Head injury at Red River Gorge

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

Meanwhile, Sam Bloch's following comments and reports confirmed that it was the tree, and not the fault of the belayer or bad rope management. 

Please reread my reply.

Just because a tree *exists* doesn't mean other factors were not in play. For example: I have also looked at the climbers tick list, and if it's accurate and up to date, this would have been the climbers hardest red point grade outside. Awesome to see folks pushing themselves, but perhaps fall experience came into play as well. Only stating this to show that it's entirely possible other factors besides the tree caused/ added to the accident. The tree didnt cause him to fall.  Per my last reply, We will never know *exactly* what happened, unless the climber is able to speak on it. Everything else is an opinion of what they think they saw or know (myself included), and also making an assumption of the climbers red point grade.

There are routes where trees are closer to the wall than this one, where excellent rope management could keep you out of danger (via climber or belayer), or as Blake mentioned, keep you from undercutting a roof or decking on a ledge. Should we give routes R ratings because a roof or ledge *exists*? No. Should we give routes R ratings because an accident happened? No. I'm sure your intent was well intentioned. But please don't suggest safety ratings unless you've at least been on a route.

I have already gotten the "R" rating removed.

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

"I make routes R from my desk"

Great job on patrolling the threads, David.

Now do Little Cottonwood. Too many Rs not enough bolts. Not safe.

Hi Kristi, thanks for chiming in. I hope you and your people are doing well -- you were so supportive and helpful on the day of the accident. Seems like you've been climbing a bunch since then  -- that's awesome.

I agree that the tree does not necessitate the route receiving an R rating, but I think it's reasonbale to mention to your belayer (hence my comment on the route's MP page) before tying into the route, just as you might mention other hazards (ledges, hollow rock, run out, choss etc.) 

My friend's fall had such a serious consequence because of a number of factors, the tree being one but not all of them. Extra slack out, and the fall being particularly "outward," or "parabolic," are two additional factors at play. David, if you reread my post in this thread and my comment on the route, I never suggested that the route be changed to an R rating, or that my friend's injury was entirely the tree's "fault" (I also know your intentions were good -- I'm not a part of the pitchforks coming for ya). 

In the end, whether there is an R attached to this climb, or any other, on a website is pretty insignificant, in my opinion. Whether a route has a danger routing on MP or not, it feels important for the climber and belayer to be aware of hazards, be focused, aware of objective hazards, take safety precautions, etc. etc. even at "safe" feeling sport areas, like the Red. Everyone be safe out there and climb hard.

Sam

When did we forget that climbing is inherently dangerous? That this is one activity for which you are responsible for your own consequential decisions, whether you like it or not. 

If you're judging whether or not a route is dangerous for you simply based on an r rating in an online forum, or the lack of an r rating, tennis might be a more appropriate activity. The debate over whether this route is r or not is ridiculous. 

super lame move DW

As one of the few people on this thread that was there here are the key take aways from this discussion in my opinion.

1. Just because someone gets hurts or dies on a route doesn’t mean the route is R/X and just because someone doesn’t get hurt or dies doesn’t mean it’s not R/X.

2. MIPS helmets are pretty amazing.  Mine saved me from severe injury or maybe even death earlier this year when I took a serious fall and I my head made full contact with the rock.  My helmet exploded.  I walked away without even a headache.  They are worth the few extra bucks.  Don’t be embarrassed to wear one sport climbing if it makes you more confident.  It’s easy to get flipped upside down on a sport route.

3. Shit happens.

4. The climber had a very serious injury but it looks like he’s gonna be ok.  In no small part because of the people that were there with medical training and the highly trained SAR team.

M Santisiwrote:

As one of the few people on this thread that was there here are the key take aways from this discussion in my opinion.

1. Just because someone gets hurts or dies on a route doesn’t mean the route is R/X and just because someone doesn’t get hurt or dies doesn’t mean it’s not R/X.

2. MIPS helmets are pretty amazing.  Mine saved me from severe injury or maybe even death earlier this year when I took a serious fall and I my head made full contact with the rock.  My helmet exploded.  I walked away without even a headache.  They are worth the few extra bucks.  Don’t be embarrassed to wear one sport climbing if it makes you more confident.  It’s easy to get flipped upside down on a sport route.

3. Shit happens.

4. The climber had a very serious injury but it looks like he’s gonna be ok.  In no small part because of the people that were there with medical training and the highly trained SAR team.

I am not here to argue about MIPS. If you read their data, it’s pretty compelling.

I’ve had a lot of climbing helmets over the years. They all kind of suck.

The only one I ever had that I liked the fit of, was a Vapor. It disintegrated when I dropped a Tupperware tote on it while packing the car. That’s a 2 foot fall with a probably 35lb box, not absurd by any means. It was completely crushed. I realized that I’d be better off with a thick beanie than that thing.

Now I wear a Vision. I’m between sizes and it’s aggravating.

I could totally see getting myself a new helmet for the holidays. What are you wearing, and how much has it pissed you off since you got it?

highaltitudeflatulentexpulsionwrote:

I am not here to argue about MIPS. If you read their data, it’s pretty compelling.

I’ve had a lot of climbing helmets over the years. They all kind of suck.

The only one I ever had that I liked the fit of, was a Vapor. It disintegrated when I dropped a Tupperware tote on it while packing the car. That’s a 2 foot fall with a probably 35lb box, not absurd by any means. It was completely crushed. I realized that I’d be better off with a thick beanie than that thing.

Now I wear a Vision. I’m between sizes and it’s aggravating.

I could totally see getting myself a new helmet for the holidays. What are you wearing, and how much has it pissed you off since you got it?

What are thoughts on old school hard shell vs newer styrofoam helmets? IE is shock absorption and complete shattering of helmet, with potential rock/head contact better than larger force to head and helmet integrity remaining? I don’t have a dog in the fight I’m just curious. Comfort obviously is one but hard shells hav never really bothered me. 

Climbing Weaselwrote:

What are thoughts on old school hard shell vs newer styrofoam helmets? IE is shock absorption and complete shattering of helmet, with potential rock/head contact better than larger force to head and helmet integrity remaining? I don’t have a dog in the fight I’m just curious. Comfort obviously is one but hard shells hav never really bothered me. 

When climbing helmets were exclusively for ice and multi pitch, I used an Ecrin Roc. Just a hard piece of plastic that is mostly head shaped. Seemed fine though thankfully I never smacked my head or had dangerous things hit my head.

It fit well enough as long as I’d shaved in the last week or so. I have that issue with all helmets though.

The Vapor I had was definitely designed to shatter on impact. It was comfortable and super light. The shattering thing though, I’m doubtful it would have offered any real benefit. I believe it could have saved a scrape and knot on the scalp. Larger impacts though, doesn’t seem like a helmet that can save a life or TBI.

The Vision I have is probably similarly flimsy but with a slightly harder shell. It’s beyond aggravating that BD didn’t make it it a true medium. S/M is too small for me. M/L is big, once cinched down to fit, the rest of the helmet bounces around on its suspension. It’s slightly better with a fat headband. That’s my fault for ordering rather than trying on.

It seems like one of the few MIPS options is the Wall Rider. What else is out there and what are some opinions? My use would be sport and single pitch trad, no longer doing ice, and maybe half a dozen multi pitch climbs a year.

I’ve been happy with my BD Capitan MIPS  

https://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_US/product/capitan-helmet-mips/

Climbing Weaselwrote:

What are thoughts on old school hard shell vs newer styrofoam helmets? IE is shock absorption and complete shattering of helmet, with potential rock/head contact better than larger force to head and helmet integrity remaining? I don’t have a dog in the fight I’m just curious. Comfort obviously is one but hard shells hav never really bothered me. 

I have the impression that the hard shells are more for deflecting projectile impacts and the foam ones are more for cushioning head into object impacts, so which is best kind of depends on what you are more concerned about in any particular outing. Think there are some hybrid models out these days that might be “best” if you just want one all rounder.

ZT Gwrote:

super lame move DW

Sorry.

Help me atone as it seems I don't understand danger grades in sport climbing: what would a standard 5.11 PG13/R/X sport route in RRG look like? I'm not talking about those ground up bolted runout slabs in yosemite that are basically route museums, but those standard rap bolted sport routes in the red. It seems to me there's nothing in the rap bolted sport climbing style that can't be mitigated with good decisions by belayer, climber, or ultimately the developer.

In trad it makes sense, because the gear quality/runout is 100% a part of the style, and if there's no good gear, that's just the nature of the line. But with rap bolted lines, what is in that style that necessitates the route to be "extra dangerous" outside good climber and belayer decisions? Doesn't it just mean it's a badly developed sport route if it has a danger grade, or maybe the route shouldn't exist or get closed until more bolts are added, the same way a route with a "bad bolt" should be avoided? 

With that in mind, I agree that it is 100% of the responsibility on the party, but does it have to be a one way street entirely? These kinds of climbing accidents among beginners are so common, and not everyone can get a proper mentor, a guaranteed 100% of the time solid belayer, or predict random weather conditions that might change the game. Even among expert belayers, attention wanders, and tired minds can miss certain details. There's a reason climbers will say "watch me on that part." 

I think there should be a designated field like that to report relevant unique dangers on the climb, even if it can be mitigated by good decisions, and even if we say climbing is inherently dangerous. The unsorted comment sections on MP kind of serves this role, but gets messy with a collage of opinions on route quality, route difficulty, history, send beta, and maybe some danger beta. I think those dangers should be close to the top above even the route description, maybe instead of what seems to me an otherwise meaningless danger grade for sport climbing.

PG-13 at the Red usually means a ledgy route where a fall is going to hurt you regardless of what you or your belayer do. Really a no fall zone. I have a hard time thinking of anywhere an R rating would be justified on a sport climb. I think you’re arguably right that there should not be an R rating on a sport climb unless it’s truly a wreck of a bolting job. Which is probably why most of the spray on “R” routes at the Red is that it shouldn’t be R. Actually that’s half the spray on the PG-13s.

For example: mountainproject.com/v/11374…

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

I think there should be a designated field like that to report relevant unique dangers on the climb, even if it can be mitigated by good decisions, and even if we say climbing is inherently dangerous. The unsorted comment sections on MP kind of serves this role, but gets messy with a collage of opinions on route quality, route difficulty, history, send beta, and maybe some danger beta. I think those dangers should be close to the top above even the route description, maybe instead of what seems to me an otherwise meaningless danger grade for sport climbing.

Nonsense. The description field completely satisfies this issue.

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

Sorry.

Help me atone as it seems I don't understand danger grades in sport climbing: what would a standard 5.11 PG13/R/X sport route in RRG look like? I'm not talking about those ground up bolted runout slabs in yosemite that are basically route museums, but those standard rap bolted sport routes in the red. It seems to me there's nothing in the rap bolted sport climbing style that can't be mitigated with good decisions by belayer, climber, or ultimately the developer.

In trad it makes sense, because the gear quality/runout is 100% a part of the style, and if there's no good gear, that's just the nature of the line. But with rap bolted lines, what is in that style that necessitates the route to be "extra dangerous" outside good climber and belayer decisions? Doesn't it just mean it's a badly developed sport route if it has a danger grade, or maybe the route shouldn't exist or get closed until more bolts are added, the same way a route with a "bad bolt" should be avoided? 

With that in mind, I agree that it is 100% of the responsibility on the party, but does it have to be a one way street entirely? These kinds of climbing accidents among beginners are so common, and not everyone can get a proper mentor, a guaranteed 100% of the time solid belayer, or predict random weather conditions that might change the game. Even among expert belayers, attention wanders, and tired minds can miss certain details. There's a reason climbers will say "watch me on that part." 

I think there should be a designated field like that to report relevant unique dangers on the climb, even if it can be mitigated by good decisions, and even if we say climbing is inherently dangerous. The unsorted comment sections on MP kind of serves this role, but gets messy with a collage of opinions on route quality, route difficulty, history, send beta, and maybe some danger beta. I think those dangers should be close to the top above even the route description, maybe instead of what seems to me an otherwise meaningless danger grade for sport climbing.

Fuck off im not reading any of that

Something like this I think would be helpful. The "safety rating" seems pretty meaningless for sport routes. For this route, I think:

"

Watch out for the tree:

1. Belayer: don't give too loose of a catch
2. Climber: don't kick too hard off the wall
3. <Link to relevant accident>

"

This field could also include postings about bad bolts, rather than having it buried in the comments, and buried in some other "bad bolts" thread.

Some jump straight to crack, but for most, these days, sport climbing is the gateway drug to outdoor route climbing. I think it would be pedagogically helpful to many beginners to articulate what might be redundant for experienced climbers. And even so, I'd still personally find such redundancy helpful, especially for long days.

Marc, in my opinion the description, just like the comment section, does not solve the "collage of beta" issue. Descriptions can include (or fail to include) movement and direction beta, history, danger beta, bad bolts, etc. Descriptions are unstructured and wildly vary in quality. More structure, for something as simple and generic as a route page, is better.

This isn’t the place for this discussion.  Maybe there’s no place for it but this definitely isn’t the place.  I say lock the thread.

M Santisiwrote:

This isn’t the place for this discussion.  Maybe there’s no place for it but this definitely isn’t the place.  I say lock the thread.

Where would a better place for a discussion surrounding climbing specific questions about injuries and accidents be found? 

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

.......

This is like helicopter parenting, and generational need for everything to be infinitely dumbed down... all bad. So bad. 

M Santisiwrote:

This isn’t the place for this discussion.  Maybe there’s no place for it but this definitely isn’t the place.  I say lock the thread.

???  Agree with Weasel above.   Lock the thread? Are you trying to out do David in ridiculous takes on how to  best save us from ourselves ?