NEClimbs.com forum

General => Epics and Accidents => Topic started by: ridgerunner on March 23, 2013, 01:19:44 pm

Title: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: ridgerunner on March 23, 2013, 01:19:44 pm
Hmmmm, another thread has pulled me into this one...arghh...ok I probably shouldn’t but here I go, to broaden the discussion on what is “acceptable” risk.

First, a definition: risk = (the probability of occurrence) times (the gravity of the consequence).

Put soloing under the light of that equation : to each his own, really, BUT having kids is often a game changer : you are then  involving other people  in your risk taking decision, like it or not. Soloing a grade 3 or 4 if you are a grade 5 climber is probably ok (as in probabilistically)... until something goes awfully wrong. And when it does, it is sad to see the tender half/and or friends beg on the net to raise money for a fund to put the kids through college (we have seen this too often). We climbers are supposed to take responsibility for our own actions, right? So IMHO, when one starts to raise a family , I have nothing against that person soloing  if that person has  a mothaload of money in the bank or an excellent life insurance that covers climbing. Freedom is great, as long as you don’t restrain other people’s freedom by your actions, be it financially or otherwise.  The consequence can be to put your family in a very akward situation - think mortgaging your children’s future. What I am saying is that having kids to support increases the weight of the second term of the risk equation immensely…
Now I don’t expect everybody to agree but this is what I did and I am curious to hear what others think of the subject, with or withour kids.
Just my two dollars.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: DGoguen on March 23, 2013, 01:49:04 pm
I know that you specifically asked about soloing but I might throw "serious alpinism" into that mix above considering the objective danger.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 23, 2013, 01:58:24 pm
I wonder haw things compare with climbing deaths   soloing vs roped climbing ??? i assume that way more people die in roped accidents, but the percentage is higher for soloing ??

Example - i have had 6 pretty good friends die climbing

one soloing
4 rappelling
one in a roped fall
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 23, 2013, 03:58:21 pm
I agree 100% with you Ridgerunner. I love my daughters too much to check out now. But I still take risks. And my level of risk taking at this point in my life doesn't have to be, nor should be, the same as the next guy. Who am I to know where he's at? For sure though, my risk envelope is much smaller than it once was because of my family.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: darwined on March 23, 2013, 04:21:00 pm
Despite my best efforts to be honest with myself about my abilities,  there are still climbs I'm surprised by.  I don't want one of those surprises to come when I'm not roped.  For this reason, I only solo easy stuff 2's, the occasional 3, and 5.5 maximum.  It's not so much the financial quotient of it all, my family would be all set.  I'd just rather be around to see them through.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 23, 2013, 04:55:13 pm
I'm not sure the difficulty has much to do with anything

John Bachar died on an 11a that he had done over 200 times and was well within his scope
Jimmy Jewel in Wales was on a 5.5
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: darwined on March 23, 2013, 05:24:20 pm
I'm not sure the difficulty has much to do with anything

John Bachar died on an 11a that he had done over 200 times and was well within his scope
Jimmy Jewel in Wales was on a 5.5

You're absolutely right.  I'm just able to reconcile that with myself somehow. 
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 23, 2013, 06:19:14 pm
My family has taken un-roped climbing off the table for me. I get my thrills in other ways these days.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: sneoh on March 23, 2013, 07:12:55 pm
Yup, with a young daughter, whom I like to see for  at least the next 15 or 20 years, soloing is definitely out of the question for me.
John, your last two posts are spot on.  So many have died rappelling.  It almost happened to someone I know 2.5 years ago.  He recovered fully physically only by the most amazing stroke of luck.  I remind myself of the statistics every time I set up to rappel.  Like not tying a good knot, it only takes one time and a little bit of "bad luck" to make one check out for good.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: DLottmann on March 23, 2013, 07:47:03 pm
I have a 1.5 yr old... I will still solo “easy grade 3” as that is often safer than leading hard grade 4...

Falling while leading grade 4 or less ice is worse than soloing... despite “Fall From Grace” type recaps...

The standard of soloing 2 full grades below what you feel comfortable leading could be a good starting point for “acceptable risk”, but labeling someone as risky for soloing without knowing their background/experience is fallacy.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: tradmanclimbz on March 23, 2013, 08:33:52 pm
I have been in Far, far more danger leading than anything I have soloed in the last decade. I probobly solo about the same if nor more # of days per year that I rope up for.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: tradmanclimbz on March 23, 2013, 08:50:20 pm
Today was a perfect example.  I led Committed 3+ 4-? at holts. I soloed it earlier this winter in hero conditions 400% solid. I led it today.  Funky hollow on the first 30ft good in the middle and baked for the top out. It was an attention getter and i felt reasonably safe but aware that it could go to shit in hurry with any little mistake. I would not have soloed this today yet I would lead it with a rope but that entailed some solo mindset climbing.

Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: hobbsj on March 23, 2013, 09:26:22 pm
So, multi-facited (sp?) question.  First off, what example do you want to set for your kids and how does climbing play in to that.  I made it very clear to my wife once we found out she had a baby in her that I plan on volunteering for any deployment I can to Afghaniland.  Its a message, even if I get killed, that i want to send to my kid.  Same goes for climbing.  There was an article a year or two ago about a climber who died and his daughter thought he was living life and was proud of him.  Its not only a matter of risk, but the reason for taking it, who you are, how you manage the risk, and what it means.  To say "having a kid means soloing is out" is narrow-minded and ignorant. That stance just shows your lack of an ability to deal with risk and teach about consequences.  If its your personal choice for that stance rather than a blanket statement, that's very different (I hope my explanation sufficiently gets across the point I'm trying to make).

For me, soloing is an option based on the information I can gather about certain climbs when I look at it.  I've left top-rope climbs undone because of the conditions.  plus, there's good ol' mother nature that can kick you in the Jimmy when you think you have a handle on things.  Some climbs I've solo'ed are safer than leads I've done. I also have no qualms asking for opinions  of my party about a decision.  Humility and being humble are key traits, IMHO, when assessing risk with high consequences.  If setting a standard of no soloing helps you mitigate risk, then so be it.  Its good that you have a personal standard.  But, realize that is just that, a personal standard and it means nothing if you can't analyze a situation when there's a rope involved.

 A rope, anchor, and belayer don't necessarily make you safer if you can't analyze a situation.  They just mean you won't die alone.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: DLottmann on March 23, 2013, 09:36:35 pm
...
 A rope, anchor, and belayer don't necessarily make you safer if you can't analyze a situation.  They just mean you won't die alone.

this part of your post is pure awesome
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 23, 2013, 09:43:31 pm
Like I said hobbs- you're acceptance of risk is all you. Just because I say it's off the table for me, doesn't mean I think any less of you for having a family and still soloing.

Hell man, I paraglided off Whitehorse and Webster for years while my girls were young(er). Soloing isn't something that interests me at this point in life so I don't do it. Having my family just kinda drives it home. Again, in my mind. If in your mind you're managing the risk of soloing with a family, I think that's cool.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: sneoh on March 23, 2013, 09:45:21 pm
To say "having a kid means soloing is out" is narrow-minded and ignorant.  That stance just shows your lack of an ability to deal with risk and teach about consequences.  If its your personal choice for that stance rather than a blanket statement, that's very different (I hope my explanation sufficiently gets across the point I'm trying to make).
For me, it is personal.  I can't speak for anyone else.  Not weighing all the facts 100% objectively perhaps but hardly narrow-minded.  I am "400%" sure of that.  As for "lack of ability to deal with risk", let's not fool ourselves that this can be a judgement stemming from an objective assessment.  Some people take "greater risk" in certain facets of their lives and lower in others.  What is low or moderate risk to me might be great risk to you and vice versa. 

BTW, it is 'multifaceted" if you are still wondering.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 23, 2013, 10:05:39 pm
I almost think if you question soloing, you shouldn't.. for whatever reason. one of my friends who died rappelling NEVER soloed, ever, but when the anchor pulls    , you die
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: hobbsj on March 23, 2013, 10:39:21 pm
Sneoh, I suck at spelling even with spell-check :-)  I agree with you and kenreville.  My statement was aimed more towards the individuals who say "a family means activity x is unacceptable" as a blanket statement. Chalk it up to my inability to communicate effectively when typing.  Your post elaborated on what I was trying to say.  As an example,  I'll solo some stuff after checking it out and rush a position with covering fire, but rarely go more than 5mph over the speed limit.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 23, 2013, 11:59:05 pm
I can be a little bit nasty and talk about the definition of risk, but I really don't know what to say. I will just listen and learn

 
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: sneoh on March 24, 2013, 12:17:47 am
It is all cool, Hobbsj.  NP.  Please take good care of yourself if you deploy.  We hope you make it home safely.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 24, 2013, 10:37:29 pm
Hmmmm, another thread has pulled me into this one...arghh...ok I probably shouldn’t but here I go, to broaden the discussion on what is “acceptable” risk.

First, a definition: risk = (the probability of occurrence) times (the gravity of the consequence).

Such an interesting subject. Can not seat back in front of my computer, reading, without letting my hands going on the keyboard.

taking a risk and doing an extreme sport is different for me. (Extreme sports (also called action sports, aggro sports, and adventure sports) is a popular term for certain activities perceived as having a high level of inherent danger.). I agree that solo is more extreme than rope up. climbing is more extreme than swimming. So, maybe we will agree that the decision to climb or to swim is not a decision where the notion of risk must be apply.

The definition of risk is: A situation involving exposure to danger. Can we associate danger with gravity of the consequence? For me there is two kind of danger, objective and subjective. objective is gravity, falling rock, broken hole... and subjective is walking in the middle of an avalanche slab, two rope unevean in a rap, poor anchor, etc. so one occur in the mountain without the presence of human and the other is made by the human. I understand that we can not know the gravity of the consequence when we decide to take a risk, but we also have to evaluate if the risk of a fall worth it. and the consequences is for me the results of taking a risk not a part of the equation.

So, I am a little bit confuse here.       
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: Admin Al on March 24, 2013, 11:37:09 pm
Please take good care of yourself if you deploy.  We hope you make it home safely.

+2
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: steve weitzler on March 25, 2013, 08:40:31 am
Maybe it's just me (to each their own) but when my kids were born I got more enjoyment watching their soccer games, dance recitals, etc. than I ever got out of climbing. Taking them hiking, climbing and biking seemed more enjoyable than hanging out with a bunch of climbing friends flexing and spraying. Now that they are older and gone I am free to do resume whatever I chose.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: David_G48 on March 25, 2013, 08:47:48 am
Maybe it's just me (to each their own) but when my kids were born I got more enjoyment watching their soccer games, dance recitals, etc. than I ever got out of climbing. Taking them hiking, climbing and biking seemed more enjoyable than hanging out with a bunch of climbing friends flexing and spraying. Now that they are older and gone I am free to do resume whatever I chose.

                         +1
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 25, 2013, 09:23:09 am
Maybe it's just me (to each their own) but when my kids were born I got more enjoyment watching their soccer games, dance recitals,  :) :)

your right Steve... it's you   :) :)  Just happy you lived to see today
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 25, 2013, 10:18:21 am
My family has taken un-roped climbing off the table for me. I get my thrills in other ways these days.

Yeah, Ken!  Swarmy rip tides, fog, killer sharks, and gnarly bass hooked on your fly rod, gin and tonics, and smoke for you mate!  Not to mention the four women in your life.


My greatest adventure ever was with you Ken.  Attempting the first winter ascent of of Annapurna 1 via the the yet un-climbed West Rib to Roc Nor, with hard left hand turn to traverse the long mile of the East Ridge (from 24,000') to the summit at just over 26,000'.  We made the best decision of our lives retreating from our high point of 23,000'.  I thought it bad judgement that you and Pemba chose to wait-and-see, at our camp I, on the glacier below the awesome South Face (prone to major avalanche wipe out).  The retreat in white out conditions back to base camp was epic- thankful of placing rock cairn navigation markers and dialing in an exit strategy in case of such an event.  The competing Japanese, climbing the direct Bonington route, were able to get the summit at a big price.  The two summiteers are still up there 26 years later.

[By the way: sorry about knocking your pack off the ledge at 20,000'!  Glad it didn't go all the way and we were able to retrieve it.  My bad, dude, but clip the sucker off no matter what!] 

Given the historical record of Himalayan Alpinism I knew it was statistically the highest risk game I could play as a climber.  We were unmarried and without children then, Ken.  I made sure that all my loved ones knew upfront the risks.  It is never with 100% blessing from your loved ones.  The decision to willfully place my self in the possible path of the grim reaper is a selfish act.  Once dead, the living must deal with the psychological and administrative debris. No amount of years of experience, the using of good judgement, and well honed skills can protect you when circumstances (either anticipated or not), nature (either weather, rock/ice fall), your response/exposure to high altitude (the killa edemas), and monumental/"momentary lapse of reasoning" [Pink Floyd] suddenly throws your life into peril.

It is exactly these elements of risk that makes climbing so alluring and compelling.  Climbing is viscerally engaging both mentally and physically.  The beauty of climbing is you can choose how you want to play the game- you can choose your exposure to risk.  It does not mean you might end up dead! Gravity is gravity no matter the grade or level of objective hazards.  A sharp mind does not mean you can not make that one last mistake.  No. amount of reading and knowing the historical record can save you.  You will never be immune to death!

....But I will tell you, all the elements and risk of climbing, has shaped my  life in incredibly rewarding and enriching ways.  The physical, psychological, and philosophical benefits are well worth all the risk I have exposed myself to.  It informs and defines my life beyond climbing. Climbing as a metaphor has always fascinated me.  Most defiantly I have way dialed back my exposure to risk since having a son and becoming older and wiser.  Short of dying, I have pushed out and tested the realms of risk, as a climber, sufficiantly enough to know its extremities. I have gone, I have seen, I have felt its grip.  It has given me great adventures and lifelong bonds of friendship.  I no long feel a need to pursue high risk.  I can take my experience of risk and apply it in non life threatening ways--such as the pursuit of financial security!
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 25, 2013, 10:42:19 am
Well put jamie..... ya makes your decisions and ya takes your chances.

i remember hanging with Tuts in JT, talking about him  going to Annapurna  4 back in the 80's.. 83? He seemd so calm about it.. scared me talking about it !
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: darwined on March 25, 2013, 10:47:31 am
My family has taken un-roped climbing off the table for me. I get my thrills in other ways these days.

Yeah, Ken!  Swarmy rip tides, fog, killer sharks, and gnarly bass hooked on your fly rod, gin and tonics, and smoke for you mate!  Not to mention the four women in your life.


My greatest adventure ever was with you Ken.  Attempting the first winter ascent of of Annapurna 1 via the the yet un-climbed West Rib to Roc Nor, with hard left hand turn to traverse the long mile of the East Ridge (from 24,000') to the summit at just over 26,000'.  We made the best decision of our lives retreating from our high point of 23,000'.  I thought it bad judgement that you and Pemba chose to wait-and-see, at our camp I, on the glacier below the awesome South Face (prone to major avalanche wipe out).  The retreat in white out conditions back to base camp was epic- thankful of placing rock cairn navigation markers and dialing in an exit strategy in case of such an event.  The competing Japanese, climbing the direct Bonington route, were able to get the summit at a big price.  The two summiteers are still up there 26 years later.

[By the way: sorry about knocking your pack off the ledge at 20,000'!  Glad it didn't go all the way and we were able to retrieve it.  My bad, dude, but clip the sucker off no matter what!] 

Given the historical record of Himalayan Alpinism I knew it was statistically the highest risk game I could play as a climber.  We were unmarried and without children then, Ken.  I made sure that all my loved ones knew upfront the risks.  It is never with 100% blessing from your loved ones.  The decision to willfully place my self in the possible path of the grim reaper is a selfish act.  Once dead, the living must deal with the psychological and administrative debris. No amount of years of experience, the using of good judgement, and well honed skills can protect you when circumstances (either anticipated or not), nature (either weather, rock/ice fall), your response/exposure to high altitude (the killa edemas), and monumental/"momentary lapse of reasoning" [Pink Floyd] suddenly throws your life into peril.

It is exactly these elements of risk that makes climbing so alluring and compelling.  Climbing is viscerally engaging both mentally and physically.  The beauty of climbing is you can choose how you want to play the game- you can choose your exposure to risk.  It does not mean you might end up dead! Gravity is gravity no matter the grade or level of objective hazards.  A sharp mind does not mean you can not make that one last mistake.  No. amount of reading and knowing the historical record can save you.  You will never be immune to death!

....But I will tell you, all the elements and risk of climbing, has shaped my  life in incredibly rewarding and enriching ways.  The physical, psychological, and philosophical benefits are well worth all the risk I have exposed myself to.  It informs and defines my life beyond climbing. Climbing as a metaphor has always fascinated me.  Most defiantly I have way dialed back my exposure to risk since having a son and becoming older and wiser.  Short of dying, I have pushed out and tested the realms of risk, as a climber, sufficiantly enough to know its extremities. I have gone, I have seen, I have felt its grip.  It has given me great adventures and lifelong bonds of friendship.  I no long feel a need to pursue high risk.  I can take my experience of risk and apply it in non life threatening ways--such as the pursuit of financial security!
I really enjoy reading your posts Jamie.  Post more often will ya.  You are one inspiring cat.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: ridgerunner on March 25, 2013, 02:31:52 pm
Thanks to all for sharing your thoughts on the matter. And for the one of you who doubts the definition of risk, I will let MIT explain the concept:
http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/block4/4.2b_-_Risk_Assessment.pdf

Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: steve weitzler on March 25, 2013, 02:41:33 pm
Very well put Jamie. I couldn't agree with you more.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: steve weitzler on March 25, 2013, 02:44:39 pm
I also think perhaps that the reason I don't do some of the things I used to do is because I am physically and mentally weaker than 20-30 years ago. I did certain things years ago because I thought I could get away with it. I don't do those things today cause I know I can't. :'( :'(
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: ridgerunner on March 25, 2013, 03:38:51 pm
"Very well put Jamie. I couldn't agree with you more. "

Yes. +1
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 25, 2013, 07:21:46 pm
EDIT- i believe that Tut's was on Gasherbrum 4 not Annapurna 4
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 26, 2013, 04:13:14 am
And for the one of you who doubts the definition of risk, I will let MIT explain the concept:
In the equation they said: "If both the probability and severity can be quantified, the risk is simply the product: risk = probability * severity".

What was the probability that Jamie was in an avalanche in his story. We can not quantify it?  What was the severity of being in the avalanche, some people survive at an avalanche. So, both the probability and the severity CAN NOT be quantify in climbing. Your equation is for management, not for climbing. So, you think that because you said that marijuana is dangerous for your health and you smoke a lot younger that your child won't take drugs? (note I am allergic to any combustion of leaves or green bark, I take a chance to dye if I smoke). The dream to be in the mountain after reading the story of jamie will be greater, but your child will have less knowledge because you bring them in a situation where you had fun, but it is not for your child.

The definition of risk is: A situation involving exposure to danger. One can climb everest and will not be in danger for all his trip. It is what tradmand said. He was soloing standard and was safer than some new rope up climber. In your text, I prefer the probabilistic risk assesment (PRA) as a tool to evaluate the risk:
1. Identify hazards and initiating events
2. Identify mitigating safety measures
3. Trace possible chains of events
4. Quantify all individual probabilities and severities
5. Aggregate probabilities and severities, and calculate risks

For avalanches, identify hazards could be to identify the avalanche bed and identify the initiating events could be trigger by human, if it is it will depend on the direction that the human take, or natural avalanche, 2- identify mitigating safety measures: don't be under it or cross it very fast or at certain time and hours or...
You can use the PRA to analyse an accident. Many times, you will understand that the person never do a probabilistic risk assesment, but just do the "state of the art method" without thinking.   
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 26, 2013, 07:23:54 am
And for the one of you who doubts the definition of risk, I will let MIT explain the concept:
In the equation they said: "If both the probability and severity can be quantified, the risk is simply the product: risk = probability * severity".

What was the probability that Jamie was in an avalanche in his story. We can not quantify it?  What was the severity of being in the avalanche, some people survive at an avalanche. So, both the probability and the severity CAN NOT be quantify in climbing. Your equation is for management, not for climbing. So, you think that because you said that marijuana is dangerous for your health and you smoke a lot younger that your child won't take drugs? (note I am allergic to any combustion of leaves or green bark, I take a chance to dye if I smoke). The dream to be in the mountain after reading the story of jamie will be greater, but your child will have less knowledge because you bring them in a situation where you had fun, but it is not for your child.

The definition of risk is: A situation involving exposure to danger. One can climb everest and will not be in danger for all his trip. It is what tradmand said. He was soloing standard and was safer than some new rope up climber. In your text, I prefer the probabilistic risk assesment (PRA) as a tool to evaluate the risk:
1. Identify hazards and initiating events
2. Identify mitigating safety measures
3. Trace possible chains of events
4. Quantify all individual probabilities and severities
5. Aggregate probabilities and severities, and calculate risks

For avalanches, identify hazards could be to identify the avalanche bed and identify the initiating events could be trigger by human, if it is it will depend on the direction that the human take, or natural avalanche, 2- identify mitigating safety measures: don't be under it or cross it very fast or at certain time and hours or...
You can use the PRA to analyse an accident. Many times, you will understand that the person never do a probabilistic risk assesment, but just do the "state of the art method" without thinking.

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
As the rumble of nearby avalanches increases, there is NO time to analyze jackshit. You're in a whiteout, there's Himalayan size avalanches all around you- the conclusion to beat it out of there was a no-brainer. One minute you're dragging a sled full of the last of your gear (much of it abandonded at higher camps), the next micromillisecond later, you're tumbling around in the madness.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 26, 2013, 09:39:31 am
Right ken.. even Twight  says " run away as fast as you can"
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 26, 2013, 11:23:41 am

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
glad that you came back safe. But it is a proove of what I was saying: the probability and severity can't be quantified.

I wrote a very good reply. But I washed it out by mistake. And I don't have time/courage to take an hour to rewrite it.
Chriss Bonington, 78 in 2012, exposure...danger...tactician and safe leader. and many other at the bottom of the cliff (cote, hurley and other that I don't remember the name who look the cliff with sadness as there relative asked then to stay on the ground.

probability of risk assesment will help you to choose between many option, not save your life when you already was in problem.

alluring and compelling...it is not what I like in climbing. I am more from the star treck generation:" Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no man has gone before." One day I saw the brown eye of a peregrine falcon flewing just at ten feet of me. the yosemite valley from el capitan, the diedral in la pomme d'or, the strength of nature in white out at huntington gully...it is not danger, as I trained for that, that bring me there but pure beauty. 
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 26, 2013, 11:35:57 am

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
glad that you came back safe. But it is a proove of what I was saying: the probability and severity can't be quantified.

I wrote a very good reply. But I washed it out by mistake. And I don't have time/courage to take an hour to rewrite it.
Chriss Bonington, 78 in 2012, exposure...danger...tactician and safe leader. and many other at the bottom of the cliff (cote, hurley and other that I don't remember the name who look the cliff with sadness as there relative asked then to stay on the ground.

probability of risk assesment will help you to choose between many option, not save your life when you already was in problem.

alluring and compelling...it is not what I like in climbing. I am more from the star treck generation:" Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no man has gone before." One day I saw the brown eye of a peregrine falcon flewing just at ten feet of me. the yosemite valley from el capitan, the diedral in la pomme d'or, the strength of nature in white out at huntington gully...it is not danger, as I trained for that, that bring me there but pure beauty.

When I asked John Bouchard years ago how he had mustered up the courage to solo Western Lady, he smiled his shark grin and said " I wanted to go where no man had gone before". John was a trekkie too. Who knew?
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 26, 2013, 12:18:30 pm
John was a trekkie too. Who knew?
Certainly a CLIMBER.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: snowleopard on March 26, 2013, 01:43:48 pm
One evening at the Cranmore climbing wall probably early to mid 90's I was getting my harness on and Bouchard was
standing alone nearby.  Several people were on the wall and suddenly Bouchard starts laughing to himself (practically an
inaudible giggle).  Wanting to be in on the joke someone asks "What's so funny John?"  His reply "I'm watching the humans"
followed by another chuckle.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: old_school on March 26, 2013, 02:17:04 pm
John did look a little bit like Spock!   ;D
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 26, 2013, 02:25:48 pm
From November and December 1987:
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 26, 2013, 03:32:11 pm
1987: Annapurna 1 and Nepal images continued:
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 26, 2013, 03:41:32 pm
1987: Annapurna 1 and Nepal images continued:
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: strandman on March 26, 2013, 06:08:28 pm
Fuckin 'Aye lad... NE climber rule.. it's just nobody else knows it..

i'll put them up to anybody....JB, Kurt, Jimmie, jimmy, Ed, bayard, YOU.. etc, etc

Hard ass mfo's   Tommy nonis, tom Callaghan, Base  the list goes on and on

You learn to play in NE and you can play anywhere
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 26, 2013, 08:47:07 pm
We sure gave it a go eh, laddie?
Live free or die.
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 26, 2013, 09:49:56 pm
We sure gave it a go eh, laddie?
Live free or die.

Sure did,Youth!


The last sentence, I believe, in Maurice Herzog's classic account of the first ascent of Annapurna 1 goes as thus:

"There are many more Annapurnas in the lives of men." 

What a great metaphor.....I read it in a global sense...what can you achieve beyond the realm of climbing?  ....In all aspects of a lifetime.
That is my Annapurna today. 
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 26, 2013, 09:55:23 pm
Nepal (or any other climbing destination) is not all about climbing....
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: Admin Al on March 26, 2013, 10:12:15 pm
wow... incredible adventure aye Jamie?
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: smartpig on March 27, 2013, 04:45:34 am
Thanks all.  John, you got that right in the other thread "Education": it's all in the doing.  As Tilman said, "put your boots on and go!"

Cheers, Mates! Bottoms up!
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: markvnh on March 27, 2013, 08:42:53 am
Thanks for sharing Jamie! Great stuff!
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 27, 2013, 11:26:26 am
The last sentence, I believe, in Maurice Herzog's classic account of the first ascent of Annapurna 1 goes as thus:

"There are many more Annapurnas in the lives of men." 

What a great metaphor.....I read it in a global sense...what can you achieve beyond the realm of climbing?  ....In all aspects of a lifetime.

This is many great adventure.

Many because i doubt that ou decide one day to climb annapurna, take your crampon and buy your plane ticket.

What are the sacrifice, the training, the employer that you had to tolerate, the first encounter with death, the probabilistic risk assesment etc...

When we red the forum, few time ago, I had the impression that many of you said:

Look how wonderfull it is, how my life was great and amasing, how happy I am....
but not for you my son...too risky!
 :-*
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: kenreville on March 28, 2013, 07:32:31 am
The last sentence, I believe, in Maurice Herzog's classic account of the first ascent of Annapurna 1 goes as thus:

"There are many more Annapurnas in the lives of men." 

What a great metaphor.....I read it in a global sense...what can you achieve beyond the realm of climbing?  ....In all aspects of a lifetime.

This is many great adventure.

Many because i doubt that ou decide one day to climb annapurna, take your crampon and buy your plane ticket.
Actually, that's pretty much what we did.

What are the sacrifice, the training, the employer that you had to tolerate, the first encounter with death, the probabilistic risk assesment etc...
There was no sacrifice other than shelling out $7k. Training was continue doing what we did whenever we could-climb. The only concern James and I had was pulmonary edema.

When we red the forum, few time ago, I had the impression that many of you said:

Look how wonderfull it is, how my life was great and amasing, how happy I am....
but not for you my son...too risky!
 :-*
Do you mean "my son" (don't have one), or "you" son?
Title: Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
Post by: lucky luke on March 29, 2013, 11:58:49 am
What are the sacrifice, the training, the employer that you had to tolerate, the first encounter with death, the probabilistic risk assesment etc...
There was no sacrifice other than shelling out $7k. Training was continue doing what we did whenever we could-climb. The only concern James and I had was pulmonary edema.

When we red the forum, few time ago, I had the impression that many of you said:

Look how wonderfull it is, how my life was great and amasing, how happy I am....
but not for you my son...too risky!
 :-*
Do you mean "my son" (don't have one), or "you" son?
[/quote]
When you work five days a week in an industry, want to be with your girlfriend, eat and sleep...the time you can spend on climbing is a little bit less than when your works is guiding, or when the cliff is in your backyard. I know some climber who climbed two 5.10 route at cathedral from six to nine as a warm up before going to work. it is six hours of training at least. And you are close to mt washington. Taking a hike with a fifty pounds pack sack with a wood frame, as i saw in the early days, as a training...it is not what many people can do. All that hard training are often omit to say, but are the most important think to come back safe, unburry.

It is obvious that I have to follow a training less interesting to onsight 5.10 than climbing as much as I can as I am in a city. I just forget to train my ankle for a year and feel weaker on my feet when I climbed. I trained my arms, but not my feet...so I hang up more than friction and edgin.

If you want to be modern, want to make climbing for every body, you also have to think about oder reality of life than climbing.