It is not ok to simul climb over another party

See now what I do is head to the pow pow in the wee hours before the sun comes up. No traffic, or perhaps (if headed that way) ski resort employees and the regular powder storm dawn patrol; everyone going 4o mph in a blizzard. Get to the parking lot before the unwashed masses show up. Nap, eat breakfast smoke em if ya got em, good times! The simul climbers don't show up until 10 am   

Greg Daviswrote:

that being said if that is a concern why are you getting on a route behind someone in the first place?

Imagine hiking all the way in to the N. Ridge of Stuart or Forbidden or the Beckey-Chouinard, and then turning around and hiking back out because there was another party there  Or imagine being upset because a party is simul climbing above you on one of those routes.     

Kyle Tarrywrote:

Imagine hiking all the way in to the N. Ridge of Stuart or Forbidden or the Beckey-Chouinard, and then turning around and hiking back out because there was another party there  Or imagine being upset because a party is simul climbing above you on one of those routes.     

iMaGiNe yOu ArE oN k2

Greg Daviswrote:

iMaGiNe yOu ArE oN k2

The West Ridge of Forbidden is a super popular moderate trade route, equating it with K2 seems odd. 

Anyway, the point is that there are LOTS of route out there where simply going home because there is another party there isn't really a viable strategy.  Same thing for simul climbing; if you won't tolerate simul climbing by any party above you, you're going to miss out on a whole bunch of really awesome routes, and maybe some new friends.

I'm just saying that instead of broad generalizations, we should acknowledge that appropriate behavior and strategies will vary by situation.

Kyle Tarrywrote:

The West Ridge of Forbidden is a super popular moderate trade route, equating it with K2 seems odd. 

Anyway, the point is that there are LOTS of route out there where simply going home because there is another party there isn't really a viable strategy.  Same thing for simul climbing; if you won't tolerate simul climbing by any party above you, you're going to miss out on a whole bunch of really awesome routes, and maybe some new friends.

I'm just saying that instead of broad generalizations, we should acknowledge that appropriate behavior and strategies will vary by situation.  That's probably too nuanced for the internet though.   

Fine. Alpine routes are a different thing, sure. Also the K2 comment was a joke, but Nuance and sarcasm both don’t work great on line? 

We have to generalize because we can’t go, route by route and in every context, and decide in every situation what’s best.

Besides, my comment wasn’t to turn around if you have a party in front of you but to pick a different route OR BE PATIENT. I get it, nuance and the internet yadayada.

Based on the number of folks on this thread saying they will pull someone off the route, block them, fight them(!!) I think painting with a broad brush to dust off these dumb ideas is a great move.

I’m pretty chill, I don’t mind people simul climbing above me or soloing by and have let people pass me plenty. Been climbing a long time I’m just happy to be out.

“I'm just saying that instead of broad generalizations, we should acknowledge that appropriate behavior and strategies will vary by situation.  “

Yeah no shit. Add “when applicable” to any best practice to avoid nit picking.

Greg Daviswrote:

 if that is a concern why are you getting on a route behind someone in the first place? 

Because I know I can simul past them and finish the route before the weather or daylight changes.  lol

Im just poking fun at your overly broad statement that there are "NO problems" being behind a slow party.  I agree with your statements about trying to avoid the situation to begin with, however as someone pointed out, there are lots of routes where just turning around or looking for something else isn't realistic.  Your statement about K2 is a bit of a stretch, this happens on all sorts of accessible moderates.  

I think I've only simuled past other people once, on royal arches.  It worked out great, everyone seemed to be ok with it,  and I dont think anyone was put in additional danger. We beat the 6 ish parties we passed to the raps, which probably saved us hours descending, and got me back to the cold beverages on the valley floor much faster.  

Happy climbing!

The point I’m making is that you can’t assume other people will be cool with it - clearly, read up thread you might get beat up lol. But yeah def have passed people and will pass people again, I just don’t expect it / plan for it. More like hope/pray. But I don’t mind waiting either.

Greg Daviswrote:

Based on the number of folks on this thread saying they will pull someone off the route, block them, fight them(!!) I think painting with a broad brush to dust off these dumb ideas is a great move.

0, 2, 0?

If someone tries to simul climb over me while I'm leading and doesn't ask permission I will again block them. Yes it's situation by situation, but ~90% of the time that's how I'm dealing with that situation. Granted it's only happened to me one time in decades of climbing...

The op anger is fully justified. These folks had no business simul climbing thru and put everyone at risk. Best practice is to climb around not through another party. And if u are climbing thru a party u better be careful and protect the 2nd from falling into the other party

What I'm reading here is that there are generally two factors that decide who should get to climb in front of others. One factor is who arrives first, the other is who is the faster climber. This is never a problem if the faster climbers arrive first, but it seems like the fast climbers like to sleep in!

Which factor is more important? I understand that it shouldn't be all or nothing... just because someone arrives first doesn't mean that everyone has to wait no matter what. And faster climbers shouldn't be able to just blast past everyone without even saying hello. I think that deferring to those that arrive first is more fair.

Another problem seems to be that there is a difference between how fast some people climb and how fast they think they can climb.

^^^

This post by Astrid Ray is fantastic; a very perceptive summary. Two parts of her posts are particularly true, and her chosen words are quite humorous (not sure if the humor is intentional or not):

"...but it seems like the fast climbers like to sleep in!"

Yes, so true. We've grown shall we say "civilized" in our old age.

And:

"Another problem seems to be that there is a difference between how fast some people climb and how fast they think they can climb."

Oh yeah, this is absolutely spot on.

Mostly these situations are so different from event to event that comments about "what one would do" are useless. Thanks for making me smile though, Astrid.

The third factor is willingness to belay brawl.

“Yer gonna want to clove in on that piece, homie!”

POW!

Violence first. Always escalate.

I expect to be guidelined for this piece of sarcasm.

“Yer gonna want to clove in on that piece, homie!”

Astrid Reywrote:

Which factor is more important? I understand that it shouldn't be all or nothing... just because someone arrives first doesn't mean that everyone has to wait no matter what. And faster climbers shouldn't be able to just blast past everyone without even saying hello. I think that deferring to those that arrive first is more fair

Being there first is FAR more important. And has been for decades. It seems like some people are trying to rewrite the rules of booty, the first ascent principle, and passing etiquette nowadays.

I've been stuck behind slow parties many times and it's only really an issue if the party is significantly slower (e.g. if the party ahead of you is only 50% slower you don't NEED to pass). And 90% of the time if you ask to pass they will let you if it's obvious you're faster. Most of the time I've been asked to pass I say sure.

But I've had idiots right on my ass, asking to pass, while there's another party or two or more in front in front of me, moving at a reasonable speed, so there's nowhere to go. And I say no. We're in a conga line, get in line and suck it up or go find another climb. They're like the people who tailgate right on your ass on the freeway when there's a line of traffic in front of you and no where to go. So they pass on the right weaving in and out of traffic causing way more risk and slowing everyone else down so they can get a few car lengths ahead. Screw those idiots.

In my mind this is less about the etiquette of passing, and more about how people should be careful not to overestimate their abilities when others' safety is involved. People just shouldn't simul-climb if they aren't really dialed-in. If it's a highly competent team of simul-climbers, most of us wouldn't care. If it's people simuling at their limit, casually taking falls, and just generally being questionable: no thanks. Given that simul-climbing is an expert technique (apparently) increasingly employed by non-experts, it's reasonable to be hesitant about a simuling party climbing above. A lot of people in this thread are taking this personally as if they are thinking 'how dare anyone question my abilities', but seriously: How much do you really trust a pair of randos to be competent simul-climbers?