Fix and follow?

I’ve been using this system for a year or two now, it works great. I use it on long free climbs, big walls, and for big wall free climbing. Some tips: 

-Avoid leaving the rope dangling if there are folks below you for courtesy. 

-No backup knots, two devices. I prefer two micros because there’s never any slack buildup and the feed the smoothest. 

-I like the idea about “fixing” on a grigri for downclimbs, I’ll have to try that.

-Make sure the follower understands how to begin ascending the rope by themselves if need be. Belayer can’t really help the follower at all if stuck in a hard section. 

-Hauling a pack or extra gear straight off the rope works pretty well *sometimes*. Works best on steep/overhanging or obviously clean hauls. I still often prefer not to take a pack and just clip shoes and maybe water bottle to the rope to reduce harness weight. If it’s lower angle, you risk getting your back stuck on the haul below you with no climber available to help retrieve, and a potentially taught rope. Not so fun, be careful which pitches you rope haul with. 

Derek DeBruinwrote:

Lost me here. Why 3 minis? Are you climbing party of 3? And micros work and are lighter than minis, if that's a consideration.

my response a year+ later, thanks covid, but 3 devices in a party of 2 = 1 for the leader to haul up packs etc on haul line, 2 more for the second climber to follow the pitch. if not hauling then only 2 micros total, but seems that hauling is one of the big draws here.

still wanting to try this system out, so much about it seems appealing

What could possibly go wrong?

• The rope never moves, so it can get sawed repeatedly at one spot if you traverse.
• The rope gets jammed in a crack at an overhang, so you can't get the rope out of the crack, and therefore you can't get your fingers in the crack to climb.
• Variation of the preceding item: you can't get the rope out of the crack, so you can't advance your ascender up the rope. (This has happened to me -- first the rope got stuck in the crack, then my Prusik knot got stuck.)
• You try to pull the rope up at the end, and it's stuck.
• Other parties are below you, and your rope is dangling in their face.

Read Accidents in North American Climbing. Rope soloing is something that occurs over and over in accident reports. I've found it to be a great technique for certain kinds of easy tree climbing. For hard climbing, it seems to me like a good way to create a self-rescue situation. Rope soloing has a reputation as a technique that seems awesome until shit goes wrong, and then shit goes very, very wrong.

Ben Crowellwrote:

What could possibly go wrong?

• The rope never moves, so it can get sawed repeatedly at one spot if you traverse.
• The rope gets jammed in a crack at an overhang, so you can't get the rope out of the crack, and therefore you can't get your fingers in the crack to climb.
• Variation of the preceding item: you can't get the rope out of the crack, so you can't advance your ascender up the rope. (This has happened to me -- first the rope got stuck in the crack, then my Prusik knot got stuck.)
• You try to pull the rope up at the end, and it's stuck.
• Other parties are below you, and your rope is dangling in their face.

Read Accidents in North American Climbing. Rope soloing is something that occurs over and over in accident reports. I've found it to be a great technique for certain kinds of easy tree climbing. For hard climbing, it seems to me like a good way to create a self-rescue situation. Rope soloing has a reputation as a technique that seems awesome until shit goes wrong, and then shit goes very, very wrong.

**Gives advice on TR soloing.**
**Doesn’t actually TR solo**

Also, using the term rope soloing refers leading. 

Ben Crowellwrote:

What could possibly go wrong?

• The rope never moves, so it can get sawed repeatedly at one spot if you traverse.
• The rope gets jammed in a crack at an overhang, so you can't get the rope out of the crack, and therefore you can't get your fingers in the crack to climb.
• Variation of the preceding item: you can't get the rope out of the crack, so you can't advance your ascender up the rope. (This has happened to me -- first the rope got stuck in the crack, then my Prusik knot got stuck.)
• You try to pull the rope up at the end, and it's stuck.
• Other parties are below you, and your rope is dangling in their face.

All fair points, but the list in reality is a lot longer than what you stated.  Lots of things can go wrong if the risks aren’t mitigated.  I’ll probably get called an “elitist”’again for saying this but fix and follow (and any top rope soloing) technique takes an advanced level of knowledge, competency and skill that a lot of climber just don’t have.  There are techniques I won’t do in climbing because I lack the competency and skill but that doesn’t mean those techniques aren’t safe and usable by others.  

 Rope soloing has a reputation as a technique that seems awesome until shit goes wrong, and then shit goes very, very wrong.

I’d say that can be the case with all climbing as is proven time and time again with stories in the accidents journal.

It has a place, but it’s slower than running a tag line, IMO.  The hauling and climbing can happen in parallel with a tag line, which is quite significant - number one disadvantage.  It takes extra time to rig a usable solo TR setup and break it down as well.  Changeovers overall take longer.  The leader gets the haulbag sooner and can drink and eat and recover much sooner with a tag line.  It just isn’t a big deal to pull a rope to belay through a well set up system.  Kong GiGi.  The leader can also rig the belay and tag line for the next lead in parallel.  If there are traverses, a tag line is supremely better for many reasons and scenarios.  Of course - rapping.  Therefore, I don’t really use this much.  Best application where it’s actually an advantage is a party of 3 - which is rare.

Max Rwrote:

**Gives advice on TR soloing.**
**Doesn’t actually TR solo**

Two problems here, one factual and one logical:

Logical problem: It doesn't make sense to say that people have to do X in order to warn about things that can go wrong with the safety of X. For example, I climb with a helmet, but and that doesn't mean I lack standing to warn someone about what can go wrong if you climb without a helmet.

Factual problem: In the post that you're replying to, I stated two examples of toprope soloing that I had done.

I haven't done fix and follow with a partner, but I do it with myself all the time. It is the basic rope soloing procedure on multipitch. I can assure everyone that it does indeed work. Need to use the right gear because the TRS happens on an "open" system with no knots, as mentioned above. The other concerns mentioned are quite manageable. 

While there certainly are rope soloing accidents, including recently, qualitatively it doesn't seem out of proportion with partnered climbing accidents. 

I think peoples opinion on this basically comes down to what they think go TRS.

James Wwrote:

It has a place, but it’s slower than running a tag line, IMO.  The hauling and climbing can happen in parallel with a tag line, which is quite significant - number one disadvantage.  It takes extra time to rig a usable solo TR setup and break it down as well.  Changeovers overall take longer.  The leader gets the haulbag sooner and can drink and eat and recover much sooner with a tag line.  It just isn’t a big deal to pull a rope to belay through a well set up system.  Kong GiGi.  The leader can also rig the belay and tag line for the next lead in parallel.  If there are traverses, a tag line is supremely better for many reasons and scenarios.  Of course - rapping.  Therefore, I don’t really use this much.  Best application where it’s actually an advantage is a party of 3 - which is rare.

I usually to the F&F with a tagline (I actually almost never do F&F without a tag), this allows me to fix the rope, then haul the bag at my own pace while the follower is cleaning the pitch. If one uses a foot ratchet system it can make the whole process downright civilized. 

All of these systems definitely add a layer of complexity and management to multi-pitch climbing and IMO are only worth it if I am climbing something that is difficult for me, otherwise I just go with standard methods and put water/gear on my harness. 

This probably overkill system for most people, and adding all these extra systems introduces complexity and therefore risk. If you have the experience to manage the complexity and practice, the tradeoffs can be worth it, otherwise it could you might be worse off with regard to to efficiency, risk, energy expenditure, etc.

Never done this method before and am curious. To clarify:

• Is the follower never actually tied into the rope? (only attached to the system via two devices on rope & when attached to the anchor)
• If there are no backup knots, isn't it paramount for the follower to make sure that the end of the rope doesn't pass through their belay device when belaying the leader on a super long pitch? (I could foresee this happening to a belayer not paying attention to how much rope is left hanging)

Josh Corbinwrote:

Never done this method before and am curious. To clarify:

• Is the follower never actually tied into the rope? (only attached to the system via two devices on rope & when attached to the anchor)
• If there are no backup knots, isn't it paramount for the follower to make sure that the end of the rope doesn't pass through their belay device when belaying the leader on a super long pitch? (I could foresee this happening to a belayer not paying attention to how much rope is left hanging)

Josh, this link was posted up thread, but I'll post again to give you a clear picture (and answer your Question #1): https://www.climbing.com/skills/advanced-techniques-follow-on-toprope-solo/

On Question #2: do not climb with a belayer who does not pay attention. Seriously though, most of the time, you and your partner should have some sense how long the next pitch would be before the the leader takes off. One thing I learned while I was the follower is that linking pitches may have its unique downside here. I encouraged my leader (fixer) to link two pitches if he could. I knew the rope would not run out, but it turned out that the free hanging rope remaining when I started climbing was not heavy enough to self-glide until I climbed a bit ways up.

Josh Corbinwrote:

Never done this method before and am curious. To clarify:

• Is the follower never actually tied into the rope? (only attached to the system via two devices on rope & when attached to the anchor)
• If there are no backup knots, isn't it paramount for the follower to make sure that the end of the rope doesn't pass through their belay device when belaying the leader on a super long pitch? (I could foresee this happening to a belayer not paying attention to how much rope is left hanging)

• Follower is not tied in. Have a personal tether thing you can use for the follower to clip to belays.
• No knots in rope except leader's tie-in - don't knowlingly climb rope stretcher pitches. If you think you are on a rope stretcher,  simul up a few meters to a better stance when the leader is relaxing after a clipping a piece, or tie a temporary overhand or barrel knot a couple feet from the rope end when you are belaying. Untie it before following.

The rope is FAR less likely to ever get jammed into a flake or pinch using this method than belaying a 2nd from above as per old style belaying. The rope is also much less likely to knock rocks down on a 2nd. If you don't like this style, don't do it. It's not like a pyramid marketing scheme where early adopters get commission for subsequent converts. But don't knock it 'til you try it. It sound like much of the criticism is coming from hypothetical users who have never done it and who just allow status quo bias to dictate that they think their known method is superior simply because they were taught that way and it's more common. If fixing was the standard way multipitch freeclimbing was taught, people would consider the older style to be a major downgrade when they learned it.

Ben Crowellwrote:

What could possibly go wrong?

• The rope never moves, so it can get sawed repeatedly at one spot if you traverse.
• The rope gets jammed in a crack at an overhang, so you can't get the rope out of the crack, and therefore you can't get your fingers in the crack to climb.
• Variation of the preceding item: you can't get the rope out of the crack, so you can't advance your ascender up the rope. (This has happened to me -- first the rope got stuck in the crack, then my Prusik knot got stuck.)
• You try to pull the rope up at the end, and it's stuck.
• Other parties are below you, and your rope is dangling in their face.

Read Accidents in North American Climbing. Rope soloing is something that occurs over and over in accident reports. I've found it to be a great technique for certain kinds of easy tree climbing. For hard climbing, it seems to me like a good way to create a self-rescue situation. Rope soloing has a reputation as a technique that seems awesome until shit goes wrong, and then shit goes very, very wrong.

I think all of these need to be evaluated BEFORE the tactic is employed. If there is any possibility of any of those, the party does not have to use F&F. In other words, nobody would/should use this tactic blindly. There is always the conventional lead and belay alternative when any of those scenarios could happen.

But personally, I think some of your concerns are more valid for someone "working on a route" with the top rope solo system, so he/she may weigh the rope frequently, which makes sawing on edge or jamming in crack more of a possibility. F&F system is more for optimizing the leader's experience and the follower is mostly the support. If used as intended on the appropriate route, the follower would be coming up the pitch quickly, without weighing the rope frequently. 

As Mikey mentioned in the interview, the system is not for everyone. Nobody is advocating it for others. Mostly, folks are just sharing their own experience. 

BTW, I have not seen/heard anyone use a Prusik knot as part of the F&F system (or even an efficient top rope solo system for that matter). Isn't that like riding a beat up bicycle on a Formula One race track?  

Kerwin Loukusawrote:

I usually to the F&F with a tagline.

Me too, I would say, but that’s not what I believe was described.  

Since there is no termination in the rope, using a rope much longer than the longest pitch is helpful and adds a little safety - like an 80m.  Helps getting started to have extra rope hanging.  

Still slower and more clusterfuky IMO.  

James Wwrote:

Me too, I would say, but that’s not what I believe was described.  

I don’t exactly remember all that I talked about on the Nugget (and the last thing I want to do is go listen to my own voice…) but I believe my main example was the the South East ridge of Cerro Torre.  That route somewhat unique and for sure different than the majority of the terrain people are using the fix and follow system on now.  Bringing a tag line on an alpine climb in a team of 3 where there is hard free climbing as well as more moderate alpine terrain wouldn’t really make sense.  Generally speaking it would be crazy to haul on more than just a few of those pitches but even crazier would be to climb 5.13 in the alpine while wearing a pack.  I think that route was a good example of how fixing and following could be applied.  The system was definitely a contributing factor that allowed all 3 of us to free climb the route.

That being said I also use a tag line fairly often.  The decision to bring one ultimately comes down to what exact route is being climbed.  Say it is a 10 pitch 5.13 with just one hard pitch and it isn’t too cold, I probably wouldn’t bring a tag, I’d just hang extra stuff on the rope below the 2nd on the crux.  If it is a more sustained route where the follower is gonna be slow to follow and I’ll want food and supplies at the belay I’d bring a tag.  I’ve done Moonlight both ways and made the decision based on weather and how fast i thought my partner would be moving.  

I don’t personally agree with the system being cluster fucky at all.  I actually find it to be less messy than stacking and flipping ropes.  I also guided for a long time and had to lead with 3 ropes on El Cap with a client, so after those experiences everything seems fairly clean and simple to me.

Good points.  With a party of 3 I already agreed - it’s no brainer faster and more organized.  For 2, it comes down to rigging those micros.  A little bit to get them on the rope, then off, then 1 on to hold the weight of the rope below so you can belay - times 20ish pitches - it’s significant.  The TRS threads mention changeover time often.  It’s also a lot nicer to climb as the second with a belay, especially on traverses, and a little faster as there is near zero rope management.  Rarely stack ropes unless a ledge makes it easy, flipping is trival, otherwise I use about 4-5 overhands with long loops to hang both ropes on a biner - flipping for block leading also very fast.  I generally find tagging the most efficient and universal.

James Wwrote:

  For 2, it comes down to rigging those micros.  A little bit to get them on the rope, then off, then 1 on to hold the weight of the rope below so you can belay - times 20ish pitches - it’s significant.  The TRS threads mention changeover time often.  It’s also a lot nicer to climb as the second with a belay, especially on traverses, and a little faster as there is near zero rope management.  

Generally disagree here. Once you know what you are doing, time to set up the Microtraxions should be really insignificant. No more time than a belayer setting up an ATC to belay you. If you have an overly complicated TR solo setup it'll take longer, so don't do that.

Also, for me, I think that TR soloing is nicer than being belayed from above, at least on vertical pitches. It really isn't any effort to manage it if your setup is good. And no shouting "up rope" to your lazy partner belaying from above. Or dealing with the even more annoying alternative of an overly tight belay from above.

I do agree though that TR solo isn't great for big traverses. I don't think anyone is going to fix and follow for On The Lamb.

In the end is comes down to situation and personal preference. 

James Wwrote:

The hauling and climbing can happen in parallel with a tag line, which is quite significant 

agree that a tag to haul a small pack (say, a Creek20) is beneficial *on most steeper/harder pitches* - not in all situations, such as easy terrain.

.  It takes extra time to rig a usable solo TR setup and break it down as well.  Changeovers overall take longer... Best application where it’s actually an advantage is a party of 3 - which is rare.

how long does it take a barely competent person to put on a microtrax? heck, even two should take what, 15-20s? Changeovers taking longer are more likely a function of people not caring much about efficiency, IMO. Focusing even a modicum of time on being efficient at all times usually saves much more than increasing climbing ability a grade or two...

Mikey Schaefer,

  Thanks for continuing to progress the sport with innovative techniques.  It’s inspirational to see how you have progressed as a climber from the young buck I met on the Diamond fresh from climbing China Doll.

Keep it up!

Has anyone tried this with a Taz lov or similar ascent/descent device? Bulkier, but more simple than double trax and eliminates the need for a belay device on the anchor for working pitches?