to be shirtless should they choose.

I suppose...

Funny story. A friend of mine was once asked to put on a T-shirt while running in a sports bra on a treadmill in a regular fitness gym, not a climbing gym. On the wall of that gym was an ad for the said gym — featuring a girl running on a treadmill in a sports bra. 

Artem Vasilyev wrote:

Honestly, I'll go ahead and post a video showing you my technique for taking up slack quickly once I get the opportunity.It's not an empty promise. I can do it quickly with the PBUS - but it's much quicker and more straightforward using the shuffle. 

I agree the shuffle is "quicker and more straightforward", most lazy things are than their counterpart. However, quicker and straightforward does not make it safer, in fact it can make it less safe.

This is an extremely important when slack needs to be taken quickly (i.e. your climber just pulled out a large loop of slack and dropped it - but there is nowhere to run back to and they are about to fall. Or they are flying up a TR.) 

.This is a very common mistake with the shuffle method. You do NOT have time to "shuffle" and take in slack when a climber falls. In fact, the shuffle when someone is falling is very dangerous because your momentarily releasing your grip from the rope to slide your hand. Stop doing this immediately! 

Tradiban wrote:

You do NOT have time to "shuffle" and take in slack when a climber falls

I think you just misrepresented what the guy was saying - I don't think he meant to say that he is trying to take in slack as the climber is falling. I think he is talking about taking in slack when your partner pulls up to clip but then drops the rope, exposing themselves to a longer fall until they either finish clipping or the belayer pulls that slack back through the belay device. I don't think he means taking up slack once the climber is actually falling. I see this happen all the time - happens to me too - when you blow the clip, you sometimes hang on for a second, contemplating the fact that you've just ruined your redpoint, before giving up and letting go. In the situation where a longer fall is bad (ledge, decking potential, whatever), and the climber didn't do what they should have done which is either 1) don't drop the rope or 2) don't try to clip a draw that's still way over their head, I can appreciate the need to take in slack quickly and side with Artem on this one. PBUS is just not ever going to be as fast as the method Artem is describing - just think about the amount of movement PBUS requires. You can be really good at PBUS and reasonably quick with it, but someone that's really good at Artem's (and Petzl's, and the UIAA's) method is going to be faster. I worked in a gym and taught PBUS to everyone and, hey, it's great. It's safe. It's marginally slower, and yes, more effort. I'm definitely not going to say Artem's method is unsafe, though. I'm totally cool if my partners want to belay that way. 

Another take - if sliding your (closed) brake hand over the brake side of the rope is good enough for feeding rope, it's good enough for taking in rope. If you're not willing to climb with Artem because of his top-rope belay technique, you should probably think twice about lead climbing at all.

Artem Vasilyev wrote:Tradiban, I am firmly convinced your concerns are unfounded. This method is not a mistake and is the proper way to take in slack quickly. I have a serious issue when people try to bumble around trying to take in the new slack with the PBUS on a gri gri when their climber just blew a clip and is in serious range of decking. I consider it to be bad belaying. I'll go ahead and post a video later today once I've organized my gear.

When a person misses a clip (they shouldn't be clipping so high anyway) best practice is to keep your hand gripped on the rope, not to try to get a little extra slack in. When they are making the clip your brake hand should be close to the belay device (but not too close! pinch!) and your body position should be extended towards the climber so you can take in as much slack as possible with one motion.

Anson Call wrote:
I think you just misrepresented what the guy was saying - I don't think he meant to say that he is trying to take in slack as the climber is falling. I think he is talking about taking in slack when your partner pulls up to clip but then drops the rope, exposing themselves to a longer fall until they either finish clipping or the belayer pulls that slack back through the belay device. I don't think he means taking up slack once the climber is actually falling. I see this happen all the time - happens to me too - when you blow the clip, you sometimes hang on for a second, contemplating the fact that you've just ruined your redpoint, before giving up and letting go. In the situation where a longer fall is bad (ledge, decking potential, whatever), and the climber didn't do what they should have done which is either 1) don't drop the rope or 2) don't try to clip a draw that's still way over their head, I can appreciate the need to take in slack quickly and side with Artem on this one. PBUS is just not ever going to be as fast as the method Artem is describing - just think about the amount of movement PBUS requires. You can be really good at PBUS and reasonably quick with it, but someone that's really good at Artem's (and Petzl's, and the UIAA's) method is going to be faster. I worked in a gym and taught PBUS to everyone and, hey, it's great. It's safe. It's marginally slower, and yes, more effort. I'm definitely not going to say Artem's method is unsafe, though. I'm totally cool if my partners want to belay that way. 

Negative. It is not appropriate to take in slack that way in either circumstance. See my response to Artem.

Another take - if sliding your (closed) brake hand over the brake side of the rope is good enough for feeding rope, it's good enough for taking in rope. If you're not willing to climb with Artem because of his top-rope belay technique, you should probably think twice about lead climbing at all

​Feeding rope and pulling rope in are separate actions. Just because it's necessary to feed rope that way doesn't been the same is true for pulling in slack.

Tradiban wrote: I agree the shuffle is "quicker and more straightforward", most lazy things are than their counterpart. However, quicker and straightforward does not make it safer, in fact it can make it less safe.

.This is a very common mistake with the shuffle method. You do NOT have time to "shuffle" and take in slack when a climber falls. In fact, the shuffle when someone is falling is very dangerous because your momentarily releasing your grip from the rope to slide your hand. Stop doing this immediately! 

So Tradiboy works in a gym and is one of the ones enforcing ridiculous gym policies. We get it, "insurance.... yada yada". Can we move on and get back to more ridiculous climbing gym policies instead of the belay debate?

Khoi wrote:

Almost no climbing gym in the Vancouver area lets you walk around the climbing floor with bare feet.  Not Cliffhanger, not Base5 in Coquitlam, not any of the 3 Hive gyms, etc.

And I don't think any climbing gym in the Vancouver area allows you to be topless.

Which sucks balls when it's hot and humid and they don't have any air circulating.