simul climbing

builttospill wrote: I didn't know this thread was a quiz for me. Maybe I should quiz you on the correct usage of apostrophes?

First off...piss off grammar nazi...we're talking about climbing here not english class...shove your apostrophe up your ass. You can redirect from the actual discussion all you want. It just makes the point that you don't know what you are talking about.

Second...maybe you should look into it? Don't you think you should know all the potential hazards, why they are such, and how to mitigate them before making statements like.....

"the Tibloc is a tiny margin of safety when simulclimbing, but by no means makes it sanitized for the masses. It's a legitimate technique though, and anyone who climbs in the mountains who says they won't use it isn't going to get real far, unless doing moderate routes is of no interest to you(and even then, there's always moderate terrain on almost any climb)."

Ok now it's my turn to play grammar nazi...can you say run on sentence?

What about saying "Always" and "almost any" when refering to the same thing....which is it? "Always" or "Almost"?
Or changing what your saying by "clarifying" it in a later
post??

Maybe you should give advice on toproping....I hope you know how that works.

josh

Mark Nelson wrote:Landing on terra firma at a rate faster than the decent of the Meleagris gallopavo? (sorry but I didn't google, I wikied & I should say it's a misnomer, they do indeed handle a glide pretty well)

HaHa!

Thats funny shit dude!

josh

Wow Mark, you've been promoted to "dude". Now maybe you can get your ass up that 14c+ proj you've been working on.

well, at least it's better than my being the asshole of the week.

And just remember, .14c+ is just a series of strenuous sandbagged .9 moves with no feet -- I keep telling myself that, though I've still only managed 5.2

J. Thompson wrote: First off...piss off grammar nazi...we're talking about climbing here not english class...shove your apostrophe up your ass. You can redirect from the actual discussion all you want. It just makes the point that you don't know what you are talking about. Second...maybe you should look into it? Don't you think you should know all the potential hazards, why they are such, and how to mitigate them before making statements like..... "the Tibloc is a tiny margin of safety when simulclimbing, but by no means makes it sanitized for the masses. It's a legitimate technique though, and anyone who climbs in the mountains who says they won't use it isn't going to get real far, unless doing moderate routes is of no interest to you(and even then, there's always moderate terrain on almost any climb)." Ok now it's my turn to play grammar nazi...can you say run on sentence? What about saying "Always" and "almost any" when refering to the same thing....which is it? "Always" or "Almost"? Or changing what your saying by "clarifying" it in a later post?? Maybe you should give advice on toproping....I hope you know how that works. josh

Wow, that was a testy response. Luckily, there's enough apostrophes in that one sentence that I could shove TWO up my ass and you'd still have enough for it to be grammatically correct!

I was being a douche bag and can admit that. I only really found one sentence to be egregious, and chose to pick on all of your writing based on that. I'm no grammar nazi, generally speaking, but I'm still an ass.

But, by definition, my sentence is not a run-on.

"Run-on sentences join two or more complete sentences with no punctuation."

Nor is it a comma splice. These are two independent clauses joined by proper punctuation, although my parenthetical aside at the end is a bit much.

Regardless, I still don't know what you consider to be the biggest danger of simulclimbing. Just because I didn't care to speculate about what you find to be the most dangerous aspect doesn't mean I don't understand the dangers implicit in it. I understand the potential for destroyed sheaths or even entire ropes, multiplied forces on protection, the rope and climber's bodies in the event of a fall by either climber, a lack of stretch available to the leader if the second falls and pulls the leader off, and shortroping a leader.

P.S. Changing what I'm saying by clarifying later? I didn't change it, I clarified. The sentence that I clarified was potentially confusing. That's not even an issue of grammar, douche bag.

By the way, regardless of our argument about grammar and semantics, I think I'll pick up a ropeman and use them in the future.

I don't think the 3.7 ounce difference between it and a tibloc is significant enough to justify using a tibloc.

Mark Nelson wrote:well, at least it's better than my being the asshole of the week.

Wow. I was laughing at your post(which was funny) and you respond with this?

I'd rather be an asshole and put the right thoughts in peoples heads, then spew forth the kind of shit that was passing as "knowledge" and "how to" in this thread.

I'm sure the rope man is to "heavy" for you guys as well.

josh

builttospill wrote:By the way, regardless of our argument about grammar and semantics, I think I'll pick up a ropeman and use them in the future. I don't think the 3.7 ounce difference between it and a tibloc is significant enough to justify using a tibloc.

Well than my point got across to at least one person....and I'm sure others are investigating it before blindly following now.

Nice doing business with you. I certainly wish you fun, safe days in the mountains.

josh

J - I was talking about myself in a different issue. Sorry man, didn't come over well.

J. Thompson wrote: I certainly wish you fun, save days in the mountains. josh

My god, I wish there were some sort of smiley face function on this forum (maybe I just don't know about it). That was too good.

You too though, honestly.

As an aside, Andy Kirkpatrick prefers the ropeman as well (and specifically cautions against the tibloc):

psychovertical.com/?10speed

Mark Nelson wrote:J - I was talking about myself in a different issue. Sorry man, didn't come over well.

All good....sorry if I lashed back. I've a habit of doing that.

josh

builttospill wrote: My god, I wish there were some sort of smiley face function on this forum (maybe I just don't know about it). That was too good. You too though, honestly. As an aside, Andy Kirkpatrick prefers the ropeman as well (and specifically cautions against the tibloc): psychovertical.com/?10speed

...save fixed to safe as it should have said....my spelling sucks worse than my grammar!

cheers,

josh

Wow, the thread almost made 3 whole pages before an argument broke out!

Damnit! This flame fest is winding to a close and we didn't ever find out what the biggest risk in simul-climbing is..

What is it????

spilling your martini, because the climbing is so friggin easy anyway; even a cave man can do it one-handed.

Ropeman wins again.

Not So Famous Old Dude wrote: What is it????

Well obviously it's the second falling AND pulling the leader off....but it's the why that's most interesting.

If the second were to fall and pull the leader off(it's dynamic because the leader might not get pulled off) then the second will actually pull the leader down has he/she falls. Thus the force/speed at which the leader falls is greatly increased.
So when the leader impacts the top piece 2 things have happened..they have increased the force and decreased the amount of rope/rope stretch to catch the fall.
So now the force's on the top piece can be HUGE. Failure is a very real possibility. If the top peice fails..then the domino effect is possible. Real scary shit....so don't fall. Well unless you're leading, and it's steep, because that might be the softest catch ever! Kidding of course....don't fall.

Have fun and stay safe!

josh

Mark Nelson wrote:spilling your martini, because the climbing is so friggin easy anyway; even a cave man can do it one-handed.

Oh and I'd glady buy any of you guys a martini.....vodka ofcourse.

josh

Actually Josh the worst case scenario is that the piece does not pull when the leader impacts it thus taking a basically static fall onto a piece which would most likely result in death. One of the few situations where you falling would kill your partner and not yourself.