0:00:00.120,0:00:02.200 All right, welcome back to the largest 0:00:02.200,0:00:05.120 study on climbing falls. In the first 0:00:05.120,0:00:08.360 episode we looked how does extra slack 0:00:08.360,0:00:11.320 affect the fall, or more precisely does 0:00:11.320,0:00:14.320 falling more reduce the pendulum into 0:00:14.320,0:00:16.520 the wall and how hard the climber is 0:00:16.520,0:00:18.840 going to hit the wall, and then I showed 0:00:18.840,0:00:21.640 you the importance of soft catch and 0:00:21.640,0:00:25.359 what a massive difference that makes and 0:00:25.359,0:00:28.400 also that hard catches are not only the 0:00:28.400,0:00:30.599 problem for heavier belayers 0:00:30.599,0:00:33.320 lighter belayers often lack practice to 0:00:33.320,0:00:35.760 give soft catches since most of the time 0:00:35.760,0:00:38.920 they don't need they fly up anyway but 0:00:38.920,0:00:41.120 in exceptional cases with enough 0:00:41.120,0:00:44.039 friction... -My foot -What happened to your 0:00:44.039,0:00:49.000 foot -Well it was a hard fall - Heavey belayer? 0:00:49.000,0:00:52.840 -Llight belayer. Yeah yeah and I also 0:00:52.840,0:00:55.320 asked you guys I'm curious did you ever 0:00:55.320,0:00:58.600 got unexpectedly hard catch from a light 0:00:58.600,0:01:01.879 belayer? And turns out this happens more 0:01:01.879,0:01:03.400 often than I 0:01:03.400,0:01:06.040 thought. so yeah light or heavy you're 0:01:06.040,0:01:08.119 going to love this episode because we're 0:01:08.119,0:01:10.320 going to investigate which method of 0:01:10.320,0:01:12.920 giving soft catch is the best. We're 0:01:12.920,0:01:16.000 going to compare stepping forward versus 0:01:16.000,0:01:19.000 jumping up and as a bonus the tube slide 0:01:19.000,0:01:21.119 method where the belayer lets the rope 0:01:21.119,0:01:23.040 slide through the device which is more 0:01:23.040,0:01:24.799 common in trad 0:01:24.799,0:01:27.920 climbing so let's begin. Now in the 0:01:27.920,0:01:30.000 previous episode I showed you this 0:01:30.000,0:01:32.799 beautiful horizontal velocity graphs and 0:01:32.799,0:01:35.720 I explained that the peak of horizontal 0:01:35.720,0:01:38.240 velocity is at the bottom of the 0:01:38.240,0:01:40.720 pendulum and that is a good indicator 0:01:40.720,0:01:44.159 how hard the climber would meet the wall 0:01:44.159,0:01:46.960 if the wall would not be overhanging and 0:01:46.960,0:01:49.200 in this test I wanted to go a step 0:01:49.200,0:01:51.600 further and see what happens when the 0:01:51.600,0:01:56.759 climber meets the wall. - 1... 2... 3... 0:01:56.920,0:01:59.840 and my idea this time was to 0:01:59.840,0:02:03.600 measure deceleration during the impact 0:02:03.600,0:02:06.840 and in many of our test cases 0:02:06.840,0:02:09.840 this idea was working really well. If we 0:02:09.840,0:02:13.000 compare the soft catches to the hard one 0:02:13.000,0:02:16.000 you can see a huge spike in 0:02:16.000,0:02:18.800 deceleration. However after doing lots 0:02:18.800,0:02:21.440 and lots of more falls and analyzing the 0:02:21.440,0:02:23.840 data I realized that the peak 0:02:23.840,0:02:26.959 deceleration is not always a good metric 0:02:26.959,0:02:29.480 to look. for example take a look at this 0:02:29.480,0:02:32.080 hard catch you can visually see that it 0:02:32.080,0:02:35.080 was much harder for the climber but the 0:02:35.080,0:02:38.200 peak deceleration was nearly identical 0:02:38.200,0:02:41.159 to the soft catches before, so it turns 0:02:41.159,0:02:44.519 out our soft bodies are incredible at 0:02:44.519,0:02:45.800 absorbing 0:02:45.800,0:02:48.400 impacts but the problem is that it's 0:02:48.400,0:02:50.080 very difficult to measure what's 0:02:50.080,0:02:52.319 happening in our muscles during this 0:02:52.319,0:02:54.959 impact. So while peak deceleration was 0:02:54.959,0:02:57.040 interesting to look in some cases, 0:02:57.040,0:02:59.840 horizontal velocity at the moment of 0:02:59.840,0:03:03.280 impact was much better indicator. After 0:03:03.280,0:03:05.560 all, all of this velocity that we are 0:03:05.560,0:03:08.239 about to hit the wall will need to be 0:03:08.239,0:03:12.200 absorbed by our soft bodies. Okay so 0:03:12.200,0:03:14.400 let's see which method to give a soft 0:03:14.400,0:03:17.599 catch is the best. To not kill me on the 0:03:17.599,0:03:20.280 very first test we started with smaller 0:03:20.280,0:03:24.200 falls and jumping up technique. And these 0:03:24.200,0:03:28.319 falls were extremely nice and soft. 0:03:30.360,0:03:33.799 [Climber] - A soft ride! [br]So let's see how stepping 0:03:33.799,0:03:38.080 forward will compare. [br][Climber] - 1... 2... 3... 0:03:38.080,0:03:41.680 - This is harder.[br]And the fall this time 0:03:41.680,0:03:45.159 felt a little bit harder and we can also 0:03:45.159,0:03:48.480 see that in the graphs. However overall 0:03:48.480,0:03:50.920 it was still a very soft catch. 0:03:50.920,0:03:54.840 And the second fall was very similar. 0:03:54.840,0:03:58.040 Also a quick note: I was not sure 0:03:58.040,0:04:01.040 how much stiffer the rope gets over 0:04:01.040,0:04:03.640 multiple falls, and even though in this 0:04:03.640,0:04:06.079 video I'm presenting you all the data 0:04:06.079,0:04:08.879 grouped by method, meaning at first I 0:04:08.879,0:04:10.879 show you all the soft catches with 0:04:10.879,0:04:13.480 jumping up method, then I show you all 0:04:13.480,0:04:15.760 the soft catches with stepping forward, 0:04:15.760,0:04:18.519 in reality we did alternate between the 0:04:18.519,0:04:21.320 methods between every fall. So we did a 0:04:21.320,0:04:23.919 jumping up and then stepping forward, etc. 0:04:23.919,0:04:26.280 Pointless information for most of 0:04:26.280,0:04:28.720 you, but I know that a lot of geeks are 0:04:28.720,0:04:30.919 watching my videos and we like to write 0:04:30.919,0:04:34.240 nitpicky comments, so this is for you 0:04:34.240,0:04:37.280 nitpicky geek. All right now let's see 0:04:37.280,0:04:40.479 how the tube slide method compares and 0:04:40.479,0:04:42.520 while I was expecting a lot from this 0:04:42.520,0:04:47.240 method, the first fall wasn't any better. 0:04:47.240,0:04:50.039 The second fall had a very low momentum 0:04:50.039,0:04:53.600 into the wall but a lot of vertical 0:04:53.600,0:04:56.800 momentum, which made me almost run across 0:04:56.800,0:04:58.840 the wall, which was slightly 0:04:58.840,0:05:02.080 uncomfortable. So we tried again and this 0:05:02.080,0:05:06.000 time the fall was much nicer and I know 0:05:06.000,0:05:08.160 that people like to try all the crazy 0:05:08.160,0:05:10.479 things they see on the internet so 0:05:10.479,0:05:12.160 that's why I have to stress that this 0:05:12.160,0:05:14.960 tube slide method is really advanced, so 0:05:14.960,0:05:17.360 if you don't know what you're doing, make 0:05:17.360,0:05:20.400 sure that you have an expert guiding you. 0:05:20.400,0:05:22.360 Now if we would compare all the best 0:05:22.360,0:05:24.919 attempts of all the methods, we can see 0:05:24.919,0:05:28.000 that the jumping up was slightly better 0:05:28.000,0:05:30.919 but overall all the method were very 0:05:30.919,0:05:34.280 similar. [br][Climber] - So all of these falls felt quite 0:05:34.280,0:05:36.240 soft except the one where he does 0:05:36.240,0:05:39.960 nothing, then I fell to the wall. 0:05:39.960,0:05:42.199 Yeah we actually forgot to film hard catches 0:05:42.199,0:05:44.080 where the belayer does nothing on this 0:05:44.080,0:05:46.919 test, but no worries this was just a 0:05:46.919,0:05:50.220 small warm-up.[br]And let's see some bigger falls. 0:05:50.220,0:05:52.240 So this time we started with a 0:05:52.240,0:05:53.880 tube slide method, 0:05:53.880,0:05:56.790 which at least in theory, [br]lets the belayer achieve 0:05:56.790,0:05:58.700 any full arc. 0:05:58.700,0:06:00.960 And here is one more attempt 0:06:00.960,0:06:04.600 this time with even bigger arc or longer 0:06:04.600,0:06:07.800 braking distance, and the fall was just 0:06:07.800,0:06:10.880 tiny bit softer for the climber. For now 0:06:10.880,0:06:12.639 I'm just going to keep the softest 0:06:12.639,0:06:15.039 attempt in the charts and let's see how 0:06:15.039,0:06:17.880 does that compare to the jumping up 0:06:17.880,0:06:20.520 technique. And we can see that the first 0:06:20.520,0:06:24.479 fall was slightly smaller, however it had 0:06:24.479,0:06:27.520 nearly identical horizontal acceleration 0:06:27.520,0:06:31.319 and velocity. However it also had lower 0:06:31.319,0:06:33.960 absolute velocity, which is actually 0:06:33.960,0:06:36.680 better for the climber. Now the second 0:06:36.680,0:06:40.919 fall was slightly smaller[br]but had a tiny bit 0:06:40.919,0:06:43.800 more horizontal velocity towards the wall 0:06:43.800,0:06:46.240 and again let's keep the best 0:06:46.240,0:06:49.039 attempts of each method and see how does 0:06:49.039,0:06:53.160 that compare to the stepping forward technique. 0:06:53.160,0:06:55.840 And we can see that the fall 0:06:55.840,0:06:59.440 was smallest however it had the greatest 0:06:59.440,0:07:02.599 impact to the wall. Now on the second 0:07:02.599,0:07:05.919 attempt the belayer did a much better job 0:07:05.919,0:07:09.560 and the fall was significantly softer. 0:07:09.560,0:07:11.479 And if we compare all the best attempts 0:07:11.479,0:07:13.680 of all the methods, we can see that the 0:07:13.680,0:07:16.680 horizontal speed at the moment of impact 0:07:16.680,0:07:19.879 was nearly identical. Which means that at 0:07:19.879,0:07:21.759 least in this test case scenario, 0:07:21.759,0:07:24.280 a skilled belayer can achieve almost the 0:07:24.280,0:07:27.440 same results with any method. But since 0:07:27.440,0:07:29.879 consistency in catches also matters, 0:07:29.879,0:07:33.440 if we compare the worst attempts,[br]tube slide method 0:07:33.440,0:07:35.800 was the best, followed by jumping up, 0:07:35.800,0:07:39.000 and then the stepping forward was the worst. 0:07:39.000,0:07:42.479 However even the worst cases of 0:07:42.479,0:07:45.440 any of these methods were much much 0:07:45.440,0:07:49.280 better compared to the passive belay. 0:07:49.280,0:07:52.120 So the first arising takeaway was that no 0:07:52.120,0:07:54.199 matter which method you choose to give a 0:07:54.199,0:07:57.039 soft catch, it's going to be much better 0:07:57.039,0:07:58.960 than passively standing and doing 0:07:58.960,0:07:59.960 nothing. 0:07:59.960,0:08:03.280 And as always one test is no test, so I 0:08:03.280,0:08:05.400 wanted to repeat these tests in a 0:08:05.400,0:08:08.159 different location with another belayer. 0:08:08.159,0:08:11.599 Ricky who has also a lot of experience 0:08:11.599,0:08:14.319 using this tube slide method, and he told 0:08:14.319,0:08:16.940 me that it's actually [br]his preferred method. 0:08:16.940,0:08:19.599 So, high expectations. 0:08:19.839,0:08:21.641 [Climber] - Two, three... [br]- Okay 0:08:21.641,0:08:23.400 - Falling! 0:08:24.130,0:08:26.100 - Aw, that was super soft! 0:08:27.662,0:08:31.950 So we did three attempts, and all[br]of them had very similar 0:08:31.950,0:08:35.789 horizontal velocity. [br]Nice, for consistency. 0:08:35.789,0:08:38.240 Next we tested the stepping 0:08:38.240,0:08:40.880 forward method and we can see that the 0:08:40.880,0:08:43.839 fall was much shorter and had a much 0:08:43.839,0:08:46.760 greater swing into the wall. It seemed 0:08:46.760,0:08:48.680 that the belayer was pulled towards the 0:08:48.680,0:08:51.720 wall way too much, and did not have enough 0:08:51.720,0:08:55.379 control to make the fall smooth. 0:08:55.379,0:08:58.200 [Music] 0:09:00.920,0:09:04.079 All right next the jumping up method, 0:09:04.079,0:09:07.200 where Ricky actually did a very bad job 0:09:07.200,0:09:08.880 on the first attempt. 0:09:08.880,0:09:11.279 And the same happened on the 0:09:11.279,0:09:14.680 second attempt where his jump was very 0:09:14.680,0:09:17.800 minimal only initiated a little bit from 0:09:17.800,0:09:20.680 his right calf. So that's not how you 0:09:20.680,0:09:23.480 jump and that's why I decided to ignore 0:09:23.480,0:09:26.669 these two attempts for the poor technique, 0:09:26.669,0:09:29.918 and after he adjusted his technique[br]on the third jump, 0:09:29.920,0:09:33.280 he jumped with both legs[br]and it was much much better. 0:09:34.480,0:09:37.519 And finally we did one passive 0:09:37.519,0:09:40.000 catch where the belayer does nothing and 0:09:40.000,0:09:42.560 same as before, it causes significantly 0:09:42.560,0:09:45.399 higher swing into the wall. So at least 0:09:45.399,0:09:48.200 in this test case scenario, tube slide 0:09:48.200,0:09:51.399 was the best, followed by jumping up, and 0:09:51.399,0:09:54.079 stepping forward was again the worst. 0:09:54.719,0:09:57.000 [Belayer] - So stepping forward versus uh 0:09:57.000,0:10:01.079 jumping up [br][Climber] - Yes stepping forward was not 0:10:01.079,0:10:04.360 in a controlled way I was just pulled to 0:10:04.360,0:10:07.120 the wall. I tried to lean 0:10:07.120,0:10:11.200 backwards to break to catch the fall 0:10:11.200,0:10:13.519 but it was not in a controlled way, and 0:10:13.519,0:10:15.880 jumping up I can choose how much I want 0:10:15.880,0:10:17.648 to jump and at what timing. 0:10:17.648,0:10:20.800 So overall which method is the [br]best will heavily 0:10:20.800,0:10:22.800 depend on your experience using this 0:10:22.800,0:10:26.000 methods, however stepping forward seemed 0:10:26.000,0:10:29.360 to be the worst and gave the least 0:10:29.360,0:10:32.160 control, and also worth mentioning is 0:10:32.160,0:10:35.399 that standing too far in many situations 0:10:35.399,0:10:37.839 can drag the belayer into the wall 0:10:37.839,0:10:40.090 completely uncontrollably. 0:10:44.510,0:10:48.449 And that would make the catch even harder. 0:10:50.490,0:10:53.120 All right but what if the belayer 0:10:53.120,0:10:56.160 is significantly heavier. In that case if 0:10:56.160,0:10:58.560 you try the jumping method there is not 0:10:58.560,0:11:01.959 much pull up by the rope and jumping is 0:11:01.959,0:11:04.959 much more difficult. So maybe stepping 0:11:04.959,0:11:07.920 forward is better in this case. To test 0:11:07.920,0:11:10.720 that Kishu suggested to introduce extra 0:11:10.720,0:11:12.880 friction which basically makes the 0:11:12.880,0:11:14.500 belayer heavier. 0:11:15.080,0:11:18.040 [Climber] - Can we try like this?[br][Belayer] - He wants to kill me! 0:11:18.040,0:11:23.040 So that's what we got: a little 0:11:23.040,0:11:25.959 zigzag in the beginning and then a 0:11:25.959,0:11:29.040 straight line all the way to the climber 0:11:29.040,0:11:31.560 so the rope actually is not going over 0:11:31.560,0:11:35.160 the edge it's just very sharp angled. 0:11:35.160,0:11:38.949 - He says you have to fall! 0:11:39.228,0:11:41.721 - One, two, three 0:11:44.365,0:11:49.523 The swing into the wall is...[br]...okayish. 0:11:49.523,0:11:51.399 So we started with jumping 0:11:51.399,0:11:54.839 method which felt slightly harder with 0:11:54.839,0:12:00.120 increased friction but still [br]plenty soft enough. 0:12:00.120,0:12:02.440 Just take a look at this belayer 0:12:02.440,0:12:05.000 running up the wall and even avoiding 0:12:05.000,0:12:07.399 his arm being squished into the first 0:12:07.399,0:12:11.160 quick draw. So let's see if 0:12:11.160,0:12:13.920 with increased friction stepping forward 0:12:13.920,0:12:16.440 will be better. This time he was not 0:12:16.440,0:12:18.560 pulled into the wall uncontrollably 0:12:18.560,0:12:21.360 anymore. It also looks like he got the 0:12:21.360,0:12:23.959 perfect timing and even started running 0:12:23.959,0:12:27.680 forward just before the impact, however 0:12:27.680,0:12:30.199 the swing into the wall for the climber 0:12:30.199,0:12:33.880 was still harder compared to the jumping 0:12:33.880,0:12:36.959 method. Okay next we did a series of tube 0:12:36.959,0:12:40.240 slide catches. The first felt very nice 0:12:40.240,0:12:43.839 and soft. Now the second fall had even 0:12:43.839,0:12:46.839 softer impact with the wall however I 0:12:46.839,0:12:49.360 still had a lot of momentum downwards 0:12:49.360,0:12:52.240 which forced me almost to run down the wall 0:12:52.240,0:12:53.680 which is a little bit awkward. 0:12:53.680,0:12:56.720 And the last fall had a very 0:12:56.720,0:12:58.702 similar effect 0:12:59.440,0:13:01.639 And if we look into the best cases for 0:13:01.639,0:13:04.360 each method we can see that jumping up 0:13:04.360,0:13:07.399 and tube slide were very very similar, 0:13:07.399,0:13:10.240 and the stepping forward was slightly 0:13:10.240,0:13:13.120 worse. And this bar chart plots all the 0:13:13.120,0:13:16.839 falls so we can see that on average, tube 0:13:16.839,0:13:19.519 slide method performed the best, followed 0:13:19.519,0:13:22.120 by jumping up, and then stepping forward 0:13:22.120,0:13:25.279 was the worst. Now from pure feeling 0:13:25.279,0:13:27.920 standpoint for me as a climber, both 0:13:27.920,0:13:30.839 jumping up and tube slide methods felt 0:13:30.839,0:13:33.720 very nice and soft. Maybe if I would be 0:13:33.720,0:13:37.120 nitpicking this extra momentum downwards 0:13:37.120,0:13:39.120 sometimes on the tube slide method was 0:13:39.120,0:13:41.279 slightly uncomfortable although in 0:13:41.279,0:13:43.680 theory the belayer should be able to give 0:13:43.680,0:13:45.839 almost any kind of catch with this 0:13:45.839,0:13:49.040 method and the stepping forward method 0:13:49.040,0:13:51.800 was maybe slightly harder, had slightly 0:13:51.800,0:13:54.600 bigger impact to the wall however it was 0:13:54.600,0:13:57.800 still plenty soft enough. And what is not 0:13:57.800,0:14:01.759 soft enough is passive belays. So once 0:14:01.759,0:14:04.399 again, no matter which soft catch method 0:14:04.399,0:14:07.639 we tried it was significantly better 0:14:07.639,0:14:10.959 than passive belay. And with added friction 0:14:10.959,0:14:13.440 the belayer wasn't even lifted off the 0:14:13.440,0:14:16.120 ground this time. Previously when we had 0:14:16.120,0:14:18.800 no friction, passive belay looked like 0:14:18.800,0:14:22.320 this: the belayer was still pulled up but 0:14:22.320,0:14:25.240 now with extra friction, that is not the 0:14:25.240,0:14:27.120 case anymore and you can see how the 0:14:27.120,0:14:29.880 climber is being pulled up and into the 0:14:29.880,0:14:32.880 wall even harder. 0:14:34.839,0:14:38.480 [Climber] - Okay that was... 0:14:38.480,0:14:42.120 ... that was the way it was. 0:14:42.120,0:14:44.839 So yeah don't forget to subscribe, I might need 0:14:44.839,0:14:47.399 advertisement money to fix my broken 0:14:47.399,0:14:51.639 body at old age. [br][Climber] - So what's your favorite method? 0:14:51.639,0:14:54.759 [Belayer] - Yeah jumping up, yes 0:14:54.759,0:14:56.959 Okay so we were leaning towards 0:14:56.959,0:15:00.399 jumping as our favorite method, but 0:15:00.399,0:15:03.160 what if the belayer is really really 0:15:03.160,0:15:05.399 heavy, or there is so much friction in 0:15:05.399,0:15:08.120 the system that the rope almost doesn't 0:15:08.120,0:15:12.439 pull the belayer up? In that case, you can 0:15:12.439,0:15:17.839 jump I don't know what 30 40 cm maybe 50 0:15:17.839,0:15:21.079 if you're a crazy athlete... but is that 0:15:21.079,0:15:23.680 enough for the soft catch? And this 0:15:23.680,0:15:26.079 brings us to this experiment: here we did 0:15:26.079,0:15:28.680 a series of falls, alternating between 0:15:28.680,0:15:31.399 stepping forward and jumping up and we 0:15:31.399,0:15:34.120 measured the forces to the climber. 0:15:34.120,0:15:36.399 And same as before, jumping up was 0:15:36.399,0:15:38.480 consistently better than stepping forward, 0:15:38.480,0:15:40.880 and doing nothing was 0:15:40.880,0:15:43.360 significantly worse. And then we decided 0:15:43.360,0:15:46.360 to introduce this zigzag in the route, and 0:15:46.360,0:15:49.279 although it doesn't look like much, 0:15:49.279,0:15:52.240 it actually added a ton of friction, 0:15:52.240,0:15:56.319 basically imitating a very heavy belayer. 0:15:56.319,0:16:00.801 [Belayer] - Wow! I couldn't jump at all! 0:16:00.801,0:16:04.480 And, as I was expecting,[br]jumping up was not working 0:16:04.480,0:16:07.279 at all in this case, so let's see if 0:16:07.279,0:16:11.289 stepping forward is going to be better. 0:16:12.240,0:16:14.659 [Climber] - Wow that was solid! 0:16:15.539,0:16:22.098 [Climber] - 2.5, oh sh*t! [br]And it actually was even worse. 0:16:23.778,0:16:26.619 [Belayer] - Man I cannot give you [br]a soft catch this way! 0:16:26.619,0:16:28.560 So yeah no matter how much I tried 0:16:28.560,0:16:31.560 to jump, I was not able to give a 0:16:31.560,0:16:34.279 truly soft catch, and stepping forward 0:16:34.279,0:16:36.419 was even worse. 0:16:37.149,0:16:40.152 [Belayer] - It's impossible to give[br]a soft catch like this! 0:16:40.152,0:16:42.569 To time well the stepping forward 0:16:42.569,0:16:44.440 on such a short fall 0:16:44.440,0:16:47.450 is nearly impossible. 0:16:47.688,0:16:51.600 Now while ,it seemed that heavy[br]belayers are doomed, on 0:16:51.600,0:16:53.839 this next experiment I actually 0:16:53.839,0:16:56.680 discovered something that helps. 0:16:56.680,0:16:59.800 This time I was belaying a light girl, and as 0:16:59.800,0:17:02.360 before, I was also struggling to give a 0:17:02.360,0:17:07.328 soft catch. The jumping [br]simply did not work. 0:17:07.328,0:17:09.270 And neither did the stepping 0:17:09.270,0:17:11.020 forward method. 0:17:11.270,0:17:13.949 But then I discovered something. 0:17:16.472,0:17:20.555 [Climber] - Better, better.[br]This one was soft! 0:17:22.793,0:17:24.878 It's soft! 0:17:24.878,0:17:28.039 So yeah, turns out that bending the knees[br]will give you more 0:17:28.039,0:17:30.799 range of movement and in this test case 0:17:30.799,0:17:34.299 scenario it made a huge difference. 0:17:34.299,0:17:36.440 [Climber] - If the fall was Wyuuuuuuuuu 0:17:36.440,0:17:41.569 Just super soft, and the others was Bump! 0:17:41.569,0:17:43.270 - Like Bum? [br]- Yeah yeah yeah! 0:17:43.270,0:17:47.480 - So it's Bum versus Yuuuuuuu.[br]- And we prefer Yuuu. 0:17:47.480,0:17:49.867 - You prefer Woooo.[br]- Yeah! 0:17:50.297,0:17:51.440 And although I already 0:17:51.440,0:17:53.320 mentioned this in the first episode, but 0:17:53.320,0:17:56.080 it's really important to stress that 0:17:56.080,0:17:59.320 simply throwing a lot of slack does not 0:17:59.320,0:18:01.618 mean a soft catch. 0:18:08.457,0:18:10.380 And in the case of a passive belay, 0:18:10.380,0:18:12.600 it can end up very badly. 0:18:12.600,0:18:14.880 And the only reason she was fine in this 0:18:14.880,0:18:17.280 case, was because she was falling 0:18:17.280,0:18:19.989 straight down under the quick draw. 0:18:19.989,0:18:22.520 So all she felt was just a jerk to the 0:18:22.520,0:18:25.360 harness. In a different situation with a 0:18:25.360,0:18:28.200 little bit of swing, that kind of catch 0:18:28.200,0:18:31.497 with would probably break her ankles. 0:18:31.497,0:18:33.720 So, instead of feeding a ton of slack for 0:18:33.720,0:18:37.643 your climber maybe you should... [br]feed your climber? 0:18:37.643,0:18:39.360 And as we saw If the fall is 0:18:39.360,0:18:42.159 small, bending the knees before the fall 0:18:42.159,0:18:45.280 might help. Now in case of a big whipper 0:18:45.280,0:18:48.080 the fall naturally is much bigger, so you 0:18:48.080,0:18:50.480 will have more time to go down and 0:18:50.480,0:18:52.799 explode up and from a biomechanical 0:18:52.799,0:18:55.120 standpoint since our muscles act as 0:18:55.120,0:18:58.440 springs, going down and jumping up should 0:18:58.440,0:19:01.200 result into a higher jump. Now if that 0:19:01.200,0:19:03.640 doesn't help I would suggest more food 0:19:03.640,0:19:06.480 cycles and if that's not an option then 0:19:06.480,0:19:08.960 I've seen a method used by a very heavy 0:19:08.960,0:19:11.400 belayer, which worked very well for him, 0:19:11.400,0:19:14.600 where he took a little bit of slack with 0:19:14.600,0:19:18.039 his lead hand and during the impact he 0:19:18.039,0:19:22.070 used his lead hand to soften the catch. 0:19:23.230,0:19:26.000 It is extremely important to not 0:19:26.000,0:19:28.880 have too much slack here or you will 0:19:28.880,0:19:31.600 burn your hand. So be smart and use this 0:19:31.600,0:19:34.559 at your own risk. This is sketchy but 0:19:34.559,0:19:36.612 I've seen it working really well. 0:19:36.612,0:19:39.159 Or alternatively go old school and learn 0:19:39.159,0:19:41.618 how to use tube style belaying, then it 0:19:41.618,0:19:43.939 doesn't matter what's [br]the weight of the climber 0:19:43.939,0:19:46.230 You can always make a soft catch. 0:19:46.230,0:19:48.760 But of course that comes with [br]its own risks of not 0:19:48.760,0:19:51.296 having an assisted belay device. 0:19:51.296,0:19:54.437 But for majority of you, [br]jumping up is going to 0:19:54.437,0:19:56.520 be the best and if for whatever reason 0:19:56.520,0:19:58.600 you find yourself away from the wall, 0:19:58.600,0:20:01.960 then just do stepping forward as we saw. 0:20:01.960,0:20:04.480 Whatever soft catch method is much 0:20:04.480,0:20:06.082 better than passive belaying. 0:20:06.082,0:20:08.280 Now I understand that this [br]video was full of 0:20:08.280,0:20:10.840 charts and graphs and chances are if 0:20:10.840,0:20:12.280 you're still watching you're a little 0:20:12.280,0:20:14.799 bit nerdy, however I'm going to make a 0:20:14.799,0:20:17.320 separate video for my belay Master Class 0:20:17.320,0:20:19.360 where I will go more on practical 0:20:19.360,0:20:22.320 details, including those sketchy 0:20:22.320,0:20:25.080 low-to-the-ground situations.[br]And also during 0:20:25.080,0:20:27.200 these two years we have measured forces 0:20:27.200,0:20:30.159 on hundred of falls, so we have a lot of 0:20:30.159,0:20:32.120 data. But as I explained in previous 0:20:32.120,0:20:34.840 episodes Peak Force to the climber might 0:20:34.840,0:20:37.120 not be the most important factor for 0:20:37.120,0:20:38.240 sport 0:20:38.240,0:20:41.080 climbers however that might be much more 0:20:41.080,0:20:45.840 important for TR climbers keep a good 0:20:47.200,0:20:50.840 eye [ __ ] so I guess this deserves an 0:20:50.840,0:20:53.480 episode for trout climbers as well and 0:20:53.480,0:20:55.640 all of these people and supporters 0:20:55.640,0:20:58.280 deserve a huge thank you none of this 0:20:58.280,0:21:00.400 project would been possible without all 0:21:00.400,0:21:03.559 of you and you deserve some 0:21:03.559,0:21:06.200 knowledge for the last 6 months I was 0:21:06.200,0:21:09.000 warming up my brain in the mornings with 0:21:09.000,0:21:12.039 brilliant.org which is an awesome online 0:21:12.039,0:21:14.880 platform for learning math data science 0:21:14.880,0:21:17.559 and computer science 0:21:17.559,0:21:19.600 interactively good morning Ben how are 0:21:19.600,0:21:22.080 you ah feeling like Quan in for 0:21:22.080,0:21:24.440 dimensional space with emotions twisting 0:21:24.440,0:21:26.960 like meus transformation and my mood 0:21:26.960,0:21:29.880 transforming like like ien vector so not 0:21:29.880,0:21:31.919 only you get deeper connections with 0:21:31.919,0:21:34.440 your smart friends you also deepen your 0:21:34.440,0:21:36.640 scientific understanding of the world 0:21:36.640,0:21:39.320 just imagine how your regular life 0:21:39.320,0:21:41.440 problems will look when you will be 0:21:41.440,0:21:44.080 contemplating that we are all just 0:21:44.080,0:21:47.120 riding a giant rock through constantly 0:21:47.120,0:21:50.320 expanding space with supernovas and 0:21:50.320,0:21:53.360 solar winds or maybe before human 0:21:53.360,0:21:57.000 thinking becomes obsolete write a short 0:21:57.000,0:22:02.120 math point poem in a style of me you 0:22:02.120,0:22:05.039 want to know how Chad GPT works so 0:22:05.039,0:22:06.880 whenever you're are a complete beginner 0:22:06.880,0:22:09.200 or ready to dive into machine learning 0:22:09.200,0:22:11.880 and Beyond brilliant.org makes it easy 0:22:11.880,0:22:14.960 to level up fast with fun bite-sized 0:22:14.960,0:22:17.200 lessons and you can try all of this 0:22:17.200,0:22:19.600 completely for free for 30 days by 0:22:19.600,0:22:22.799 visiting brilliant.org heart disey and 0:22:22.799,0:22:26.120 first 200 of you can also get 20% off 0:22:26.120,0:22:28.520 their annual premium subscription 0:22:28.520,0:22:31.720 so thank you brilliant for making sure 0:22:31.720,0:22:34.279 that we still use our brain and thank 0:22:34.279,0:22:37.080 you for watching enjoy your brain and 0:22:37.080,0:22:40.120 climbing and see you in the next one now 0:22:40.120,0:22:44.799 it's going to be fun feeling like 0:22:45.240,0:22:49.240 qu that word