Climbing Anchors - By John Long and Bob Gaines. Outdated?

2013 is pretty recent. I doubt that anything in a book by those two is "wrong." Part of gaining experience is seeing different ways things are done and being able to decide what is best for you and your situation.

And I hope this thread doesn't turn into a sliding-X debate. But it might!

Frank, If something is outdated enough, it could no longer be the recommended way of doing something such that it is wrong. Much like having the friction hitch backup for rappel off of your leg loop which is now outdated. People new to the sport reading this don't yet have the experience to know what to decide what is right for them, that's why they bought an educational book to tell them this. Yes, there are many ways of doing things, but if a large portion of the text on rock protection is not current and accurate, how can a relatively knowledgeable climber be sure that the sections on systems is up to date and accurate? 

I hope it doesn't turn into a sliding X debate. I only used it as an example of information in the book and knowledge here on MP going contrary to each other.

Be careful with hard and fast rules. The autoblock on the leg loop works fine.

Long places too much faith in dynamic "equalization ," but otherwise it's a good book with nice primers on  placing pro and fundamental principles.  Funny thing, the data about equalization was available before he published the 2013 book and even shared with him (think it was Rich?), but unfortunately he chose to ignore it, so by your definition it was outdated when it was published.

Also, sliding Xs are fine in the right situation.

The book is not outdated.  And keep in mind that MP posts are often made by good people with infinitely less experience than those two.

Much much much more care is needed with recommending variants one reads about here than with recommending that book.

Equalette: It is the one topic of that book I explicitly do not recommend, especially the part implying that beginners not knowing how to judge good gear might be able to get by due to the superior dynamic equalization of the equalette.

FrankPS wrote:

The book is not perfect, as there will never be a definition of perfect for this topic. 

All that matters is that if you follow the principles and techniques in the book, your anchors will not fail when you need them.

FrankPS wrote:

Be careful with hard and fast rules. The autoblock on the leg loop works fine.

Hard and fast rules? My understanding is that the AMGA no longer recommends this method. If the person rappelling becomes unconcious they can potentially invert, and if the friction hitch is off of the leg loop will cause it to bump into the rappel device and be defeated. Hence friction hitch off of the belay loop doesn't cause this problem when the rappel device is extended. 

cdec wrote:

Except when the ATC tends the prussic or the buckle gets released.

Yes, you have to make sure your autoblock is not too long  As with many things in climbing, it must be done properly!

Anyway, these are digressions from my original point - there's nothing wrong with the book and you have to have the judgement to apply the techniques in the book.

Bill Lawry wrote:

The book is not outdated.  And keep in mind that MP posts are often made by good people with infinitely less experience than those two.

Much much much more care is needed with recommending variants one reads about here than with recommending that book.

Equalette: It is the one topic of that book I explicitly do not recommend, especially the part implying that beginners not knowing how to judge good gear might be able to get by due to the superior dynamic equalization of the equalette.

Bill, Thank you for posting this. I guess it just surprised me that the information about rock protection is so outdated and no longer accurate that it had me wondering how much the other parts of the book were like this. 

FrankPS wrote:

  As with many things in climbing, it must be done properly!

As in use an extension and move the friction hitch to the, full strength, belay loop off the, less than full strength and possibly releasable, leg loop.

The basic ideas put forth in the book are still valid. Newer gear and options may make some of the placements different, but everything is still correct. The sliding x that you mention, while not ideal for every situation is EXTREMELY strong, so there is no need to avoid it completely. The AMGA guides are all about the quad anchor now, but it has its deficiencies too. Just read up and practice all of the options so that whatever the situation you're in you're able to build a good anchor. 

cdec wrote:

Except when the ATC tends the prussic or the buckle gets released.

If it can reach the ATC you've tied it wrong. If your harness buckles spontaneously release get a different harness immediately. 

anotherclimber wrote:

Bill, Thank you for posting this. I guess it just surprised me that the information about rock protection is so outdated and no longer accurate that it had me wondering how much the other parts of the book were like this. 

Give some examples of the outdated rock protection information. I haven't read the book, I'm curious to see what you're referencing.

Bill Lawry wrote:

And keep in mind that MP posts are often made by good people with infinitely less experience than those two.

Experience with climbing does not equate to understanding of the physics of an anchor. 

'Outdated' as opposed to what? Winging it? Basic Rockcraft? Freedom of the Hills? Though Basic / Advanced Rockcraft and FoH is exactly how the world learned to climb once upon a time and if they were still all you had you'd be just fine.

cdec wrote:

As in use an extension and move the friction hitch to the, full strength, belay loop off the, less than full strength and possibly releasable, leg loop.

1. auto block isn't requiring full strength to act as a brake.

2. If you are worried your leg loop will come undone, You should probably look at the identical buckle (on some harnesses) that hold your waist in the harness.

3. Just because something is "outdated" doesn't mean it isn't effective and safe. apparently they also say that the Grigri is standard for guiding nowadays. stupid mistakes are made and organizations use the "fail safe" models which require less skill and less overall knowledge to operate (more $$$ on newbies and expensive gear). Sprat/Irata have done the same things with industrial work and now with all this "safe" technology there are more accidents and near misses on record.

Had people telling me how the Grigri+ is safer than a standard Reverso in guide mode and my techniques were "unsafe". They proceeded to embark on a moderate multi pitch and had a ledge fall on a easily protected spot requiring them to self rescue and bail (which they didn't have the knowledge of and required my "outdated" assistance to lend them a rope and retrieve gear. don't see how you trust a buckle on a harness and not the identical buckle on a leg loop. 

John Wilder wrote:

I don't think he was referring to solely their climbing experience. 

Thanks for that, John.  Seasoned climb wisdom is a big part of what I meant.  Less about what theoretically makes sense and more about what does in actual practice - except for the equalette. ;-)

Scott Baird wrote:

Give some examples of the outdated rock protection information. I haven't read the book, I'm curious to see what you're referencing.

A fair amount of talk of how to deal with rigid stem Friends, mentioning two lobe cams and Camalot Jr. in passing, mentioning recent catalogs for referencing information which gear catalogs haven't been sent out in years. The four smallest Tricams, the heads being anodized and having dyneema slings. Saying that Yates Gear will re-sling them, which I don't believe they've done that in years. Saying that Big Bro's come in six sizes which maybe they used to, but I'm aware of only four and a discontinued larger number 5. 

Mind you none of this information is a deal breaker, but it seems for something that was supposedly revised in 2013, they didn't appear to put a lot of effort into verifying and updating the text. Which to me strongly implies that perhaps other system information maybe inaccurate or not updated either. For a technical educational manual of sorts it reeks of sloppiness in not updating the information in newer revisions. Considering how much people seem to really like and advise new climbers to buy it, I was surprised that this is how it is. 

Bill Lawry wrote:

Thanks for that, John.  Seasoned climb wisdom is a big part of what I meant.  Less about what theoretically makes sense and more about what does in actual practice - except for the equalette. ;-)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Long's decades of experience do not automatically make his arguments more logical nor data valid.  This is a common fallacy on MP and climbing in general, and tends to result in the promulgation of outdated ideas.