UKC

  I'm very happy with my top rope belay and very confident in my skills for this. 

But I'm now having lessons and started to lead climb. ( infact top rope now  seemsvery tame now compared) , I'm due to start  learning belaying next week under an instructor, I know you have to do  catch falls dynamically but while I'm learning and getting confident  can I get anyway in anchoring my myself to the route. ( with a 120cm sling or longer ) I know that will make the catch harder on the climber but I'm hoping it would stop me getting launched half way up the wall while I learn. 

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

Personally, my number 1 priority for my belayer is them holding onto the dead rope. If they get pulled up in the air so be it as long as they hold onto that rope.

Also consider you won't be able to get any further than the first quickdraw, and you might not have the opportunity to anchor yourself to anything. The other downside of being tied down is your can't move out of the way if something is heading for your head.

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

I think it depends on the weight difference between you and your partner. If you're below approxmately 70% of their weight I'd use something to stop myself from being launched, either a ground anchor or an edelrid ohm (I've never used one, but people speak very highly of them). 

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

Giving a dynamic catch is a good objective in general but there are many constraints of its practicality or advisability in different situations.

Practically, most multi-pitch stances (and some single pitch) will permit very limited belayer movement, while big weight differentials may also require belayers to be tethered.

Other reasons not to offer a dynamic catch would include when there's a possibility of groundfall or hitting a ledge, or when a fall from a roof would make it very hard to get back on again.

In general, the use of an ATC or similar device rather than a locking device will inevitably offer a small degree of dynamic catch. How much more you are able or wanting to provide is very much context dependant.

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

First I'd ask why are you anchoring yourself to the route?

If it's to stop you falling off a ledge then a sling to a tree or the first bolt works quite well. This is generally only a problem until the leader makes the first clip or on multi-pitch climbs - a clip stick might solve the issue on single pitch climbs better.

If it's to stop you flying in the air then it's going to be harder as you need the sling going downwards and that's rarely possible at a sports crag. 

Some people attach themselves to a rucksack placed on the ground with a few big rocks on the inside (but it seems overkill to me in most cases).

Indoors some climbing centers have floor attachments, it's unusual to need them for lead belaying as the climber rarely falls off near the ground (they set routes to make the first few clips easy) and once you have a few clips in place there's enough extra friction that you need to have quite a big weight difference for it to be problem.

If you do have a massive weight difference then I'd recommend the Edelrid Ohm, it works really well catching lead falls, although it's best with thinner single ropes (<10mm).

On the topic of dynamic belaying, keep in mind your priority is to stop the climber decking, you can give a softer catch by going with the fall but please don't leave loads of slack in the system, it's sloppy and dangerous

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

You'll be fine, just do as your instructor advises and don't re-invent the wheel. If there's a big weight mismatch a sandbag can help with comfort and control catching falls (which most leaders rarely take and most belayers rarely have to catch even indoors). Again, take advice if you have an instructor. As for dynamic belaying, it's a nicety but safe belaying should be your focus, always maintaining control of the dead rope and managing the slack in the system which includes any movement a fall may induce in the belayer. There's nothing wrong with just locking off your belay device and hunkering down to catch a fall, it's safe and it works.

There's no need to overthink this.

jk

Ok well I'll forget  about anchoring myself  then as if done correctly there shouldnt be a massive of extra force. 

Weight wise I'm about 80 odd kg and cant see me belaying someone 120 odd kilos and once I've done a dew I'll I'll probz be used to the odd trip in the air..

I guess I'll just see how the lessons go and should gain a bit of extra confidence  doing that. 

Maybe I've just seen to many horror videos on youtube.  

In reply to springfall2008:

Sorry but I don't agree with the view that leaving loads of slack in the system is sloppy and dangerous.  Having the correct amount of slack in the system makes that catch soft, and converts more of the energy into downwards force, which is absorbed by the stretch in the rope, rather than lateral force, which is absorbed by the climber hitting the wall.

This video explains the physics with the animation at around 2'20"  youtube.com/watch?v=qOhojbsLfRg& 

Obviously too much slack is bad, especially low down, or if the climber is above a ledge or something else they could hit, but the right amount is of benefit to the climber.

I've seen many accidents at my local climbing wall because of inexperienced or nervous climbers climbers & belayers leaving too little slack in the system (including  broken ankles), but have never seen anyone be injured by decking because of too much slack.

Apologies to Springfall if you are aware of all this and were just talking about having way too much, but I thought it would be better to expand on this for the OPs benefit

In reply to Iamgregp:

There's a critical distinction to be drawn between 'slack' and 'give'. Slack is given before a rope comes tight and will have precisely the same effect as if the climber had made it a little higher before falling - with all the same issues surrounding a possibly hard catch remaining. Give is provided once the rope is loaded and will soften the catch by spreading the resisting force over a longer time period.

I sense that give is what you had in mind anyway, but describing it as giving extra slack can lead to unhelpful confusion.

In reply to john arran:

No, I meant slack.  When you use an assisted braking device (as I do) the slack has to be there before the rope comes tight.  

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

 I knew what was meant by slack and extra slack there is a line between  good and too much. I don't need to worry about multi pitch stuff as I'll just be working inside and  very very odd trip to sandstone. 

In reply to Iamgregp:

I appreciate that having unnecessary slack out can change the direction of the stopping force, which can affect the speed of lateral movement (as in your helpful video link) but my view is that it's preferable wherever possible to reduce the stopping force rather than actually increase it (albeit often in a more helpful direction and potentially to overall benefit). This is best achieved by allowing 'give' when holding the fall. And it's very little to do with the type of belay device used since it's usually possible to allow yourself to be pulled a greater distance than you could safely let slip through a device.

In reply to Iamgregp:

You've lost me. Why do you believe that?

jk

In reply to jkarran:

It's to do with the vector forces at the point of the rope coming tight. More slack means falling further beneath the runner before resistance is felt, which increases the overall force, but at the same time this means the pull on the climber is more vertical and less horizontal than it would have been without slack, with the overall effect that it reduces lateral impact against the wall.

In reply to john arran:

Yeah agreed, good point. The ideal would be your belayer being super dynamic and able to give you lots controlled breaking through give when you fall.

However if the person belaying me is in a tight space, or isn't particularly dynamic in their belaying style I'll take a couple of armfuls of slack in the system over risking hitting the wall too fast.  

I guess it is a bit each to their own.  Some people I know prefer the rope to be relatively tight as they hate falling, whereas I and a few other amongst our group like a good few armfuls of slack in there.... As long as the climber and belayer communicate and say what they want it's all good...

In reply to john arran:

  
I find this argument a bit arm wavy. It is quite easy to prove (ignoring stretch) that extra slack decreases horizontal speed when you swing in by considering conservation of angular momentum about the runner (approx same angular momentum when rope comes tight as when you hit the wall).

In reply to john arran:

Ah I see, I read it with the wrong emphasis, I thought he was making a point about specific belay devices rather than the merits of longer falls. I've never really bought the argument about plates slipping vs locking devices, you really can't get your brake hand that far from the plate to allow meaningful braked slippage without risking a rope burn or a bite from the plate.

A longer fall especially on steep ground is certainly more comfortable, however it's achieved than slamming into the wall with feet or worse, in short falls, knees.

jk

In reply to Robert Durran:

That's because it wasn't an argument as such, but rather an arm-wavy description of why something apparently counterintuitive could well be the case after all.

In reply to Iamgregp:

Then only accidents I've seen at walls is because of too much slack, or people using GriGri's and panicking with the lever. And leaving loads of slack IS dangerous, very dangerous in some cases.

The belayer, then they're standing too far away from the wall, another cause of injury I've seen at the wall.

In reply to Iamgregp:

I understand what you are saying, and certainly agree that on an overhang if you are in no danger of decking then more slack is going to mean you don't hit the wall as hard.

On the other hand too much slack is likely to cause you to be falling faster so if you deck or hit a ledge the consequences are much more severe.

Indoors if the lead rope from the climber is slack enough to touch the ground I'd fully expect a member of staff to be having a word with the belayer.

So what's the right amount of slack? Well if you are novice I'd say just enough so the climber can move without rope drag, between almost taught for the first few clips to a small amount of slack such that the rope might curve downwards but never touches the ground when the climber is higher up.

Of course if you are more experienced and climbing big routes with large overhangs you should know better than an internet forum anyhow

In reply to jkarran:

The plate slippage is going to reduce the peak force on the anchor, which is exactly what you want for Trad climbing. I don't think the falling climber will tell the difference however...

In reply to springfall2008:

I understand how it works in principle, I just don't believe it actually does in practice for a couple of reasons, the way we hold the dead rope means there is very little free to slip before the plate bites the brake hand and we tend to lock off very hard. I don't recall ever holding a fall where a noticeable amount of rope has slipped.

Jk

In reply to springfall2008:

People do go on a lot about giving a "soft catch" but, as far as I can see, it is a complete non issue when climbing on bolts or indoors (yet this is when you most often see people doing it); the elasticity of the rope means that peak forces are never going to be uncomfortable for the climber let alone risk bolt failure. Giving a "soft catch" is a specialised technique really only applicable when protecting marginal trad gear placements. On the other hand, leaving extra slack in the system to reduce the speed a climber swings into the rock is a sensible sport climbing technique as long as it is not done when decking out is a risk (as seen as all the time with "copy cat" inexperienced climbers indoors!). Giving extra slack in fact results in a harder "catch" (greater peak forces) but many people seem unaware of this (and don't even notice - which, I think, shows the irrelevance of giving a soft catch!). There is certainly plenty of confusion about the two techniques.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Has it not occurred to you that giving a "soft catch" might also "reduce the speed a climber swings into the rock" and indeed may be a preferable way to achieve that in many or most circumstances?

In reply to Robert Durran:

I agree.

The rope does most of the work, that's what it's designed for.

"Soft Catch" is like some fad, that people think you have to be able to do or you're a bad belayer. But people are trying this who can't even belay safely in the first place, because they think that's what you are supposed to do.

Soft catch, is so specialised, I've never felt the need to try it.

In reply to krikoman:

You're right in that people often seem to misunderstand it, maybe yourself included. The vast majority of what's meant by giving a soft catch is simply allowing your body to be pulled up or in a little as the rope comes tight, rather than bracing yourself and standing as firm as possible to resist the pull.

There is a need for care of course, notably in making sure you aren't going to be pulled into anything or lose your balance. But I see the bigger risk as being when people misinterpret a soft catch as needing you to let substantial amounts of rope slip through the belay device - that's very much asking for trouble.

In reply to john arran:

Yes it has. In fact, since my last post, I've been thinking about the physics of why my intuition that it would  be might be correct!

I don't see why that should be the case. Leaving extra slack is easy whereas "soft catch" techniques require a certain amount of timing and action. Having said that, a "soft catch will always, to some extent, be given involuntsrily; a belayer is not a rigid object bolted to the ground!

Edit: Just seen your reply to Krikoman. I agree that there is usually no point in actively fighting against a "soft catch" (a soft catch may be pointless, but equally does no harm). And this thing about letting rope run through your hands and device is dangerous madness!

In reply to john arran:

I pretty sure most people think this is what is required, and attempt to achieve. In my  experience it's usually beginners too, who seem to think "soft catch" is some sort of badge of honour and seem to throw the basics out the window. They're usually standing miles away from the wall and get pulled in anyway, ensuring a "soft catch" but sometimes getting slammed into the wall as a consequence.

We have a problem with people, who transfer from indoors to outdoors tad, standing too far away, they don't understand the way gear is pulled out on a leader fall if you stand a long way from the vertical.

In reply to Iamgregp:

Are you sure about that?

I found your measure of "a good few armfuls of slack" so surprising that I measured it. For me a few armfuls of slack measures at over 10 feet further that you would fall?

In reply to john arran:

I find the nomenclature of the soft catch risky and would be happier if we focussed on identifying when the risks dictate the need for a quick, firm catch with the device locked and your body braced.  The rest of the time you can be a bit more relaxed, move a little with the forces and allow the basic laws of physics to soften the catch for both you and the climber.

In reply to Iamgregp:

Definitely  not, but sometimes something that someone says seems so far wrong that it's worth checking.

Unless your climbing partners have REALLY short arms I.would suggest that you moderate your requests for slack

In reply to timjones:

I deleted my post as I though it was a bit rude!  Sorry that's all got confusing now   

The guys who belay me are all great, it's all good!

In reply to Shaunhaynes99:

You're worrying over nothing, you won't get pulled in the air unless a few weeks after learning to belay you're involved in a remake of Hard Grit.

In reply to Iamgregp:

There was no need to delete it, I took it as a bit of leg pulling.

And I feel a little wiser for knowing that an armful of slack equals three feet and 2 inches

In reply to timjones:

It was meant as leg pulling, but I worry that things don't come across right when written down!

I was just about to take the piss and ask how bloody long your arms were, but then my curiosity got the better of me and I grabbed the tape measure (yes I AM having a slow day)...

Turns out one arm full for me is three feet!  Who knew?

In reply to Iamgregp:

How do one define one's arm full?

In reply to Robert Durran:

 It's precisely how much slack you take in when you 'yard the rope in'

In reply to john arran:

No, no, no!

We were talking about giving slack so it's obviously the amount of rope that you can pay out in a single motion when your partner is screaming for it in a blue funk

I think we're broadly agreeing that an armful is about 3 feet so all we need to know now is how many armful there are in  a "good few"?

In reply to timjones:

So the distance from your waist to your hand held above your head?

In reply to Robert Durran:

You're quite correct and I have a nasty suspicion that I measures the wrong type of armful.

But there is no way that I'm opening myself to further ridicule by getting the tape measure out again

In reply to jkarran:

There have been quite a few tests of this and the slippage only really becomes effective in reducing forces when the falls get big (FF1.5+ roughly) and then they're big enough to need gloves and a very strong grip and probably you'll get slammed into the wall etc etc. 

I was researching the difference in force between using a GriGri and using an ATC in real world, smaller falls on good protection. Turns out there isn't much difference until the falls get serious and your protection marginal. It's likely that a really, really good and experienced belayer may be able to reduce the force on gear at smaller falls by letting rope slip and progressively increasing grip on the rope but we're talking high risk for someone who hasn't practised this and it would probably only make sense when you're trading off serious injury if you don't do it.

For mere mortals, you're better using other ways of reducing load on gear if you're creating the sorts of forces that might pull well placed protection.

In reply to timparkin:

Yeah, perhaps I should have been clearer, since belay gloves for summer climbing are almost never seen in the UK I work on the assumption no rope slips through the brake hand when catching a normal fall, that leaves best case about 50cm of slippage for most belayers before they get their hand bitten by the belay plate, in many cases far less as people tend not to rest with the brake hand way down below and behind their hip.

Totally agree there are simple, safe and effective alternatives.

jk