Mountain Project Logo

Bowline for Master Point Knot?

bearbreeder · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2009 · Points: 3,065
Abram Herman wrote: I'm really confused by this statement. How does better rope management affect how many things are getting clipped to the master point? I generally belay direct off the anchor using an atc in autoblock mode on the master point, and then I tie myself in with the rope using a locker on the shelf to keep the atc clear from obstructions so it can function properly. Why is this bad, and how could it be avoided through different/better techniques?
for 2 bolts youre absolutely and utterly fine

for a multipoint trad anchor with widely spaced nuts, ie a WIDE angle between the anchor arms ... there may be some concern that in a VERY high factor fall youll get pulled up and place a sideways pull on some of the outer arms, thus lifting out the nuts ... generally cams are less susceptible to this ... and honestly if you were lifted up that much on a fall, even with a regular anchor unless you had an upward pull piece, youd have the same problem

some mutter about triaxial loading on the shelf biner ... but honestly for most applications and unless you have WIDE arms on the anchor its not a worry IMO

as long as you keep a biner in the masterpoint, the knot itself wont fail, and even then there is some testing to suggest that biner in masterpoint stuff is just a myth anyways on nylon cord

guides use and teach the shelf all the time ...

;)
Wiled Horse · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2002 · Points: 3,669

those bolts look sketch

Abram Herman · · Grand Junction, CO · Joined May 2009 · Points: 20

That's true bearbreeder, but since I'm only using it when bringing up the second, that scenario couldn't happen. I'd be in on the master point if I was belaying a leader :-)

I guess I could see the triaxial loading argument, but as you said, you'd have to have some way-too-wide angles in your anchor, and even if you did the triaxial loading weakness would be inconsequential for that application.

bearbreeder · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2009 · Points: 3,065
Abram Herman wrote:That's true bearbreeder, but since I'm only using it when bringing up the second, that scenario couldn't happen. I'd be in on the master point if I was belaying a leader :-) I guess I could see the triaxial loading argument, but as you said, you'd have to have some way-too-wide angles in your anchor, and even if you did the triaxial loading weakness would be inconsequential for that application.
then yr totally and utterly fine ... you wont die from it, except from the intrawebs =P

Jake Jones wrote: When I use the "shelf" I always clip one leg from each piece. Does anyone else do that? I thought that's the way it's supposed to be done for purposes of redundancy.
thats the way you should do it ... and how they teach ya

the shelf is a useful tool ... some people prefer to tie a larger masterpoint, others use a big masterpoint biner, and some use the shelf instead ...

there is no "right" way ...

unless its MY way in an intraweb argument of course

;)
Abram Herman · · Grand Junction, CO · Joined May 2009 · Points: 20

Jake, if the follower is being belayed directly off the master point, it couldn't happen... How would they lift the anchor UP?

Not trying to be totally contrary to everyone, I just always thought clipping the shelf was very useful and convenient for a lot of applications, and I'm always interested in other perspectives when someone tells me "YER GUNNA DIE!" ;-)

Abram Herman · · Grand Junction, CO · Joined May 2009 · Points: 20

Well, I don't know if nuclear winter is covered in UIAA standards. Does anybody know of any research on the subject? I do try to be a safe climber...

Jeremy Riesberg · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2012 · Points: 5

I've been using the alpine cockring for a while now for trad. So far I'm loving the ease of the system and how quick it is.

paulraphaelson.com/download…

Allen Corneau · · Houston, TX · Joined May 2008 · Points: 80
rgold wrote: The reason no one has mentioned it is because it isn't true. The two knots use about the same material; actually, slightly less for the bowline on a bight since it is based on an overhand rather than a figure eight.
Not quite.

I just set up a standard 3-point anchor with my cordelette. The "height of the knot" is the length of the center leg to the top of the knot:

Overhand:
1. Height of knot:14"
2. Bottom of master point: 22"
3. Master point loop: 6"

Figure 8:
1. Height of knot: 14"
2. Bottom of master point: 19"
3. Master point loop: 2"

BOAB:
1. Height of knot 11"
2. Bottom of master point: 16"
3. Master point loop: 2"

I couldn't tie the BOAB at the same height as the other knots because there was not enough material. This clearly shows that the BOAB in this configuration takes much more material than the other knots.
rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Abram Herman wrote: I'm really confused by this statement. How does better rope management affect how many things are getting clipped to the master point? I generally belay direct off the anchor using an atc in autoblock mode on the master point, and then I tie myself in with the rope using a locker on the shelf to keep the atc clear from obstructions so it can function properly. Why is this bad, and how could it be avoided through different/better techniques?
Oh for god's sake. I never said the shelf was bad. I never said it had to be avoided, except perhaps if you are going to use a bowline on a bight instead of the usual figure-eight. There are numerous ways to arrange everything at the power point without resorting to the shelf and without anything malfunctioning, that's what I meant by "intelligent rope management." I never said these ways were better or worse than using the shelf, just that they were available if you don't want to use the shelf.
Ryan Williams · · London (sort of) · Joined May 2009 · Points: 1,245

I just spent two weeks climbing multipitch trad routes, up to 15 pitches long, and I don't own a cordelette. Just sayin...

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526

Agreed Ryan, cordelettes have been massively oversold. But they do have their occasional uses, and that's what we're talking about.

Allen, I don't know how you got your numbers. Perhaps you aren't tying a bowline on a bight, which, sadly, is not the same as a bowline tied with a bight of rope?

When you tie a bowline on a bight, you make an overhand knot, drop the loop that would have been be the powerpoint of the overhand over the knot, and readajust the strands. No more rope is fed into the configuration, so the amount of material used cannot possibly change.

You shouldn't have had any problem tying the knot at the 14" mark, because you've already tied an overhand in that position, and you had a 6"power point loop to drop over the overhand knot.

Allen Corneau · · Houston, TX · Joined May 2008 · Points: 80

"Allen, I don't know how you got your numbers. Perhaps you aren't tying a bowline on a bight, which, sadly, is not the same as a bowline tied with a bight of rope?"

Nope, I know my knots and use the BOAB regularly.

"You shouldn't have had any problem tying the knot at the 14" mark, because you've already tied an overhand in that position, and you had a 6"power point loop to drop over the overhand knot."

That 6" loop gets folded in half and then some gets taken up in the knot.

Try it yourself and you'll see.

(For some reason my quote function won't work.)

Allen Corneau · · Houston, TX · Joined May 2008 · Points: 80

Rebuilt my experiment and took pictures, so here we go...

(All measurements remove 4" from the measuring tape to account for the top biners.)

Overhand in a standard three-point cordelette:
Height to knot: 12"
Bottom of loop: 24.5"
Loop length: 10"

Standard cordelette with overhand.

Same rig except with a Figure-8 knot:
Height to knot: 12"
Bottom of loop: 21"
Loop length: 5"

Standard cordelette with a Figure-8 knot.

Same rig except with a Bowline on a bight:
Height to knot: 12"
Bottom of loop: 18"
Loop length: 3"

Standard cordelette with a Bowline on a bight.

Close-up of the BOAB:

Bowline on a bight, close up.

Ryan Kempf · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jul 2011 · Points: 371

Look man. You can do this. But what's the logic behind it? Your adding an extra step to an overhand. If your logic is it's easier to untie, u've already fkd ur anchor up in the 1st place. You shouldn't have enough force generated on a TR anchor to make it overly difficult/impossible to untie a figure 8 on a boatload of cord.

Does it work? Yeah. Does it create problems with clipping into the top shelf (very common) quite possibly. With a binner clipped into the master point the danger of pulling the master point through is nill. But why over complicate the master point?

This is simply an idea someone had (that can work), but there are quicker, easier solutions to this issue. No need to over complicate a senario where the existing method is tried and true and faster to tie and break down to boot. Let it go duder.

Tie a fkn figure 8 and call it good. Better yet, ditch the cord, use a 48" runner and the sliding x method.
People stress about if a piece of the anchor blows on a sliding x and shock loads the rest of the system.

Let me put this in simple terms. If you set up your dynamically equized anchor properly (which is Increadably easy), no one single piece is going to let go (as long as the placement isn't completely worthless). The whole system while fail simotaniously. If this happens you have royally fucked up and deserve the consequences. Though your second does not.

Long story short but long winded. I can't think of a single reason to use a boab for a master point. Overly cumbersome, presents some inherent danger, and time consuming. I mean think about being in the alpine dehydrated, exhauseted, starved, and adding complexity to your anchor. Bad fucking ideas man.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Allen Corneau wrote: That 6" loop gets folded in half and then some gets taken up in the knot.
Ah yes, right you are. I was overly focused on the concept of the knot using "more material."

I still wouldn't think of this as some massive deal-breaking difference though; about 3" in arm length for 7mm cord and less for 6mm cord.

Ryan Kampf wrote: But what's the logic behind it?
No reason to use it in general. If the rigging is going to take a lot of continual loading, eg if one was going to be hanging on it for a long time while equipping a route, then the welding of the figure-eight is more of a problem and the bowline on a bight is the logical choice.

Ryan Kampf wrote: Better yet, ditch the cord, use a 48" runner and the sliding x method.
Well, yer not gonna die, but the sliding-X has been tested rather extensively at this point and it doesn't do a better job at equalizing while introducing the potential of anchor extension. And if the anchor in question is a three-point anchor, there is no sliding system that is any good at all. So if logic is still a valid criterion, then no, the sliding-x method is not "better yet."

Ryan Kampf wrote:Let me put this in simple terms. If you set up your dynamically equized [sic] anchor properly (which is Increadably [sic] easy), no one single piece is going to let go (as long as the placement isn't completely worthless). The whole system while fail simotaniously. [sic]
This is just not true. And I'm not speaking hypothetically here. I know very experienced climbers with multiple big-wall ascents in remote locales in their resumes who have experienced the failure of one of several anchor points. Of course, one can always simply define these anchors as "completely worthless," but then you are just ignoring the problem, not solving it. Such failures are certainly very rare, but they do happen, and the entire point of most rigging techniques is to guard against such unlikely but dangerous outcomes.
Behave · · Oklahoma City, OK · Joined Jun 2012 · Points: 35
Ryan Kempf wrote:Long story short but long winded.
Then it wasn't a long story short. Just a long story.

That's about the nicest thing I can say about your post. Thanks to everyone else who has contributed meaningful discourse to the thread.
trundlebum · · Las Vegas NV · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 85

9 out of ten times all of this stuff...
Master points built with a cordellete Blech...
Total dweebery!

Time consuming.
6 pitch climb, so you wind up building and breaking down this thing 12 times.

What are you guys hauling up?
A freight train, a party of 9 ?

unless your building a wall anchor for a bivy...
Or your three pieces all suck individually...

Just clove with no slack the three individuals pieces with your lead line be done with it !

Seriously ?
We are talking about a free climbing anchor right?
Unless you are at a hanging belay, AND
one of the pieces is less than bomber AND...
on he next lead you can't get a good first piece for at least 8' then what's all the hubub ?

That's not an adjustable equalization any way.
As soon as a large load is any where off of 'dead plumb' one of the two (depending on load angle) out side points becomes unloaded any way. The you are down to two points.

On top of that, what?
you're going to set your pieces above your reach while standing on your belay stance so that by the time your 'sacred' master point is setup it's still well above harness height ?
And then what?
After all that you use a clove on your rope to tie in with?
Other wise what?
you biner your harness right to the master point and therefore 'marry' the anchor?

One post up thread mentioned putting an ATC in guide mode on the master point. Then you are talking about belaying your second (on a tope rope) off this right? My God all that engineering for a second?
If it is in consideration of a leader leading off the anchor before getting a few good pieces in ?

Seriously...
Unless you are doing a RX lead off of an anchor with dubious placements or setting up an anchor for a multiday big wall bivy that you are going to be jugging back up to...

I'll stick with a simple clove on each piece, a good solid stance and be done with it.
Like Donini says:
"I haven't equalizd an anchor in 25 years"

David Coley · · UK · Joined Oct 2013 · Points: 70

For two-bolt belays I use an 8mm 120cm sling to form the powerpoint. This can be difficult to untie if the second has fallen off a lot and is on the heavy side. Hence I now tie an alpine butterfly rather than an overhand/fig8.

I find it almost as quick to tie.

A 3-point trad anchor would be a different story.

Bryan Hall · · Portland, Oregon · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 100

Seems like a decent idea to me. The only questions/dislikes I had we're these:

1. Is the knot truly redundant? I played with it a bit and it seemed tricky. Depending on where I cut the knot it seemed like compromising the lower half directly compromised the corresponding piece above. This would potentially be the most critical issue to address.

2. I also didn't like having to clip 6 strands instead of 3 for the master point. Seems cluttered, especially for small biners. Plus, regardless of all the measurement tests and what the results turned out to be.... 6 loops uses more cord than 3 and that can't be argued.

Jonas Salk · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2008 · Points: 10
bearbreeder wrote: just use a fig 9 ... easy to tie and untie .... ;)
+1
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Beginning Climbers
Post a Reply to "Bowline for Master Point Knot?"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.