"In direct" is not a climbing command, it's a status update!
|
Mikey Schaefer wrote: I’m not saying there is anything wrong with going in direct, everyone who climbs does it and I use it just like you describe. All I’m saying is there is no need to announce it. I’ve been going in direct for decades and never announced it to any of my partners then in the past few months I’ve seen people at the crag announce it and have it contribute to a few near misses. It’s a useful technique but a useless command. |
|
vital technique. dangerous command. |
|
This whole debate is a bit silly. Using this term for sport climbing is unequivocally best practice. It’s a sport climbing specific communication that means only one thing: the climber has clipped in to a bolt for the comfort/convenience of both climber and belayer. They are still on belay, but not actively climbing any time soon. The belayer will give a bit of slack, keep the climber locked off but can feel free to mentally relax, adjust their stance/layering, have a snack etc and await the command “take” to let them know they are back to actively belaying. It never EVER means off belay. In the majority of US sport climbing areas, best practice is never to come off belay but to lower, So to say “someone might think it Meant off belay=bad command” is absurd, as off belay should never be an option for the belayer unless specifically communicated beforehand or after crystal clear communication on the fly. That said common climbing commands are only useful if you know you are on exactly the same page as your belayer on what your commands mean before you leave the ground. If you don’t do that work before you climb and an accident happens that is not the fault of a command, it is user error. |
|
nowhere wrote: Dismissing the debate as it runs counter to your personal experience is a bit silly. The only things that can be considered “unequivocally best practice” are those in which there is no room for debate. This is not one of them. I consider tying knots when rappelling to be one of these things but there are plenty of people who would have a debate about it. When you make a statement like “this means only one thing” on page five of a forum conversation about different things a command might mean you may be missing the fact that others may have a different experience and understanding than yourself. It may have only one meaning to you and a different one to me. That’s why the conversation exists. To address the topic; I have climbed with partners that say this, usually at the anchor. I would agree that generally it’s more of a status update and if it has any effect on my actions it is simply that I relax a bit as compared to when they are actively leading. I was at smith a few weeks ago next to a group that had a guide. The climber reached the top and clipped in and yelled “safe!” The guide’s response was “what does that mean?” It was mostly amusing. |
|
“In direct” is best used in the bedroom. |
|
"In direct!" Or "straight in" means you're clipped into a bolt or Hardware but still on belay. Spread the word. Problem solved |
|
Nate A wrote: We have some climbers presenting faulty interpretation of verbal command, with some assumptions thrown in. This can not be described as a debate, it is closer to sharing ignorance. Here are statements, with some creative interpretation added to emphasize how stupid they are - Command "in direct" is dangerous, because I might interpret it as "indirect" which has directly opposite meaning. And, so on... |
|
His argument was basically “this is a stupid debate because “in direct” only means one thing. Your examples are pretty good evidence of that as a poor argument. Also, the obvious caveat that no matter what “everyone” agrees to on mountain project, there are people who are not on mountain project that didn’t get the message. Communication is key, preferably on the ground. |
|
csproul wrote: You'd never take someone off belay at the wrong time? Cool! The point that some people are making is that the meaning of these words is not as well-established as you might think, and someone might take you off belay. Do you see the "maybe" in your post? That's the problem. Sure if you have a discussion and work out every detail of communication with every partner every time there won't be a problem. Make sure you both discuss what you don't know that you don't know about the other climber's understanding. This is another one of those threads where the same characters declare with absolute confidence "I don't worry about this sort of thing because I would never be involved when a mistake was made" (Hey, I'm in also the club that never makes mistakes, so I'll like your post in solidarity!) Cue the long list of pro climbers that are injured, had close calls, or are no longer with us because of careless mistakes or miscommunication. And likely you won't ever be involved when a mistake was made, but only if ... |
|
Nate A wrote: Why are you and OLH hung up on cleaning anchors? Nobody is talking about using “in direct” to clean anchors. |
|
Guides, but maybe others as well, shouldn't be so parochial that they don't know that "safe" is the term for "off belay" in the UK. My take is that the belayer is either belaying or not belaying, and that they are belaying until the leader definitively declares the belaying job is over. Most of the accidents I've heard about occur because the belayer makes assumptions in the absence of a definitive "off belay" from the leader. |
|
soft crux wrote: Oh please, do tell us about this “long list of pro climbers.” Particularly as it relates to this topic. To summarize, everyone should expunge the term “in direct” because some people who have little or no use for it are confused by or refuse to understand the difference between “in direct” and “off belay.” Got it. And R. Gold, with all due respect, and there is a lot of respect due. No, it never, ever means to go off belay. It just means that I am no longer hanging off of the belayer with tension. |
|
Well team it was a good discussion. I learned something. My mind was changed on the internet. So, yeah. |
|
“Pulling up” is also a really useful phrase and one I expect my partners to understand and use. How many of you plan to take me off belay when you hear that? ;-) |
|
In Direct used at the anchor is 100% not necessary, there is no need for it at all. The belayer doesn’t need to relax and get a snack or put on a layer in the 1 minute or less it takes for the leader to thread the rings. He also doesn’t need to say it to get more slack, he did fine pulling slack to clip bolts the entire route he will be fine at the anchors also. Mid route after a leader fall I can see it being used in conversation like “hey I’m going to yard back up to my high point and go in direct and rest”. But saying in direct doesn’t or shouldn’t change what the belayer does so it is a ineffective command because it doesn’t and shouldn’t illicit a response. |
|
Frank Stein wrote: The topic is miscommunication. If you don't understand how that has caused accidents, then I can't help you. If you don't understand how miscommunication could be a problem, even after rgold explained it to you, then I can't help you. Nobody said the term should be expunged. That's you going hyperbolic because you are clearly irritated by the fact that others don't agree with your dogma. You can plea on the internet as much as you want about what YOU believe a word means. That won't change how it is often used (and it is often used at the anchors.) Funny how words don't always mean the same thing to everyone. But perhaps that's a moot point. |
|
Have y'all considered maybe discussing what commands will be used when with your partners before leaving the ground? More than any universal set of commands, just agree on a set of commands between you and your partner. And if you find yourself switching partners so often that such conversations are wearisome, maybe think about why you're switching partners so often? Might have something to do with your dogmatic insistence on one particular climber patois. |
|
This might be the most tedious thread in MP history. Yet somehow I still feel compelled to weigh in. In my experience, "in direct" is a very useful command in certain contexts, and can be confusing and hazardous in other contexts. So both sides of this tedious argument are correct, within their climbing situations, but they are talking past each other since they are referring to different situations. To elaborate with specific examples: 1. If you are working/dogging a permadrawed cave route in Rifle, "in direct" is a standard command that everyone uses. You whip, you boink up, clip your dog draw into the permadraw, and then you say "in direct" so your belayer can get back into position and rest a minute. In this case "in direct" is actually a command, and it means "stop holding tension on the rope and get back into position, while still keeping me on belay". This is standard protocol and all regular Rifle climbers will be versed in this. Everyone lowers (no one goes off belay and raps down), so the chance of confusion on this front is low. In this case, saying "in direct" is an appropriate and useful standard command. 2. If you are onsight leading a crack at Donner Pass, and get to the chains where you intend to thread and lower (but where rappelling could also be appropriate), saying "in direct" is unnecessary and creates potential for confusion. In this case it is just better to say nothing while you thread the rope, and the only command needed is to say "take" and the "lower" when ready. In this case, there is the potential for a lower/rappel anchor miscommunication, so it is better to minimize unnecessary announcements at the chains. Here, "in direct" is not needed and should be avoided. I climb in both of these contexts, and choose my use of commands based on situation. It seems like the crowd saying to never say "in direct" are only familiar with and talking about Scenario 2, and are ignorant to the norms of Scenario 1. And, as always, a thorough discussion on the ground of what you intend to do and how you will communicate is essential. |
|
Can we all agree that “in direct” DOES NOT MEAN “0ff belay”? Certainly in the single pitch sport environment the ONLY phrase that should mean “off belay” is an unequivocal “off belay” Further, I would suggest that the phrase “off belay” should virtually never be heard in that environment either… |
|
Mark E Dixon wrote: I think we do all agree on that. But there are examples of people, not directly in this conversation, that may not understand. This is similar to the grigri debates. We can all agree that a grigri should be used properly, don't clamp it to let out slack, keep a hand on the brake rope etc. And I don't think anyone would argue with any of that. But yet we see examples of people doing it wrong all the time. There's kind of a "shoot the messenger" attitude in some of these posts. I don't think it means off belay, I'm just saying that I'm sure there are examples of climbers that do use it that way. |