This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
3 people are in a straight queue, facing the same direction, forwards.
Person C is at the front, B in the middle, A at the back.
A-B-C
Persons B + C are in front of A.
Persons A + B are behind C.
Person C has some weird magic done on them, first they shrink down + turn into a Frog, and then into a little Rock of gritstone, then they expand massively + become Froggatt Edge, the Peak district suddenly materialises there too.
Person B, again, weird shit happens, they turn a snake, but then into a climbing rope.
Person A gets some good magic, they turn into a fully kitted climber, and person Zzz, a belayer, lands behind them.
Person A ties in and starts climbing, belayed by Zzz.
Person A, places gear, climbs above it, has the rope, B, in front of them /their legs, and is climbing the rock, C, which is also in front of them. This is good and safer, if they fall, the rope is less likely to catch a leg / invert them.
The rope is in front of themselves /their legs, they /their legs are behind the rope.
Person A now gets the rope, B, behind a leg. The leg is in front of the rope / the rope is behind the leg. If the climber falls now, the rope, caught behind the climbers leg, will pull them into an inverted position, possibly causing a head injury. Not Good.
Re the Autumn issue of BMC Summit, re article, pg 67, "How to Injure Yourself climbing", "Inverted falls".
Just wanted to point out what i think are errors, when someone prints a text describing the potentially dangerous situation of a Rope behind your Leg + how it might cause an inverted fall.
I've also seen it incorrectly worded in a (used) book on Redpoint Bristols shelves, can't remember title now, and another thread here a couple of months ago.
You might have your own preferred way of describing this. However, the author has contradicted / muddled the description of his preferred way, twice, with regards to which is good + bad.
The text.....
"A sure fire way of incurring some nasty rope burn + to fly through the air upside down is to fall while leading with your leg behind the rope"... ( i'd say this is wrong, leg behind the rope = good)
"... Try to be aware of how the rope is running whilst climbing and ask your belayer to alert you if you're climbing with the rope behind your leg. " ( yes, i'd want to be alerted of this scenario).
"Keep it between your legs + feet, or in FRONT of them, especially when near the start of a route, moving through an overhang, or when clipping. ( I agree with this too).
" Don't panic if you find your leg behind the rope, stay calm and take the time to step back round " ( Disagree, no need to panic, or step around, leg behind rope = Good).
For me.... (+ you?)
Rope in front of the leg = Leg behind the rope = Good.
and so Vice-versa
Rope behind the leg = Leg in front of the rope = Bad.
5
5
56
1
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Typically:
- moving leftwards: keep rope to right of right leg
- moving rightwards: keep rope to left of left leg
- moving straight up: keep rope between legs.
Typically:
- moving leftwards: keep rope to right of right leg
- moving rightwards: keep rope to left of left leg
- moving straight up: keep rope between legs.
4
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
My head hurts maybe we can treat this in a simpler fashion - 'Be sure to have your leg the correct side of the rope in order to avoid tumbling and inversion'
My head hurts maybe we can treat this in a simpler fashion - 'Be sure to have your leg the correct side of the rope in order to avoid tumbling and inversion'
6
4
1
4
1
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Shouldn't the snake eat the frog and the climber try to smash the snake with a quickdraw? And everybody would fall together. Then surely it would be better to have the leg before the rope, so the climber would fall on the plumpy snake (it has eaten a frog after all)?
How would that work in Ireland, would B turn into a lezard and then a daisy chain? Or what?
I don't think this is very a very credible scenario, all in all.
Shouldn't the snake eat the frog and the climber try to smash the snake with a quickdraw? And everybody would fall together. Then surely it would be better to have the leg before the rope, so the climber would fall on the plumpy snake (it has eaten a frog after all)?
How would that work in Ireland, would B turn into a lezard and then a daisy chain? Or what?
I don't think this is very a very credible scenario, all in all.
4
In reply to Fraser:
Cheers, good point, even if that bit mostly / often happens naturally? but must add, also keep rope in front of yr leg again.
> Typically:
> - moving leftwards: keep rope to right of right leg
> - moving rightwards: keep rope to left of left leg
> - moving straight up: keep rope between legs.
Cheers, good point, even if that bit mostly / often happens naturally? but must add, also keep rope in front of yr leg again.
1
In reply to neuromancer:
My cat says it's ok to.
I don't often confer with him about the more important stuff though, unless i've ran out of...
My cat says it's ok to.
I don't often confer with him about the more important stuff though, unless i've ran out of...
Post edited at 14:57
2
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Froggatt faces West. A climber on Froggatt will typically be facing East. In front of and behind will therefore depend on the frame of reference, usually not specified. Surely it's easier just to say that the rope should remain between the climber and the rock.
Froggatt faces West. A climber on Froggatt will typically be facing East. In front of and behind will therefore depend on the frame of reference, usually not specified. Surely it's easier just to say that the rope should remain between the climber and the rock.
Post edited at 15:04
4
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
I think the reason for this misunderstanding is just that folk get used to saying phrases without thinking, in this case "leg behind rope" when they mean "rope behind leg". Well spotted.
I think the reason for this misunderstanding is just that folk get used to saying phrases without thinking, in this case "leg behind rope" when they mean "rope behind leg". Well spotted.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
If there was just a fixed rope down a crag, it would be entirely correct to say 'behind the rope' when referring to the space between the rope and the rock. It's contextual rather than a simple mistake.
If there was just a fixed rope down a crag, it would be entirely correct to say 'behind the rope' when referring to the space between the rope and the rock. It's contextual rather than a simple mistake.
2
In reply to john arran:
I don't think anyone will be assessing the crags alignment to the compass and using it as a reference point to describe which way the rope is, i guess my crap sense of humour is failing to spot u r having a laff...
Probably agree with Leeward + yourself that its better to just say ...
Keep the rope between u + rock / keep yr leg the correct side of the rope.
I don't think anyone will be assessing the crags alignment to the compass and using it as a reference point to describe which way the rope is, i guess my crap sense of humour is failing to spot u r having a laff...
Probably agree with Leeward + yourself that its better to just say ...
Keep the rope between u + rock / keep yr leg the correct side of the rope.
In reply to john arran:
No the scenario is one of leading and climbing above gear and rope behind leg causing inverted fall, as per title of para in article.
No the scenario is one of leading and climbing above gear and rope behind leg causing inverted fall, as per title of para in article.
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
The problem is that it's fundamentally ambiguous. If A is the other side of B from you, it is said that A is behind B, even though they both are in front of you. Like I said, it's contextual.
The problem is that it's fundamentally ambiguous. If A is the other side of B from you, it is said that A is behind B, even though they both are in front of you. Like I said, it's contextual.
1
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Your assuming "behind" is being used relative to the climber who is facing the rock.
In the context of climbing and falls, I (and presumably the author of the article) take "behind" to mean relative to the direction of a potential fall (i.e. away from the rock).
The word "behind" is dependent on a frame of reference and is therefore ambiguous in this case.
They should have described it as having your leg in between the rock and the rope or something.
Your assuming "behind" is being used relative to the climber who is facing the rock.
In the context of climbing and falls, I (and presumably the author of the article) take "behind" to mean relative to the direction of a potential fall (i.e. away from the rock).
The word "behind" is dependent on a frame of reference and is therefore ambiguous in this case.
They should have described it as having your leg in between the rock and the rope or something.
In reply to Phil Anderson:
In which case we mean the same thing, we agree that behind you is away from the rock.
I can't help thinking most people see it this way too, that when facing something, it is in front of you, and that which is in the opposite direction is behind you.
Regardless of the frame of reference, if you consider the objects being referred to, rope + leg, my main point is that he has it one way in one sentence, setting up his frame of reference, but then says that he thinks a certain scenario needs warning about, but it doesn't, it is safe.
I split the section into 4 quotes.
The frame of reference for quote 2 + 3 is the way i perceive rope in spatial relationship to leg, but if author has it this way, then the quoted parts 1 + 2 are wrong.
However, if your spatial perception of this agrees with quote 1, it will also agree with 4, but then, if you pay attention to the detail of what object is in front/ behind which, you will have to agree that he is wrong about quoted parts 2+3.
In which case we mean the same thing, we agree that behind you is away from the rock.
I can't help thinking most people see it this way too, that when facing something, it is in front of you, and that which is in the opposite direction is behind you.
Regardless of the frame of reference, if you consider the objects being referred to, rope + leg, my main point is that he has it one way in one sentence, setting up his frame of reference, but then says that he thinks a certain scenario needs warning about, but it doesn't, it is safe.
I split the section into 4 quotes.
The frame of reference for quote 2 + 3 is the way i perceive rope in spatial relationship to leg, but if author has it this way, then the quoted parts 1 + 2 are wrong.
However, if your spatial perception of this agrees with quote 1, it will also agree with 4, but then, if you pay attention to the detail of what object is in front/ behind which, you will have to agree that he is wrong about quoted parts 2+3.
Post edited at 18:42
In reply to john arran:
None of the objects can really be thought of as having a direction, except the person, who has a physical front and back. Therefore that is the basis and context from which what is in front of what, and behind what, are defined, surely?
None of the objects can really be thought of as having a direction, except the person, who has a physical front and back. Therefore that is the basis and context from which what is in front of what, and behind what, are defined, surely?
Post edited at 18:56
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
I think everyone would agree the front of the leg is the side of the leg closest to the rock.
Most people would say the front of the rock is the side closest the leg (the face of the rock), although I can see you describe this as the back of the rock.
The front of the rope is ambiguous, but the article makes sense if you consider it the side of the rope closest to the leg:
Leg 'behind rope' and rope 'behind leg' are both bad. Leg 'in front of rope' and rope 'in front of leg' are both good.
I think everyone would agree the front of the leg is the side of the leg closest to the rock.
Most people would say the front of the rock is the side closest the leg (the face of the rock), although I can see you describe this as the back of the rock.
The front of the rope is ambiguous, but the article makes sense if you consider it the side of the rope closest to the leg:
Leg 'behind rope' and rope 'behind leg' are both bad. Leg 'in front of rope' and rope 'in front of leg' are both good.
3
In reply to timstyles:
I think i should call "foul" on yr reply ... Leg behind wicket....
???
Front of the rock?
Most cliffs i can think of don't have a front or back as such, but the rock face is in front of me when i am facing it, as is more often the case when climbing it.
A boulder will have a front, back, + some sides, but u probably wouldn't be using a rope. Which side is in front if you will be very very ambiguous when bouldering!
Nowhere did i use a reference to the front or back of the rock, but you say i did.
Front of the rope? .... sides of the rope?! Now what r u on about!
Yr last sentence assumes anything goes without the point of reference,... The reference point/ subject /object is you, you are facing the rock when climbing, it is in front of you.
Leg behind wicket.
I think i should call "foul" on yr reply ... Leg behind wicket....
???
Front of the rock?
Most cliffs i can think of don't have a front or back as such, but the rock face is in front of me when i am facing it, as is more often the case when climbing it.
A boulder will have a front, back, + some sides, but u probably wouldn't be using a rope. Which side is in front if you will be very very ambiguous when bouldering!
Nowhere did i use a reference to the front or back of the rock, but you say i did.
Front of the rope? .... sides of the rope?! Now what r u on about!
Yr last sentence assumes anything goes without the point of reference,... The reference point/ subject /object is you, you are facing the rock when climbing, it is in front of you.
Leg behind wicket.
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Last try:
If the rope is in a dangerous position relative to your leg, it is entirely reasonable to describe your leg as being behind the rope, seeing as your leg is on the far side of the rope. It is also entirely reasonable to describe the rope as behind your leg, seeing as the rope is close to what we normally would describe as the back of your leg.
I recommend you try seeing things from more than one viewpoint. In this instance, there is no right and wrong, there is a right and a right, but given the possibility of misinterpretation both of these rights should be viewed as wrong.
Last try:
If the rope is in a dangerous position relative to your leg, it is entirely reasonable to describe your leg as being behind the rope, seeing as your leg is on the far side of the rope. It is also entirely reasonable to describe the rope as behind your leg, seeing as the rope is close to what we normally would describe as the back of your leg.
I recommend you try seeing things from more than one viewpoint. In this instance, there is no right and wrong, there is a right and a right, but given the possibility of misinterpretation both of these rights should be viewed as wrong.
5
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
The terminology is confusing because it all depends on perspective. I can see where you're coming from but I'd say that when a leader's leg is between the rope and the rock in a normal climbing situation ( = bad), their leg is behind the rope. It's behind the rope in the sense that the rope is an object and the leg has gone behind (on the other side of) that object.
I think one of the issues here is that when climbing we are generally going up or across and not forward, so there isn't a conventional 'front'. If you're driving on a road and there are two cars in the same lane and going in the same direction and they are both in front of you , you would say that one of those cars is in front of the other, which in turn is in front of you. That makes sense because you are interpreting the situation relative to the direction of travel, which is the same for all three vehicles involved. Whereas in climbing you aren't generally moving into or towards the rock, so there isn't a definitive sense of perspective and different people will see it in different ways. So for me, the 'bad' situation is the leg being behind the rope in the sense that it's on the other side of or, if you like, hiding behind the rope.
Think about it this way, you're playing hide and seek in a room, you're in the middle of the room and someone is hiding on the other side of a window curtain, between the curtain and the window. Are they behind or in front of the curtain? I think most people would say they are behind the curtain. "I can't see you because you're behind the curtain." Even though the person hiding is further away from you than the curtain.
I'm not sure there's really a right or wrong answer here and there's certainly room for confusion, so any instructional manuals should use clear terminology like 'leg between rock and rope'.
The terminology is confusing because it all depends on perspective. I can see where you're coming from but I'd say that when a leader's leg is between the rope and the rock in a normal climbing situation ( = bad), their leg is behind the rope. It's behind the rope in the sense that the rope is an object and the leg has gone behind (on the other side of) that object.
I think one of the issues here is that when climbing we are generally going up or across and not forward, so there isn't a conventional 'front'. If you're driving on a road and there are two cars in the same lane and going in the same direction and they are both in front of you , you would say that one of those cars is in front of the other, which in turn is in front of you. That makes sense because you are interpreting the situation relative to the direction of travel, which is the same for all three vehicles involved. Whereas in climbing you aren't generally moving into or towards the rock, so there isn't a definitive sense of perspective and different people will see it in different ways. So for me, the 'bad' situation is the leg being behind the rope in the sense that it's on the other side of or, if you like, hiding behind the rope.
Think about it this way, you're playing hide and seek in a room, you're in the middle of the room and someone is hiding on the other side of a window curtain, between the curtain and the window. Are they behind or in front of the curtain? I think most people would say they are behind the curtain. "I can't see you because you're behind the curtain." Even though the person hiding is further away from you than the curtain.
I'm not sure there's really a right or wrong answer here and there's certainly room for confusion, so any instructional manuals should use clear terminology like 'leg between rock and rope'.
Post edited at 23:38
2
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Isn't this just a difference in the observer -
Assuming the leg is trapped in what we (presumably) agree is a bad situation - leg between rope and rock.....
- from the climbers perspective, assuming she is facing the rock, her leg is in front of the rope / the rope is behind her leg.
However....
- from the belayer/casual observer's perspective the climber's leg is now behind her rope (i.e. looking from a distance towards the rock they can see the rope, with her leg behind it)
Just to remove the familiarity of referring to the rope, consider a climber ascending part of a rock face where a tree grows "In front" of the crag. The climber, facing the rock, knows the tree is behind him; but a watcher from a distance can't see the climber as he is "behind the tree".
Isn't this just a difference in the observer -
Assuming the leg is trapped in what we (presumably) agree is a bad situation - leg between rope and rock.....
- from the climbers perspective, assuming she is facing the rock, her leg is in front of the rope / the rope is behind her leg.
However....
- from the belayer/casual observer's perspective the climber's leg is now behind her rope (i.e. looking from a distance towards the rock they can see the rope, with her leg behind it)
Just to remove the familiarity of referring to the rope, consider a climber ascending part of a rock face where a tree grows "In front" of the crag. The climber, facing the rock, knows the tree is behind him; but a watcher from a distance can't see the climber as he is "behind the tree".
1
2
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
I have to say that I've been convinced by others that it depends on perspective. For example, if I'm at the top guiding a less experienced second through the crux, in theory I would be correct to say "hold on the right" as it could mean my right or theirs. In practice, of course, it would be more helpful to describe from their perspective (and I would be less likely to get abuse back from them!), but either way would be correct.
Even if it wasn't correct, everyone knows what their belayer means when they shout up that your leg is behind the rope.
I have to say that I've been convinced by others that it depends on perspective. For example, if I'm at the top guiding a less experienced second through the crux, in theory I would be correct to say "hold on the right" as it could mean my right or theirs. In practice, of course, it would be more helpful to describe from their perspective (and I would be less likely to get abuse back from them!), but either way would be correct.
Even if it wasn't correct, everyone knows what their belayer means when they shout up that your leg is behind the rope.
2
In reply to Fraser:
I would add to the last one - make sure your belayer is standing to the side for the first few moves. You don't want to come off with the rope between your legs if your belayer is standing directly below you and out a few paces!! Obviously it's better than decking but best avoided.
> Typically:
> - moving leftwards: keep rope to right of right leg
> - moving rightwards: keep rope to left of left leg
> - moving straight up: keep rope between legs.
I would add to the last one - make sure your belayer is standing to the side for the first few moves. You don't want to come off with the rope between your legs if your belayer is standing directly below you and out a few paces!! Obviously it's better than decking but best avoided.
In reply to Scott K:
I would rewrite these completely, as they could be dangerously misleading if followed literally when turned sideways on - particularly so when stepping through or flagging. In fact I would replace all of them with the much simpler: 'Don't let any limbs pass between the rock and the rope', which will work in all situations.
> Typically:
> - moving leftwards: keep rope to right of right leg
> - moving rightwards: keep rope to left of left leg
> - moving straight up: keep rope between legs
I would rewrite these completely, as they could be dangerously misleading if followed literally when turned sideways on - particularly so when stepping through or flagging. In fact I would replace all of them with the much simpler: 'Don't let any limbs pass between the rock and the rope', which will work in all situations.
1
In reply to john arran:
Happy now?
> Typically:
> - moving leftwards: keep rope to outside right of right leg
> - moving rightwards: keep rope to outside left of left leg
> - moving straight up: keep rope between legs
Happy now?
In reply to Fraser:
No. You're presuming you're always facing in the direction of travel. Quite often, when traversing left, you'll point both feet to the right and reach behind you.
No. You're presuming you're always facing in the direction of travel. Quite often, when traversing left, you'll point both feet to the right and reach behind you.
In reply to john arran:
Really. You surprise me.
I did say 'typically'. Typically, I face the direction of travel but ymmv.
> No.
Really. You surprise me.
I did say 'typically'. Typically, I face the direction of travel but ymmv.
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Can we just rewind the whole script at x10 speed back to this original situation.
Person C (future rockface) needs to be turned 180° so they are facing A.
Person B (future rope) can't be represented by anything that gives them an obvious direction. They should have started out life as a snake.
So the concepts of back and front are now just a matter of perspective.
Nice try though!
> 3 people are in a straight queue, facing the same direction, forwards.
> Person C is at the front, B in the middle, A at the back.
Can we just rewind the whole script at x10 speed back to this original situation.
Person C (future rockface) needs to be turned 180° so they are facing A.
Person B (future rope) can't be represented by anything that gives them an obvious direction. They should have started out life as a snake.
So the concepts of back and front are now just a matter of perspective.
Nice try though!
1
In reply to nb:
Yep that perspective works, but i am still facing the rock even if it is also facing me, + still think describing the ropes place is relative to which way i face, so i want the rope in front of me / my legs, or, as we can all ageee on, between me (or the leg it is nearest to)+ the rock .
Yep that perspective works, but i am still facing the rock even if it is also facing me, + still think describing the ropes place is relative to which way i face, so i want the rope in front of me / my legs, or, as we can all ageee on, between me (or the leg it is nearest to)+ the rock .
1
In reply to Rock to Fakey:
Short story is don't come between the rock and the rope.
Rock/wall - Rope - Climber ====> GOOD
Rock/wall - Climber - Rope ====> BAD
NEVER put your leg between the rope and the rock/wall, follow Eminem's instructions when he describes two trailer-park girls ---> "go round the outside, round the outside, round the outside"
Short story is don't come between the rock and the rope.
Rock/wall - Rope - Climber ====> GOOD
Rock/wall - Climber - Rope ====> BAD
NEVER put your leg between the rope and the rock/wall, follow Eminem's instructions when he describes two trailer-park girls ---> "go round the outside, round the outside, round the outside"
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...