The easiest climbing is the most dangerous?

Andrew Ricewrote:

Good rule of thumb is not to draw generalized conclusions about human behavior based on people at the outer ends of the bell curve. What Alex was doing was incredibly dangerous. And he could have just as easily died from a bird or a bat popping out of a crack in his face and startling him. But unless you and I are planning to free solo the El Cap Boulder Problem it's kind of beside the point. And, as noted, Alex backed off his first attempt after feeling out of sorts on the 5.11 slab pitch. And he got injured being dropped by Sani. 

I wish folks would stop saying she dropped him, climbing on a short rope with no knot was 99.9% on him. 

It still does make the OPs point though, most car accidents are within five miles of ones home on familiar roads.

I personally love nothing more than running things out/soloing on easy terrain these days so its a risk I'm willing to take, family, friends and all. I still believe it is safer than road biking for more context, safer than driving on busy interstate highways too.

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

the takeaway is to keep reminding yourself that you can still die on the easy stuff.  I always try to tell myself "it's not over yet. Focus! " it is not over untill you are safe on the ground. 

Every move brother, every move.

F Wheelerwrote:

Ladder rungs break too.  And people die falling down stairwells.  And I’m sure you’ve been on trails where a bad stumble could have sent you over the edge.  

No one stay completely protected in precarious situations 100% of the time.

Sure.  Totally agree.  I'm simply saying that when one can stay reasonably protected in precarious situations, I do.

Short Fall Seanwrote:

Hi Jake, someone else seemed critical of your response up thread, and I am also really curious about how you see this. Are you somehow going out trad climbing and never finding yourself in exposed, unprotected situations? On 4th class sections of approaches or descents? You're never runout on unprotectable 5.4 terrain on the last pitch of a 5.10 route or something? I'm thinking of all the places I climb multipitch routes, and I can't come up with one that doesn't have this potential. Maybe it's possible if you're always cragging somewhere with splitter cracks?

Please don't take this as snarky, as I'm genuinely curious about your views here. I often feel like there is a contingent that believes they can engineer and care-take all the risk out of climbing, and I just don't see it that way. I think of physical ability as the first line of defense in keeping yourself safe, and the idea that you can always be protected (by something other than that physical ability) to be a bit misguided. I take participation in climbing, but trad climbing in particular, to be a tacit acceptance that you may be killed or maimed by something that you could not have protected yourself against.

I'm not saying I haven't climbed R rated routes.  I definitely have.  It's not a regular practice, but I've done it.  I did it knowing the risk.  Implying that I said I never find myself in exposed, unprotected situations is both vague and a bit of a misrepresentation of what I said, to make it black and white, this or that.  Here's the meat of what I actually said:

"It happened to this guy. rockandice.com/climbing-acc…

I feel confident in saying, I've never done it."

 The "it" that I've never done is In the article I referenced/linked.  The "it" in the article is a guy that ran it out on easy terrain and died because he didn't protect when he could have (ostensibly, I can't re-read the article because it's behind a paywall now, but that's how I recall it).

That's all I'm saying.  If that was unclear, that's probably my fault.  I thought it was clear because of what's in the article.  How that went from "I don't run it out if there's pro" to "I never run it out on anything ever and never would" I don't know.  But regardless, that's what I'm saying.

I'm not inherently bold in any kind of climbing except maybe highball bouldering now and then.  So this matters for me psychologically.  What this means for me is that committing to an R rated route means I have to be super-inspired by the line to try it.  That's only happened a handful of times in ~13 yrs of climbing.  The commitment level for me with R rated vs. G rated is galactically different for me.  I understand that some people are built the opposite way psychologically.  I'm envious, to be honest.  But I won't ever be that person, so in hopes of clarifying again what I meant:  I don't run it out when I don't have to.

I appreciate genuinely asking for clarification.  That's probably as well as I can explain it from my perspective.

John RBwrote:

Examples:

John Bachar, famous free-soloist, dies on a 5.8. 

At the time of his accident, the route John was on was not known. Speculation was an easy 10. But I also may have missed later-discovered information.

Also, John had been suffering a neurological disorder where he would suddenly and completely lose use of one of his arms for a period.

But this is besides your point - which is worthy.

Bill Lawrywrote:

Also, John had been suffering a neurological disorder where he would suddenly and completely lose use of one of his arms for a period.

He continued free soloing knowing this?

Adam Rwrote:

He continued free soloing knowing this?

As far as I recall (he died 14 years ago), he was posting on Supertopo about having a neurological problem. I thought it was just one arm, but perhaps it was with both.  But he didn't post technical details (that I saw) just some vague complaints about this issue.  But yeah, it sounded like his arm(s) would suddenly just lose motor control now-and-then.

Given that he was at Dike Wall and climbing alone and soloing routes he'd soloed many times before, the likelihood is that either his neurological issue caused a fall or something broke.  No witnesses so we'll never know.  It's hard to imagine he'd fall from operator error given his resume and intimate familiarity with the routes in the area.

I'll defer to John Gill and Bill Lawry and others who might know more if I've said anything wrong here.

M Mwrote:

I wish folks would stop saying she dropped him, climbing on a short rope with no knot was 99.9% on him. 

Agree.

It still does make the OPs point though, most car accidents are within five miles of ones home on familiar roads.

A fallacy since most driving occurs within five miles of home on familiar roads. And I had always heard the figure of 25 miles, not 5.

Bill Lawrywrote:

At the time of his accident, the route John was on was not known. Speculation was an easy 10. But I also may have missed later-discovered information.

Also, John had been suffering a neurological disorder where he would suddenly and completely lose use of one of his arms for a period.

But this is besides your point - which is worthy.

In one of his earlier videos, he was asked when he was going to stop free soloing? His answer was when I die. self-fulfilling prophecy.

On any given day in mountain travel and climbing, one will move in and out of "must not fall" terrain, likely throughout the day.

It's key to note when you're in such terrain and behave accordingly. It could be on a trail where pitching over the side will result in a long tumbling fall. It could be scrambling in a talus field, etc. You get the point.

Consciously self-note: - don't fall here. And follow your advice.

John RBwrote:

Hmm, maybe my point was obvious then?  But I found it counter-intuitive. 

For example, when I watched Free Solo, my hands were sweating when Alex was on the Boulder Problem (insecure V7).  It didn't occur to me that the 5.8 pitches or the raps down East Ledges were more dangerous because he might let his guard down and make a mistake.

I don't know, whenever I solo something my mindset is very different then when I'm climbing at my max limit.  I'd say any example of Honnold soloing isn't how the average person solos.

When I'm on the steep perma drawed sport wall I don't have too much thought about falling and am usually laser focused on light hands and climbing fast.  

When I'm doing my solo routine which is significantly easier, I'm thinking about every foot placement, each hand hold, moving slowly, and focused on how to keep my composure. 

I'd argue I'm at my safest mindset on the easier stuff that has more risk than climbing at the max where I'm at times more of risk to skip a draw or slip since I'm trying to conserve as much power as possible since I'm so focused on performance. 

John RBwrote:

Patrick Edlinger, one of the premier rock climbers in history, died falling down a steep flight of stairs.

No one takes a belay on stairs... we are all free soloists when it comes to stairs.

Not that it adds much to this interesting conversation, but we can't forget about Barry Blanchard's stair fall: https://gripped.com/news/fundraiser-for-legend-barry-blanchard-after-serious-injury/ Happily, I've since read that he's made a good recovery. At this rate, we'll soon have to declare on our life insurance applications whether we live in a bungalow or a two-story house.

John RBwrote:

But I found it counter-intuitive. 

For example, when I watched Free Solo, my hands were sweating when Alex was on the Boulder Problem (insecure V7).  It didn't occur to me that the 5.8 pitches or the raps down East Ledges were more dangerous because he might let his guard down and make a mistake.

It depends on how you think about it: the level of concentration one exerts on the hardest climbing cannot be maintained all day long, otherwise I bet Alex wouldn't have gotten more than 100ft off the ground. Accidents tend to happen on descents b/c it typically occur after one is already over-taxed: you don't hear people screwing up rappelling the south rim of the Black Canyon as it occurs @ the start of the day.

rebootwrote:

It depends on how you think about it: the level of concentration one exerts on the hardest climbing cannot be maintained all day long, otherwise I bet Alex wouldn't have gotten more than 100ft off the ground. Accidents tend to happen on descents b/c it typically occur after one is already over-taxed: you don't hear people screwing up rappelling the south rim of the Black Canyon as it occurs @ the start of the day.

Yup, the huge relief of "it's over" at the summit when the descent lies ahead has gotten a bunch of us.

But half of the people I mentioned in my OP were starting their day when they fell (2 prepping on ledges, 1 was hiking to a crag).

I've sometimes been hiking with my partner and our 5 yr old daughter on some random Boulder trail (like the Aqueduct trail around Frisky) and it suddenly dawns on me that a slip in a few spots would almost certainly be fatal.  And I shudder thinking how many times I'd walked by and not even noticed it in my complacency.  Walking is such a wired-in skill and falling down is so rare (for most of us) that we don't usually even consider it.  As the difficulty increases, the awareness of falling does as well and we become more and more wary.  Alongside this curve is the fact that you pointed out, reboot, that we spend a lot more time doing the easier stuff.

Anyway, I now grab my little girl's hand on that section.  It's both of us or neither.

M Mwrote:

I wish folks would stop saying she dropped him, climbing on a short rope with no knot was 99.9% on him. 

Just want to say I agree with you here. Unfortunate choice of wording on my part. When the world's most famous climber takes a fall because he had an inexperienced belayer, a short rope and didn't tie a stopper knot it IS entirely on him. 

My personal kryptonite is marbles of gravel over solid rock.  They have a way of looking like forgiving gravel, but they're anything but.  My right hand bears a significant 2-inch scar that I picked up in an incident 100 metres from the trailhead parking lot (which also speaks to the premature "whew, the day's over!" mentality).  Ever since, I've had Kenny Loggins' "Highway to the Danger Zone" running through my head on the last kilometre of every trip.

I also cringe every time I read a news report about a mountaineering fatality with phrases like, "the avid climber succumbed to the cold, high-altitude conditions 200 metres from the top, after successfully summiting the peak."  Sorry, but if you die on the way down, that's not a successful summit in my books.

This is a topic that has become more acute as climbing veers farther away from precisely the kind of amorphous, semi-protected/unprotected moderate terrain typical of so many climbs from earlier eras. In that time, if you didn't like that style of climbing, you might take up bouldering or more likely, just quit climbing altogether. Many did, as they grew older and started families etc. The chance of an unexpected event such as a loose hold or rockfall or sudden panic in a bad place was seen as incompatible with adult life. This style of climbing however was seen as synonymous with "real" climbing and carried the aura of that "adventure" morality so popular from the Victorian era onward. "The leader must not fall" had the air of a Sunday sermon more than actual advice and many were the leaders who came up short and paid the price.

Technology stepped in in the 1960s and began to erase the appeal of these sketchy types of routes. Much better gear, high-quality ropes, and better shoes and chalk changed the sketch factor completely. Climbing gyms sealed the deal and now an entire generation is mostly unfamiliar with what might be called off-piste climbing. And TBH steeper cleaner more athletic climbing is, for most people, far more interesting than dangerous scrambly "classics" from the 1940s and 1950s.

But it is very feasible to find oneself, especially on longer trad climbs, in situations where the climbing is easy but falling is deadly and no technology is available as a backup. Claims are made that not placing bolts preserves "adventure" and keeps the rock undamaged. The purpose of preserving "adventure' on moderate trade routes climbed 10 times a day seems tenuous at best and the damage from adding limited fixed gear is minimal compared to serious injury or fatality. For some people, the danger is at the heart of the sport. Many of those people no longer climb seriously or at all but they do like to preach. I find it harder and harder to justify this attitude as the bodies are broken or pile up in some of these areas. In the end it's just rocks, rocks that will fall down at some point, maybe tomorrow, maybe long after all of us are gone and forgotten. The conflicts about bolts in the the late 20th century will probably strike future generations as peculiar to a time and place, like Prohibition or medieval theology.

Regardless, let your guard down for a second in climbing and it might bite you in the rear end and hard. Easy climbing and rappelling are ground zero for this happening. Be careful out there.

Well said Peter.  Currently there is some complaints at City of Rocks due to some popular old trad/solo routes getting bolted on Bath Rock.  Tough to say what to do. The Climbing Gold podcast has J Star talk about it, pretty interesting to hear some hard climbers opinions. 

I don't know about Barry but Patric was hammered.. raging boozer by the time he passed.   John Bacar had a lot of health stuff going on and he did go into it in detail on the taco.  certainly for myself there are boatloads of climbs that I used to be able to solo but no longer do. age happens...  they were pretty sure John was on a hard 10 and there is some speculation about rockfall but if he had an episode like what he had talked about on the taco and he was on a thin climb  it would be a done deal. 

Grant Watsonwrote:

Sorry, but if you die on the way down, that's not a successful summit in my books.

If someone onsights their proj and then gets lowered off the end of the rope, can they still tick it on MP?