Some thoughts on risk and injury

[iain]

ouch

[Peter_Puget]

I have been busy at work and come back to find that I have lost interest in this thread but in response to JK’s question, I was starting to develop some thoughts relative to Dryads question of how risky behavior is received amongst climbers. The guys I mentioned did exhibit reckless behavior. I would also agree that soloing is not always as risky as perceived - Bachar while soloing a 5.9 slab in the Meadows is probably less likely to be involved in an accident than some party of newbies climbing Hermaphrodite Flake.

[mattp]

Dru -

 

Cascade may be one of the most dangerous climbs around, but I'm not sure that proves or even necessarily supports your suggestion that gaper climbs are generally more dangerous and deadly than serious climbs -- if that really was your suggestion in the first place. I bet that, even on Cascade, it has a great deal to do with the way in which said newbies are more likely to manage the dangers of the route in addition to the "objective" hazards it contains. But then, I'm not sure you really said that gaper climbs are generally more dangerous but, rather, that more accidents occur on those climbs. As much as I might like to, I can't argue with that.

[Dru]

Even experienced climber get in accidents on Cascade. I know of one climber with over 10 years of experience who was soloing up the lower approach ice when he caught a frontpoint in his pant leg, tripped, and slid over 100' down low angle ice before managing to self arrest (with a Quark, in a bush sprouting from the ice!) just before shooting over the 40' high cliff at the bottom of the route.

 

Analysis of the accident indicated said climber was still asleep resulting from a free bivi in an unheated shack in the woods the previous night (-20C) and if he had been approaching a more difficult climb likely would have been more psyched and hence more alert and apprehensive of danger.

 

 

Put another way: free soloists fall and die off 5.7-5.9 climbs, not off 5.11s and 5.12s.

[j_b]

the 2 groups most at risk among climbers are gumbies and experts pushing the envelope. i, somehow, doubt that experts biting it on easier climbs are statistically significant. yet i agree with whoever said that most accidents occur on non-technical terrain.

[Dru]

Derek Hersey Steck Salathe 5.9

Alex Lowe normal route Cho Oyu or Shisapangma or wherever

 

experienced climbers easy routes

[cracked]

Dru said:

Derek Hersey Steck Salathe 5.9

Alex Lowe normal route Cho Oyu or Shisapangma or wherever

 

experienced climbers easy routes

But Shishapangma was more of a 'shit happens' accident. Not much to do about Himalayan-scale avalanches. Hersey was a different story. I'd say you're comparing apples and oranges. Technical rock != Himalayan slogs.

[Dru]

j-b just said easy routes

 

for both climbers indicated the routes in question were in the easy category

 

hmmmm?

[j_b]

allright, keep'em coming.

 

cracked's point about big mountain climbing is a good one imo (regardless of what i said).

[whirlwind]

personly i sontime run the fuck out of easy pitches which in the case of a fall would be bad news and probly not good, but i tend to try and only do it on "clean" fall routes

[Al_Pine]

Bringing this somewhat back near to Dryad's original post, does this phenomenon of good climbers dying on easy terrain imply

a) shit happens, or

b) accidents happen from complacency?

 

The armchair asshole in us can take some comfort in the b) route and say, "they made a mistake, it won't happen to me." But at the same time, it's pretty tough to believe that one is immune from mishap when it's happening to very experienced climbers.

 

I, for one, felt pretty mortal when hearing of the very experienced climber dying on Exasperator this year in what was basically a sport-cragging accident. I mean, if it happened to a guy like that, with way more experience than me, what chance do I have?

[iain]

for the alex lowe deal I think you could leave it at all bets are off climbing in the himalaya. at least that's what the rescue insurance says...or is it just an altitude, don't remember

[ketch]

Al_Pine said:

Bringing this somewhat back near to Dryad's original post, does this phenomenon of good climbers dying on easy terrain imply

a) shit happens, or

b) accidents happen from complacency?

 

The armchair asshole in us can take some comfort in the b) route and say, "they made a mistake, it won't happen to me." But at the same time, it's pretty tough to believe that one is immune from mishap when it's happening to very experienced climbers.

 

 

I agree with both A and B. Sometimes it is a case of complacency, for that we sometimes are a little rough for being "stupid." Other times it is just plain Shit happens. I took one of those a while back. Good pro, fall factor of like 0.17 I peeled and clipped a little ledge after of about 4' of air. The impact shattered my heel and then I completed the fall another two or three feet. I can't think of anything that would have made it any better. In retrospect if my knees would have been a little more bent I may not have taken so much impact on my heel. Hell I had only been in the air a couple feet. I don't know if it would help, I don't want to try it again to find out.

 

I am a lot less complacent with even the little stuff now though, I do my best to not screw up but, ...shit happens. I am open to crticism of how to not make the same mistake. I wasn't too open after the fall to someone sayin I had been an idiot for peelin (at least when they didn't have any idea what was up)

[pope]

Al_Pine said:

Bringing this somewhat back near to Dryad's original post, does this phenomenon of good climbers dying on easy terrain imply

a) shit happens, or

b) accidents happen from complacency?

 

Obviuosly both cases occur. What I can't understand is why people do not control the stupid little variables which could mean the difference between life and death. On my last trip to Index I saw a guy leading a meandering route by placing only TCU type cams without any extensions. I watched as his rope wiggled these cams up and down and completely out of their original orientations. I watched his partner finish a pitch and belay off of one bolt to which he was connected by a sling with a 'biner on each end. If anything there failed (bolt, 'biner, sling, other 'biner) he would have killed both himself and his buddy.

 

Are these bad habbits the result of poor training? No training? Ignorance? Laziness? All of the above? With the number of mountaineering manuals available at the public library for free, how can anybody be so casual with his own life? Why would his buddy tolerate that kind of crap?

[AlpineK]

Dru said:

Derek Hersey Steck Salathe 5.9

Alex Lowe normal route Cho Oyu or Shisapangma or wherever

 

experienced climbers easy routes

 

Even though the Steck Salathe is 5.9 I'm not sure I agree with the statement that it is an easy route.

 

In a recent study of tree climbers, tree climbers with the most experience were the ones most likely to get hurt on the job. The main reason was that experienced tree climbers were the ones who were most likely to do the hardest tree climbing (removal /prune). I'm not sure how this relates to rock/alpine climbing but it's something to think about.

[Pencil_Pusher]

While ignorance may prevail for newcomers to the sport, complacency is more amongst the experienced. That you've climbed a tree or rock hundreds of times in all sorts of variation and nothing bad yet has happened is what leads to shortcuts and the like. The tough part is being able to recognize this complacency in yourself and find some balance between being too anal or too carefree. For soloists I have no idea, that is the ultimate mind game, I think. I guess the law of natural selection will take care of the rest.

[mattp]

I think there is an analogous situation with climbing, Mr. K. If you think about the more dangerous routes around here, anyway -- mountain routes like the Willis Wall or the Price Glacier where you spend a lot of time below seracs, or scary rock leads like DDD or the first pitch of Heart of the Country, I don't think you'll find many beginners on them. Yes, relative beginners will take some risks with seracs such as you encounter on the Kautz Glacier Route, but the exposure here is extremely brief compared to the Willis Wall or the Price. And yes, relative beginners may run it out on the some fourth class choss heap like, perhaps, Mount Thompson, but I think that by far the vast majority of routes that you and I would recognize as dangerous are undertaken by relatively strong climbers and, when it comes to leading the scary pitches, the more experienced climber of the team is just about always handed the rack.

 

We've been speculating about whether, on average, relatively easy routes kill more people because they are more popular or because they tend to be popular with bumblers or because they tend to actually be more dangerous in an objective sense, but I am pretty sure some statistically valid survey would reveal that those who knowingly take risks are more often more experienced (in the case of your tree trimmer's example you are talking about knowingly taking risks, aren't you?).

[sk]

Pencil_Pusher said:

While ignorance may prevail for newcomers to the sport, complacency is more amongst the experienced. That you've climbed a tree or rock hundreds of times in all sorts of variation and nothing bad yet has happened is what leads to shortcuts and the like. The tough part is being able to recognize this complacency in yourself and find some balance between being too anal or too carefree. For soloists I have no idea, that is the ultimate mind game, I think. I guess the law of natural selection will take care of the rest.

well said

[Pencil_Pusher]

Hi Muffy, I read all these posts and it looks like you were saying the same thing here so ditto on the 'well said.' True enough on getting complacent at lower grades, I've done it myself.