UKC

Hello everyone, I was to a climb another day. And I noticed people do three things that I would never do in my life. 

1. Using no harness for top rope and just tying around the waist.

2. Belaying off the bum with no belaying devices.

3. Using a single bowline and clove hitch for the anchor for the top rope.

All of these looks incredibly dangerous to me, but many people do this. Maybe I'm missing something. What do people here think?

In reply to Removed User:

Looks good, light is right, who needs a full rack and harness. 

In reply to Removed User:

Were they crack climbing?

In reply to Lankyman:

Not really, you can see on the picture. A bit of overhang with slab on top.

In reply to Removed User:

That an expansion bolt might be seen as unethical so maybe a maybe a tricam would fit better than a cam.

I look forward to further replies to No. 2.

In reply to 65:

With a big crack I'd always favour throwing a big hex in there, old school on rope of course.

In reply to Removed User:

Quite clever, in the absence of a ruck sack for body belays just drop the rope lower, I'm sure with the right trousers he'd hold a leader fall.

In reply to Removed User:

Well, until the 1960s or so, everyone did.

In reply to MG:

Er... 1978, in my case 🤭

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Never used a clove hitch.

In reply to Removed User:

Old school southern sandstone ethic. (Assuming that is SS? Looks like it)

No leading, strict no lowering ethic to protect rock, and also no endless hanging off routes you don't belong on wearing down marginal holds. If you only ever weight the rope in an 'oh shit' moment that setup is perfectly adequate. Safer than soloing which is the other old school way on that rock

In reply to Removed User:

A lot of us think we should say goodbye because you won't be around for long.

In reply to tomdiddlybomb:

Yeah, that's traditional Southern Sandstone style. Good to see some people are still sticking to the classics in his day and age.

In reply to Removed User:

Is this satire?

In reply to Removed User:

For some unknown reason, people who climb on Southern Sandstone still use techniques which went out of date some time in the last century. Just because they 'kind of worked' back when there wasn't an easy alternative doesn't mean they're still worth using.

Perhaps they also drive cars without seatbelts, crumple zones and air bags or ride bikes without air filled tyres. Best to ignore them and keep out the way so that when someone ends up on the floor you don't have to help first aid two broken legs.

The anchor setup with a bowline and clove hitch is absolutely fine however. 

In reply to Removed User:

I'm more interested in the hairstyles in the first picture you posted: those afros are f-uckin' crazy, man!

In reply to Removed User:

I climbed like this for many years back in the 60's. It's not something I would do now, given a choice, but it's safe albeit uncomfortable in the event of a fall.

In reply to LucaC:

They didn't 'kind of work' they worked fine. I haven't climbed on southern sandstone for a few years but I'd still tie in direct and use waist belay of preference. Simple, quick to set up, easy to pay out and take in. Why take excess gear and get it covered in abrasive sand. However I do see that many people are unfamiliar with the technique and nervous being belayed in this way.

Hang free in space with a waist tie-in and you die quite quickly. Hence the requirement to be familiar with the "baboon roll" with a sling to improvise a crude sit harness. It works.

In reply to Removed User:

Looks fine to me. That's the very very far end of Harrison's? Pretty sure I've climbed that route at least once. Or at least one right next to it

Providing the exceptional case... Only at Harrison's (and other Southern Sandstone outcrops), not on anything overhanging and they're experienced doing it and know what they're doing -- then it's fine. I wouldn't recommend it for novice or use anywhere else though. But in that location it's fine.

They'd be better off with thick twisty blue rope though as that's thicker so kinder on the waist and belayer's bum as well as being cheaper and the twisty rope (hawser laid) lets sand and grit fall out of it. Again.. only on Southern Sandstone!

In reply to Removed User:

(1) and (2) are what everybody used to do before harnesses and belay devices were invented, so up to about the mid-70s or so. Harder to waist belay effectively with modern ropes that are a lot thinner and more slippery than they used to be, but still fine for top roping

In reply to Removed User:

Traditional belay and tie in technique. Safe enough, if you know what you are doing. However there is a reason we now have belay devices and harnesses. Those old trad techniques can be painful. There's a reason you wear a long sleeved shirt with a collar when belaying, rope burn. Waist tie ins are also painful if you fall and you don't want to hang around dangling with that rope pulling on your gut.

In reply to oldie:

Not what I would do, but agree that is fine, if uncomfortable, and I have seen older, experienced southern sandstone climbers using it.

Also pleased to see the OP has maintained the privacy of the climbers.

However, very disappointed to see that the poor pooch in the background hasn't been blurred out. Everywhere they go now, it'll be "Oh look, it's that dog from UKC with the old school sandstone climbers".

Thank you for all the kind the replies! 

It now makes more sense, though still not something I'll ever be doing in my life. 


>That's the very very far end of Harrison's?
Yes, exactly!

In reply to Removed User:

As others have said, that's the classic Southern Sandstone style and you will still see it lots today. It lends itself very well to the short routes, which are more like highball boulders, on the soft rock, which is top rope only. The climber is lowered down after each attempt, which rules out dogging, a big problem for erosion there, as well as normal red pointing tactics, which creates a challenge somewhat more like bouldering. Flick through any of the guidebooks and most climbers depicted will use that arrangement. 

And nothing wrong with that anchor set up, so not sure why you think it's unsafe.

In reply to Pedro50:

Actually I was in that situation once at Harrison's. Then there were loads of deep grooves created by rope running over the edge (now filled). I couldn't finish the climb but the rope was jammed fast at the top and I was just hanging there (one can apparently lose consciousness in 10 minutes plus). Usually there would be lots of other climbers around plus rope etc so easy to sort out. However nobody apart from belayer around. No extra gear just anchor sling at top with krab and the rope. Belayer let out enough slack in rope from top back to him, I tied loop on bight and stood in it which immediately released pressure on waist..... can't remember how I got down but it can't have been difficult.

Incidentally different context but IIRC Rockfax Winter climbing book recommends waist belay for bucket seat belay in easy angled snow. I think it could have had more explanation and photos of the technique though for anyone unfamiliar.

In reply to Removed User:

That was my initial thought but I was doubtful (and couldn't confirm it from other UKC photos) because I haven't been there for about 40 years. Just confirms how much of a geek I am with that kind of location identification.

A question, why the new account for this issue? 2nd account or long time lurker and previously not been bothered enough about anything to post.

In reply to ExiledScot:

Have you never ever had a big hex stuck in the crack you so gleefully put it into?

In reply to oldie:

For a technique you claim 'worked fine' this scenario really doesn't sound fine. 

We have amazing gear which is designed for purpose and incredibly good. If carrying a harness, belay plate and screwgate 20 minutes from the car park to the end of Harrisons requires you to leave kit behind to save weight then you better stick to the boulder gym. No one should be belaying like this.

Using a body belay in a winter climbing context is a vastly different scenario. Please don't try and justify the use continued use of body belaying whilst bottom roping by comparing it to a situation where it's appropriate to use a body belay.

In reply to Removed User:

I tended to use a proper harness and a belay plate when I still lived in the UK and climbed the sandstone, but to suggest this method is unsafe for others I'd say is wrong. Is there a better way with modern kit? Depends what you want from your safety system.

One of the joys of climbing is we each get to make our own choices. If somebody was soloing nobody would have thought twice about it, this is safer yet more controversial which is rather funny to me!

In reply to LucaC:

I think his waist tie in and body belay was rather a long time ago (clues are in his post name as well as in his actual post) and may have been before harnesses were widely available and used.

So for you to have a go at him as if that occurred last week is a bit out of order.

I'm one of your downvotes by the way 😁

In reply to Removed User:

Southern Sandstone perchance?  Yes, people do seem to still do those things.  I don't understand why, it's a lot less safe than doing it properly.

In reply to Michael Hood:

I was conscious of the question being accepted very negatively. And what I see now based on 27 downvotes and 1 upvote it wasn't very welcomed

Some people did consider it's something outdated and not to use nowadays. But some thinking of it as more of a just another option rather than something outdated.

I wonder if there's any guidance from BMC on the belaying methods.

In reply to Removed User:

No, I was wondering why the new account now. It's just that there's a long history on UKC of new accounts with slightly "left-field" questions being trolls or bots.

Which of course you'll be aware of if you're a long time lurker.

In reply to tomdiddlybomb:

Yes, that protects the rock from the rope sawing grooves into it.

Ideally, you still want the top karabiner as close to/hanging over the edge with static line/slings to the anchors (and padded underneath). If done correctly, lowering off shouldn't cause damage to the rock if you can't finish the route.

In reply to LucaC:

How often does a top rope jam? Rope was poorly arranged so that was not fine, but doesn't negate the belaying method. Unlikely nowadays at Harrisons with the rope grooves filled in and the top krab positioned as it should be. Only time that happened to me and I did climb a lot at Harrisons.

The context here was that a post mentioned the "baboon roll" to take weight off the waist to prevent asphyxiation. I thought it worth mentioning another method (useful only when bottom roping) that didn't even require a sling.

I'm not saying everyone should use a waist belay, but to say it should never be used is surely a bit narrow minded. You might change your mind if you tried it. Its quite understandable to be concerned about old methods if one has only climbed while that "amazing gear" has been available, but IMHO a waist belay is still valid toproping on sandstone.

Personally I find it useful to be able to carry just a rope plus perhaps a few other items, especially on some scrambles. If necessary in the event of a fire I shall lower my wife from our first floor window using a direct tie on and waist belay, no time spent putting on harnesses, krabs, plates, even munters etc.   

I did actually say "different context". My point was that there are some situations where a waist belay may still be useful. I did not intend to use this to justify top roping at Harrisons. Sorry if that was not apparent.

In reply to oldie:

What's special about toproping on sandstone? If it's still an accepted technique we'd all be doing it when toproping on gritstone, limestone etc. I'm not saying it wasn't the best practice for it's day, or that it doesn't have it's place today (winter, scrambling, escaping a fire in extremis), but things have moved on.

In reply to Removed User:

Some people even go climbing with no ropes! I once saw someone scaling a wall while eating a packet of Monster Munch (Roast Beef FYI), but I didn't manage to take any photos. I'll make sure to get some if I see them at it again. 

In reply to Wide_Mouth_Frog:

Climbing: Either solo or top roped (belay from below), no lead. No hang dogging, no abseiling down to inspect/clean no repeatedly trying, no lower down at top, climb over the top yarding arm over arm on some rigging rope if needed

Height: Southern Sandstone is low, most roped climbs would be highball boulders if discovered today. Tallest is at Harrison's and there are some 9 or 10m climbs but most even at Harrison's fall into the 5-8m range. The other outcrops being lower and 6 or 7m being "good" for a tall one

Fragile rock: you don't want people resting on a rope much and ideally not even weighting it. See comments about belay from below. Use  a krab over the top edge and a rubber car mat or doormat under ropes/krab at top to protect the rock, not top roping from above or the rope would rub over top edge.

Tradition: it's part of the experience, shouldn't we embrace diverse traditions and do it local style, not everything's the same everywhere.

Try it: have you tried belaying like this with a thick rope? it actually works and belayer is going to pay attention (well a million times more likely). 

Cheap as chips: 1 steel locking krab a 10m bit of semi static and a 20m bit of thick blue twisty rope will be all you need apart from a couple of old doormats and climbing shoes. You can use climbing rope if you have that already. I'm not aware of any tests or certificates needed for this but "Bum belayer level 1" will probably be created by someone soon, ask about it at you local climbing wall 🤣

In reply to deacondeacon:

Sounds a sensible person. But if it turns out they're actually eating pickled onion Monster Munch, then heckle the sicko. 

In reply to Michael Hood:

I am being slightly contentious for the sake of it, but I do strongly believe that weird climbing practices which were passable in years gone by really need to be phased out and replaced with sensible modern techniques and equipment. 

In reply to Wide_Mouth_Frog:

Southern Sandstone is very soft and friable. Techniques because of this developed to protect the rock. Some of which have spilled over into traditions. You’ll find the Southern Sandstone ethics guide on the BMC website.

As mentioned elsewhere, no leading as hard protection would rip through and damage the rock. Bottom top-rope belaying with the anchor point well extended over the edge, as ropes can and have cut grooves in the rock.

Historically, and probably even now static laid ropes were/are used rather than dynamic kernmantle, so that when someone fell off there was limited stretch resulting in the possibility of groves being sawed. Plus ethic saw the climber being lowered off, again to protect the rock. Cheaper Laid hawser ropes thus persisted amongst regulars well into this century, firstly because they were less likely to be damaged by the sandstone, secondly sand at the base of crag fell out of them, and third it meant their main rope for climbing elsewhere didn’t have sand in it.

Such ropes are too stiff for many modern belay devices, so body belays were standard.

Many people have migrated to kernmantle ropes, often semi static like fixed lines on climbing walls, along with harnesses, and rope ground cloths to try and keep sand out of the rope, plus steel belay crabs to reduce wear. 
 

Some folks still climb traditionally. Preserving the rock is mandatory, using laid ropes and body belaying is not.

In reply to Luc

Why is it "weird". It wasn't just "passable", it worked and still does. Waist belaying has justifiably been "phased out" in most aspects of climbing. Almost certainly all older  climbers now use modern belay methods for sport and trad. However some of these still use waist belay for sandstone toproping so there must be a reason for that as they have actually experienced both types of belaying......for them it is obviously a "sensible" choice.

Perhaps I too am being being unreasonably contentious. But it is irksome when people who have not practised something I do consider safe, if done correctly, appear to decide it is unacceptable.

In reply to Removed User:

Reminds me of when my family and our friends' family went for a picnic at Birchen Edge.
I took my gear with a view to taking a non climber in our group up a couple of easy climbs.
I was shocked to see what the majority of climbers were doing. Climbers weighed down with full racks on climbs that need two pieces at most. Climbers getting a runner in and then hanging on the rope for a rest, On Nelson's Slab! (Is that what they call dogging?) Hanging off the rope while top roping. Abseiling back down the route they had climbed.
So I said to my friend, keep your trainers on, I kept mine on, and I tied the rope round his waist, and mine.
In the next hour, we did 11 routes, I'd solo, waist belay at the top with usually roped looped round a boulder and tied back to my waist loop, though occaisionally had to make do with feet well braced., - tight rope, and he followed me up.
Most others were getting one ot two routes done in that hour. Yes I was showing off, and yes I'm very old, but it was also my little protest at over-use of, over reliance on, and wasting time with equipment.

In reply to LucaC:

I will never, ever give up my Ronhills!

In reply to LucaC:

When you have phased out all the weird practices will there still be a place for soloing? After all, it's quite an old technique and is not really sensible, to most people's way of thinking.

In reply to Pedro50:

This is one of the reasons why the tradition was to lower the climber rather fast. The climber would also push the knot down with both hands at his/her waist to take some of the weight off the waist.

In all the very many times we went to Harrison's in the sixties, I don't remember ever seeing unsafe belaying by this method. By contrast, I have quite often seen what I regard as dodgy belaying at modern climbing walls and sport venues.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I think there's a fairly big difference between deciding actively to do a climb unprotected and deciding to do it protected but for no good reason choosing a method of protection that is rather inferior (for both climber and belayer) to what would normally be done.

Only thing I can think of is people topping Southern Sandstone (because you can't lead it) wanting to introduce some of the feelings of risk involved in leading?

In reply to Removed User:

Sorry, not read the thread so this has probably been covered already. That looks like ZigZag at Harrison's. I've used rope round waist and body belays there, it's normal. If that freaked you out, you'd absolutely shit yourself if you saw the regulars there who don't even body belay, they just hold the rope in one hand! 😂

In reply to Removed User:

I started climbing in the US with rope around the waist and hip belays and they worked fine for several years before "improvements" began to show up.  I wouldn't trust anyone but an old-timer to give that type of butt-belay now, because if the belayer allows the rope to slip down just a little bit, a fall will flip them right over, and contemporary complacent belay styles have pretty much killed the level of attentiveness needed for those old-fashioned belays.  That said, if the locals are used to doing this and know to avoid the pitfalls, it's fine.

The anchor setup is textbook good.  What could possibly be the hesitation there?

In reply to Removed User:

London(ish) innit? Nuff said, me old china.

In reply to rgold:

I *assume* the idea of typing a rope into a bolt (no krab) freaks some people out, even though it's rounded wire not sharp edges and top rope only so only ~double the climber's weight. But seen as death-on-a-stick by overly nervous people.

(~2x weight climber due to the "pulley" effect of belaying from below style top rope)

In reply to Neil Williams:

Is there a difference in the overall potential for death/injury between climbing with no rope and climbing using an outdated method of belaying?

In reply to rgold:

I *assume* the idea of typing a rope into a bolt (no krab) freaks some people out, even though it's rounded wire not sharp edges and top rope only so only ~double the climber's weight. But seen as death-on-a-stick by overly nervous people.

(~2x weight climber due to the "pulley" effect of belaying from below style top rope)

In reply to TobyA:

You 'avin a giraffe mate? It ain't London. It's proper posh down there

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Climbing without a rope (soloing) is clearly riskier.  But what reason would there be for wilfully badly protecting a climb?  I can see why one might choose to solo, accepting the risk, and obviously when leading there are routes which are badly protected which you have to make a conscious choice whether to climb or not based on that risk.  But there's basically no advantage to using an outdated belay technique over using a harness and a belay device in this setting.

In short if you're going to top-rope, why not do it in the safest way possible?

In reply to Neil Williams:

I never claimed there was an advantage to using outdated techniques. I'm simply pointing out that in climbing we don't always go for the safest option, whether top roping or leading. If we did, trad climbing would no longer be practised.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Just don't get me started on people bouldering without a helmet, and not wearing high vis vests too! 🤣

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Depends who's belaying obviously. The waist belay is a safe as any other method if you know what you're doing, and a useful last-gasp part of the tool-kit. The biggest fall I ever held (in 1967) was a 12m factor 2 on a waist belay. It pulled me upside down while about a metre of rope fizzed through my bare hands, but I stopped him and still bear the scars. Abbing off afterwards was the most painful part. So I wouldn't go back to it but it's nice to know it's still there and that I'd hang on for grim death. Incidentally, this video that's currently going around of a girl being dropped by a professional coach only goes to show that any method is potentially lethal in the hands of a complete knob. He seemed to be making a lot of 'assumptions' about her. The very fact that we bother to belay people at all is based on only one assumption - that any climber can fall off any climb at any time, for no apparent reason, and without any warning. A lesson to us all. 

In reply to Andy Long:

Yes, it's probably hard to forget you're supposed to be belaying someone when using a waist belay so in this respect it might have an advantage.

BTW, I hope that after the incident you describe, you abbed off in classic fashion. I mean, if you're really going for the burn.....

In reply to rgold:

My main concern is clove hitch, is it something to trust with half a meter rope left? If yes, why there's bowline and on one side and a clove hitch on the other? Why not two clove hitches? Following the trend of things being easy - the bowline is overcomplication in this setup.

In reply to Neil Williams:

What is your evidence that the waist belay, if done correctly, is wilfully bad protection? IMHO its not.

Is wearing a harness safer? Yes, being suspended on a direct waist tie in for some time will  result in unconsciousness and asphyxiation. Is this at all likely top roping on sandstone? No, because the krab is at the edge and the climber will be lowered well before adverse effects. Also backthread there were two ways the climber could remove their weight from their waist in the highly unlikely event of it being necessary.

 >But there's basically no advantage to using an outdated belay technique over using a harness and a belay device in this setting. In short if you're going to top-rope, why not do it in the safest way possible? <

Repeating myself but some people who now use a harness and belay device for trad, sport and wall have made the decision to continue using tie in and waist belay for sandstone, based on their actual experience not theory.   

In reply to Removed User:

Yes its fine.

Clove hitch because it's easy to adjust when setting the bight to the right length. Bowline because you only need one side to be adjustable, and it proves you know two knots

In reply to Tom Valentine:

We don't, but that's because there are advantages of trad and soloing other than safety.  I fail to see any advantage at all of using the older technique for top roping unless you've somehow managed to remember your rope but forget everything else.

In reply to elliptic:

Worth mentioning that clove hitches slip under cyclic loading - if using one as a top rope where this might happen, add a stopper knot.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I abbed off in the then standard way, over the shoulder with sit-sling and Karabiner.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Less faff, quicker, lighter, maybe using specialist ropes for sandstone (i.e. hawser laid) that don't work well with modern belay devices.

Wouldn't do this myself (although I too started out when waist belaying was normal and have held falls with this) but I can't see the big problem here.

Especially since we're only talking about bottom roping - forces are teeny weeny on the belayer unless you have let out miles of slack.

In reply to Andy Long:

Ah yes, the part timer's method........

In reply to Neil Williams:

Well initially i said there was no advantage to using an old fashioned technique like a waist belay but since I've been reminded that some modern belay methods allow you to actually forget that you're belaying someone on a top rope, I think i might have to reconsider. If you are paying out rope around your waist you are very aware of what you climbing partner is doing and if they decide to , for instance, jump off when they have finished the route you will probably know about it straight away, far in advance of when they actually hit the ground.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

One of the main reasons not to use a modern belay device on Southern Sandstone is that the sand gets everywhere, including in the rope, and is incredibly abrasive. So we always used old (but safe) gear and ropes for sandstone top-roping; we preserved our better gear for lead climbing elsewher.

In reply to CantClimbTom:

There are other ways to protect the rock at the top, where you could use modern gear. 

I'm not sure what your point is here. 5-8m is more than enough to seriously hurt yourself, or worse. 

None of this means you need to body belay 

By all means respect how it was done. But traditions evolve too. Nobody uses braided ropes in the mountains anymore and with good reason 

Why would I? I've got a belay device and a modern rope

You're probably right about that 😂

In reply to Hooo:

Ahhh those were the days when people like "Hank Bannon" would belay one handed whilst rolling up!

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I hope you're not being serious.  How would you forget you were belaying?  Bizarre.

In reply to Guy:

Try any French or Italian sport crag for people belaying no handed, fag in one hand, coffee in the other!

In reply to Michael Hood:

I get why you might use static rope for top roping on sandstone to avoid erosion, but can't in a million years see why anyone would use outdated hawser laid rope for any form of climbing other than dogged adherence to traditions.

In reply to Removed User:

74 replies.

The state of us.

In reply to Neil Williams:

So what was Sara's coach doing when he allowed her to hit the floor from that height. If he didn't forget that he was belaying her then his attention was of the same level as someone who has forgotten what his primary role is.

And if you're going to chuck around words like "bizarre" have you ever seen a more bizarre climbing video than the one where the belayer using the latest technology at his disposal allows his partner to hit the floor and suffer critical injuries almost without noticing it was happening? That's what I call bizarre.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

It's nothing to do with the kit.  If someone's attention is going to lapse it'll lapse whatever they are using.  But you've just argued in favour of Grigris etc, as if the belayer's attention lapses they might (not will) still lock...

In reply to Neil Williams:

His attention didn't lapse because of the kit but the consequences of his attention lapse were not helped by his use of the kit. 

If he had been using a waist belay it is unlikely that Sara would have hit the floor.

How is that me arguing in favour of Grigris etc?

In reply to Guy:

My first ever trip to Harries was with the famous "Hank' holding the rope. He did at least wrap it around his back while rolling up though. 🙂

In reply to Neil Williams:

From what people have said in this thread, and presuming I've understood, it sounds like grains of sand don't damage hawser laid rope as much as kernmantle.

I wonder if there's any non-anecdotal evidence to support that.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Ah I see, I thought it was the other way around (i.e. that hawser laid rope being completely static would reduce damage to the sandstone).  But properly rated static/semistatic rope is so cheap I don't think I'd worry about that.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Evidence?  I think it's more likely to be honest, because if you're slow to respond with a waist belay you're getting horrible rope burns and your climber is decking.  Though I've seen worse at Harrisons - a guy literally just holding the rope (not even round his back), and his climber wasn't small either.

Waist belays and bowlines round the waist (always with a stopper knot) have a role in setting up quick belays against slips/slumps/slides (very low impact force) rather than actual falls when scrambling, but there is really no sensible case for that when actually climbing.  Why wouldn't you use the correct modern kit?  Do you also wear tweed and hobnailed boots*?

* Yes, obviously not on sandstone as there'd be none of it left once you'd finished, but you get my point.

Because if you are concerned about peoples' attention lapsing, devices that are actually designed to (to some extent) help mitigate that are a better choice than reverting to archaic methods.

In reply to Hooo:

"Hank's" brother was my history teacher.  They both taught me a lot. Great times. 

In reply to Removed User:

Do you mean Frank? 

Nobody uses Hawsar rope, just chunky static.

You don't even need to have it around your wait to belay, you can just hold it. Very easy to catch a fall and lower with just the hands. It works very well and is safe.

In reply to Removed User:

It's hard to gauge your experience from your profile, but I'd guess you haven't yet got the experience to judge what is "safe".  All of what you describe can be safe in the appropriate situation.

In reply to GrahamD:

I've been climbing for 30 years and never seen: hip/waist belaying, clove hitch on a top rope anchor. Less than two carabineers on a top rope anchor, that is to be used for half of a day.

But I come from another country, and the rocks are usually  way higher. You would set up the top rope for at least half of a day and you won't be able to check it on every climb. So you need to setup something you trust for at least 4 hours without even seeing it. I would definitely feel on edge if there was a clove hitch with half a meter rope left with no stopper knot. But as I see here, the small rocks with the requirement to go on top every time leaves the room to keep things "lightweight".

In reply to Neil Williams:

So in Sara's fall, to what extent was the belay device effective in mitigating the consequences of the belayer's attention lapse?

In reply to Tom Valentine:

What sort of device was in use?  If it was a Grigri, then it's likely no device or method would have provided mitigation.

If you're trying to argue that a Grigri is in any way less safe than a waist belay then I'm sorry you are just talking absolute tripe, aside from niche situations like very sketchy gear where the Grigri might cause it to fail due to not providing a very dynamic belay.

Edit: Yes, it appears the Grigri was being misused in that slack was being fed without a hand on the brake rope.  That's just crap belaying and grossly negligent - aside from autobelays there is no belay device or method where you are supposed to completely let go of the brake rope.  Someone who is going to be that negligent would probably be negligent with other methods, too.  Certainly if I was climbing with someone who I considered an iffy belayer (not that I'd choose to do that) I would want the added security of a brake assist device.

I accept people like yourself have been climbing for longer than I've been alive, but dogged "we used to do it like that and didn't die so it's better than the modern stuff" arguments are just utterly fallacious (and sit up there with fallacious arguments about the likes of cycle helmets*, too).  Use the proper kit and live to climb another day.

* Wear one or don't wear one, it's personal choice.  But arguments that they make you less safe, as I sometimes seem to see online, are just absolute tripe.

In reply to Removed User:

Pretty weird that..... 30 years and not aware of body/waist belay methods, necessary in some circumstances as a last resort (or just old folk demonstrating how they used to climb on routes they are unliky to fall on ....as it hurts being held dangling by a rope loop round the waist). Thanks for the thread though... worth it for Lankyman's crack-squad first-responder comment alone. BTW, clove hitch for the second of two solid belay points is standard in UK trad, let alone SS.

In reply to Neil Williams:

You said earlier that some devices provided a degree of mitigation . i was trying to establish if that was the case in this particular incident.

I'm pretty sure that any modern belay device is as efficient as a waist belay when used properly. I'm just not convinced that a waist belay is less safe simply because it is considered by some to be archaic.

In reply to Offwidth:

Last resort yes, re-enactment of old techniques yes.

But arguments that they're in any way superior or should be methods of choice...I find this bizarre.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

A waist belay is less safe because it's less secure.  It was posted above (I forget who by) that to hold a large fall the belayer needed to take serious rope burns.  That's still an injury thus less safe than a proper device which wouldn't incur that.  It's also a higher risk that they'd just let go - some people would take the pain and hold on, others would instinctively let go.

Obviously there are cases of people being dropped using Grigris and serious falls being caught using waist belays.  But overall, modern kit is safer, that's why it exists, and it simply makes no sense not to use it except in extenuating circumstances.

In reply to Neil Williams:

It's top roping only, there are no big falls. You really can easily hold a fall with just your hands on the rope. 

In reply to Neil Williams:

I find it bizarre you think someone worth listening to is seriously claiming that. Outdoor climbing is deliberately taking risks and the games we play are normally a matter of choice with equal partners in a non-professional setting. A comedy response to such attitudes was the naked lead with a rope tied round one's genitals (I haven't the balls for that personally )

In reply to Pu11y:

No guarantee you will.  Why not use the modern kit available to you to ensure you will (assuming you're paying attention)?

In reply to Neil Williams:

That’s why belay gloves were used. Chouinard’s sale of rugby shirts in the 60s took off as they protected your back from the rope.

In reply to Offwidth:

To me it's all about risk-benefit.  I don't see any sense in taking unnecessary risks that don't have benefits.  I can't see any real benefits of not using a harness and belay device when top-roping, aside from if you've somehow remembered your rope but forgotten everything else.  I can see benefits of doing that when scrambling (and the falls tend not to result in full weight on the rope) so can see why people do use those techniques there.

If we consider trad leading, it has benefits over top-roping - in a simple sense it might not be possible to easily reach the top without leading, but also there are the decisions and risk management aspects of it that people actually enjoy.  Thus we have benefits to justify the risk.

In reply to Removed User:

I posted earlier about 'over use' of equipment, and the adequacy of waist belays etc ('old-school' as some on here would say)
As it happens I was strolling along the top of Stanage on Sunday, and saw this belay setup:
A sling around a big boulder, tied off and clipped into a quickdraw (?), another long sling from the quickdraw, the other end clipped into the harness, (couldn't quite see how) of the climber, who was sittng with their feet over the edge, presumably using their belay device correctly. Climber to boulder was about 15 feet. There was a lot of slack in the slings, and the belayer could have been pulled off the edge if holding a fall.
Personally, I would, on topping out, have walked around the boulder, and back to the top of the climb, put a figure of 8 in the rope coming back, and clipped that to my front belay loop. As that length of rope is dynamic, I would have stood, (not sat) a bit back, from the edge, and had the belay rope as tight as possible. (I also believe standing is sometimes preferable to sitting, being more dynamic.)
My concern about what I saw was that the setup consisted of 5 seperate pieces of gear between the boulder and their krab on their harness, the failure of any one piece being consequential. My set up would have had one, the rope. And it all looked a bit thin to me. When I climb, looping the rope to the belay point would always be my first option, and if I had to use a sling, I'd have 2 belay points.
I expect a lot will point out many errors or faults in my 'old fart' system, but I'm posting this to hopefully prompt people to have a careful think about their set up, and not to assume that lots of equipment is best, or that one setup is best for all situations.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Don't get me wrong I have embraced all the modern advancements in gear and techniques over the years and been grateful for them but I do feel a little nostalgic for the no fuss, simple approach that I started out with.  Literally a rope over you shoulder and a couple of slings and off you went. We also had plenty of falls but managed to survive with just this.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Saves bringing gear

Saves wear on gear

Saves sand getting in gear

Saves sand getting in dynamic rope

Promotes a no dogging ethic

There are often low to mid height cruxes with dynamic moves. It's very hard to take in the rope for these moves with a belay plate. Safer with a hand belay. Would need a boulder mat otherwise.

Thick static ropes don't run nicely through belay plates 

Makes it easy to have quick goes and take turns easily - often ropes are left up to share all day

I'm sure there are more benefits.

In reply to Neil Williams:

For what it's worth, I would never dream of trying to hold a fall of any sort, even top roping, with just my hands on the rope. I assumed the comment was a joke at first, probably from a closet campanologist.

And, for clarity, I think I stopped using a waist belay when the Sticht plate came on the market, but that was probably more to do with the convenience of using the device rather than any worries about the safety of using the older method.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Well I know it's hard to ascertain if the OP is trolling, or indeed if the photo is an old one, but those climbing that way on SS are almost certainly not  bottom roping as the ethic on SS is to top-out (and it hurts to be lowered with a rope loop round the waist).

In reply to Offwidth:

Wrong and wrong. The method is still widely practiced. The ethic is to top out, but if you can't finish the climb or fall off, you are lowered and it does not hurt. They are bottom roping. 

In reply to Pu11y:

Never found it hard to take in rope through a belay device.  If it is hard it's the wrong belay device for that rope.

As for sharing ropes, tying into a harness takes no longer than tying into your waist, and putting the rope through a device takes less time than tying in, so that's a bit of an odd argument.

I do see your other points, but personally I'd choose safety over those.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Nowt wrong with a bit of nostalgia of course.  But just like I'd rather be crashed into in a modern car than a 1970s one if I had to be crashed into, I'd rather if I fell off climbing I was in a harness and my belayer was using a modern belay device.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Nope, I've actually seen that in the 2010s at Harrisons.  Sure, if the climber was a 10 year old most adults probably could, but the climber was a full sized adult.

In reply to Pu11y:

I know full well what happens (unethical behaviour is what caused all the rope damage). As for lowering with my full bodyweight through a rope tied round my waist it really hurts me when I've done it so you and your pals must have abs of steel.

Do you know the individuals and that they didn't top-out?

In reply to Fredt:

I'm not sure comparing a bad modern setup and a good traditional setup is really a valid comparison.  Why not compare a good modern setup with a good traditional setup?  And yes I agree, use the rope where possible, though sometimes it isn't if the gear is a long way back and it isn't long enough.

I must admit I do prefer the reassuring thickness of nylon slings, but while Dyneema looks thin it's certainly strong enough, that preference is purely emotional (aside from settings where you could get abrasion).

In reply to Offwidth:

We certainly used to do this in the 80s and 9 early 90s. On routes like the flakes, where the crux is at the top,  I didn't always manage to top out and would get lowered down.  It was uncomfortable but not painful. It kind of added an incentive to not fall off!

In reply to Removed User:

Not many belay devices run well with 11mm rope, especially for taking in rope fast. You really could be protecting a dyno or big static moves from the ground, like bouldering, but the routes continue up to 10 meters, but normally 6 or 7. You can't take in rope fast enough with belay device. A bouldering matt is an option, but not ideal. 

Not trying to convince people, just showing that there are legit reasons. Climbing safety is sometimes about having an open mind...

In reply to Guy:

As I said, I'm fully aware of what went on. I was climbing from the late 80s and have read much climbing history and have talked extensively to those operating (back to post war times). I was taught the techniques and when they were still very applicable (and so needed some practice).

I still body or waist belay hundreds of times a year to add security on volume paired rope solo sessions on easier routes on short crags, where a solid rock belay is sometimes a time consuming faff for the risk involved. I sometimes roped solo stuff with a rope loop on routes I find easy, just to get the rope to the top. What I'll not be doing again is climbing with any significant risk of being left free hanging with a rope loop round my waist (I guess it wasnt just steel abs.... people used to wear thick clothes that reduced the pressure) as I really didnt enjoy the bruises; and because I care for my internal organs I certainly won't risk taking a shock load on a rope loop round the waist. It really annoyed me over the years when some 'old school' seconds wanted a fairly slack rope from my top-of-the-crag body belay, as it added risk to me as well as risk to them.

In reply to Offwidth:

I probably do know them. If they topped out or not, I would not know. Knowing the route though, I would imagine so. It is a popular warmup route and it's on many peoples solo rounds. As I said, although the ethic is to top out to complete the route, you can be lowered if you fail, so I don't see the relevance of if they topped out or not. The major rope groves in the rock are from when they did not overhand the setups over the edge. Although there is continued damage from poor setups, this is certainly not from locals who belay traditionally, the oppisite in fact. 

In reply to Removed User:

Some images from Bowles and High Rocks.

In reply to Pu11y:

The top out, on rounded sandy holds with the anchor well over the edge, 1m below you and the rope being just held on to sounds quite 'exciting'! 

In reply to Pu11y:

Three of the best climbs on SE Sandstone.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I suppose that's the substance of this long thread.

I doubt if those now using waist belay/direct tie in on sandstone consider they are taking an unnecessary risk. That will be based on experience, almost certainly including using and being able to compare modern methods for other forms of climbing. We can argue about relative benefits (Pu11y suggested some for the old technique) but ultimately that's not of major importance.

In reply to Neil Williams:

While a bit irrelevant to a bottom roping thread this has always interested me because one should always wear gloves when waist belaying a leader (not necessary to top rope). I always did so (at least on the braking hand) and obviously never got burnt. This was emphasized in reputable technique manuals including Blackshaw and also Fyffe and Peters 1997, endorsed by the BMC. Not doing so was actually an unnecessary risk but judging by the number of people relating tales of badly burnt hands over the years bare hands were common.

In reply to Offwidth:

"old folk... climbing routes they are unlikely to fall on"? I dispute that. I climbed a lot in the 1960s and onwards and leaders then (including me) were lobbing all over the place. The risks e.g. of dangling were the norm and accepted. I never noticed 1960s climbers being more risk averse than 1970s, 80s or later climbers. (Just my memory of course)

In reply to profitofdoom:

Yes I remember falling off the Dangler at Stanage numerous times until we clinched it circa 1965.  Terrible ethics I know but we didn't know any better

In reply to profitofdoom:

Sorry if I wasnt clear.... I was referring to the OP photos.

In reply to Offwidth:

OK, I see! Sorry about that, and thanks for your reply 

In reply to profitofdoom:

We fell off an enormous amount, because the whole point of top-roping (apart from preserving the delicate sandstone) was to push our standards the whole time. The belaying seemed very straightforward, even before the existence any belayi devices (we had leather gardening gloves as belay gloves, but I think a lot of the time didn’t even bother with that). There was enough friction with the rope (rough polypropylene) simply going round the belayers bum. I don’t remember there being any accidents of any kind/ i.e. people being dropped. Of course belay plates or figure of eight descendeurs (better with the thick sandy /sandstone worn ropes) began to be used more or less as soon as they became available. Harnesses thigh harnesses came in quite late - before that I think we rigged thigh loops with a figure of eight tape sling. Not quite sure. That may just have been for abseiling.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Do you remember the Davek harness?  I think that's what it was called.  It was designed for aid climbing but was dismissed as too intrusive and uncomfortable for trad. I seem to remember it being around in the late 60's.

In reply to oldie:

I think the Whillan's harness was designed with the climbing of fixed ropes in mind rather than trad climbing but I could be wrong.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Bought Davek late 60s. IIRC used it for over 10 years .Not nearly as good as modern harnesses. Almost rigid unpadded tape with rope tied through loops at front.Fixed leg loops. Tended to slip down if much weight on gear loops but easily fitted tape braces.However improvement over my hemp cord waistband. : )

Never bought a Whillans as falling climber could invert and hit head if near ground due to tie in below centre of gravity. At least one climber lost a testicle after omitting  the essential krab near tie in.In hindsight better than Davek though.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

IIRC Whillans first made his harness for fixed ropes while on 1st ascent Annapurna S Face. Afterwards it was altered for normal climbing use and seemed to be almost omnipresent for 10 years or so in UK (except for idiots like me).

In reply to oldie:

I resisted for a while preferring a waist belt.  I think it was a Troll.  It was quite broad and it worked pretty well especially as more protection became available as it was somewhere to hang it.

In reply to Removed User:

It is Half Crown Corner at Harrison Rocks, a 5 b.

The   top double anchor and knots  with plenty of rope end are acceptable for this situation, note the crab is well over the top edge which is good practice which a lot of climbers forget as they don't have a fully adjustable double top sling like this set up .

On the topic of tying in and no harness, it's a personal choice in my opinion, only suitable for top roping  generally, note the local climbers are very acquainted with the route and plan to walk off the top, NO  lowering off is permitted in the local guide. Dogging the routes are very much frowned upon. 

Body belaying is for sure a higher level of risk and a decision the climbers must take on board, that said ATC's and the like fail too with incompetent belayer. The mechanical advantage in top roping can make body belaying in the hands of an attentive competent climber ok and body weight is always given a lot of consideration.

Sandstone outcrops do attract a lot of  beginners and free spirited local climbers as a matter of course will discouraged this style of tying in and belaying for sure.

Neil , (an old dog)

In reply to Removed User:

The premise of this thread as that these practices are dangerous. They're not. These were normal practice for decades. Most climbers of a certain vintage will have used them, and both taken and held falls with them. When tied with a rope around the waist a fall while seconding or top-roping is uncomfortable, but not excessively painful, and mainly on the ribs rather than internal organs. It was only a problem if you were suspended in space for a period of time, but that shouldn't happen when top-roping, and as already explained there were techniques for dealing with that.

Of course there are now better techniques and better equipment. I'm not going to comment on sandstone ethics and practice because I've never climbed there, but presumably local climbers know all about modern gear and their use of these techniques is an informed choice.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Yes, that was the very first harness I ever had. I thought it was quite good. I then had a very nice Littlejohn harness, which was very lightweight and had separate quick-fastening buckles for the thigh loops so that you didn’t have to step into it. Also a very fast and easy main buckle. Very practical and good in every way. 

In reply to Neil Williams:

You really want to open that can of worms?! 😂 What if you wearing a helmet changes drivers' behaviour around you in a negative direction (as some studies have suggested)?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

One of the best things about Harrisons in the mid to late 60s was the scene. Far fewer climbers, and very friendly. You became part of a huge, rather elitist club, in effect. A lot of London climbers, so the air was full of London banter with cockney accents. Arguably more fun, less serious, and a lot more eccentric than nowadays. Some real characters.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

I lived in Sheffield so had the Peak on my doorstep. I never climbed at Harrisons, it seemed rather esoteric and strange as it may sound remote.  I think it's fair to say it is off the beaten track location wise with respect to other venues.

In reply to Removed User:

Clove hitch slipping:

youtube.com/watch?v=EZq0QhQco98&

In reply to Removed User:

... at 11kN!

If you're generating even a significanf fraction of that while top-roping you're doing something very very wrong. Or eating way too many pies!

In reply to Removed User:

If it's briefly loaded to 10kN and slips a bit, the load will come down. Now if that's a top rope anchor belayed from below, so the top krab acts like a pulley, that'd take a 5kN fall on the rope. One heck of a fall for a top rope?? 

Not sure the clove hitch slipping is a realistic scenario for the setup in your photo, and if in some inexplicable freak high load it slipped say.. 10cm wouldn't a small slip be a good thing?

In reply to Pu11y:

I used to have a southern sandstone set up as described- works really well & encourages concentration from climber & belayer! I also had a steel screwgate for the anchor

Most of the sketchy/dangerous belaying I have witnessed has been at busy climbing walls.. 

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Southern Sandstone is indeed esoteric and remote. If you live down that way, it's what you go climbing on. But I don't think anybody living in Sheffield would bother making a trip down there.

In reply to abcdefg:

Especially if the air is full of London banter with cockney accents........   

In reply to abcdefg:

Except that IIRC John Allen (and Steve Bancroft) did just that to climb several of the Southern Sandstone test pieces. I don't think it was a pop-in on the way to the continent but it might have been - was reported in the mags at the time which would have been mid/late 70's, or early 80's but definitely before John went to NZ.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Well, of course, there would be no point in you going all the way down there to a venue awkwardly placed south of London. John and I went there simply because we were at school nearby, then later, I went there when I was London-based in the 70s. 

In reply to Removed User:

Irony bypass must have been painful 😀😀

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

And very thankful for it I'm sure.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Yes, very. The better climbs are all technically very interesting. High Rocks is very different from Harrison’s and much higher. The best routes there are really brilliant. Some of the other more esoteric rocks are very good too, like Under Rocks, and the bits of Eridge that are accessible.

In reply to Howard J:

Danger is always relative.  It's not possible to properly answer yes or no to the question "is it safe?" in pretty much any context at all.

What it is is less safe than using a harness and belay device.  How much less safe will depend on a few factors like weight difference and experience with the technique.

However I tend to see risk personally as a risk benefit thing - what do I gain by taking the risk?  Unless I've forgotten my harness, belay device and krab, I don't see anything gained by using the older technique so doing so fails my risk benefit analysis.

Yours may of course differ.

In reply to john arran:

>If you're generating even a significanf fraction of that while top-roping you're doing something very very wrong. Or eating way too many pies!

Definitely! But at the same time if there's any option that is 100% bullet proof, why not use it? 
Similar to what other commenters said it's up to risk/benefit ratio. And for me 10 seconds you save on adjusting the clove hitch instead of bowline/figure8, doesn't worth all the thinking is the ring thin enough / rope thick enough / is this situation stable enough for clove hitch not to get loose / etc.
 
 

In reply to Removed User:

Clove hitch with a stopper knot after you've adjusted it.  Best of both worlds.

For a bowline you would also want a stopper, while a Fig 8 is a massive faff to adjust.

In reply to Removed User:

I climb on the soft stuff, and normally use a harness and device, as most locals do. But there have been times - for instance end of evening, I’ve packed my stuff up and someone needs to go up to retrieve the sling - when I’ve tied the rope round my waist and someone has given me a body belay. The main reason I’m fine with it is that I’ve probably climbed that route hundreds of times- the stoners do these routes over and over again, year in, year out.

I doubt any stoners think sandstone is the best climbing out there, but the local scene is great, there are loads of keen climbers.

In reply to helix:

Bear in mind how highly rated the southern sandstone has been by the likes of Martin Boysen, Mick Fowler and Johnny Dawes. I think one of its merits is that it provides very interesting technical climbing at all grades, in a way that gritstone does not. IMHO, gritstone only starts to get interesting at VS and above. What really surprised my brother and I when we started climbing was just how easily we transitioned to mountain rhyolite and dolerite from the sandstone in 1968 (without any experience of climbing either gritstone or limestone). We went straight from top-roping at Harrisons to our first leading in North Wales without batting an eyelid. In one month we progressed from moderate to HVS - mostly because we already had an enormous amount of technical reserve (climbing up to 5c on SS).

In reply to Removed User:

There is never an option that is 100% bullet proof.

In reply to Neil Williams:

You only got rope burns if you allowed rope to run through your hands.  If you waist belayed properly that didn't happen with the hawser-laid ropes used way back then.

The biggest fall I've ever held in my life was onto a single Viking hawser-laid rope and I was waist belaying.  The leader fell from the very top of Gauntlet at Gogarth and fell the whole length of the second pitch ending up below the stance.  I banged my head a bit but no damage to my hands.

To be clear, I'm not recommending it, and certainly not with skinny kernmantel ropes, but I do occasionally use a waist belay to bring a second up easy ground at the top of a crag and they are moving quickly.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

This seems a sensible time to use that technique, analogous to scrambling where you're just preventing someone tripping over and sliding rather than actually taking a massive lob.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Actually, I was misremembering.  It was the Ramp.  The Gauntlet was a separate club epic!

In reply to Neil Williams:

Fair point. However in the context of belaying we are really talking about whether a technique is effective. Can it be relied on to keep the climber off the deck and without significant injury to either party? Body belays have been proved to be effective, and were the usual method of belaying for a much longer period than harnessess and belay devices have been in use. Injuries, mainly  rope burns to the belayer, were comparatively rare and could usually be mitigated by thick clothing and gloves. However this was really only a risk when lead climbing, not when seconding or top-roping.

For the first couple of years of my climbing career we used Viking No 4 hawser-laid ropes tied with a bowline around the waist, and body belays.  I absolutely agree that for most purposes harnesses and devices represent a considerable improvement, which is why they are now standard practice. However that does not mean that the traditional techniques were unsafe, and they still have their place in some situtations.

In the specific context of top-roping there is no reason to think that the climber in the photos is at any greater risk of being dropped than if they were belayed with a modern device. Neither is their any reason to think that in the event of a fall (which in top-roping is little more than a slump onto the rope) they will be injured, although a harness might be more comfortable.  That is why I and others have challenged the assertion that this is "dangerous".  A number of southern sandstone climbers have explained why, in the specific context of that slightly esoteric pasttime, this sometimes has advantages.

"Dangerous" often really means " a technique I am not familiar with", and that seems to be what prompted the (now removed) OP's comments.

In reply to Howard J:

The OP still uses the word dangerous.  I'd more go for "unnecessarily less safe" as I see no benefit to it over using a harness and belay device.

In reply to Neil Williams:

This is getting repetitive. You have been assured again and again by people who have had considerable experience of using that old way of top-roping on SE Sandstone that it was not 'less safe’. In all the dozens of times I went to Harrisons in the late 60s I never saw anyone being dropped or injured in any way. Ever. Whereas, ironically, I have seen people much more recently being dropped at climbing walls when using all the latest harnesses and belay devices like Grigris.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Even though I'm defending the belay option, for those experienced using the set-up, in the unlikely event of a slip on the top-out, some bad luck with the shock load could end up causing injury. I was always very uncomfortable and once ended up bruised on the rare occasions I just dangled with full weight on a 9mm rope waist loop (I had no 11mm ropes back then).

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

If it's not less safe, why isn't it still the norm?

In reply to Neil Williams:

Harnesses are definitely more comfy than rope tied round

Newer thinner ropes are much more difficult to belay without a belay device 

Not sure about this but old hawser laid rope may be easier to waist belay than kernmantle 

Must be other factors, safety isn't the only consideration 

In reply to Neil Williams:

The primary reason is probably nobody is taught or learns it, especially as many probably start on climbing walls and eg a tube is good for both leading and toproping. I absolutely sympathise if anyone is nervous about being belayed apparently with the rope just held in the hands having learnt using a belay devices.

IIRC nobody in this thread has provided evidence about why the older method is not safe if performed correctly. If we accept it's safe why are we playing with words and saying it's less safe?

Pu11y presented suggestions at 10.04 and 10.40 on Tuesday about advantages of the technique. The most vociferous posts against it appear to be from people who have never used it (apologies if I'm wrong).

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Did either incident involve the American guy who got washed off the tidal ledges and required the assistance of a Sea King to extract him from out in the bay? I seem to recall that his first two visits to Gogarth were quite 'eventful'.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Synthetic fibre clothing doesn't take kindly to friction belaying (it has a pretty low melting point). Cotton does.

Who wears purely cotton outdoor clothing these days...?

In reply to Ian Parsons:

 

No, all epics were Stoat-based.  Both involved loose rock and facial injuries.  My successful ascent of the Ramp was with Rick Allen, who was always exciting to climb with.  Which is why I insisted on leading the top pitch!

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Ah yes; Rick had his moments, although I don't think I was present for any of them. I do recall climbing Debauchery with him on my 21st birthday, but that was sensibly uneventful. Pretty sure that the American was a Stoat at the time, but maybe only for a year on some sort of exchange. I remember that he was particularly miffed at having to ditch his rather expensive alpine boots - as people often tended to use for walking to the crag in those days - in order, presumably, to facilitate not drowning. I think the brand was Lowa; popular in the US at the time but not often seen in the UK.

In reply to oldie:

Because safety is never an absolute?  Nothing is 100% safe, not even staying in bed.

I know how to waist belay but the only context I would use it in is scrambling.

In reply to Offwidth:

I was always very uncomfortable and once ended up bruised on the rare occasions I just dangled with full weight on a 9mm rope waist loop (I had no 11mm ropes back then).

Which is why you learnt a baboon roll as mentioned aeons ago above. 

In reply to timparkin:

Use a spar knot, just as easy to tie.

In reply to Pedro50:

Unhelpful to the young climber I was then who had no idea what that meant. We had harnesses from the 70's, so why not use them unless we had forgotten it or the route was a really easy for us?