UKC

I was teaching a ropework class a couple of days ago and explaining why you might choose to belay from the central loop rather than the harness belay loop.  I clipped the belay karabiner where I always have: at the top of the central loop (ie above both the harness tie-in points).  This is where pretty much every diagram I've ever seen has you attach the krab.

One of the participants said that he'd been shown this by someone in the past, who had said that you should always put the belay karabiner at the bottom of the central loop, ie below the tie-in points.  They'd suggested that it introduces less of a twist into the central loop when loaded and increases the degree to which you are 'separated' from the load.

I've just tried this: with the karabiner clipped high, the tie-in loops move along the bottom part of the central loop https://photos.app.goo.gl/jKV141AUFaDQS8o18 whilst with the karabiner low, the tie-in loops are free to move on the upper part of the central loop https://photos.app.goo.gl/1ryMF17pxngSVfgZ9

I need to try this with a proper body weight load from below me to see how it behaves in a real-life situation.  Any thoughts?  I can't see that either version is more or less safe than the other, and it might be true that the second version is actually slightly more comfortable...

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I'd say if we were to be anal, it will depend on the expected direction of the load.

Yet back in real live, a) It really doesn't matter. b) If you are anal enough for it to matter then you are anal enough to make sure the rope runs through a runner at the belay so the expected direction is up(ish) and so it'd always be clipped at the top. c) Just use the belay loop...

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

From my understanding, your participants suggestion doesn't really seem like it would do anything of the sort. I'd use the top strand or belay loop as it's on top and easier uncluttered access away from the rest of the rope loop. 

When belaying from the top of a pitch, belaying off the rope loop will help transfer less of the forces directly onto your harness and by implication, you. Assuming, that the rope loop has also been incorporated into the anchors and is equalised correctly. Again use the top of the rope loop so you have uncluttered space to belay in. 

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

And why might you? I don't see any obvious advantage.

For single pitch sport climbing the belayer normally isn't tied in anyway; for multipitch I'm normally on half ropes, would you clip both of them? Then on multipitch there's also the risk of ring loading your knot, which way or may not be an issue in the real world.

In reply to AlanLittle:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/skills/belaying_-_rope_loop_or_belay_lo...

This article covers the choice. The handbook for RCI seems to alternate in diagrams, but doesn't go into detail on choice.

In reply to Philip:

As in the suggestions of the article; I quite often belay through both rope loop and harness belay loop.

Other factors affecting the forces on the belay loop for me, include being tied to an anchor by a figure of eight on a bight, again often going through both rope and and harness belay loops.

Sometimes I anchor through a separate locking karabiner attached to both loops with clove hitches, but at other times I have the belay plate passing through that same karabiner (I presume that I may be criticised for this, depending on the direction of loading).

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I aways clip both belay loop and ropes. Below the knot when bringing up a second, and above when belaying a leader (or whatever seems the easiest)

I realise on specific occasions it might be easier with only rope loop clipped. 

However, I think the instances of accidentally removing yourself from the belay when un-tieing are far more common. Eg. When switching to abseil at the top.

Edit: Although that might not be belaying, but its all about habits, and not messing up when you tired or moving fast.

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I only use the rope loop if I'm tied in. We use the rope loop to add more of the dynamic properties of the rope in the system. Most people tie rope loops which are bigger than their belay loop meaning that if the belay plate is clipped through everything then the smaller loop (ie belay loop) takes all the load negating the reason we're belaying off the rope loop in the first place. 

To help everything line up with the direction of load, I use the following method:

At the top of the pitch belaying a second: belay device clipped below the knot.

Belaying a leader: device clipped above the knot. 

In reply to Steve Claw:

Yes, I've always done this. More obviously sits better for an anchor a little above you so suss it out there first. 

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

All of this discussion being moot regardless due to any sane person who values their comfort and sanity belaying direct off the powerpoint on the anchor 😎

In reply to MischaHY:

I agree that difference between rope loop, belay loop, above and below knot are trivial to the point of insignificance, but if you've ever belayed a second who needs a helpful tug past the tricky moves, you'll know how very much easier that can be when belayed from the waist rather than from the anchor.

In reply to john arran:

Genuinely no offence John but I'm blown away that you're suggesting it's easier to assist a second when waist belaying rather than in guide mode where you've already got a progress capture device in place and need a few seconds to modify it into a suitable 3:1 haul rig. 

I assume you're referring to giving someone a quick boost of extra momentum on a single tricky move in otherwise moderate terrain? Because this is also far easier with a direct belay where you can fully haul on the ropes without worry about having to keep control of the braking strand. 

In reply to MischaHY:

I'm with John on this, depending on circumstances obviously, but it's much easier and quicker to give a little "help" when belaying off your harness. This is especially so when it's an unexpected help requirement.

In reply to Cobra_Head:

I just don't understand a scenario where that would be easier. But I'll take your word for it that you find it better 🤷‍♂️ 

In reply to MischaHY:

If you're belaying direct, you can pull only up with your arms on the rope. If you're belaying at the waist, assuming you're not too tightly in at the anchor, you can squat, take in, and then use your legs to give a lot more assistance.

In reply to john arran:

But surely if you can squat that would mean as soon as the second loads the rope you'd be holding their weight on your legs whilst standing? Like, if you're rigged so the load goes onto the anchor then you can't bend like that anyway. 

Or have I misunderstood your scenario? I wouldn't ever personally rig a setup where the load doesn't go directly on the anchor unless I was very very doubtful about anchor quality. Otherwise you could get pulled awkwardly or potentially over an edge in the result of the second popping off unexpectedly. 

In reply to MischaHY:

Agree with John Arran. At least for an instant assist for the second, rather than a deadweight haul. I've never found it too hard to capture the progress with either tube device or waist belay. I find it hard to explain but I seem to to sink down as the second moves and then straighten my leg as part of the assist process while simultaneously taking in/pulling the rope.

In reply to MischaHY:

Well if you had a ropeman or something similar to hand, you could achieve the same result by putting it on the rope to the climber and clipping it directly into your belay loop. I don't see a problem with that, except the need for more kit and the time taken to add it. Would be easier, certainly. But in my experience, and that of many others, it has worked pretty well without, as a rough and ready solution for giving help to a not-too-heavy second.

In reply to oldie:

Maybe we're just used to different scenarios. In the situation described I would just take a microtrax off my harness, clip it to the live rope and my belay loop and then use the squat method combined with normal guide belaying to provide quick and safe assistance, or if needing to do more than 1-2 pulls would just set up a 3:1 or better system which again would make for a very easy and safe assist with no downsides.

In reply to MischaHY:  I'd agree with you here - if you have enough slack in the system to give a meaningful haul by squatting and standing catching a surprise fall could get messy.

I'm surprised at 5 dislikes for Luca's post at 08:26.  Technical problems with what he writes?

In reply to john arran:

I'm sure it works fine to a given extent, but considering this thread was born from the deepest bounds of best practice consideration it just seems way off the mark 😆

I think it also comes down to route considerations and other factors because whilst hauling in a bit of slack and squatting is fine on a 2-3 pitch route, it's not what you'd want to be doing on a 15 pitch route. In that situation it's far more time and energy efficient to use progress capture devices and a direct belay. Perhaps my expectations and techniques are more calibrated to long alpine walls than short UK trad these days. 

In reply to wbo2:

This part of the thread is about a situation where the second is known to be in difficulties and the rope is already tight, so there will be no surprise fall.

In reply to MischaHY:

You're probably right about the different scenarios. Where the simple tug via the harness works it does have the big advantage of being quick and requires no setup or extra gear.

I also think many/most climbers have little or no experience of hauling systems and I'm not sure how many even use guide mode, but maybe I'm wrong.

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

The rope loop is connected by the fig 8 knot. The only direction of pull acceptable on this loop is via the knot. If you apply a force on the loop from anywhere other than the knot then you risk damaging the knot or rope. Essentially you are making a loop then pulling the two ends that go into the knot laterally. Fig 8 can roll and the knot isn’t designed to be loaded in this way. I would always use my belay loop. I know the forces won’t be that great if belaying a 2nd but arresting a lead fall could damage the rope. I personally wouldn’t do it. Just my two peneth. 

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I was originally told that if you were lucky enough to have an abseil loop on your harness (my first 2 harnesses did not) then you should use it for abseil only but not belay. That is probably BS now loops have become normal and people use them all the time.

There are pros and cons for belaying from the loop versus rope depending on anchors, stances and angles etc but the considerations are relatively minor. Personally I believe the small difference in strength of cross loading the knot on the rope loop highlighted by Wooj isn't significant in real life *as long as it isn't a standard bowline* which can come undone in that loading, but few people use bowlines and if they do... they probably tie a safer variation.

A real-world difference between where on the rope loop you place the belay krab?  Meh....     just do whichever is tidier at the time

In reply to Wooj:

So presumably you don't pass this rope loop through two parts of your harness that are physically separated and so pull the two sides of the loop apart?

In reply to Wooj:

People belay a second from the rope loop because it allows the load of a falling climber to be transferred to the anchors rather than directly through the harness. 

Belaying from a rope loop is very common in the UK and is generally what would be taught by most mountaineering instructors and national mountain centers (PYB, The Lodge and Tollymore) in a normal lead climbing context.

In reply to oldie:

This is a very 'UK' thing - in Germany/Austria/Switzerland/France it's very much standard practice to use guide mode and powerpoint belays wherever possible. 

In reply to MischaHY:

Agreed. You may recall there was quite a long thread on this topic this summer, prompted by an Aspirant Guide in Chamonix telling me that belaying off a harness was a good way of killing my second!

Steve

In reply to Wooj:

Holding a lead fall when belaying off the rope loop will not damage the rope.

Whilst ring loading isn't the knot's strongest position, it will still hold any load that climbers will create.

In reply to gooberman-hill:

Yes I remember that thread, I think that was silly advice and it's "horses for courses" but there is some interesting background about why the Chamonix guides will default to belaying directly rather than via a harness. The following video explains that and a few other things, actually while not taking it dogmatically I think this is one of the best belay (etc) videos I've ever seen and it changed my opinions on a couple of points.

youtube.com/watch?v=eqZQnCGl24A&

Enjoy...

In reply to MischaHY:

Ha ha I haven't got a Micro Trax on my harness, nor the £50-£60 to buy one.

Maybe you just have more gear than most of us.

In reply to tlouth7:

If you pull up on fig 8 know when tied into your harness you will see both rope strands are parallel to each other leading into the knot. Even though the loop is thread through the waist and leg loops. I was meaning more if the direction of pull is not from the knot. It’s more about how the rope loop is orientated when you use it.

In reply to Alex Riley:

Yes I can see that and how it would work safely with the force being applied directly opposite the knot. I was meaning more of it not being part of the anchor and just belaying straight from the loop, thus having the potential to cross load the knot. 

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

The first pic looks like it'll stay fractionally more organised holding a (non FF2) lead fall.

The second pic looks like it'll stay fractionally more organised if your second falls below you.

Can't imagine it matters a jot either way in the real world, my belays were always rats' nests of knots on knots with the live rope clipped wherever it'd fit, they always worked fine.

jk

In reply to MischaHY:

Why? 

You should be tight on the anchors belaying. Either sitting or standing depending on anchor height, ideally near the edge to observe the second. With good anchors and stance management there is zero chance of being pulled over the edge. 

Don't take this offensively pay for a day out with an instructor or guide. It sounds like it might be a revelation: you'll become quicker, slicker and safer. Not to mention protect your second better. 

In reply to MischaHY:

What is done in the alps, stays in the alps! If you are facing 1500m of low grades etc speed is your friend, so direct belaying off a sling, massive hex etc.. but the decision on what's safe is made by the guide / instructor with 1000s of multi pitch routes under their belt, often using the same anchor every other day / week. 

Plenty in the alps do go off the harness on roadside bolts, but most I've seen are off the rope on mountain routes. Given that John lives and works there I suspect he knows! 

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

Thanks, all - sorry to leave it for a while before coming back to the thread!

Looks like a typical UKC response - evenly split between 'it makes next to no difference' and 'yer gonna die'   I think I'm tending towards the former.  I'll have a play with this when I'm at the wall with the class tomorrow, but I suspect that in real life it won't make any great difference where you clip the belay karabiner, and I'm reassured that both are used.  In fact, I think there are three possible locations - above the tie-in loops, below them, or in-between them...

Jez, I spotted that in your video on this youtube.com/watch?v=rpiPEsyKJ08& you went below the tie-in points.  Was that a deliberate choice and would you go above for belaying a leader climbing the pitch above you?

Those who clip both the central loop and the belay loop - what's your logic for this?  It seems to me that you just lose the major advantage (of separating yourself from the loading) of using the rope loop, and the only things you gain are redundancy of one of the loops failing (extremely unlikely) and not dropping your plate if you absent-mindedly untie the rope loop.

Mischa - I think you're a bit too used to bolted belays!  This set-up (watch Jez's video if you want to see it shown more clearly than in my photos) is absolutely standard in the UK.  Yes, I do sometimes use a guide plate straight off the powerpoint (most often if I want to bring up two novice seconds simultaneously) but I'd say 80% of the time I'm belaying a single climber off my rope loop.  The emergency assist on a tough move is very easy: you take a small step backwards to get a little slack in the ropes connecting you to the anchor, use that slack to dip your knees and take in at the same time, lock the plate and stand up.  I would absolutely not want to do it repeatedly, but if your second is stuck on one hard move it's a very fast way to give them a quick boost up!

Ring loading: as Jez says, absolutely not a concern.  It's not possible in a normal climbing context to generate the sort of force needed to roll a fig 8.  If it was we'd see accidents, given how common this method is...

In reply to summo:

No offence taken as good safe feedback and advice is always appreciated 😎👍

However if you have a look through my various messages (and indeed read the message you quoted in its entirety) you'll see that I was making exactly the same point as you in that you should always be belaying with the load directed entirely through the anchors regardless of whether belaying from waist or direct. Personally I always choose a direct guide mode belay over a waist belay unless there is a significant advantage to the waist belay (crap anchors, weird position etc). 

I was lucky enough through my university years to spend many days out cragging and learning under the observation of MIA/IFMGA instructors and then have since had the chance to reinforce those learnt skills on quite a few long and tricky walls around Europe, so I'm comfortable saying that I always use safe practice and will generally be aware of what the best practice is in the given scenario (even if I happen to ignoring it at the time 😉🤞). 

I completely agree that money invested on a day or several out with an instructor is very well spent and will set you up for future success on hard things whilst staying safe.

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I actually assumed this conversation was about multipitch when it's apparently about single pitch trad, or a multi with such big ledges that you can 'take a step back'? I can't fathom how I'm supposed to be taking a step back in a belay like Jez demonstrates which is clearly a hanging belay, or at least with anchors positioned above the head. In this scenario it makes no difference whether the anchor is bolted or trad when regarding the belay method. I'll arrive at the stance, place a few pieces, equalize them with rope or sling to form a powerpoint and then belay off that. 

Obviously on single pitch trad with a flat topout and low anchors a quick belay off the loop is absolutely no bother and it's clear why this is the done thing back home where we have short crags and this scenario is common. This has nothing to do with anchor type and I do think the comment about bolted belays was quite condescending. 

I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen people using crap rope loop belays at the top of UK crags with all sorts of bad practice like rope loading over their legs, weird positioning, struggling to lock off the plate properly etc etc when they would have had a bombproof option for a direct or redirected belay on slightly higher anchor points. Just because it's the done thing doesn't mean it's the best thing. 

In reply to MischaHY:

I suspect most folk will do the opposite,  only direct belaying / or using a plate of any brand when the situation justifies it. 

Edit. Current systems haven't developed by chance, 1000 hrs of hours of different agencies, manufacturers, governing bodies have tested different devices, then used them direct/semi direct and so on. Then also drop tested systems using towers (with human belayers), force meters fitted, or the more crude throw a tyre off a quarry edge and 20m slack. As well as considering providing assistance to a second, hoisting, escaping etc..   They didn't just evolved because it easy or comfortable, safety was and is the driver. 

In reply to MischaHY:

Mischa, your actual first contribution to this thread was to suggest those who use this system lack sanity!  I understand that this was tongue-in-cheek, but if you're going to hand it out you need to take it too...

I never specified single pitch or multi; I never specified whether you were belaying a leader or a second.  My question was simply about, having evaluated the situation and elected to belay from the rope loop, precisely where to clip it. 

Don't really want to spend ages arguing about the boosting of a second, but yes, this trick will quite clearly not work in a hanging belay.  It's only an option if your anchors are both above and behind you, and you are on a large ledge.

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

Thanks for watching the vid!

When I'm teaching, it's not something I normally mention to be honest. I'm more concerned about correct orientation of the device and quality belaying, you have to pick your battles!

By default I'd go under for belaying a second, over for belaying a leader, but wouldn't bother swapping if on a multi pitch stance.

I do teach to use the rope loop where appropriate, although the belay loop is of course absolutely safe. I don't believe the rope loop adds any dynamic element that's of any interest, it's only a few inches and if you really wanted to protect the anchors (at this point I'd probably be regretting my life choices) perhaps belaying off the belay loop would allow you as the belayer to take more of any force by bracing?

Just because the thread has gone this direction... I often use indirect belays, I often use direct belays, I just pick what's appropriate for each situation

 

In reply to summo:

I agree, but that's because that's how UK climbers have been taught.  Belaying off the harness is seen as the standard way, and I think the impression is given (if only by implication) that this is the only correct way.  This extends to an impression that you should not belay directly off trad anchors.  I can't recall reading any articles which recommend this, and literature on guide plates usually shows them used with bolted anchors.

I have a guide plate (Reverso) but I seldom use it in guide mode, and only on absolutely bomber anchors, such as a large tree or block. For reasons I'm not quite sure about I'm reluctant to do it on other anchors, which I am happy to belay indirectly from.  I think part of it may be that on a decent stance then most if not all the force from a slip by a second is probably being taken by me rather than the anchors, which are only providing secondary support.  This obviously doesn't apply on tiny stances or hanging belays, but in those cases I am even more anxious to protect the anchors by interposing myself into the system (although maybe I'm just kidding myself there). I think this is a fairly common mindset among UK climbers, who have never been taught to belay directly and don't trust it not to rip the anchors if they are not in the system to absorb some of the force.

On the other hand, watching that French video and seeing the upward force on the anchors when directly belaying a leader, it is not something I would want to do on trad anchors.  It is usually easier to attach an anchor for an upward pull to the climber rather than to the other anchors.

Answering the original question, I think I clip to the rope loop wherever way is most convenient and accessible, which will usually depend on how the ropes are running to the belay. I don't think I've ever consciously considered which side of the knot is best in those terms, and I think this might only arise if other things are equal, which they seldom are.  I doubt in the real world it makes any difference. Surely what is more important is that the ropes can run freely and the belayer has space to lock off in case of a fall.  That may indeed decide which side of the knot is best, but I don't think the knot itself is part of my thought process.