Some thoughts on risk and injury

[JayB]

Peter_Puget said:

A while ago a friend of mine climbed a bit with a climber well known for climbing solo in Colorado, I went there for a visit and came away convinced that his behavior was the result of something close to what would otherwise be construed as a mental health problem.

Pp

 

Derek Hersey? Cool with me if you want to keep that private though...

[pope]

Peter_Puget said:

Now that I am older I find it much easier to empathize with the friends and family of an accident victim and view climbing as an essentially empty activity. If someone really thinks that a climbing success is worth a significant risk my first impulse to feel sadness at how shallow their view of their own life is and how little potential they can see in the future. A while ago a friend of mine climbed a bit with a climber well known for climbing solo in Colorado, I went there for a visit and came away convinced that his behavior was the result of something close to what would otherwise be construed as a mental health problem. The climber later died while soling. A climber from my hometown in CA was well known for his soloing epics suffered from manic depression disorder and later committed suicide. As a young teen I remember being very impressed by him. To the extent the climbing “community” exalted these people it acted poorly.

 

Gotta work will finish these thoughts later....

 

Pp

 

The degree to which you think somebody involved in extreme climbing practices (free soloing or hard alpine) is mentally unstable seems to be influenced by your vantage point. When you were younger, maybe you looked up to climbers who cheated death, and maybe now you're wise enough to realize they were just crazy, that they didn't respect their own lives, that only lunacy could compel them to behave like that.

 

But remember, the general public thinks YOU are crazy to climb, no matter what risks you think you're accepting or controlling. They don't care whether you're sport climbing, trad climbing or top roping, they just think you're nuts to be strapped to the side of a cliff.

 

And maybe they're right. Most of us want to find our limits in climbing, both physically and mentally. The sport climber who decides 5.12 is only attainable if he climbs with a smaller diameter rope and super-light 'biners is essentially playing the same game as the trad climber who wants to link three grade V climbs in the Valley and decides to try it solo. The primary difference is that the sport climber will likely rely on his gear.

 

Only one close friend of mine has ever been injured severely in a climbing accident. In his case, the anchor failed while he was top roping. He arguably would have been safer without a rope since soloing produces a focus and a tenacity that just can't be duplicated while on belay.

 

I've met many climbers who enjoy soloing and not one of them seemed mentally ill. The solo climber walking up a hand crack is in some ways more secure than sport climber who routinely falls on his 9.8 mm rope and blindly trusts that it will catch him two seasons after he purchases it. At another time in my life soloing seemed completely reasonable to me as well, first as a means to move quickly in the mountain environment, then eventually as an exhilerating pursuit that required no purpose.

 

Edited October 30, 2003 by jkassidy

[Dane]

Pretty funny really.

 

Everyone dies. That is fact is hard to swallow. At some point I realised I too was mortal. Took me longer than my father and most of my friends. No clue as to why. I think it is a climber thing. We can do things most can't dream about.

 

One thing I learned early on. No clue what it feels like to be dead. I do know the ones left behind suffer.

 

Our society has a bad habit of condemming anyone who chooses how they live and how they choose to die.

 

Die soloing and you are generally considered an idiot in my book......and I have soloed a lot. Die in the mountains and I figured you made a dumb mistake.

 

(generally thinking, shit, that could just as easily have been me)

 

But I also figure you are gonna die (given enough time) so why not have a little fun while you are around? No one would be more pissed than myslf for greasing off some crack 100 ft up. But I would be even more pissed getting wacked by a head-on on 405.

 

A lot of climbers are troubled enough to take their own life. Never occured to me. Too much fun looking around the next corner.

 

"Climbng is hard, but it is easier than growing up."

[mattp]

JK-

Yes, I agree that the general public will percieve climbing as dangerous no matter whether sport climbing or solo rock or Himalayan death fest. But the fact is that I have had more friends die climbing than from any other single cause (disease, car accident, etc.). Climbing IS dangerous. Solo climbing is MORE dangerous, and top-roping is LESS dangerous. Sorry, but I disagree: climbing is downright dangerous and difffenrent styles of climbing pose varying degrees of unnecessary risk, apart from the skill or awareness of the individual engaged in those specific activities.

 

I used to argue that MOUNTAIN (Alpine) CLIMBING was dangerous and that ROCK Climbing was not. But recently I wonder if this is true.

 

Dane-

I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but it sounds to me as if you may not want to recognize what I believe to be the basic truth here:

 

climbing is dangerous.

[pope]

mattp said:

JK-

Yes, I agree that the general public will percieve climbing as dangerous no matter whether sport climbing or solo rock or Himalayan death fest. But the fact is that I have had more friends die climbing than from any other single cause (disease, car accident, etc.). Climbing IS dangerous. Solo climbing is MORE dangerous, and top-roping is LESS dangerous. Sorry, but I disagree: climbing is downright dangerous and difffenrent styles of climbing pose varying degrees of unnecessary risk, apart from the skill or awareness of the individual engaged in those specific activities.

 

I used to argue that MOUNTAIN (Alpine) CLIMBING was dangerous and that ROCK Climbing was not. But recently I wonder if this is true.

 

Dane-

I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but it sounds to me as if you may not want to recognize what I believe to be the basic truth here:

 

climbing is dangerous.

 

These days I pretty much agree with you and the general public that all climbing is dangerous. Now that I'm a daddy, I participate in climbing by taking every safety precaution I can. I even own a helmet. I was simply commenting that when Peter pointed out two emotionally unstable solo climbers, he might not have given us a glimpse of the mental state of the average solo climber. I think you can argue that a solo climber is self-absorbed, that he has little respect for the concerns of close family and friends, but I don't think that makes him a nut case.

 

Soloing is definitely a bad choice for me today, but when I did a lot of it, I felt like I was very safe about it. I routinely down-climbed most of the routes I'd solo up, and so I felt like I could work my way out just about any jam.

 

I don't agree that soloing is necessarily more dangerous than other climbers. I'm pretty sure that available stats (like in the old Meyers guide to Yosemite) show that very few soloists die. More accidents happen in mainstream climbing practices by far.

[mattp]

In certain mountaineering situations it might be safer to climb alone than with a partner, I suppose, but I don't think unroped rock climbing can really be said to be safe.

 

What kind of "stats" did Meyers present that showed soloists didn't get the chop very often? Even if relatively few soloists are killed, that might not support your assertion that it is a safe practice -- the question would have to be whether, for a given number of hours of risk exposure, or for any particular climb, would the average climber be more or less likely to be killed. Even if you thought you were being careful once upon a time I doubt that, viewed in this context, one could argue that soloing is anywhere near as safe as roped climbing (that is what we're talking about, isn't it?).

[Bug]

mattp said:

In certain mountaineering situations it might be safer to climb alone than with a partner, I suppose, but I don't think unroped rock climbing can really be said to be safe.

 

What kind of "stats" did Meyers present that showed soloists didn't get the chop very often? Even if relatively few soloists are killed, that might not support your assertion that it is a safe practice -- the question would have to be whether, for a given number of hours of risk exposure, or for any particular climb, would the average climber be more or less likely to be killed. Even if you thought you were being careful once upon a time I doubt that, viewed in this context, one could argue that soloing is anywhere near as safe as roped climbing (that is what we're talking about, isn't it?).

On the other hand, not getting in any climbing can be unsafe. After a long weekend of my wife and kids in Icicle canyon I left them in the van watching Snow White while I free soloed the R&D route. That was much safer than driving home without having climbed anything.

Yes honey. No honey. OK honey. See you in a few honey.

[Peter_Puget]

JK -

 

I was speaking of two indiviuals who over the years have recieved much "press" exposure. Their respective behaviors were definately higher risk than average solo climbers. The press and word of mouth talk about these climbers was for the most part quite adulatory.

[dryad]

I think something a lot of folks would prefer to sweep under the rug is that that easiest, most trivial climb can kill you. I just recently took a whipper on a super-easy route, one that people solo with some regularity. I was running it out because the climbing was so easy, then just happened to step on a wet patch and next thing I know I'm hanging next to my belayer. I got off with only minor scrapes and bruises because of a bomber cam and my helmet that now has a big dent in it, but without that stuff I'd be toast. I'm sure many climbers have similar near-miss stories.

[sk]

absolutely... we all get complacent when we are climbing 'below' our grade, or someplace we climb alot. we get sloppy and lazy. Then we make a mistake and we pay attention for a while. When you climb you have to be ALLL THE WAY ON!!! ALL THE TIME!!!!! or the fact, is you will die eventualy.

[erik]

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

we all get complacent when we are climbing 'below' our grade, or someplace we climb alot. we get sloppy and lazy.

 

 

i think you should not make a broad statement like that. anyone i climb with can attest to the fact that i am always up on the double triple check for all aspects of safety. i tell myself i do not want to be killed/injured nor do i want that same fate afflicted upon a friend or loved one. so why would i allow myself to be complacent?

 

 

 

[lummox]

Bug said:

After a long weekend of my wife and kids in Icicle canyon I left them in the van watching Snow White while I free soloed the R&D route.

dude. i hope you left the windows cracked a little and some water.

[sk]

erik said:

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

we all get complacent when we are climbing 'below' our grade, or someplace we climb alot. we get sloppy and lazy.

 

 

i think you should not make a broad statement like that. anyone i climb with can attest to the fact that i am always up on the double triple check for all aspects of safety. i tell myself i do not want to be killed/injured nor do i want that same fate afflicted upon a friend or loved one. so why would i allow myself to be complacent?

 

 

good point erik.. you are perfect and the rest of us only can try.

 

My point is that THAT CAN HAPPEN, and sometimes does. it is important to Climb when you are climbing not drink or smoke pot or fuck arround.

[iain]

 

oh and

[erik]

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

erik said:

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

we all get complacent when we are climbing 'below' our grade, or someplace we climb alot. we get sloppy and lazy.

 

 

i think you should not make a broad statement like that. anyone i climb with can attest to the fact that i am always up on the double triple check for all aspects of safety. i tell myself i do not want to be killed/injured nor do i want that same fate afflicted upon a friend or loved one. so why would i allow myself to be complacent?

 

 

good point erik.. you are perfect and the rest of us only can try.

 

My point is that THAT CAN HAPPEN, and sometimes does. it is important to Climb when you are climbing not drink or smoke pot or fuck arround.

 

you really are dumb. to make comments like that, especially when you have no clue.

 

i think we have been near each other once while climbing, so you have no idea on what occurs with my friends and i while we climb. so dont try to guess.

 

i never stated i was perfect, i stated that i take every chance i can to check everyone. i dont make a production about it, but i do make sure every one my friends or loved ones is as safe as they can be. i make the effort, that is not being perfect it is being responsible.

 

 

[minx]

just as a follow up to erik's point, not getting into the muffy/erik war of words...i had a sharp reminder this summer to pay attention to the little things. i had grown rather comfortable and casual and let the habit of checking his knot, harness etc everytime slide. well one time he didn't tie such a good knot and it came untied. fortunately no harm done. but it was HUGELY irresponsible of me and i'll never do that again. i may not make a scene out of it but i always give my partners the eye now. ALWAYS.

 

CHECK THE BASIC SHIT....ALWAYS!

[sk]

erik said:

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

erik said:

Muffy_The_Wanker_Sprayer said:

we all get complacent when we are climbing 'below' our grade, or someplace we climb alot. we get sloppy and lazy.

 

 

i think you should not make a broad statement like that. anyone i climb with can attest to the fact that i am always up on the double triple check for all aspects of safety. i tell myself i do not want to be killed/injured nor do i want that same fate afflicted upon a friend or loved one. so why would i allow myself to be complacent?

 

 

good point erik.. you are perfect and the rest of us only can try.

 

My point is that THAT CAN HAPPEN, and sometimes does. it is important to Climb when you are climbing not drink or smoke pot or fuck arround.

 

you really are dumb. to make comments like that, especially when you have no clue.

 

i think we have been near each other once while climbing, so you have no idea on what occurs with my friends and i while we climb. so dont try to guess.

 

i never stated i was perfect, i stated that i take every chance i can to check everyone. i dont make a production about it, but i do make sure every one my friends or loved ones is as safe as they can be. i make the effort, that is not being perfect it is being responsible.

 

erik, I wasn't talking to you or about you. I have personaly SEEN someone take a 30 foot ground fall when he was stoned out of his mind climbing someplace he was comfortable. He should have known better. It was more than 10 years ago and at the time I knew nothing about climbing. I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I am glad you are so concious of your friends and loved ones Erik that is a good thing.

[iain]

hey I started up moonshine dihedral w/o a rack one time. went to place the first piece up a ways...whoops fun to downclimb to have your partner throw a rack of gear at you.

 

p.s. I'm only occasionally this dumb.

[Bug]

lummox said:

Bug said:

After a long weekend of my wife and kids in Icicle canyon I left them in the van watching Snow White while I free soloed the R&D route.

dude. i hope you left the windows cracked a little and some water.

The windows fell out long ago.

[pope]

mattp said:

In certain mountaineering situations it might be safer to climb alone than with a partner, I suppose, but I don't think unroped rock climbing can really be said to be safe.

 

What kind of "stats" did Meyers present that showed soloists didn't get the chop very often? Even if relatively few soloists are killed, that might not support your assertion that it is a safe practice -- the question would have to be whether, for a given number of hours of risk exposure, or for any particular climb, would the average climber be more or less likely to be killed. Even if you thought you were being careful once upon a time I doubt that, viewed in this context, one could argue that soloing is anywhere near as safe as roped climbing (that is what we're talking about, isn't it?).

 

In Meyers old yellow guide (printed in the early 80's I think), he stated that not one free soloist had died in the Valley, even though quite a bit of it was going on at the time. Maybe the reason for this is that only highly skilled climbers were soloing on terrain that was well within their abilities. The same climbers might tie into a rope and try to free an aid pitch that protected with mostly #2 RP's and bottoming cam slots. What's more dangerous? My last leader fall was 25 feet onto a zero TCU. I think cruising along ropeless on a 5.8 hand crack is probably safer, although perhaps less forgiving.

 

Peter, do you think that it shouldn't have been reported when Croft soloed Astroman? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it that the media has a responsibility to avoid reporting on risky behavior, or is it that they should have avoided idolizing the "mentally ill" solo climbers with which you are familiar?

[Dru]

stats show the majority of accidents occur on technically easy routes - ANAM in any year will tell you this. Also the vast majority of mountaineering accidents occur on gaper type alpine routes. There are obviously exceptions to these statements - I can think of Slipstream for instance - but more way more climbers have been injured and killed on Professor Falls and Cascade than on Slipstream. They just weren't famous climbers.....

[catbirdseat]

iain said:

hey I started up moonshine dihedral w/o a rack one time. went to place the first piece up a ways...whoops fun to downclimb to have your partner throw a rack of gear at you.

 

p.s. I'm only occasionally this dumb.

That's intereresting. I haven't tried that one yet.

[mattp]

I agree with you there, Dru, that a simple browse of ANAM shows lots more reports of accidents on technically easy routes than on technically difficult ones. However, what about deaths and what about exposure? Is it true that way more people have been killed on Professor than Slipstream if you compare the number of ascents with the number of deaths on each? If you compare to the number of climbers who climb these routes, is it even true that the rate of injuries is greater on Professor? I'd guess that "gaper routes" may be more likely to hurt people, but I doubt they are anywhere near as likely to kill you.

 

My friends who have been killed or seriously hurt while climbing have been pretty experienced climbers and none of them were on what I would call a "gaper route."

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Dru said:

stats show the majority of accidents occur on technically easy routes - ANAM in any year will tell you this. Also the vast majority of mountaineering accidents occur on gaper type alpine routes. There are obviously exceptions to these statements - I can think of Slipstream for instance - but more way more climbers have been injured and killed on Professor Falls and Cascade than on Slipstream. They just weren't famous climbers.....

 

Is this perhaps due to the greater number of persons swarming easier routes or trade routes? If a bunch of choss thaws out of the snow and comes rocketing down the mountain, it's got a much higher probability of taking someone with it if there's a ton of people in its path. And with more people, you've also got the issue of spreading out the amount of time people are on a given route, increasing the "window of opportunity", if you will, for something to happen, along with increasing the likelihood that an objective danger type of event is going to claim a victim/victims.

 

It would seem that the inverse (or converse? Obverse? Opposite?) would be true w/r/t relatively fewer soloing deaths. Far fewer people are out there soloing, thus you've got far fewer of them to be killed off. And, probably adding to this would be the soloist's extremely high level of focus and attention (per JK), likely high skill level, and the attendant planning and preparation hopefully undertaken as a result of said skill, focus, and attention, which would hopefully go some way toward mitigating more avoidable disaster scenarios (see minx's puddle-slipping anecdote, e.g.).

 

Deux centimes.

[Dru]

mattp said:

I agree with you there, Dru, that a simple browse of ANAM shows lots more reports of accidents on technically easy routes than on technically difficult ones. However, what about deaths and what about exposure? Is it true that way more people have been killed on Professor than Slipstream if you compare the number of ascents with the number of deaths on each? If you compare to the number of climbers who climb these routes, is it even true that the rate of injuries is greater on Professor? I'd guess that "gaper routes" may be more likely to hurt people, but I doubt they are anywhere near as likely to kill you.

 

My friends who have been killed or seriously hurt while climbing have been pretty experienced climbers and none of them were on what I would call a "gaper route."

 

Matt - it is as true for deaths as for injury. Cascade Waterfall is the most dangerous route in the Rockies. However it is impossible to accurately calculate the accident probability per ascent because complete ascent statistics are not available. It may or may not be the case that there are something like 5 accidents per 1000 ascents of Cascade and 3 per 100 on Slipstream but we do not have the data to confirm or deny that hypothesis. Certainly a lot of the accidents on Cascade were caused by judgement errors that would likely not have occurred on Slipstream but Cascade also has a lot of avalanche deaths due to the "bowl of death" above, just like Slipstream and its seracs....

 

There don't seem to be almost any accidents on the Trophy Wall (Terminator etc) and those routes get sent a lot nowadays, take a number style line ups and everything...