Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The other tomcat]

That one would change my underwear to climb....lol...

[lucky luke]

That one would change my underwear to climb....lol...

Ha ha good one.

I don't think that his level of risk is too hight. I think that he have a lot of experience. Maybe it was an epic and he didn't really have the choice to bail.

As a beginer, you can learn to see the danger or you can learn to make a move. When you learn to make a move...it is very secure and you can do difficult movement without fear. When you see the danger, when the danger is too big too fast, some people will bail and never climb against. when you see just the danger, you are not able to make a move without fear. So, you have to see the movement too.  Is it that relation, between a potential risk of injury and a potential risk of making a movement, which is the level of risk?

[tradmanclimbz]

Maybe he just got lucky? I have taken 30ft upside down gear rippers and survived.. Experience and skill kept me alive on a sketchy rout yet bed decisions made me fall on a sketchy route and then there was luck that also stepped in and kept me from getting hurt...

[fresh]

If you continually take a 1 in 100 chance that gives you a 100% chance of getting hurt if you climb  over 100 days...   learned that in pistol competition. If your gun only malefunctions once every 100rds  it is a 100% garuentee to get a jam in the competition as they usually averages 125 rounds fired.

like DMan said this isn't quite right, but I think about this stuff a lot so I'll flesh it out.

it's easier to calculate the chance of it NOT happening. if you want, subtract that number from one to get the chance that it WILL happen.

so if you take a 1 in 100 chance 100 times, the chance of it not happening is 99/100 to the 100th power.

(99/100) ^ 100 = .366

so there's a .366 chance that everything will be ok. there's a .634 chance that it'll happen once (or more than once!) in those 100 times.

some other numbers:

(199 / 200)^100 = 0.606
(999 / 1,000)^100 = 0.905
(9 999 / 10 000)^100 = 0.990

so if you go climbing 100 days a year, and accept a 1/200 chance of a catastrophe once each day, there's almost a 40% chance that you'll have a catastrophe in that year. if you follow that policy for 10 years, that chance rises to 99%.

it sounds kind of morbid to say, "today I accept a 1/1000 chance of breaking a leg", but actually I think it's ignorant to pretend that the risks we take can't be seen in those terms. but usually choices in climbing don't have to be gambles, they just become gambles when we're not accurate in our observations.

[DMan]

WOW Fresh! MIND = Blown. I totally agree with your numbers, but that’s mainly because I am not that good at math

I’m +1ing your post for this though, as I think it is MOST relevant:

"but usually choices in climbing don't have to be gambles, they just become gambles when we're not accurate in our observations."

[lucky luke]

so if you go climbing 100 days a year, and accept a 1/200 chance of a catastrophe once each day, there's almost a 40% chance that you'll have a catastrophe in that year. if you follow that policy for 10 years, that chance rises to 99%.

it sounds kind of morbid to say, "today I accept a 1/1000 chance of breaking a leg", but actually I think it's ignorant to pretend that the risks we take can't be seen in those terms. but usually choices in climbing don't have to be gambles, they just become gambles when we're not accurate in our observations.

As a mathematical description, it is very interesting. We understand that we can estimate a level of risk. People with higher level have bigger chance to be injure. I ask the question to myself a couple of time, should I stop climbing because I was lucky. The tread is how you evaluate your level of risk. If you do the same movement one hundred time, it is possible to apply pure mathematical relation. But if you climb onsight....How can you evaluate a mathematical risk of injury.

Saying a broken leg or arm means that I understand the dynamic of fallen, the rope strech, my body placement, how to place my pro, my reaction under stress, etc. Because to evaluate the result of a fall, I must know that. In sport, the bolt are place by other to be safe. there is not  a real reason to do that. In top rope, the fall is smaller, but when you climb in second... you can fall with a long rope elongation. So, the fall will be close to a small lead fall.

In the case of Steeve Arsenault, he climbed 1000 routes, and more. Harder and more difficult. For a strong climber like him, lucky is a general term to say that his system work. He use a good technique, verify is belay, double check knot instinctively as he know that he can make a mistake and that the rock decide where he is going. As we use your mathematical description, he should be death for a long time. What is his level of risk versus what is his level of knowledge. He had many experiences. Some harder than the other for sure. Compare with the experioence of those who bail at the first sign of snow or difficulty...       

[DMan]

... Compare with the experioence of those who bail at the first sign of snow or difficulty...     

Even the most experienced pro climbers know when to bail when they sense they are in over their head. That’s why they are still here. We’ve all debunked Tradman’s mathematical equation as being false, so no, Steve should not be dead. And no, “lucky” is not the right term for someone who has applied careful risk management in many extreme situations.

We’ve all had “many experiences”. I still can’t figure out what it is you are trying to say, and I try so hard to...

[sneoh]

Thanks for the contribution, fresh.

so if you go climbing 100 days a year, and accept a 1/200 chance of a catastrophe once each day, there's almost a 40% chance that you'll have a catastrophe in that year. if you follow that policy for 10 years, that chance rises to 99%.

Note that 40% chance is condition upon one taking the 1/200 level of risk at least once each AND every day of the 100 days of climbing in the example fresh gave above.  Does one always go to the limit of one's level of risk every time one goes out?  I can't speak for everyone but I certainly do not.  Otherwise, I would have had many broken limbs over the past 20 years.

True, any number one gives for chance of injury - 1/100, 1/200, 1/1000 is a guess, hopefully a best guess (based on many factors with experience being one of them).  And, more importantly, one is usually conservative and tends to overestimate the chance of injury.  As a species, we have plenty of self-preservation 'instincts' embedded in our genes.

And, Champ, the level of risk you yourself proposed for discussion here is broken limb, not loss of life so I am not sure where you are going with the "he should be death for a long time." business.  And, I apologize ahead of time for indiscretion and possibly outright rudeness, I believe SA has broken a limb climbing.  In fact, the 1st time I met him (at Crow Hill), I seem to recall him having a cast on but climbing hard nonetheless.

[lucky luke]

Note that 40% chance is condition upon one taking the 1/200 level of risk at least once each AND every day of the 100 days of climbing in the example fresh gave above.  Does one always go to the limit of one's level of risk every time one goes out?  I can't speak for everyone but I certainly do not.  Otherwise, I would have had many broken limbs over the past 20 years.

Sneoh I ask how you calculate your level of risk. If you went to go in the math, not on the rock. that is O.K. for me. Personally, if I can broke my leg or and arm, I will go for it. If the risk is greater (vertebrae of hips) I will bail. It is what I am doing in the cliff and when I do an onsight...I can not measure a percentage of falling.

If you like the maths, This is O.K. The hypothesis of Fresh is false. when you calculate a level of fall, you most measure the chance of a fall. It could be ten time or less at each one hundred climb in trad. So, the chance of a fall is 10 percent. From that, there is 3 to 4 chances to be injure on 100 falls. so you need to climb a thousand of route to have three or four injury. It is the ratio of SA that you gave in your description. From those injury, some can be fatal, very important and minor. Now you need to climb three thousand route to have one chance ( ) to died.

Sneoh, I know that you are a good guy, we are in a beginer forum. Do you think that a different point of view can be helpfull for those people who like to do trad climbing and can be interested, not to have the advice of the king of the mountain, but to understand all the aspect of climbing?

[DMan]

The world as Champ sees it:

1010010001000010001010001001010101001001001010
0101001010101001101001000100001000101000100101
01010010010010100101001010101001101001000100001
1010010001000010001010001001010101001001001010
0101001010101001101001000100001000101000100101
1010010001000010001010001001010101001001001010
0101001010101001101001000100001000101000100101
01010010010010100101001010101001101001000100001
1010010001000010001010001001010101001001001010
0101001010101001101001000100001000101000100101

Oh shit, there’s a glitch in the Matrix. I better back off this route before I break my hips.

[strandman]

Should this really be in the beginner forum ?

According to the math.. i should have died in a fall July, 1987. 

You cannot calculate the odds of breaking a leg, or a wrist or anything in climbing. You just can't do it.The difficulty of the route doesn't matter or anything else .

[steve weitzler]

If you are worried about the risks in climbing take up bowling!!

[lucky luke]

Should this really be in the beginner forum ?

According to the math.. I should have died in a fall July, 1987. 

Lucky??? I kidding you. It was a close call for sure.

I think that beginer more than any body else have to know abut that. I was we my partner and his friend is a vedry good guide. One day, we were at the bottom of cathedral and we saw marc coming down with his client saying: "it is important what I saying to you" He was teaching one of that lucky comportment that will save his life in the futur.

All climber do some thing instinctively. When some one ask us, why are you doing that? Our answer is I don't know. All that little technique that we apply because one day we thinks that it is going to save our life in trad can not be explain. But every climber will say, I am lucky to still doing it because today, it save my life.

Try to explain at a gym climber, 5.11 at his first six month,  that he never learn the trick!!! It is impossible. if we talk about where are you going to fall, what if you hit a ledge, what if your hand is trap in a crack or your feet, what if you tied that way or this way...etc.  We all know that a 5.9 crack is different than a 5.9 slab. and that some people can be very good in slab and can not climb a crack because the technique is different. Why beginer should know there level of risk because they climb in a gym and how they can learn it? It is a beginer question.

In mountaineering freedom of the hill, they don't teach the good and bad way to do some thing. It is a bible of all possibility in climbing (edition up to fifth edition, after it is more a do that do this book). If you try to do one technique per week, one hour per week, yor level of knowledge will be a lot higher. When you choose a guide, do you want a do this or do that relation or a why should I have do to that, I am scare...relation? a good guide, in trad, will bring you to see the danger in a way that you will protect yourself when you are going to climb alone with your partner.

But how a beginer can estimate is level of risk?     
 

[DGoguen]

But how a beginer can estimate is level of risk?   

I'm not saying it's wrong, but I don't think I have ever met anyone so intent on quantifying subject matter, again and again, that has so many variables.

The beginners will figure it out just like everybody else did, and be stronger for it. They will do some stupid things, for sure, who hasn't.
Some won't figure it out even with the best advantages money can buy.

[strandman]

Right on D