What did I just read?

[wyandottecaver]

jharman2,

Actually, I don't think being in shape is much of an issue here. Anyone who has done whitesides, bridge day, and Golandrinas can obviously get up and down a rope. I think several people have made valid points on literary choices and weakness in the article, but top heavy cavers do have different challenges. I choose to use a high attachment that loses some length of step but keeps me comfortable.

As for American techniques, They seem to have been quite effective for American caves. While I'm sure there are those who take pride in a rigged route with 26 rebelays and 40 anchors...who has time for that In all seriousness the technique should match the cicumstances and each has a valid and proper place.

[Jeff Bartlett]

Anyone who has done whitesides, bridge day, and Golandrinas can obviously get up and down a rope.

I fail to see how the ability to complete these climbs with a ropewalker system makes one an expert on appropriate attachment point placement for use with a Frog system or Texas system.

Regardless, if I may take John's thought one step further, the fundamental issue here -- and we can say "curvy" or "top heavy" if that makes everyone feel better, I'm certainly not here to debate the semantics -- is that this person is too obese* to hold themselves upright on rope in a typical caving harness. I'm not a small guy, but I can hold myself upright just fine, and I believe the inability to do a "v-sit" (as described) was part of the entrance questionnaire for last year's Bridge Day rappel. It is fair to question whether this would cease to be an issue were the author in better physical condition.

* The medical term, specifically used here after plugging Amy's published height and weight numbers (5' 6", 190 lbs, per the diagram in the article) into a BMI calculator: "Your BMI is 30.7, indicating your weight is in the Obese category for adults of your height." A BMI of 25.0-29.9 is considered "overweight" and a BMI of 30+ is considered "obese."

[Extremeophile]

Anyone who has done whitesides, bridge day, and Golandrinas can obviously get up and down a rope.

I fail to see how the ability to complete these climbs with a ropewalker system makes one an expert on appropriate attachment point placement for use with a Frog system or Texas system.

Regardless, if I may take John's thought one step further, the fundamental issue here -- and we can say "curvy" or "top heavy" if that makes everyone feel better, I'm certainly not here to debate the semantics -- is that this person is too obese* to hold themselves upright on rope in a typical caving harness. I'm not a small guy, but I can hold myself upright just fine, and I believe the inability to do a "v-sit" (as described) was part of the entrance questionnaire for last year's Bridge Day rappel. It is fair to question whether this would cease to be an issue were the author in better physical condition.

* The medical term, specifically used here after plugging Amy's published height and weight numbers (5' 6", 190 lbs, per the diagram in the article) into a BMI calculator: "Your BMI is 30.7, indicating your weight is in the Obese category for adults of your height." A BMI of 25.0-29.9 is considered "overweight" and a BMI of 30+ is considered "obese."

I'm obese, though it would make me feel better if you called me Rubenesque. I've done a little bit of frogging and don't have problems staying upright either, but my boobs ("the boys") probably aren't 25 lbs. You don't really know though until you weigh them.

[batrotter]

This entire thread is quite amusing. At the least, Amy's article does have something to do with caving and it deals with the ever increasing mass of females and males. I would rather read this article than that stupid one about caves underneath Venice. Now, that was a true waste of time, paper and ink. I thnk a good number of you here just a personal problem with Amy when she was a frequent poster.

[jharman2]

I fail to see how the ability to complete these climbs with a ropewalker system makes one an expert on appropriate attachment point placement for use with a Frog system or Texas system.

It does not make them an expert. I'm constantly learning new tricks and tweaking my frog system. One of the things that I recall from my early days of buffoonery was using a climbing harness instead of a standard caving sit harness. The difference was remarkable, it was MUCH harder to frog with a high attachment point.

One thing Amy didn't mention in the article (or if she did I missed it as I'm easily distracted by the curvy female form) is how a high attachment point impacts the curvy cavers ability to perform basic maneuvers like changeovers. I would expect the high attachment point would make changing over MUCH more difficult. It would also seem that crossing mid-rope obstacles like rebelays or knots would be much more difficult. But of course as wyandottecaver says in true throw-and-go fashion:

rebelays and 40 anchors...who has time for that

Seriously though, is this NSS news article depicting an unsafe practice? Does a high frog attachment point make it nearly impossible to do a changeover? Yikes! I hope not. Maybe I'll give this a try this weekend. Maybe someone who knows Amy can ask her to post a vertical mythbusters video of a changeover and of passing a knot. Hopefully, it's easier than I imagine.

[Jeff Bartlett]

I'm obese, though it would make me feel better if you called me Rubenesque.

I prefer "stout," because then it sounds like people are just calling me a good caver. Next time you're in TAG, we'll have to weigh each other's tits.

[Scott McCrea]

Next time you're in TAG, we'll have to weigh each other's tits.

I will offer no support for this.

[Chads93GT]

I'm obese, though it would make me feel better if you called me Rubenesque.

I prefer "stout," because then it sounds like people are just calling me a good caver. Next time you're in TAG, we'll have to weigh each other's tits.

Moobs....... google it. Lynn loved that search ;)

[Carl Amundson]

To John's point, change-overs ARE more difficult with a high attachment point. To make it work effectively you would need to carry a QAS.
I teach change-overs on a regular basis to new cavers and a high attachment point IS a problem.
Also the inefficiency of the high attachment point will make the caver take more steps to climb the same distance.
Comfort is a good thing, but a top heavy caver might want to consider a different system then a frog. The Mitchell climbing system would be a better alternative.
I do find it problematic that someone is showing poor technique as a way to get around a problem. Body type matters, but you should pick the correct climbing system for you , not teaching inefficient techniques.

[Mike Hopley]

Seriously though, is this NSS news article depicting an unsafe practice? Does a high frog attachment point make it nearly impossible to do a changeover?

You must be able to reach above your descender and attach an ascender (QAS) to the rope. This could be impossible if a high attachment point is combined with a long rack. This is the minimum requirement to make changeovers feasible. For some people, that might be enough; others might still find it too difficult.

The only way to know whether the system is safe is to test it. "The system" includes both the equipment setup and the person using it. Deviations from "standard" setups are not necessarily bad, but they need to be tested carefully and thoughtfully.

It would be interesting to hear what Amy has to say about this issue, but I doubt you'll hear from her!

To John's point, change-overs ARE more difficult with a high attachment point. To make it work effectively you would need to carry a QAS.

All frog systems incorporate a "QAS" anyway (the upper ascender). Or maybe I've missed your point?

[caverdan]

The medical term, specifically used here after plugging Amy's published height and weight numbers (5' 6", 190 lbs, per the diagram in the article) into a BMI calculator: "Your BMI is 30.7, indicating your weight is in the Obese category for adults of your height." A BMI of 25.0-29.9 is considered "overweight" and a BMI of 30+ is considered "obese."[/i]

I'm obese, though it would make me feel better if you called me Rubenesque. I've done a little bit of frogging and don't have problems staying upright either, but my boobs ("the boys") probably aren't 25 lbs. You don't really know though until you weigh them.

Dude.....that scale is for women...which means your not only obese......your butt ugly too....for a girl.

Props to Amy and her courage to have an article of hers printed in the NSS news. If ya'll want better articles than this one ...then start submitting them. I'm working on two right now. The first one is on how to use a pee bottle and keep WNS off your Johnson....(string and spoon method) The other one is on how to measure boob weight for both men and women. Hey Derek.... Mikie and I are meeting at Hooters to start our research....care to join us?

[Carl Amundson]

To John's point, change-overs ARE more difficult with a high attachment point. To make it work effectively you would need to carry a QAS.

All frog systems incorporate a "QAS" anyway (the upper ascender). Or maybe I've missed your point?

What you are calling a QAS is actually your foot-loop ascender.
Technically a QAS is a separate (additional) ascender from your climbing system. The foot-loop ascender is part of your climbing system.

[Cody JW]

Back when I first started vertical in the 80s the frog was all I used. I did not know better at the time and used a high attach seat . I climbed with it ,even did Surprise, Mega Well and some large TAG stuff with it. After switching later to a caving harness I found a caving harness with the low attach point lined the croll up much better. I have found that if you have your feet in the foot loops and apply just a small amount of pressure during the rest cycle it helps offset the tipping back. I figured the Europeans use the frog extensively and they set it up with a low attach point for a reason. For me , that reason is self starting and I get a better stride.I also believe that I can reach it easier when it is low for easier removal. With that in mind I cannot help but think it is easier for re belays. I suspect it will not be long before we see a "Myth Busters" video on high attach and re belay's.

[Tlaloc]

...and Golandrinas

Isn't it "Golondrinas" with an 'o'?

[Carl Amundson]

John Woods wrote a couple of very nice documents about body type and ascending systems:
Typecasting the Vertical Caver and Comparisons of the Frog and the Mitchell ascending systems
They are very informative and a good read. Body type matters with a frog system.
If you are too top heavy, switch to a Mitchell,