"In direct" is not a climbing command, it's a status update!

Nick- I’m with you.
No need to announce “in-direct” at anchor if your going to then say “off belay” with your next breath. When you get to anchor you don’t need to say anything- when you pull up slack- it’s your belayers job to give you rope as you need it.
The only thing I ever say to my belayer is “take” - I wish to feel the rope pulling me up to the anchor then I say “lower”….
This climbing thing is incredibly simple.

HOW ARE ALL THESE PROS GOING IN DIRECT IF THEY NEVER USE A PAS ?

reboot wrote:

if you think "in-direct" is confusing, don't use it? But allow the rest of us who wouldn't partner w/ someone like you use it?

Of course you are allowed to do whatever you want, its just not best practice, and could eventually lead to a serious accident.  

that exact wording has resulted in accidents. 

I’m curious and would like to ask a favor.
Those of you who think “in direct” means “off belay”-

Where did you learn this?

A mentor? A partner? A guide? A gym to crag class? A book?

I find “in direct” extremely useful and would hesitate before climbing/projecting with somebody who didn’t use it exactly as I do.

Definitely something I plan to ask about before climbing with new partners.
Just as I always try to ask about lowering vs rapping single pitch sport routes. 

I don't think anyone conciously thinks it means off belay. many of us however have witnessed it taken as off belay unbeknownst to the person who just used the term.  its just so unnessicary. if the belayer is paying attention they should   know whats going on without verbal communication. If they are not paying attention in direct  just gives them an excuse to be even more  disconnected with the whole process.   Personally I only use the term if I have been asked  by the belayer for a break.  usually prefaced by the belayer with the question "are you in a good place?"  I hear that I know they need to do something important like untangle ropes, bathroom break, add or remove clothing layers etc.  At that point I will inform them that I am in direct and they can do whatever it is they need to do.  Otherwise its just slack, take or lower.  

Over post limits..

I use the method all the time, just don't use the term regularly.. I  feel the term gets overused and should never be used at the anchor.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I’m curious and would like to ask a favor.
Those of you who think “in direct” means “off belay”-

Where did you learn this?

A mentor? A partner? A guide? A gym to crag class? A book?

I find “in direct” extremely useful and would hesitate before climbing/projecting with somebody who didn’t use it exactly as I do.

Definitely something I plan to ask about before climbing with new partners.
Just as I always try to ask about lowering vs rapping single pitch sport routes. 

Agreed on all counts. But I go one step further. With new partners at sport crags, I tell them (nicely) at the beginning of the day “Do not take me off belay. I will never rap. I will always lower. So never take me off belay unless I’m standing on the ground next to you.” (Yes yes exceptions apply but…not really…) I find this to be a good way to get on the same page.

soft crux wrote:

HOW ARE ALL THESE PROS GOING IN DIRECT IF THEY NEVER USE A PAS ?

Dude, we just had a multi-page thread about how you don't need a PAS to go "in direct".

Anyway...

I would discourage using "In-direct" for anything other than telling your partner to take you off belay. Same with "Secure" and "Safe", which all mean the same thing. The reason you're saying In-direct, safe, or secure is that you no longer require a belay. If you still require a belay, you shouldn't be telling your belayer that you're safely attached directly to the mountain by some other means.

Even if you're just resting on a piece mid-way up, why say anything at all? It's not like your belayer can let go of the brake! What if the piece you're resting on blows? From the belayer's perspective, there's no difference between resting on a good stance vs resting on a piece... The rope is not under tension but the belay remains on.

When you want to lower off a single pitch climb, there is no reason to say anything other than "slack", "take" and "lower". Saying "In-direct" when you actually want to lower has and continues to get people killed.

There are clearly two camps of people here. 1) Gumbies and non-gumbies who don’t sport climb much, who think “in-direct” can possibly mean “off belay”…although why one would ever think this is beyond my comprehension…yet, I’ve seen it happen. 2) people who are predominantly sport climbers who work and dog routes, and who see the value in going directly into bolts, and the value in letting their belayer know that they’re doing this and that they can relax until climbing resumes. These people also understand that “in-direct” never means “off-belay” and would typically never use the command at an anchor. The real danger comes when these two groups intersect without realizing they’re not on the same page.

shredward wrote:

Of course you are allowed to do whatever you want, its just not best practice, and could eventually lead to a serious accident.  

Considering you don't know what I practice, how do you know it's not best for me?

There are basically 2 camps: those who don't have a lot of need for "in direct", and those who do. Yet somehow the former think just because they don't need it (and therefore can be pretty unfamiliar w/ its use), they want to make it a "best practice" for everyone, even though the latter group is perfectly safe w/ it.

My solution to csproul's conundrum is to NOT climb w/ the former camp, just like I don't climb w/ plp who don't understand a soft catch.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I’m curious and would like to ask a favor.
Those of you who think “in direct” means “off belay”-

Where did you learn this?

I don't think anyone here is saying that they use the two terms interchangeably (except the guy that almost dropped his wife...)

A more interesting question is who is teaching the use "in direct" at all? And what specifically are they teaching?

It's a weird, optional, pseudo command. It is common enough that it seems to be a standard, yet ultimately it is ambiguous and could even be ignored. It's a shorthand for "I'm no longer relying on your belay but I might change my mind so keep me on but you can relax if you want to but only until I'm no longer in doing whatever prompted me to go in direct..."

If the command does communicate to the belayer that they can change their behavior, should there not be an "out direct" command telling them to change back to normal belaying?

Look, I also don't think anyone equates in direct, to mean off belay.

However...

Single pitch sport cragging, climber reaches the anchor, yells down

"Blah bla blah!"

Does that sound like:

1. Take
2. Slack
3. Lower
4. Off belay
5. Dropped my beer

Or....hmmmmm.....some useless piece of information like in direct. You clipped the anchors, or got there somehow, and are proceeding with whatever the plan is. Yay you. 

Mid pitch, use in direct, sure, cuz who is going off belay then? If both partners know each other enough to know that they can ask for that, either partner, either way, then sure, use it as information for the belayer, or a request to the climber, as some of you detailed.

Best, H

soft crux wrote:

It's a weird, optional, pseudo command. It is common enough that it seems to be a standard, yet ultimately it is ambiguous and could even be ignored. It's a shorthand for "I'm no longer relying on your belay but I might change my mind so keep me on but you can relax if you want to but only until I'm no longer in doing whatever prompted me to go in direct..."

I think we've found our common ground, my friend.

But to csproul's earlier comment, I definitely fall into the camp of non-sport climbers who just don't use this term at all. 

I do hang on gear (more often than I like to admit), but I just don't say anything. My belayer continues to belay, and when I'm ready to climb again it's with confidence that there's been no unnecessary communication that could result in confusion.

csproul wrote:

…although why one would ever think this is beyond my comprehension…

Because in the English language "off belay" can be a statement or an imperative.

It can be the climber describing their situation: "I'm off belay... i.e. I'm no longer relying on you to hold the rope" because they are in a safe place, anchored, on a huge ledge, whatever.

Or it can be a command: "Belayer, take me off belay."

And different people do use it slightly differently that way. Stuff like "I'm safe" or "I'm in direct" can be interpreted as the first form.

I stick to "on/off belay" and if I'm going to be messing around hanging off a bolt or whatever I'll just say something along the lines of "keep me on, but I'm going to clip in here..." 

johndrico wrote:

I would discourage using "In-direct" for anything other than telling your partner to take you off belay. 

No. There is already a command for telling your belayer to take you off belay, "OFF BELAY".

You and many others in this thread clearly don't use "in-direct" regularly, so don't go assign some meaning to it when you don't use it. That's how people get killed. For climbers who use it regularly, it has a very specific use (and not at the anchor) that people I climb with understand well. You may never need to use it in your entire climbing life, that's totally fine. But don't conflate it with "off belay". 

soft crux wrote:

I don't think anyone here is saying that they use the two terms interchangeably (except the guy that almost dropped his wife...)

A more interesting question is who is teaching the use "in direct" at all? And what specifically are they teaching?

It's a weird, optional, pseudo command. It is common enough that it seems to be a standard, yet ultimately it is ambiguous and could even be ignored. It's a shorthand for "I'm no longer relying on your belay but I might change my mind so keep me on but you can relax if you want to but only until I'm no longer in doing whatever prompted me to go in direct..."

If the command does communicate to the belayer that they can change their behavior, should there not be an "out direct" command telling them to change back to normal belaying?

^^Aikibujin gets it
Belayers do change their behavior. They no longer actively are taking the climbers weight. They may even tie off the brake strand and go hands free until the climber is climbing again. I don't think it’s a good idea, but I even see belayers go completely hands free with a Grigri at that point.

And there is such a “out direct” command among many sport climbers I’ve climbed with. They’ll often say “back on you”, or tell the belayer to “take” so they can come off the bolt. Again, these commands are very common among people who predominantly sport climb, and it is clear that is not your crowd.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I have 100% seen a few people take “in direct” to mean “off belay”. In a few cases the climber meant the same thing and was going to rappel. But in a few other cases, the climber meant to be lowered and was off belay. Luckily, they figured it out before decking. I can tell you that every one of these latter cases were clearly novice and inexperienced climbers.

soft crux wrote:

Because in the English language "off belay" can be a statement or an imperative.

It can be the climber describing their situation: "I'm off belay... i.e. I'm no longer relying on you to hold the rope" because they are in a safe place, anchored, on a huge ledge, whatever.

Or it can be a command: "Belayer, take me off belay."

And different people do use it slightly differently that way. Stuff like "I'm safe" or "I'm in direct" can be interpreted as the first form.

I stick to "on/off belay" and if I'm going to be messing around hanging off a bolt or whatever I'll just say something along the lines of "keep me on, but I'm going to clip in here..." 

I’d never take someone off belay if they said ”I’m safe” or “I’m in direct” . Well maybe the first one, but only if they were a euro and we discussed before hand that this meant “off belay”. For everyone that isn’t a Gumby or from another country with a different set of commands (that they mutually understand) the only command that means take me off belay is “off belay”, and to do so with these supposed other commands is just plain irresponsible.

It's a weird thing to yell to your belayer, especially if you climb with a variety of partners.

What I think IS important at a sport crag with other parties climbing around you is to yell out your belayer's name previous to any command, especially from the anchor. "Barbara! Off belay..." I got taken off belay once mid-pitch because someone with a voice similar to mine yelled "off belay" and my belayer thought it was me. This happened on an Owens River Gorge route were the pitch goes around a corner so the belayer can't see the leader. Imagine my surprise to hear my belayer yell "off belay."   

In another incident involving bad communication, a good friend, I'll call him Rick, very nearly got killed on my watch. It happened on a route called Shithooks in the Meadows. I led in one long pitch on doubles. At the top I tied the ropes together, set up a TR, and rapped. We were three, so Rick could lower or rap. When he got to the anchor, on TR, he fiddled around for a minute and yelled down "Off belay." Taking him at his word and assuming he'd rap - easier on the thinner doubles -  I took him off and turned around to talk with two rangers who happened to be on the scene. One was new and the other was showing her around. Then I heard Rick yell "Take." WTF? I dove for the rope and threw the live end around and under my arms just as he weighted the rig. Lucky for buddy it wasn't too steep. 

Communication, both before a climber leaves the ground, and after, is a matter of life and death. KISS. Keep it simple stupid.

Even just using names isn't safe. Was at a wall with only a single other group when my partner yelled "G, I'm off belay". I looked over as I was taking my partner off when I saw the other belayer, who apparently had the same name, start doing the same. Their leader was definitely not yet at the anchor.

slo ta wrote:

Even just using names isn't safe. Was at a wall with only a single other group when my partner yelled "G, I'm off belay". I looked over as I was taking my partner off when I saw the other belayer, who apparently had the same name, start doing the same. Their leader was definitely not yet at the anchor.

Yeah I know, but it sure increases the odds...