Textbook Bad GriGri belay puts comp climber in hospital

Paul L wrote:

This.  

I'm appalled that there are people saying that the climber bears responsibility for this accident in any amount because she didn't communicate with her belayer that she was falling from the top, especially other climbers.  Yelling, "falling," or even, "take," in the gym are in reality only courtesy.  You could even say the same for outside if just clipping anchors to lower off (yes, impact on community gear should be considered, but that's nothing to do with climber/belayer safety).  There's no reason for the climber to be at the anchor any longer than they need to clip the draws, so if they just let go in order to be lowered down, what's it matter?  Or, if they want to take an unannounced fall just to get the jitters out? It's all the same as just having a foot pop... the belayer should always be expecting a fall.  There is just not a valid reason to assign any blame to the climber once the climber is on the wall.  

I mostly agree…but communication and understanding your partner’s intentions and being aware of their actions is safety (whether belaying or climbing). Blame is not the point. Complacency is what kills climbers. Scrupulous communication is really what prevents most accidents. Just my opinion. (And I am certainly NOT trying to lay any blame on the specific child in this incident. Not only do I not know what happened exactly, but it’s clearly 100% the adults’ fault in any case.)

Andrew Rice wrote:

I know this isn't called "Gym Comp Project" but I'm going to point out another side-effect of this kind of shitty belaying. Competitors (and we're talking about mostly young people... kids) walk into comps and time after time have to rely on a belay from someone they've never met or seen. I know parents who spend hundreds of hours volunteering as comp belayers and who take it extremely seriously. I'd let them belay me any time. But every single time there's an incident like this it corrodes the confidence and trust competitors have to give to their belayers. Which becomes a distraction.

Also, this isn't the first comp fall I've seen. Back when my daughter was a comp climber I saw a kid deck lead climbing when his belayer had too much slack and was too far from the wall. Kid fell at the 2nd draw and just went right to the mats. Luckily he wasn't that high and it was just a bad bouldering fall with harness and rope on. The other time was a screw up by a speed climbing belay team. That kid hit the ground and I think there were some broken bones...

I've belayed at USA Climbing divisional/regional comps (also had a daughter competing). IME it's essential to have an experienced "head belayer" in the group to assess skills, make sure less experienced people are on little kids/toprope, run everyone through expectations and spot check belayers throughout the comp on their technique and rope management. I've also seen a kid deck from clip 2 - loose belaying, but that one was also on the routesetters. You've got to make them reasonably safe until you turn up the difficulty.

claudio ricardez wrote:

" Did she say "take" or "on belay" but the belayer did not hear her due to distractions? I can't even feel comfortable giving or starting a belay myself, unless I have had communication with my partner and know for sure what is going on. 

I give communication when the anchor set up requires slack and anchor set up. But in that situation you are taken off belay, but in her instance she is clipping anchors. She could have fell at any portion of the climb and result would have been the same due to the inadequete belay.

Ben Silver wrote:

So this was basically the “Euro” or “old” method but without the brake strand in hand, right?

Yes it definitely was this, something I used to do in the late 90s as well as everyone around me. We also *paid attention* as years of ATC belaying had us doing.  Petzl has put out great instructional videos on belaying techniques that are ignored internationally , I see people ignoring their instructions all the time. 

Khoi, 

Do you have a problem reading? I clearly stated I was not blaming her and was ignorant about gym and competition climbing and was just asking a question about how stuff is done in these circles. And I also clearly stated that the belaying was horrible.Others who responded, let me know that yes in fact it was common practice to just get to the top and let go and that he should have expected this as well. I was not blaming her but rather just asking if this is what is done in these situations and if it was common. I was tripped out by this because I have never belayed or been belayed without communication 1st.

The " being roasted" comment I made was because I was aware I was ignorant about this stuff and may get some crap for it. Was not trying to be controversial or troll. So, like yourself, I will be blunt. Unlike your pretentious ass, I have no problem admitting I don't know about something and asking about it. If you want to take that as being stupid and pointless, so be it. Now I remember why I stay away from gyms.

claudio ricardez wrote:

Khoi, 

Do you have a problem reading? I clearly stated I was not blaming her and was ignorant about gym and competition climbing and was just asking a question about how stuff is done in these circles. And I also clearly stated that the belaying was horrible.Others who responded, let me know that yes in fact it was common practice to just get to the top and let go and that he should have expected this as well. I was not blaming her but rather just asking if this is what is done in these situations and if it was common. I was tripped out by this because I have never belayed or been belayed without communication 1st.

The " being roasted" comment I made was because I was aware I was ignorant about this stuff and may get some crap for it. Was not trying to be controversial or troll. So, like yourself, I will be blunt. Unlike your pretentious ass, I have no problem admitting I don't know about something and asking about it. If you want to take that as being stupid and pointless, so be it. Now I remember why I stay away from gyms.

You might want to add the internet to that list of places to avoid!

Kyle Gilbert wrote:

I've also seen a kid deck from clip 2 - loose belaying, but that one was also on the routesetters. You've got to make them reasonably safe until you turn up the difficulty.

Was it at Mesa Rim? Would be funny if we saw the same incident. 

Andrew Rice wrote:

Was it at Mesa Rim? Would be funny if we saw the same incident. 

No, Chicago area. Teenage kid belaying at a youth comp, it was a very overhung, short route with a reachy crux at clip 2. Come to think of it, several kids decked on the same problem, but after the first one they put down some crash pads, no injuries. Overall the belaying I've seen at youth comps has been very good, but every belayer should be supervised to prevent what happened here.

Tone Loc wrote:

I mostly agree…but communication and understanding your partner’s intentions and being aware of their actions is safety (whether belaying or climbing). Blame is not the point. Complacency is what kills climbers. Scrupulous communication is really what prevents most accidents. Just my opinion. (And I am certainly NOT trying to lay any blame on the specific child in this incident. Not only do I not know what happened exactly, but it’s clearly 100% the adults’ fault in any case.)

Right, but in the context of a gym, and a comp training, that's all done on the ground.  There shouldn't be any expectation of additional communication from the wall.  [edit] to add, I think this is largely true in outdoor climbing, also.  The difference may be in particular the expectations at the anchor since there will be more times outside where the climber isn't clipping dedicated anchor draws or often times the anchor is in a place where falling is not excpected (ledge, large stance, etc), but this is again discussed on the ground.  

Also, youth comps are creeping into the conversation, but this particular incident was an adult at an IFSC World Cup training camp. Any belayer there should absolutely know that these climbers can fall anywhere, and often just let go once the anchors are clipped. 

Paul L wrote:

Right, but in the context of a gym, and a comp training, that's all done on the ground.  There shouldn't be any expectation of additional communication from the wall.  

Also, youth comps are creeping into the conversation, but this particular incident was an adult at an IFSC World Cup training camp. Any belayer there should absolutely know that these climbers can fall anywhere, and often just let go once the anchors are clipped. 

Maybe that shouldn’t be the norm? Humans gonna human, unfortunately.

Tone Loc wrote:

Maybe that shouldn’t be the norm. Humans gonna human, unfortunately.

What part shouldn't be the norm? 

If you yell, "Falling," while on a route, what's the expected response?  Should you then wait for your belayer to say, "OK! Ready!" before you fall?  Should every fall need to be announced?  I'm genuinely confused about what the norm should be in your opinion.  

It was well outlined in the first few responses how the belay was bad, both in practice and the overall setup (distractions, etc), I'm just not sure what the climber could/should have done outside of their on-the-ground checks with the belayer?  I also said before that complacency likely played some part here due to the level of climbing and the event they were at, with assumptions about the level of belaying that could be expected, which would call in to question who vetted the belayers since they were most likely provided by the gym/organizers.   

Paul L wrote:

What part shouldn't be the norm? 

If you yell, "Falling," while on a route, what's the expected response?  Should you then wait for your belayer to say, "OK! Ready!" before you fall?  Should every fall need to be announced?  I'm genuinely confused about what the norm should be in your opinion.  

It was well outlined in the first few responses how the belay was bad, both in practice and the overall setup (distractions, etc), I'm just not sure what the climber could/should have done outside of their on-the-ground checks with the belayer?  I also said before that complacency likely played some part here due to the level of climbing and the event they were at, with assumptions about the level of belaying that could be expected, which would call in to question who vetted the belayers since they were most likely provided by the gym/organizers.   

I just meant the norm of getting to the top and letting go intentionally without commands. Of course the belay was terrible/non-existant and of course the whole point is protecting against unexpected falls and of course that falls to belayer 100% of the time the climber of off the deck. But, most safety protocols are meant to instill habits that prevent the 1 in 100 accident. I get comp climbers push hard and “run past the finish line” so to speak. I’m just suggesting that maybe we should rethink the risk-reward of doing that. I’m not saying that happened here; it’s just a facet of the overall discussion.

Philippe Wagner wrote:

How did this person even get approved for belaying athletes? I mean I’m sure that’s not the first time he belayed badly. A “professional belayer” should belay… well, in a professional manner. Not paying attention and belaying with an outdated method are bad enough in this context but blocking the Grigri during the fall and not having the presence of mind to let go is a whole different degree of incompetence. 

I 100% agree that no one using that belay method with a grigri is a trusted belayer. Period. Everyone should know better by now and should have made the effort to learn proper technique with their belay device.

However, it has nothing to do with presence of mind and everything to do with bad design. Clutching the grigri in surprise or panic is a natural, instinctive reaction. That is why Petzl has worked so hard over the years to try to ingrain in every user that they must not grip the grigri or even leave their thumb on the cam while belaying. Many of us are old enough to remember when the grigri first came out and everyone held it with one hand to feed slack, which was Petzl's recommended method, until the accidents started happening. So Petzl reverse-engineered a non-intuitive, awkward belay technique to balance the device on a finger and keep a few fingers around the brake strand. Most of us have adapted and made peace with this technique. Some folks will even defend this work-around as completely fine and unremarkable. But the grigri is still a design that is damn dangerous if you use it in the way it was originally designed to be used.

Relatedly, I had my first and probably last experience driving a snowmobile last week. I was immediately troubled by the right hand throttle, which anyone with experience bicycling would instinctively clutch to brake. Only it's not the brake, it's the throttle. I was well aware of this problem during my snow mobile excursion, and I STILL almost ran over one of my friends when she suddenly braked in front of me and I instinctively tried to brake with my right hand. Not because I'm stupid or unaware, but because the lizard brain is responsible for split-second reactions, and the lizard brain bypasses rational thought. Fortunately, my lizard brain steered to the side at the same time that it hit the gas.

Again, not a defense of that belayer, who was using a technique known to cause serious accidents. Just a comment on what we can expect from the human brain. Anyone who thinks they'll have the presence of mind to override instincts or ingrained habits in a split second is playing with fire. Bad design makes it more likely that the user is put in that situation. 

L Kap wrote:

I 100% agree that no one using that belay method with a grigri is a trusted belayer. Period. Everyone should know better by now and should have made the effort to learn proper technique with their belay device.

However, it has nothing to do with presence of mind and everything to do with bad design. Clutching the grigri in surprise or panic is a natural, instinctive reaction. That is why Petzl has worked so hard over the years to try to ingrain in every user that they must not grip the grigri or even leave their thumb on the cam while belaying. Many of us are old enough to remember when the grigri first came out and everyone held it with one hand to feed slack, which was Petzl's recommended method, until the accidents started happening. So Petzl reverse-engineered a non-intuitive, awkward belay technique to balance the device on a finger and keep a few fingers around the brake strand. Most of us have adapted and made peace with this technique. Some folks will even defend this work-around as completely fine and unremarkable. But the grigri is still a design that is damn dangerous if you use it in the way it was originally designed to be used.

Relatedly, I had my first and probably last experience driving a snowmobile last week. I was immediately troubled by the right hand throttle, which anyone with experience bicycling would instinctively clutch to brake. Only it's not the brake, it's the throttle. I was well aware of this problem during my snow mobile excursion, and I STILL almost ran over one of my friends when she suddenly braked in front of me and I instinctively tried to brake with my right hand. Not because I'm stupid or unaware, but because the lizard brain is responsible for split-second reactions, and the lizard brain bypasses rational thought. Fortunately, my lizard brain steered to the side at the same time that it hit the gas.

Again, not a defense of that belayer, who was using a technique known to cause serious accidents. Just a comment on what we can expect from the human brain. Anyone who thinks they'll have the presence of mind to override instincts or ingrained habits in a split second is playing with fire. Bad design makes it more likely that the user is put in that situation. 

I’m just going to agree with that. I had a close call some years ago with a belayer using the outdated method but he let go of the device and I just had a longer fall. But he was also paying attention and not completely caught by surprise. As you said it’s an accident waiting to happen and nobody should be doing it anymore. 

L Kap wrote:

However, it has nothing to do with presence of mind and everything to do with bad design. Clutching the grigri in surprise or panic is a natural, instinctive reaction. That is why Petzl has worked so hard over the years to try to ingrain in every user that they must not grip the grigri or even leave their thumb on the cam while belaying. Many of us are old enough to remember when the grigri first came out and everyone held it with one hand to feed slack, which was Petzl's recommended method, until the accidents started happening. So Petzl reverse-engineered a non-intuitive, awkward belay technique to balance the device on a finger and keep a few fingers around the brake strand. Most of us have adapted and made peace with this technique. Some folks will even defend this work-around as completely fine and unremarkable. But the grigri is still a design that is damn dangerous if you use it in the way it was originally designed to be used.

I think the real problem is that many people think the “grigri resting on the finger” should be the default position and that decamming the grigri is necessary to pay out slack (not saying this is you, just pointing out that it’s common). Even though this isn’t nearly as bad as the old method of fully grabbing the device or anywhere close to what the belayer in the video was doing, I think it’s still suboptimal if used excessively. Unless you are using a really fat and fuzzy rope, most of the time you can pay out slack without even touching the grigri using almost the same technique you would with an ATC.

The only time I touch the grigri when lead belaying is when I need to quickly pay out multiple armfuls of slack (often for clipping or big moves). The first armful brings your brake hand to the grigri until the pointer finger touches the rail, and then you can smoothly transition to decamming with the thumb and rapidly pay out however much additional slack is needed. The brake hand comes off the grigri the moment the quick feed is done and sucks up any excess slack as the climber makes their clip.

This way, your hand is only briefly in contact with the grigri, and it’s at a moment when you are paying close attention to the climber and often anticipating the need to take in slack. This dramatically reduces the odds that a belayer will panic grip the grigri and makes it far more likely that they will instinctively clamp down on the brake strand as they should.

Tone Loc wrote:

I just meant the norm of getting to the top and letting go intentionally without commands. Of course the belay was terrible/non-existant and of course the whole point is protecting against unexpected falls and of course that falls to belayer 100% of the time the climber of off the deck. But, most safety protocols are meant to instill habits that prevent the 1 in 100 accident. I get comp climbers push hard and “run past the finish line” so to speak. I’m just suggesting that maybe we should rethink the risk-reward of doing that. I’m not saying that happened here; it’s just a facet of the overall discussion.

I would never tie in with a belayer who expected me to tell them before I fall or "let go".  That's insane and would totally f with my already fragile lead head.  I will very very rarely tell them to watch me if I'm low of the wall where a small bit of extra slack could put me on the dirt and in terrain where I wouldn't normally fall (ie, they showed up at the gym after me and don't know how pumped I am already).  But even the idea of saying "watch me" is pretty silly.  They better already be watching me- it's like their only job.

Tone Loc wrote:

Maybe that shouldn’t be the norm? Humans gonna human, unfortunately.

Since we're talking about a specific instance that was captured by video, tell me where in the entire video the belayer was paying attention to his climber? She could have fallen at any moment prior to clipping the anchor, too. 

Collin H wrote:

I think the real problem is that many people think the “grigri resting on the finger” should be the default position and that decamming the grigri is necessary to pay out slack (not saying this is you, just pointing out that it’s common). Even though this isn’t nearly as bad as the old method of fully grabbing the device or anywhere close to what the belayer in the video was doing, I think it’s still suboptimal if used excessively. Unless you are using a really fat and fuzzy rope, most of the time you can pay out slack without even touching the grigri using almost the same technique you would with an ATC.

The only time I touch the grigri when lead belaying is when I need to quickly pay out multiple armfuls of slack (often for clipping or big moves). The first armful brings your brake hand to the grigri until the pointer finger touches the rail, and then you can smoothly transition to decamming with the thumb and rapidly pay out however much additional slack is needed. The brake hand comes off the grigri the moment the quick feed is done and sucks up any excess slack as the climber makes their clip.

This way, your hand is only briefly in contact with the grigri, and it’s at a moment when you are paying close attention to the climber and often anticipating the need to take in slack. This dramatically reduces the odds that a belayer will panic grip the grigri and makes it far more likely that they will instinctively clamp down on the brake strand as they should.

I don’t agree on this, Grigri resting on the finger is the default position when I pay out slack and I don’t consider it dangerous. I have the braking strand in my hand at all times and if the climbing falls my hand goes down in the breaking position (same reaction as with ATC). I feel zero temptation to death grip the Grigri when it’s only resting on my finger (doesn’t feel natural) and I even doubt I would be able to if I wanted.

Collin H wrote:

I think the real problem is that many people think the “grigri resting on the finger” should be the default position and that decamming the grigri is necessary to pay out slack (not saying this is you, just pointing out that it’s common). Even though this isn’t nearly as bad as the old method of fully grabbing the device or anywhere close to what the belayer in the video was doing, I think it’s still suboptimal if used excessively. Unless you are using a really fat and fuzzy rope, most of the time you can pay out slack without even touching the grigri using almost the same technique you would with an ATC.

The only time I touch the grigri when lead belaying is when I need to quickly pay out multiple armfuls of slack (often for clipping or big moves). The first armful brings your brake hand to the grigri until the pointer finger touches the rail, and then you can smoothly transition to decamming with the thumb and rapidly pay out however much additional slack is needed. The brake hand comes off the grigri the moment the quick feed is done and sucks up any excess slack as the climber makes their clip.

This way, your hand is only briefly in contact with the grigri, and it’s at a moment when you are paying close attention to the climber and often anticipating the need to take in slack. This dramatically reduces the odds that a belayer will panic grip the grigri and makes it far more likely that they will instinctively clamp down on the brake strand as they should.

The ability to pay out slack in a grigri without decamming, and without locking it up, is highly dependent on a bunch of variables. How long are your arms vs. the climbers? How fast and unexpectedly does your climber pull up slack? How high does your climber clip? How much slack are you willing to leave in the rope? How good are you at keeping the brake strand in the smooth-feeding position when moving between hand positions?

Go to any gym or crag, you will see it is exceedingly common for belayers to keep their brake hand up under the grigri. This elimates a lot of variables that can cause a belayer to short rope. The big thing for safety is that the belayer should take their thumb off the cam when not paying out slack. In addition to never letting go of the brake strand, of course. 

L Kap wrote:

The ability to pay out slack in a grigri without decamming, and without locking it up, is highly dependent on a bunch of variables. How long are your arms vs. the climbers? How fast and unexpectedly does your climber pull up slack? How high does your climber clip? How much slack are you willing to leave in the rope? How good are you at keeping the brake strand in the smooth-feeding position when moving between hand positions?

Disagree with your comments on GriGri design being the issue. Its the user 100%. The design works great when you are properly trained.

The variables you outline here are just none issues if you are properly trained. 

All of your arguments that the GriGri sucks are coming from a perspective of an untrained person.