Pro tip or gumby gym staff "advice"

Won't mention the gym to prevent any bias or unnecessary drama. I was taking a lead belay test with my friend who was new at the gym. When I led and fell, I ended up level with my belayer.  The gym staff giving the test suggested that my friend stand to the side of the bolt to introduce more friction into the system. We didn't say anything, since the whole process took about 40 minutes already and we just wanted to climb.

It has always been my understanding that the way to limit the fall distance is to stand directly under the bolt (rope going as close to plumb up to the bolt as possible). This way upward pull is resisted by the weight of the belayer as directly as possible. 

So what do you think, standing to the side of the bolt. Pro tip or gumby gym staff?

Eternal Gumbywrote:

Won't mention the gym to prevent any bias or unnecessary drama. I was taking a lead belay test with my friend who was new at the gym. When I lead and fell, I ended up level with my belayer.  The gym staff giving the test suggested that my friend stand to the side of the bolt to introduce more friction into the system. We didn't say anything, since the whole process took about 40 minutes already and we just wanted to climb.

It has always been my understanding that the way to limit the fall distance is to stand directly under the bolt (rope going as close to plumb up to the bolt as possible). This way upward pull is resisted by the weight of the belayer as directly as possible. 

So what do you think, standing to the side of the bolt. Pro tip or gumby gym staff?

Staff is technically right, but it is only a marginal gain in friction.

Comically incompetent staff. As a general rule going forward assume this to be the case. 

They'll make sure no one dies or gets seriously hurt, they're adequate at that job. If it's more complicated than tying a fig 8 then assume that a crossfaded dirtbag would be a significant improvement. 

Throw an Ohm on the first bolt and the gym staff nailed it (you stand 3' to side and back for suggested friction). 

John Clarkwrote:

Staff is technically right, but it is only a marginal gain in friction.

False.  You and the staff are technically incorrect.

A 180° bend around a biner provides more friction than say a 170° bend around a biner.  So the greatest friction at the first Quickdraw (edit:specific to a fall on the first draw) would be from the belayer standing directly below it. Of course it’s important to stand off to the side a bit when the leader is close to the ground  to avoid having a leader land on your head.

Furthermore,  the further the belayer is away from the wall or off to the side from the the first draw provides more ability for leader to displace the belayer horizontally versus vertically upward.  Hence, a longer fall for the leader.  

OP. This is correct.  
It has always been my understanding that the way to limit the fall distance is to stand directly under the bolt (rope going as close to plumb up to the bolt as possible). This way upward pull is resisted by the weight of the belayer as directly as possible. 

 Just stand off to the side a bit when the leader is only 2 or 3 draws up to avoid getting kicked in the head and prevent the leader from getting tangled up in the rope. 

So what I think the staffer was trying to get at was sheave resistance? Which it can make a small impact. But yeah, as Greg noted, not really important in this case. It’s basically just a simplification for friction, which each QuickDraw will add a bit of. But friction isn’t dependent on surface area, just the force and by extension, the direction that force is applied (hence a 180 degree bend - directs all of the force directly on the carabiner from you and the climber).

Changing your angle won’t really have much of an impact, but by redirecting that force, in this case you’re probably not increasing the friction because you’re making worse use of your weight (less direct application) and so less force on the carabiner in the first place. Now if you get to wrapping ropes around things, that math needs calculus and small angle approximations and stuff and it’s late I don’t wanna think about it. But basically consider it as you’re adding more places for the force to act normal (optimal for friction) to the wrapped thing. So instead you can prolly just, sum up the sheave resistance for each wrap and it’ll get you an idea of how much you’re increasing the force required to pull by friction.

Don’t trust gym staff for physics lessons is the tl;dr, I guess.

Greg Dwrote:

A 180° bend around a biner provides more friction than say a 170° bend around a biner.  So the greatest friction at the first Quickdraw would be from the belayer standing directly below it.

If standing directly below the first quickdraw provides a 0 degree bend around the biner, how does this result in more friction than having a >0 degree bend around the biner by standing some horizontal distance away?  

I do agree that, for multiple reasons, it's generally better to stand closer to underneath the first draw.  I just don't think it's true that you get the most friction at the first biner by standing directly under it.  

I vote gumby gym staff.  If the climber ends up that low, introducing more slack into the system by standing farther away from the first draw is exactly the wrong thing to do.

I was taught to stand at to either side of the first draw (about 1m max distance away) away from the climber, so they wouldn't land on your head.

Staff is technically correct about friction increasing, but incorrect about the outcome of standing to the side/away from the wall. The added friction is more than overcome by the changing of direction of pull relative to gravity-it’s much easier to pull a load sideways than straight up.

obviously what we care about here is how far the climber falls, so the advice is terrible.

Standing to the side/ away from the wall is a great tool for passively providing a softer (but longer) catch and keeping your body/your side of the rope from hitting the climber. 

Assuming they're having you fall from the last clip on the route, I'd be more worried about how you ended up level with your belayer.

You should stand slightly sideway, just enough to prevent being hit by the climber. Any extra distance from the wall/bolt line produces extra slack, which far outweighs the effects of marginal gain in friction. Also you will swing more, which increase your chance to hit something. 

This discussion is within the gym context. Outside, however, depending on the circumstances, there could be very legitimate reasons to not stand directly under the climber, particularly in areas known for loose rock. This has nothing to do with increasing friction in the system, and involves balancing the risk from extra slack in the event of a fall against potentially subjecting to belayer to being hit by rock dislodged by the leader.

Whenever I climb at the gym I like to throw slack into a pile right under the draw, and execute a running belay in the event of a fall. I've never short roped anyone and I give VERY soft catches. 

I don't like standing under the first draw, but that is a function of the "viewing angle" and not additional friction, of witch would be marginal. If your partner is falling far enough for you to be lifted off the ground you are going to swing under the first bolt or hit the wall effectively eliminating the "added friction" if your leader keeps falling, as they do. 

James Moffattwrote:

If standing directly below the first quickdraw provides a 0 degree bend around the biner, how does this result in more friction than having a >0 degree bend around the biner by standing some horizontal distance away?  

Its a 0 degree bend until the leader falls.  Then, it is a 180 degree bend.  This applies to a fall on the first draw only.  

Once the second draw is clipped, standing off to the side does create >0 bend at the first draw adding a bit of friction for a fall on the second or higher draw.  But, this is offset by the belayer being displaced horizontally more easily.  When I belay my partner that I outweigh by 80lbs, I intentionally stand a bit away from the wall to soften the catch.  

I do agree that, for multiple reasons, it's generally better to stand closer to underneath the first draw.  I just don't think it's true that you get the most friction at the first biner by standing directly under it.  

I vote gumby gym staff.  If the climber ends up that low, introducing more slack into the system by standing farther away from the first draw is exactly the wrong thing to do.

The 0 vs 180 degrees at the first draw depends on whether or not the second one has been clipped.  There is hardly ever - indoors anyway- a good reason for stand back away from the wall.  People tend to though to save their necks (queue the belay glasses discussion).  Standing a few feet to the side is generally a good practice though - both to avoid getting hit by the  falling climber (although ultimately you may end up side by side) but even more so to allow you to be able to step on and quickly give ~3 feet of slack (especially when using the dreaded Gri-Gri).

Of course in the wild there are many other constraints - as Alan pointed out.  In truth there are few absolutes - all context specifics.  In doors when dealing with the staff learn to smile politely and respond "will do" to all their requests.

Greg Dwrote:

Its a 0 degree bend until the leader falls.  Then, it is a 180 degree bend.  This applies to a fall on the first draw only.  

Greg, the person stepping to the side is the belayer, not the climber. You are right if talking about the climber, but wrong if talking about the belayer stepping to the side. In any case, the staff is overblowing some stuff. I can go find the page in my engineering textbook to explain after work if you want.

Climber end of the rope is always going to end up at 180ish after falling, belay end will likely end up closer to 0 if the belay gets lifted, but you can, as a belayer, increase the angle around the first biner by stepping to the side. Again though, really really marginal gains in friction.

John Clarkwrote:

Greg, the person stepping to the side is the belayer, 

Clearly.

not the climber. You are right if talking about the climber, but wrong if talking about the belayer stepping to the side. In any case, the staff is overblowing some stuff. I can go find the page in my engineering textbook to explain after work if you want.

Read my second post just above for clarification. 

Greg Dwrote:

Clearly.

Read my second post just above for clarification. 

We’re on the same page then. Weight difference makes a huge difference as you say. More tension in the line will increase the friction. I was approaching in a similar weight climber/belayer frame of reference.

Greg Dwrote:

False.  You and the staff are technically incorrect.

A 180° bend around a biner provides more friction than say a 170° bend around a biner.  ...

180 degrees is the angle over which the rope runs in the event of a fall on the first bolt with the belayer directly under the bolt. I 100% agree that standing to the side will reduce this angle and the resulting friction. Further, angle reduction leads to an exponential reduction in friction--though no big deal standing a little to the side.

Further, standing to the side--all things being equal--will probably add extra slack in the system due to the catenary shape of the rope between the first draw and the belayer. Obscure, fun fact: the catenary has the most slack when the belayer is 3 units to the side and the bolt is 4 units above the floor/ground. 

I agree with many posters above that there are many other considerations regarding where to choose to stand as belayer. 

Recap of the original question: I can't speak to the quality of pro tips nor Gumby thresholds for gym staff physics knowledge. But physics does not support the suggestion to stand to the side to reduce friction.

Greg D writes: “A 180° bend around a biner provides more friction…”
I’m no scientist, but basic geometry tells us that a 180° angle presents itself as a straight line with absolutely no bend at all. It’s at 179° or 181° that a very slight bend begins to appear.