Backing up a PAS on a sport multi pitch climb

So a week ago me and my partner were practicing our multi pitch on a short 2 pitch sport climb and we had an interesting disagreement.

When I lead the 2nd pitch, it had 2 rap rings and a 3rd bolt. I went in direct with my PAS to the bolt then built a sliding X and clove hitched into the master point, so I was in to 2 pieces direct. This also allowed me to stack the rope on the cloved rope at my waist while my PAS held my weight. 

When my partner got to the belay as the follower he went in direct to the master point and was confused and slightly irritated that I was connected twice, because being directly into the master point is already redundant. 

I feel more safe, secure and confident at belay stations when I'm tethered with both my PAS and cloves in on the rope. I feel like it backs me up if something weird happens or I were needing to move my PAS. 

Are there any reasons why backing up the PAS like this is bad practice? Is this uncommon? 

You can clove in using a good length of rope and position yourself with a connect adjust. Tell him it’s common practice among bigwallers and he may be more impressed. 

Not at all uncommon. There are schools that teach that beginners — whether to climbing in general, or just to trad or multi-pitch — should always use two tethers, and only switch to one after quite a bit of experience.

Sure, there are people who don't find it valuable. There is also a hardcore group of anti-tether folks who seem to feel personally offended by tethers. As I see it, if it only saved one fall, it would be worth all of the downsides.

But it also does make my life easier — even though I use a basic, non-adjustable sling in a bowline-on-a-bight, and use the rope as my primary connection.

At the very least, I know that the last two steps before I leave any anchor are to test the system by weighting the rope, and only then unclipping my now-unweighed tether. No matter how tired or dehydrated I am, those happen every time because I train them every time.

I can immediately think of fatal accidents that would have been completely avoided by using a tether and taking those last two steps.

Pat Lwrote:

So a week ago me and my partner were practicing our multi pitch on a short 2 pitch sport climb and we had an interesting disagreement.

When I lead the 2nd pitch, it had 2 rap rings and a 3rd bolt. I went in direct with my PAS to the bolt then built a sliding X and clove hitched into the master point, so I was in to 2 pieces direct. This also allowed me to stack the rope on the cloved rope at my waist while my PAS held my weight. 

When my partner got to the belay as the follower he went in direct to the master point and was confused and slightly irritated that I was connected twice, because being directly into the master point is already redundant. 

I feel more safe, secure and confident at belay stations when I'm tethered with both my PAS and cloves in on the rope. I feel like it backs me up if something weird happens or I were needing to move my PAS. 

Are there any reasons why backing up the PAS like this is bad practice? Is this uncommon? 

i would not consider a sliding x redundant.  connecting with a pas and  with a clove is fine.  it may clutter things a bit more but gives you an extra margin of safety.

old5tenwrote:

i would not consider a sliding x redundant.  connecting with a pas and  with a clove is fine.  it may clutter things a bit more but gives you an extra margin of safety.

His thought was that an anchor going into 2 bolts is redundant. So attaching to that master point puts you on a redundant system. 

Could you elaborate a bit more on your opinion? Thanks! 

If you tie a knot for a master point you have isolated strands so if something happens to one side the other side is still intact. A sliding X is the least secure anchor generally for many reasons, including shock loading the system if one side fails. My understanding is that's it's generally fine for single pitch bolted anchors but not really recommended for use when multipitching. 

Tethering yourself to a bolt and then setting up an anchor, to which tou attach yourself is good practice. My partner getting annoyed at having an extra point of connection would be a yellow flag for me. 

Pat Lwrote:

His thought was that an anchor going into 2 bolts is redundant. So attaching to that master point puts you on a redundant system. 

Could you elaborate a bit more on your opinion? Thanks! 

it's pretty simple - two bolts are redundant, but the one sling with the sliding x is not (ie if the sling fails then the whole anchor fails).  if you put a figure-8 knot in the sling (to facilitate a master point) then it is redundant (ie if one part of the sling fails there is another part that holds).

Pat Lwrote:

His thought was that an anchor going into 2 bolts is redundant. So attaching to that master point puts you on a redundant system. 

He is correct, especially when using a climbing rope, which is inherently considered redundant, which is why people don't constantly climb with two ropes.  (Sometimes they do climb with two ropes but there are other reasons behind that, not because "we must have two of everything".)

If you want to also connect with a PAS it's not the end of the world, though it isn't necessary either.  One thing you'd want to ensure is that if you're at an anchor and lead belaying someone climbing above you, to have your rope connection point tighter than your PAS (or better yet, forego the PAS, which would give you more options for length of rope tether).  If you get ripped up by a big leader fall, and come tight on your PAS, which is static material, it's gonna hurt.

So, you and your partner both have a point.  Honestly, after reading your original post, my biggest piece of advice for you would be to learn anchor configurations other than the sliding x, which perhaps you do and I just can't tell based on the post!  :)

Seriously Moderate Climberwrote:

He is correct, especially when using a climbing rope, which is inherently considered redundant, which is why people don't constantly climb with two ropes.  (Sometimes they do climb with two ropes but there are other reasons behind that, not because "we must have two of everything".)

If you want to also connect with a PAS it's not the end of the world, though it isn't necessary either.  One thing you'd want to ensure is that if you're at an anchor and lead belaying someone climbing above you, to have your rope connection point tighter than your PAS (or better yet, forego the PAS, which would give you more options for length of rope tether).  If you get ripped up by a big leader fall, and come tight on your PAS, which is static material, it's gonna hurt.

So, you and your partner both have a point.  Honestly, after reading your original post, my biggest piece of advice for you would be to learn anchor configurations other than the sliding x, which perhaps you do and I just can't tell based on the post!  :)

Thanks for the reply! Yes I personally prefer a pre tied quad. But in this case we were also teaching someone brand new and wanted to keep it super simple with a sliding X on a Nylon sling.

I hadn't considered the lead fall and loading the PAS. That's a really good point. 

I think for me being primarily into the anchor on a clove hitch from the climbing rope and then having the PAS on above for a mental backup. Kind of what someone said above, knowing there are 2 steps before I am off the anchor. 

Number one, I applaud being connected to the anchor by two points. No matter how meticulous you are, one point is always more subject to human error than two. Throw in some cluster fuckery in a given anchor and its easy to not be properly connected with just one point, imo.

I don't recall the numbers but most adjustable PAS slip under leader fall like loads so can retain a dynamic relationship with the anchor (ie Petzl connect adjust iirc). Conversely, as others have pointed out, static daisies like a Metolius PAS as going to take an important source of dynamic cushion out of a lead fall and are less than ideal, imo.

Pat Lwrote:

I think for me being primarily into the anchor on a clove hitch from the climbing rope and then having the PAS on above for a mental backup. Kind of what someone said above, knowing there are 2 steps before I am off the anchor. 

I think my question is: do you trust your gear or not? If you trust a clove hitch to a locker to a solid anchor,* then why do you feel the need for a "mental backup?" And if you don't trust the clove, why incorporate it into your anchor at all? What do you need to decide to either trust the clove or reject? Test data?  To go out and bounce the heck out of it at a ground-level anchor? More mileage at hanging belays?

This particular anchor had three bolts, and it's often tempting to clip something to that third bolt so it's not all lonely. I get that. Do you feel the need to backup your clove when you encounter a two-bolt anchor?

For me, the downside of adding a backup in this situation is that it adds complexity. Accidents involving gear failure at tended anchors are vanishingly rare; but accidents involving confusion, lack of attention, miscommunication, and mental mistakes are extremely common. So i try to keep systems as simple as possible, and my anchors as clean and uncluttered as possible. Will one extra PAS throw everyone into chaos? Probably not, but it adds another strand, another point of confusion, another thing to manage. Add in a party of three, each person adding their own backups, and you have the makings of a spiderweb.

So go back to my first question: do you trust the clove or not? If not, why not?

*I do.

I cannot imagine caring if my partner prefers to be connected twice.

If they insisted *I* backed up my clove or tether, that'd be different, but I don't see how their tethering preference impacts my experience.

As mentioned it's fine to use both. Also as mentioned a sliding X isn't redundant (unless it has limiter knots). You don't need equalization on two bolts so you can just tie a knot in the sling to create a masterpoint and then it's redundant. A quad works but it's overkill. 

Seriously Moderate Climberwrote:

He is correct, especially when using a climbing rope, which is inherently considered redundant, which is why people don't constantly climb with two ropes.  (Sometimes they do climb with two ropes but there are other reasons behind that, not because "we must have two of everything".)  

No one considers a climbing rope as being redundant, because it isn’t. Like the belay loop on your harness, it is considered to be sufficiently strong that redundancy isn’t necessary.

I get what you are saying here, but these terms can be confusing to beginners and it’s best to use them correctly.

Jason Kimwrote:

No one considers a climbing rope as being redundant, because it isn’t. Like the belay loop on your harness, it is considered to be sufficiently strong that redundancy isn’t necessary.

I get what you are saying here, but these terms can be confusing to beginners and it’s best to use them correctly.

A rope is considered redundant in a climbing system because the sheath protects the core. You have to break two things to get the rope to fail. I've heard this in both the climbing and rope access worlds. 

How to speak about it to beginners I don't know, but it is correct in the rope systems world. 

Ricky Harlinewrote:

A rope is considered redundant in a climbing system because the sheath protects the core. You have to break two things to get the rope to fail. I've heard this in both the climbing and rope access worlds. 

How to speak about it to beginners I don't know, but it is correct in the rope systems world. 

In 25 years of working with ropes I’ve never heard of a single rope referred to as a redundant component. To the contrary, I’ve always heard it referenced as a single point failure. In the rope access/rescue worlds they use two ropes to make their rope systems redundant. In the climbing world we view it as resilient/strng enough to accept a single point of failure. 

The sheath may protect the core from abrasion, but beyond that? 

Peter Thomaswrote:

In 25 years of working with ropes I’ve never heard of a single rope referred to as a redundant component. To the contrary, I’ve always heard it referenced as a single point failure. In the rope access/rescue worlds they use two ropes to make their rope systems redundant. In the climbing world we view it as resilient/strng enough to accept a single point of failure. 

The sheath may protect the core from abrasion, but beyond that? 

I have heard this from AMGA Rock Guides I have taken courses from as well as the rope access instructor I work under (I am a certified CAL/OSHA rope access technician and assistant rope access instructor). 

For low angle in the rope access world one rope is sufficient. It is true that when weighting the rope and not simply using it as a backup that a second rope is required in rope access. 

Of course there are times when two ropes make sense and add a large margin of safety. However, what has been explained to me is that just as the belay loop is by itself redundant by being two separate loops of webbing sewn together, so too is the rope. What has been explained to me by multiple credentialed experts is that the only non redundant part of the typical climbing system is the belay device and carabiner, and this is because they simply don't fail in the ways other parts of the climbing system tend to. 

I'm not doing any original analysis here, just passing along what I've heard from multiple experts who I very much trust. I tried doing some googling and came up empty which I find strange, so I dunno how to proceed from here really as I usually try to back up my claims with sources. 

So if other industry experts disagree with what I've been told then I'm not sure where to go from there, but among the credentialed guides and rope access instructors I've talked with a rope is considered redundant on its own. 

Positioning is actually a really good reason to have 2 tethers to the anchor. Hanging and semi-hanging belays can be pretty bad with 2 people hanging tight on the master point. I’d even say it increases the likelihood of mistakes like dropping critical gear. 

[warning - going to get pedantic on redundant]

How is a single rope redundant?

You F up your tie-in knot and there's no backup.

Matt Nwrote:

[warning - going to get pedantic on redundant]

How is a single rope redundant?

You F up your tie-in knot and there's no backup.

Fuck up the master point on your anchor and your anchor isn't redundant either. 

Ricky Harlinewrote:

A rope is considered redundant in a climbing system because the sheath protects the core. You have to break two things to get the rope to fail. I've heard this in both the climbing and rope access worlds. 

How to speak about it to beginners I don't know, but it is correct in the rope systems world. 

This is the type of nonsensical nonsense that confuses people, and doesn’t serve to educate or help anyone understand why we back up some components of the protection system and not others.

The sheath and the core are separate but equally important components of a climbing rope. Without both, you don’t really have a climbing rope. It doesn’t make any sense to start breaking equipment down into its integral parts and then claim that the whole magically becomes a redundant piece of gear. Show me a rope with a core and two layers of sheath and maybe we can start talking about some form of built-in redundancy.