Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta

Crag & Route Beta

Area	Location	Sub Location	Crag	Links
All NSW	(General)	(General)	(General)

Author

Shackles and the sheriff of Shipley


kuu

21-Apr-2011
7:13:36 PM

On 21/04/2011 RNM wrote:
>Hi Kuu
>
>The point is that people should be taught how to re thread the rope and
>either lower off, or abseil, once the party have finished climbing on that
>anchor.

Re-thread the rope through the in-place anchors? Or re-thread through added quickdraws?

In the first case it still means wear on the anchors/shackles.
>
>If the second person doesn't know how to do so, and is keen to learn,
>teach them (preferably well, with a dry run on the ground, etc etc).
>
No argument. Teach, teach, teach!

>If the second person is not comfortable doing this (eg; you are runnig
>a top rope for someone), then you should climb back up and re thread the
>rope yourself.

And then? Lower off after re-threading through the in-place anchors? (More wear!) Or re-thread and abseil off?

Isn't this a case of convenience versus conservation?
>
>No need to leave biners behind when you have finished.
>
>

spicelab

21-Apr-2011
7:16:15 PM

On 21/04/2011 RNM wrote:

>
>I have no idea who the Sheriff is, but I agree that his approach, in this
>instance, was somewhat lacking.
>
>Specifically, it was lacking a mallet. I would like to send him a mallet,
>for future use on his rounds. Perhaps you already have a significant head
>injury (there are certain indications this may be the case), but if not,
>I would hope he can inflict one on you. If we are lucky, it might even
>be severe enough to prevent you from posting. If he has to deal with people
>like you on a regular basis I am truly amazed he has not; a) killed someone,
>b) gone insane, c) given up all together.

Deary me. You could be forgiven for thinking that this is the worst injustice ever inflicted on humanity.

Sturge

21-Apr-2011
7:53:01 PM

On 21/04/2011 RNM wrote:

> I would like to send him a mallet, for future use on his rounds.

You should get two mallets of the same age, brand, usage, etc.
Send one to the Sheriff and send one to Mikl, for destructive testing, so that the Sheriff may be better advised as to the extent he may reasonably expect to be able to use said mallet.

Linze

21-Apr-2011
8:06:30 PM

>
>It reminds me of the street where my grandmother lived until 3 or 4 years
>ago (and my father grew up) in the suburb of Enoggera in Brisbane, next
>door to her (and on the corner of the street) the older gentleman neighbour
>had a number of fruit trees (mostly citrus) which he tended to and he allowed
>people to pick some fruit on the understanding that they only took a reasonable
>amount for personal consumption (and in parallel with the anchor situation
>I note that larger families took more fruit, my grandmother took only a
>little, the injustice!!). This situation existed without incident for
>over a quarter of a century.
>
>However as is want to happen, the folks in the street got older and eventually
>passed on, some of newcomers to the street (dinki couple) started taking
>advantage of the arrangement, they would pick every single piece of vaguely
>ripe fruit off the trees/vines and take it home with them. My grandmother's
>neighbour on several occaisions tried asking politely and when that failed
>he was as firm as a man in his early 80s can be when trying to reprimand
>someone half a century his junior can be.
>
so some consumed a little and others more, but overall the system was in harmony... so if some create little wear and other a little more is it fine - as long as they dont take advantage of the situation - becasue it will all even out overall? hmmm....
>
>So, I'll repeat my offer. If you're willing to put your money where your
>mouth is and donate $1000 towards anchor upgrades at the blackheath crags,
>I'll donate my time and we can work together to double that money and we
>put it into play.
>
no thanks, i am never going to be a large contributor to bolting either in terms of cash or time, but i am happy for anyone to top rope on any bolts that i do place if that seems like the right thing to do at the time...

rolsen1

21-Apr-2011
8:38:35 PM

I'm glad I don't live in NSW

>>door to her (and on the corner of the street) the older gentleman neighbour
>>had a number of fruit trees (mostly citrus) which he tended to and he

This example is rubbish as the neighbour owned the trees, when you bolt, rebolt or install anchors you are doing this for the benefit of the climbing community you don't own them. Yes I agree there are certain are social norms, and we should act in the best interest of others but you don't own the bolts. If you're not happy to donate your bolts/anchors to the climbing community then don't bolt.

On 21/04/2011 Cranky wrote:
>I had led the route and threaded the shackles, then lowered off and belayed
>the second, and then the second lowered off. Wrong, now I know.

This seems fine to me, assuming the (non-confident) second is not dogging over having multiple goes then I can't see how we expect the leader to lower off quick draws, belay the climber up then re-climb the climb! If the leader rapped in the first place then the wear on the anchors would be similar to the preferred method.

hipdos

21-Apr-2011
9:23:31 PM

On 21/04/2011 davidn wrote:
>Really, this whole thread comes down to 'more flies with honey'. Linze
>got buttonholed by someone who was a bit forthright, and he felt affronted.
> Many of us have been volunteers at one time or another. Regardless of
>whether there are good reasons to be short with people, you get an immediate
>impression of 'the cause' based on the way people interact with you. If
>the interaction is positive, you may patronise 'the cause' for life; if
>it's a grumpy diatribe, you might go out of your way to do 'the cause'
>harm.
>
>Adam has a good point about anchor wear; but Linze has a point too - being
>nice can be f---ing hard work, but it works wonders for getting the point
>across.

Have you ever met the Sherriff? Linze merely went through the same experience as thousands of innocent and unsuspecting Shipley climbers! And they were all affronted! But he does a lot of good bolting work (Thanks Sherriff)...

RNM

22-Apr-2011
1:29:53 AM

'hit 'im in the edd wiff a hammer' 'hit 'im in the edd wiff a hammer' 'hit 'im in the edd wiff a hammer'!

On 20/04/2011 Linze wrote:
>I didn’t know what he was talking about
>After giving this some thought,

(I am not convinced)

>I want to know if this is really an issue
>for people.
>(wouldn’t most of the damage be done on decent anyway?).
>If this is really a problem, then
>why on earth are there shackles up there are all, millions of inexperienced
>climbers are going to top rope this route, so why not accommodate this????.
>I will happily donate some old locking biners and then people can happily
>wear the s$5t out of them by top roping day and night... after which I
>will happily put up some more... after which i am sure someone else will
>have some they can donate...
>So, I do actually want to find out: is top roping through these anchors
>really an issue for people??????? If it is i will go and put some biners
>up there......

Linze posed the questions, several people provided the answers... they fell on deaf ears. I persisted, but it has become evident that Linze isn't an ignorant bumbly who wanted clarification and information, Linze is in fact an ignorant bumbly who felt jilted because someone affronted Linze in front of their friend. Poor Linze. Sure, it is hardly a crime to be ignorant and/or lazy, but it is more that Linze doesn't quite seem to 'get it' that is frustrating.

Linze even seemed keen to get into a bit of bolting/anchor replacement at one point, which would be awesome. I would gladly spend time with Linze if Linze wanted to find out more about replacing anchors etc, as I am sure would many others.

The hammer is the metaphorical cyber mallet of chockstone, and no, I would not hit anyone with anything more lethal than a tendon hammer... that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to though! Covering him in honey just doesn't seem right either.

All in all an amusing way to while away some free time.

SteveH

22-Apr-2011
9:28:52 AM

In some sports crags I have been to OS, to clean a sports route (that is not steep enough to warrant back-cleaning) the standard practice is for the climber to clip in hard, thread the anchor till both ends are on the ground (or at next belay station) and rap down, NOT retie and get lowered by your belayer, thereby reducing even more wear than what is currently standard practice here (threading, retying and getting lowered).

RNM

22-Apr-2011
10:21:33 AM

On 21/04/2011 davidn wrote:
>Really, this whole thread comes down to 'more flies with honey'.

I think it may have been you suggesting we lather on the honey, instead of dishing out the shit...?!

:)


aarond

22-Apr-2011
10:37:57 AM

unless your batmaning up the whole climb, top roping through the anchors should put no more wear on the anchors than pulling you rope to retrieve it after climbing it. maybe even less because the rope is running through the anchors slower..


Miguel75

22-Apr-2011
10:37:58 AM

On 22/04/2011 RNM wrote:
>On 21/04/2011 davidn wrote:
>>Really, this whole thread comes down to 'more flies with honey'.
>
>I think it may have been you suggesting we lather on the honey, instead
>of dishing out the shit...?!

I thought he was suggesting Linze be covered in honey and staked to an ant hill... which I thought was a touch harsh.


aarond

22-Apr-2011
12:00:23 PM

On 22/04/2011 davidn wrote:
>On 22/04/2011 aarond wrote:
>>unless your batmaning up the whole climb, top roping through the anchors
>>should put no more wear on the anchors than pulling you rope to retrieve
>>it after climbing it. maybe even less because the rope is running through
>>the anchors slower..
>
>A - what - 5 kg rope running over the anchors would make as much impact
>as an 85 kg weight running over the anchors?
>
>Here's a good test for you. Get a patch of carpet and run an 85 kg weight
>over it repeatedly. Then do the same with the 5kg weight, but faster.
> Let us know which one wears it down first.

i dunno about you but i cant actually lift an 85 kg body up a climb when belaying, i let the climber climb with their hands and feet to get up and only have to pull 5kgs of rope through.

like i said - unless your batmaning up a climb there's only the weight of the rope running through the anchors.

pharmamatt

22-Apr-2011
1:01:34 PM

On 22/04/2011 aarond wrote:
>On 22/04/2011 davidn wrote:
>>On 22/04/2011 aarond wrote:
>>>unless your batmaning up the whole climb, top roping through the anchors
>>>should put no more wear on the anchors than pulling you rope to retrieve
>>>it after climbing it. maybe even less because the rope is running through
>>>the anchors slower..
>>
>>A - what - 5 kg rope running over the anchors would make as much impact
>>as an 85 kg weight running over the anchors?
>>
>>Here's a good test for you. Get a patch of carpet and run an 85 kg weight
>>over it repeatedly. Then do the same with the 5kg weight, but faster.
>> Let us know which one wears it down first.
>
>i dunno about you but i cant actually lift an 85 kg body up a climb when
>belaying, i let the climber climb with their hands and feet to get up and
>only have to pull 5kgs of rope through.
>
>like i said - unless your batmaning up a climb there's only the weight
>of the rope running through the anchors.

because said 85 kg climber downclimbs every route with the rope unweighted!


aarond

22-Apr-2011
1:06:05 PM

how else do you get down then without leaving the beiners up there?

even if your tope roping with bieners you will have to lower off the rings at one stage.

pharmamatt

22-Apr-2011
1:44:36 PM

On 22/04/2011 aarond wrote:
>how else do you get down then without leaving the beiners up there?
>
>even if your tope roping with bieners you will have to lower off the rings
>at one stage.

last person up, takes up a cowtail and belay device eg. ATC. hard clips the anchor with the cowtail, rethreads the rope and raps down.


aarond

22-Apr-2011
2:22:15 PM

the top roping climber can do that too.


aarond

26-Apr-2011
8:25:15 AM

so im still confused what the issue is here... is it the pulling the rope through when someone is climbing the route, or is it the lowering after the top roper has climbed the route?(which is what lead climbers do, apart from the "elite" few it seems who who do it the proper way)

99% of lead climbers i have seen lower of through the rings at places like Shipley! (including this Sheriff guy.)
come on really... do sport climbers (where this ring issue occurs) actually take up the extra weight of an ATC to abseil down?? hell no!

Marssan

26-Apr-2011
11:42:28 AM

It's the lowering that causes the wear.

Here's my attempt to clarify the situation. From best practice to worst.

Best: First climber climbs route, puts draws on anchor, lowers from draws. Subsequent top-ropers climb with rope running through draws at anchor, subsequent leaders lower from the draws the first leader put up. Last climber (leader or seconder) cleans anchor, threads anchor rings and abseils from rope running directly through anchor. The only wear the anchor rings get is when the last climber gets to the bottom and pulls the rope i.e an un-weighted rope sliding through through them - pretty minimal.
This is the absolute optimal situation, you can't get any better than this unless you walk off. I'm sure anyone who's installed anchor bolts wishes more people would do this.

Middle: First climber puts draws on anchor. Subsequent top ropers and leaders lower from those draws. The last climber re-threads anchor and is lowered with the rope running directly through the anchor rings. The wear on the anchor is that of the weighted roped running through it ONCE.
This seems to be the accepted middle ground for cleaning a climb at the areas i climb at (Blueys mostly).

Worst: First climber gets to top and threads rope through anchor. All subsequent top-ropers are belayed with the rope running through the anchor rings directly. If there are 3 top-ropers, the anchor gets three times the wear.
To Linze and anyone else who seems to be missing the point. This is pure climbing douche-baggery. Don't ever do it. If you do and you get yelled at, you deserve it 100%. Don't go crying to the forum complaining how rude the Sheriff is, he was right.


nmonteith

26-Apr-2011
2:00:29 PM

Great overview of the issue Marssan. Spot on.

rolsen1

26-Apr-2011
2:18:13 PM

On 26/04/2011 Marssan wrote:
>It's the lowering that causes the wear.
>
>Here's my attempt to clarify the situation. From best practice to worst.
>
>Best: First climber climbs route, puts draws on anchor, lowers from draws.
>Subsequent top-ropers climb with rope running through draws at anchor,
>subsequent leaders lower from the draws the first leader put up. Last climber
>(leader or seconder) cleans anchor, threads anchor rings and abseils from
>rope running directly through anchor. The only wear the anchor rings get
>is when the last climber gets to the bottom and pulls the rope i.e an un-weighted
>rope sliding through through them - pretty minimal.
>This is the absolute optimal situation, you can't get any better than
>this unless you walk off. I'm sure anyone who's installed anchor bolts
>wishes more people would do this.
>
>
>Middle: First climber puts draws on anchor. Subsequent top ropers and
>leaders lower from those draws. The last climber re-threads anchor and
>is lowered with the rope running directly through the anchor rings. The
>wear on the anchor is that of the weighted roped running through it ONCE.
>
>This seems to be the accepted middle ground for cleaning a climb at the
>areas i climb at (Blueys mostly).
>
>Worst: First climber gets to top and threads rope through anchor. All
>subsequent top-ropers are belayed with the rope running through the anchor
>rings directly. If there are 3 top-ropers, the anchor gets three times
>the wear.
>To Linze and anyone else who seems to be missing the point. This is pure
>climbing douche-baggery. Don't ever do it. If you do and you get yelled
>at, you deserve it 100%. Don't go crying to the forum complaining how rude
>the Sheriff is, he was right.
>
>
>

Rubbish, you can't have it both ways, either no one lowers off or everyone can.

So the accepted "middle ground" allows leaders to lower off anchors but not top ropers? If it is good enough for leaders to lower off an anchor than it is good enough for anyone. Yes, I agree but we should all try to minimise wear on any fixed gear but this just hero leaders looking down on top ropers, period.

If a leader leads the route and lowers and cleans the route then a second person leads the route and they both take the "middle ground" approach then there is exactly the same wear on the anchors as the leader who leads the route and lowers and then the second who top ropes and lowers.

What about if I don't want you to place any bolts at a crag at all? Does that make it all right for me to go and yell at those who placed the bolts?

There are 104 messages in this topic.