Author Topic: Fall at Rumney  (Read 775 times)

Offline M_Sprague

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #30 on: May 01, 2007, 05:15:52 PM »

How does clipping from the waist NOT decrease your length of fall during a clip.

You will start the fall from lower down, which evens out the fact that you will end up lower
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is not a path and leave a trail."

-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Offline DWarriner

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #31 on: May 01, 2007, 05:34:39 PM »
Expand this image...
There are no stupid questions - only stupid answers.

Offline M_Sprague

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #32 on: May 01, 2007, 06:48:03 PM »
Good drawing, but was the waste before or after the fall?

Mrs. Brown says to write "It's not a waste to clip at your waist" fifty times.  ;)
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is not a path and leave a trail."

-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Offline bikewrench

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #33 on: May 01, 2007, 08:37:03 PM »
Good debate! I'm convinced the fall distances are the same either way, clip at the waist or haul rope. I usually base my choice on the terrain. I'll generally clip from the "easiest" spot to clip from (within reach of course). Great reason for double ropes. Since you get the best of both worlds when clipping from below the next piece, "shorter" climb to the next clip yet always protected by a short rope below.

Offline tradmanclimbz

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3858
  • Nick Goldsmith
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #34 on: May 01, 2007, 10:22:30 PM »
Doubble ropes stink for sport climbing though as they streach like crazy and wear out super fast if you whip and lower on them. Also chances of belayer error pretty much tripple. I climb doubbles ice and multi pitch but not sport or 1/2 pitch trad.

Offline blake

  • NEClimbs Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #35 on: May 02, 2007, 07:26:17 AM »
yeah, who climbs doubles on sport?  and learning to climb to a bolt THEN clipping is great practice.  I have seen too many people 3 feet below a bolt with 4 arms lengths of rope out standing up on their tip toes with shaking legs and freaking out trying to get the clip.....its absolutely stupid.  if they make 2 more moves they're clipping in the easiest position and wasting much less energy.

Offline OldEric

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
  • climb on
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #36 on: May 02, 2007, 09:46:16 AM »
And then there are all those times when you climb up until the clip is at your wasted waist and you think "oh-oh, I should have clipped when I could have....".  You can't generalize.  Clip where it's easiest. Whoops - did I just generalize?

Offline jimmy

  • NEClimbs Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #37 on: May 04, 2007, 04:57:40 PM »
Old Eric is both old and right.  All technical analysis aside, you generally should think about clipping from the best stance, which might even be from above the bolt.  We have a tendency to clip from below the bolt b/c it makes climbing up to the bolt more enjoyable (i.e., a TR).

Offline JakeDatc

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • "Don't worry, this won't hurt me a bit"
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2007, 01:21:48 AM »
Yep... i definitely clip where most practical.. sometimes thats under it.. at it.. over it.. skip right on by going mehh the next one is right there (sorry DQ ;) )

it's the damn tall developers ya gotta watch out for..  my friend curses at some of shimbergs routes since she is short and his clips seem to be generally too high for her.
"I really don't know who act like if he have the true." -Champoing

Offline oldmansmith

  • NEClimbs Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #39 on: May 11, 2007, 12:06:43 PM »
Tall doug reed in the new river gorge used to pick his bolt placements with his elbow so he didn't get cussed out by the short climbers!

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #40 on: May 11, 2007, 04:22:53 PM »
I guess my point is, why not while putting up the route, choose your bolt placement from the good stance, and fire that bolt in at the hip, not at the highest reach.  First 2 bolts excluded, wouldn't this lead to shorter fall potential?

Offline tradmanclimbz

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3858
  • Nick Goldsmith
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #41 on: May 13, 2007, 09:39:28 AM »
What I try to do is place the bolt where  #1 it will be clipable from a decent hold or stance for most people (not just tall stringbeans) #2 The bolt will protect a decent ammout of climbing to the next bolt or protection.  Placeing the bolt even a few inches higher may help keep someone from hitting a ledge or sharp horn etc but placeing it  too high makes it stupid to clip for shorter climbers.  Every placement is diferent so there are no real hard fast rules.

Offline JakeDatc

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • "Don't worry, this won't hurt me a bit"
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #42 on: May 13, 2007, 10:20:46 AM »
Dman..  shorter fall potential while clipping.. but longer fall once it's clipped.  Would you rather have a (usually, for the grade) jug protected or the hard moves after it?

"I really don't know who act like if he have the true." -Champoing

Offline juanpaab

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #43 on: May 13, 2007, 02:38:49 PM »
i couldnt tell if this was solved or not but the math is off.  A clip from 2' above the last bolt is definatly going to result in a longer whip.  However if the climber is not clipping it will result in a shorter fall.  A climber that is 2' above the bolt and then falls will fall a total of 4' then plus any dynamic effects.  A climber at the same height but going for the clip has 2' of rope between him and the last bolt, plus the 2' needed to get to the next bolt, plus the 2' back to his harness(2'+2'+2'=6').  when the climber pitches at this point they would experience a 12' fall plus dynamic effects which we could possibly say may add another 3 to 4 feet.  whereas a climber clipping that 4' bolt at the waist would only suffer an 8' fall.

Joe

Offline OldEric

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
  • climb on
Re: Fall at Rumney
« Reply #44 on: May 14, 2007, 09:53:33 AM »
i couldnt tell if this was solved or not but the math is off.  A clip from 2' above the last bolt is definatly going to result in a longer whip.  However if the climber is not clipping it will result in a shorter fall.  A climber that is 2' above the bolt and then falls will fall a total of 4' then plus any dynamic effects.  A climber at the same height but going for the clip has 2' of rope between him and the last bolt, plus the 2' needed to get to the next bolt, plus the 2' back to his harness(2'+2'+2'=6').  when the climber pitches at this point they would experience a 12' fall plus dynamic effects which we could possibly say may add another 3 to 4 feet.  whereas a climber clipping that 4' bolt at the waist would only suffer an 8' fall.

Joe

But you are not actually falling the distance (2+2 in your example) of the rope that is above your harness.  You don't magically rise up 4 feet and then fall back down.  If you were at the top of a 1000 foot cliff and had 200 feet of rope in a pile at your feet with one end clipped to an anchor and the other end tied to your harness and then jumped off - how far would you go.  By your logic it would be 400 feet.