UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => bouldering => Topic started by: shark on April 02, 2016, 10:01:09 am
-
Bouldering with a helmet, that's never a good sign.
Or it could be considered sensible to do most of the time (http://www.dpmclimbing.com/blogs/entries/blog-1-1).
Good article by John Sherman (don't know how old it is) but food for thought.
I usually wear a helmet when indulging in grit soloing.
I've never knocked my head bouldering though - anyone else ?
-
Bouldering with a helmet, that's never a good sign.
Or it could be considered sensible to do most of the time (http://www.dpmclimbing.com/blogs/entries/blog-1-1).
Good article by John Sherman (don't know how old it is) but food for thought.
I usually wear a helmet when indulging in grit soloing.
I've never knocked my head bouldering though - anyone else ?
Only when handling a ladder :p
-
An article looking at helmet usage in a broader context (http://www.climbing.com/news/no-brainer-helmet/).
-
Another good article :2thumbsup:
"Risk homeostasis" though. Interesting thought as a general concept but in this instance I think donning a helmet would more likely be a visceral reminder of the consequences of impact more than encourage taking greater risk.
-
Yes - good article. The risk homeostasis is widely discussed in regard to cycling helmets - after an Australian study (kind of) showed that cyclists wearing helmets took more risks.
I'm surprised there isn't a 'bouldering and sport climbing' helmet that is designed to stop injury from your head hitting things rather than the mountaineering helmets which are more to stop objects falling splitting your noggin open. The article seems to say as much too (though not directly) and manufacturers say there is no standard for such helmets - so they wouldn't sell. Though I would have thought the same standard that apply to cycling/skateboarding and possibly ski-ing helmets would apply here.
-
The only time I've ever banged my head climbing was when bouldering. My hand slipped out of an unexpectedly damp jam but my foot, jammed in the same crack, stayed, leading to me falling backwards and cracking my head on my spotter's knee.
It didn't make me start wearing a helmet to boulder though- I'm just more careful with foot jams.
-
I'm surprised there isn't a 'bouldering and sport climbing' helmet that is designed to stop injury from your head hitting things rather than the mountaineering helmets which are more to stop objects falling splitting your noggin open. The article seems to say as much too (though not directly) and manufacturers say there is no standard for such helmets - so they wouldn't sell. Though I would have thought the same standard that apply to cycling/skateboarding and possibly ski-ing helmets would apply here.
In Shermans DPM article the first picture is captioned...
Verm with his modified youth skateboard helmet on the FA of My Bloody Valentine
I guess he chose it because of its design to protect against impacts when falling and hitting the ground with your head as you are suggesting.
-
the only helmet i equip when bouldering is the one in between my legs.
-
I'm surprised there isn't a 'bouldering and sport climbing' helmet that is designed to stop injury from your head hitting things rather than the mountaineering helmets which are more to stop objects falling splitting your noggin open.
I thought the petzl meteor expanded foam style helmets were designed with absorbing impact in mind rather than having a solid shell to stop falling rocks?
-
Genius!
Better Bouldering Tips by John Sherman - Highballing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVN_hQPalBo#ws)
Previously linked by Slackers :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup:
-
A helmet .......
Bouldering............
Get a fucking grip......................
-
Helmets
I'm surprised there isn't a 'bouldering and sport climbing' helmet that is designed to stop injury from your head hitting things rather than the mountaineering helmets which are more to stop objects falling splitting your noggin open. The article seems to say as much too (though not directly) and manufacturers say there is no standard for such helmets - so they wouldn't sell.
The UIAA and, by extension, the BMC are 40 years behind the times here. The UIAA standard is useful for mountaineers encountering falling ice and rock but almost useless for 75% (guesstimate) of helmet users: rock climbers most concerned about protecting from blows to the side or back of the head. Nothing has changed since 2003 when I bought a Petzl Meteor because it was light and comfortable, I didn't look more of a twat wearing it than I do already, and Bentley had his picture taken on Equilibrium wearing one. I had no real idea if was going to be any good if I banged the side of my head lobbing off Moonwalk. 13 years later nothing has changed. Needing to replace the helmet, I have almost no useful information on which to judge my purchase. This is not good enough!
There has been no safety innovation since the Metor: helmets have got lighter, more colorful, and have magnetic buckles which don't work when they get grit in them. I'd pay £200 for something that was as light and comfortable as the Meteor and offered a demonstrable significant increase in side and rear blow protection. Currently, buying a skater's helmet looks the best option.
You can't blame the manufactures. As the Climbing article says, a manufacturer might aim to improve protection for the back of the head but a new standard, when it eventually arrives, might only test side impacts. Until we have agreed new international standards, helmet innovation will consist of cut-outs for pony-tails and changing the shade of orange.
-
Are there any recorded instances of people sustaining head injuries when bouldering? I've never come across any.
-
If you're gonna wear a helmet bouldering, then surely you should wear one in the car too, in order to be consistent.
-
Are there any recorded instances of people sustaining head injuries when bouldering? I've never come across any.
Apart from cheque above and John Sherman (7 times!) though you have to wonder whether the first one affected his judgement and / or balance.
-
For the lone boulderer with limited pads, I can see a place, if only psychological. However, most of us just scrounge more pads. In terms of helmet innovation the petzl sirocco is as close as it gets to cutting edge in climbing helmets and will be my replacement.
-
:goodidea:I climb with several helmets on occassion. Usually when bouldering with Fatneck and Richie Crouch.
-
I put a helmet on for spotting once.
Went out searching for undiscovered boulders in North Wales.danny was trying this arete when he suddenly pinged off towards me. Diligent spotter that I am I protected him from the nearby pointy boulder, however came close to snacking the back of my head against it. Next time he went up I was sporting his helmet (more for comedy value than genuine concern).
-
I often wear a lid when bouldering on my own. I started after banging my head after a 'slip, off-balance landing and stumble' checking stuff in a fairly wild place where few climbers go and wondering about the consequencies of concussion in such situations. As discussed above, I'd love to see a lightweight climbing helmet properly designed for side impacts. I also tripped over and banged my head once, stupidly celebrating, by dancing along a kerb with hands in pockets, after a good local ice climbing forecast in Fort Bill: I was admitted for 2 days for obs, with a suspect radial skull fracture. The forces just from tripping and cracking ones head on hard things can and do kill people; add a few metres of extra potential energy and I think more people should be wearing lids when on their own.
http://scienceblogs.com/whitecoatunderground/2009/03/18/a-simple-bump-on-the-head-can/
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/06/deaths-mortality-rates-cause-death-2011
The Verm is in a different category... the boulder problems he was usually involved with would be considered routes in the UK.
-
I reckon aligning helmet use with particular disciplines of climbing is often the problem when choosing whether or not to wear one. I always wear a helmet when winter, trad or sport climbing. However, I try to assess each situation on its own even though I know I'll come to the same conclusion in those disciplines now. I used to sport climb without one, but having flipped myself on a slab (and climbed on Peak limestone!), I now wear a helmet on every sport climb I do. Equally, I can understand when people wear a helmet on certain trad or sport climbs but not on others.
By the same logic, I wouldn't avoid wearing a helmet on a particular boulder problem simply because it's an apparently safer discipline in which I don't usually wear one. I sometimes wear one on a highball. I also agree that it might be a good idea to wear one when on your own, particularly if there's a risk of head injury. The important thing is to manage the risk on each climb, whatever category it may be in.
Despite thinking more people should wear helmets, I guess I have to reluctantly conclude that everyone has their own opinion on them. As Brian Butterfield says, "It's up to you!".
-
Anybody wearing a helmet on every boulder problem they do is a fool (or at least, so overly cautious that they are unlikely to be out bouldering in the first place).
Anybody who says they wouldn't wear a helmet on any boulder problem out of sheer principle is equally foolish.
If there's a reasonable chance you could smack your head on a rock with even the most modest amount of force, and a suitable (foam structure) helmet was available, you should consider wearing it. Head injuries are no joke.
-
You can't blame the manufacturers.
You can partly blame them - standard safety tests come about via manufacturers as well as other sources. If they devised (collectively or individually) a new test on side and rear impacts there's nothing stopping them submitting it to be a recognised standard.
I spoke at some length to a manufacturer about this, when they brought out some very good looking new helmets. The excuses given were cost, the fact that getting it recognised in different countries wasn't straightforward and that the current tests are tricky to reproduce consistently already (with examples of some helmets on the market which meet the standard, but not really the spirit of the standard). I felt like the real fear was they'd create a standard which their current range didn't meet.
-
Head injuries are no joke.
Really? I hate concussion, it does my head in
-
In a crossover with the gooDADvice thread, when my two boys ride or scoot to the park then play on the frames etc they tend to keep their helmets on, more out of not wanting to forget them than being wary of injury. The other day this approach saved my eldest from a nasty bump as he slipped off one of the angled spinny things, he whacked the side of his head on the hard plastic from being stood up, it could have been nasty without a helmet. As it was he walked away and suppressed any tears (his mum wasn't around and some older boys were! :punk:)
Whereas helmet wearing for snow sports has pretty much become the norm on the continent, when it does snow in the UK I'm always amazed the risks people take on sledges with helmets rarely used.
Whilst cycling I now feel naked without a helmet, however when in Belgium recently we were the obvious non-locals as we were pretty much the only ones wearing them. I now understand why this is the norm. In Belgium etc cycling is not a 'dangerous' activity, the terrain, infrastructure and attitude of other traffic all means it is very safe. I always wear a helmet on a bike, but also defend the choice of those who choose not to.
Would you wear a helmet to go for a walk along the top of Stanage? Even though there is a tiny risk of tripping and cracking your head on a rock, few people would consider this a risk worth wearing a helmet to prevent.
With bouldering I think there are plenty of high-balls or problems with dodgy landings where a lid would make a lot of sense, but for many other problems it may hinder more than it helps. Keep one in the car and use your judgement if it's worth taking.
-
The Scousers all climb with lids.
-
You can't blame the manufacturers.
You can partly blame them - standard safety tests come about via manufacturers as well as other sources. If they devised (collectively or individually) a new test on side and rear impacts there's nothing stopping them submitting it to be a recognised standard.
I spoke at some length to a manufacturer about this, when they brought out some very good looking new helmets. The excuses given were cost, the fact that getting it recognised in different countries wasn't straightforward and that the current tests are tricky to reproduce consistently already (with examples of some helmets on the market which meet the standard, but not really the spirit of the standard). I felt like the real fear was they'd create a standard which their current range didn't meet.
Thanks Wil, so some intransigence from manufacturers too. UIAA need to take a lead. So which helmet(s) didn't meet the spirit of the standard, by PM/email if necessary!
-
Only once, and it was my own stupidity. Fell off a problem backwards in Glen Clova whilst heel hooking, bounced off the mat and on my way back down cracked the back of my head on an sharp angled boulder, split scalp and mild concussion was the result, if I had landed a foot further out before bouncing it would have been very different... normally I have a spotter and the spare mat over the nasty little boulder but the other half was using it for sunbathing and I had no spotter ... lesson well and truly learned
-
Seem to be two discussions here, the OP and then one about the relevance of the current helmet standard for rock climbing as opposed to mountaineering. Split thread maybe?
I'll stick to the OP, but I think there are some misconceptions regarding the latter :)
Just like when route climbing, there may be occasions when a helmet might be worth having. The idea that boulderers don't wear helmets, period, to me seems a bit dumb and ruled by convention, concern about image etc. Some highballs, bad landings or times when you go out without a spotter might all make wearing a lid worthwhile. I do know at least one friend who almost always wears a lid when bouldering, interestingly he is both a bit of a maniac and very strong willed. He gives no fucks whatsoever that the convention is that boulderers don't wear lids. More power to him, I reckon.
-
Seem to be two discussions here, the OP and then one about the relevance of the current helmet standard for rock climbing as opposed to mountaineering. Split thread maybe?
The original post was even more specific and was about helmets for bouldering.
This is inextricably linked to the design of the helmet so I see no reason to give an Admin an unnecessary task of splitting the thread.
-
the other half was using it for sunbathing and I had no spotter ... lesson well and truly learned
heck yeah
the risks related to sun cream on a pad are too scary to contemplate
-
I'll stick to the OP, but I think there are some misconceptions regarding the latter :)
Such as? :)
-
the risks related to sun cream on a pad are too scary to contemplate
Indeed if you fell in sun cream on your pad it could disrupt sperm cell function (http://www.newswise.com/articles/some-sunscreen-ingredients-may-disrupt-sperm-cell-function). (https://themixingbowl.org/static/img/smilies/panic.gif)
-
I'll stick to the OP, but I think there are some misconceptions regarding the latter :)
Such as? :)
The assertion that the standard is 40 years out of date, and that there has been no innovation.
About the standards (UIAA & CEN): UIAA have more flexibility, but CEN standards take between 5 and 10 years to update. Despite this, the last major helmet update brought in off-centre impact testing. There have been strong arguments, like yours, to make this more rigorous, but equally strong ones not to. We could use the innovative 360o helmet from Wild Country as a case study for this. For the first time, a manufacturer designed and marketed a helmet based on improving off-centre impact protection to be equal to that at the crown (the standard only requires off-centre impact protection to be 1/4 that needed for crown impacts). A great idea, but it didn't sell. Climbers preferred lighter, better ventilated offerings. And there's the rub. The counter argument to better protection is that it comes at a cost, which is less people wearing such helmets.
One of the problems when writing standards is that if you are too prescriptive, you stifle innovation, but I agree that there currently are some issues. For me, the biggest one is that because the test locations are fixed, you can add a great big hole in the shell elsewhere to reduce weight and increase ventilation. That's been fed into the discussion for the next review, and I also think a good compromise for off-centre impacts would be to up the requirement from 1/4 to 1/2 the crown requirement. Bear in mind that the crown requirement is pretty high - twice the protection compared to a cycling helmet for example.
The advice given in current BMC publications can be summarised as - the best helmet is one that you'll wear because it fits and is comfy, and if you want maximum protection for rock climbing where impacts may occur from any angle, choose a helmet with good head coverage which maintains good foam thickness towards the rim.
Regarding innovation, as well as the 360o Wild Country made a stab at a modular helmet, the Alpine Shield. Again, not that popular. Others have made helmets for multiple activities, kids and those specific for women. Take the piss about holes for pony tails but if that increases wearability for a major user group then for me that's as important as upping the impact specs. Finally there is the hideously orange Scirocco, which addresses some of the issues around foam helmets by using a new material which is more tolerant to crushing in transit, and has some multiple impact resilience.
All that said, I'm very interested in peoples views on any perceived shortcomings on equipment standards or the advice we give - with the boatloads of experience on this forum I'd be an idiot not to listen :)
-
Dan, thank you for taking the time to reply.
The 40 year comment was a bit provocative, however I maintain that the spirit of the 70s lives on: the test is far more demanding for blows to the top of the skull. It would be good if the next set of standards took into account both the most likely direction(s) of impact and different vulnerabilities associated with different directions of impact. From this perspective I’m guessing the back of the head should be the most protected for a rock-climbing helmet.
Interesting thoughts about the 360. I wasn’t in the market for a lid when it came out so wasn’t paying attention but I didn’t register it was that much better in side-impact protection. The advertising suggested to me ‘entry level’ hybrid like the elios. Was the problem with the marketing as much as the design? The old HB dyneema had a following because it was the best thing to be wearing if you were hit on the (top) of the head by the proverbial falling microwave, so safety can sell.
I get your comments about wearability but I’m not sure I buy your argument about standards being too prescriptive or that innovation is proceeding at pace. I think you are being generous to manufacturers here. The Sirocco is interesting from a materials perspective certainly but, as far as I can see, no advance in protection. I’m hoping Petzl or someone else are going to use polyproplyene in a rather more protective lid. A nudge from the standards setters will help. Currently innovation is about making helmets more wearable and lighter, both admirable but not the only story. Had standards on side impact been more stringent the 360 would have been identifiably more protective and the punter would have a more informed choice.
I’m exercised by all this as I once worked in a head injuries unit, a very sobering experience.
-
Weirdly I didn't think to take helmets to Font this Easter for my 3 and 5 yr old. They're very agile and 'experienced' at indoor climbing, so not so prone to falling off out of control, but there's no way they're aware of the dangers of bouldering outside and spotting two of them (the youngest being somewhat prone to questing) is tricky at best. We already have kids Elios so no big deal. Centres tend to have kids in helmets, so presumably there is a market for kids helmets with better side protection/protection from falling? The BD Vapour feels the most protective that I've tried in terms of side/rear protection.
-
There has been no safety innovation since the Metor: helmets have got lighter, more colorful, and have magnetic buckles which don't work when they get grit in them. I'd pay £200 for something that was as light and comfortable as the Meteor and offered a demonstrable significant increase in side and rear blow protection. Currently, buying a skater's helmet looks the best option.
Well as not many know, the Petzl Meteor used to be also dual-certified to the cycling standard EN1078. The latest Meteor 4 is not; I don't know why. However this always seemed a very sensible approach to me as EN12942 primarily deals with rockfall protection, EN1078 with head hits rock/tarmac. So you could try to source a Meteor 3+ (the shape is similar) or just hope that the reason the Meteor 4 is not dual-certified is bureaucratic and not performance related...
-
Not sure why Petzl can't still do two standards when Kong can do four...http://www.kong.it/en/2-products/items/c2-sport/f3-helmets/p371-scarab
Could be something as silly as Petzl not wanting to be seen to be selling a cycling helmet, sticking to their core markets etc.
-
I haven't read the thread but it strikes me (...) as a no-brainer (...) that the market for bouldering is virtually untapped at present. An enterprising company could do very well by paying hard cash to a few top boulderers, say Nalle, Jimmy Webb, Pooch, Shauna to be seen wearing an innovative superlight helmet such as petzl's scirroco or similar. It'd be interesting to see the resulting change in norms.
Marketing something good for health, unlike over-caffeinated sugary drink company :)
-
I haven't read the thread but it strikes me (...) as a no-brainer (...) that the market for bouldering is virtually untapped at present. An enterprising company could do very well by paying hard cash to a few top boulderers, say Nalle, Jimmy Webb, Pooch, Shauna to be seen wearing an innovative superlight helmet such as petzl's scirroco or similar. It'd be interesting to see the resulting change in norms.
Marketing something good for health, unlike over-caffeinated sugary drink company :)
Call me cynical but if it were a boulderer sponsored by over-caffeinated sugary drink company then you'd likely end up with something similar to this...
(http://downwindsports.com/icefest/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/GADD_CP_HUNLEN_160209_3443.jpg)
-
Not sure why Petzl can't still do two standards when Kong can do four...http://www.kong.it/en/2-products/items/c2-sport/f3-helmets/p371-scarab
Could be something as silly as Petzl not wanting to be seen to be selling a cycling helmet, sticking to their core markets etc.
I think it would likely still pass the cycling test, however I believe that have to pay to have it tested, maybe they decided the dual (or more) certification wasn't leading to a sufficient increase in sales to justify the cost of gaining the certification.
-
Certifying for multiple standards is expensive, more popular for kid's helmets as the rationale there is they're more likely to do a range of things and buying a lid for each thing is prohibitively expensive when they grow out of them so quickly.
The cycling helmet standard is quite a bit weaker in many ways than the climbing one - I'd expect climbing helmets to pass the cycling one fairly easily in most cases.
-
When I bought my helmet I specifically got one which seemed to offer more in the way of side impact protection (think its a third generation meteor). It's whatever I'm wearing in this badass picture :ang:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1689/26426498315_5e20210d03_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GgdHgi)
This one was certainly rated as a cycling helmet and at the time I was led to believe that this was a sure sign that it would offer good side protection.
A couple of weeks ago I picked up a partner's lid, who has the latest meteor and I was shocked at how little there was to it. Very very light and lots and lots of ventilation. I immediately considered buying one.
I've been idly following this topic and when somebody mentioned this latest incarnation didn't have the cycling rating I thought "Huh, that must be because they've stripped it back so much, I won't be buying that one then". So it would be interesting to know just how well this will perform for side impacts.
I'm one of those punters that you see wearing a helmet at Malham. With the potential that there is for inverting on sport routes, I find it astonishing that more people don't opt to do the same. I can only think that people are either less risk averse or helmets still have an image problem.
-
As I mentioned about the BD Vapour feels much more protective than the Petzl helmets IMO. It feels more like a bike lid. If I did enough climbing to justify getting one I would :-[
-
As I mentioned about the BD Vapour feels much more protective than the Petzl helmets IMO. It feels more like a bike lid. If I did enough climbing to justify getting one I would :-[
And you get the added excitement of wondering whether it's one of the ones made of fine bone china that slipped through quality control.
-
I always used to dislike the petzl meteor expanded foam type climbing helmets as a big danger to climbers is falling rock which I thought is what the hard shell in a lot of helmets is designed for. I've got a Grivel Salamander which is one of those hybrid helmets with a solid shell for falling rocks and expanded foam for impact. I have just though though that the expanded foam is just for the top of the head, with no impact protection from the side :-\
Also, a mate once left their meteor next to a radiator overnight and came in the morning to find part of it had melted into a divot, rendering the thing useless! :o
-
When I get around to retiring old bike helmets its quite fun to see how tough they are. Not very is usually the case! Impressively failing with less than body weight on the top or side. One of the problems with using super-light helmets for climbing/bouldering is not when you're wearing one, but when your not wearing one. Being shoved into the bottom of a sack, rolling about in the back of the car, being sat one/stepped one etc are more likely to render one unsafe than using one for it's purpose.
-
When I get around to retiring old bike helmets its quite fun to see how tough they are. Not very is usually the case! Impressively failing with less than body weight on the top or side.
I know little about helmet technology (I wear them when cycling and ~95% of the time when roped climbing) but isn't this what you'd expect of cycle helmets because in doing so the energy carried by the impact is absorbed by the helmet rather than being transferred to the head i.e. its the helmet rather than the skull that fractures?
-
Being shoved into the bottom of a sack, rolling about in the back of the car, being sat one/stepped one etc are more likely to render one unsafe than using one for it's purpose.
That's probably the main reason I'll never get one of those type of helmets (and the melting mentioned above). I'd rather something saving my life isn't broken by me accidentally treading on it...
-
I always used to dislike the petzl meteor expanded foam type climbing helmets as a big danger to climbers is falling rock
Depends what you're doing. Risk of falling rock on grit, and probably the majority of established single pitch crags, is almost zero.
-
I'm one of those punters that you see wearing a helmet at Malham. With the potential that there is for inverting on sport routes, I find it astonishing that more people don't opt to do the same. I can only think that people are either less risk averse or helmets still have an image problem.
On sport routes? I'll give you Malham (or low angle sport) due to the nature and angle of the climbing but in general I'd say there's a lot less chance simply due to angle.
With regards to 'pony tail cutouts', DanM has a valid point. Nat used to struggle for her helmet not to tilt forward or when wearing a headband, tilting any other which way. Her new girly-specific lid has fixed this (same model).
-
With regards to 'pony tail cutouts', DanM has a valid point. Nat used to struggle for her helmet not to tilt forward or when wearing a headband, tilting any other which way. Her new girly-specific lid has fixed this (same model).
I've long hair and have never worked out the need for these cut-outs when you can just have the pony-tail positioned lower down. :shrug:
-
I'm one of those punters that you see wearing a helmet at Malham. With the potential that there is for inverting on sport routes, I find it astonishing that more people don't opt to do the same. I can only think that people are either less risk averse or helmets still have an image problem.
On sport routes? I'll give you Malham (or low angle sport) due to the nature and angle of the climbing but in general I'd say there's a lot less chance simply due to angle.
With regards to 'pony tail cutouts', DanM has a valid point. Nat used to struggle for her helmet not to tilt forward or when wearing a headband, tilting any other which way. Her new girly-specific lid has fixed this (same model).
Sorry Paul, you've confused me with someone who climbs anything other than low-angled sport.
-
I've long hair and have never worked out the need for these cut-outs when you can just have the pony-tail positioned lower down. :shrug:
yeah, but how does your hair look after you take the lid off?
helmet hair?
-
Are there any recorded instances of people sustaining head injuries when bouldering? I've never come across any.
I managed to sustain a nasty gash behind the ear falling off Banana Reverse onto the boulder behind a few years ago, from all of 1.5m above the deck... Should have taken a spotter.
-
yeah, but how does your hair look after you take the lid off?
helmet hair?
As crap as it did before I put it on.
-
I've twice ended up driving to A&E after bouldering at Almscliff, careering up the A1 whilst mopping blood out of my eyes with a beanie. Once after missing the slap on DBS - hit head on the pointy little boulder at the left side of the roof; once after coming off Patta's Arete when a heel-hook pinged (to this day I have never been able to find the rock my head hit).
Also had a few near misses when my head swept the ground on Pebble Wall and Crusis (the problem that slaps up the crack on the Virgin) - trapped heel-toe and head pendulum action.
Never occurred to me to wear a helmet - I have always found the ones I own to be an uncomfortable encumbrance. Just feel that it's not worth making every bouldering session more unpleasant, in view of a very small number of near-misses over many years. That said, I have never tried one of the ultra-light helmets - could change the balance of the matter. I am pretty paranoid about the risk of leg breaking after-all - careful about pad positions and making sure straps are tucked away and clip-stick the starts of everything at Malham and Kilnsey.
-
I've twice ended up driving to A&E after bouldering at Almscliff, careering up the A1 whilst mopping blood out of my eyes with a beanie. Once after missing the slap on DBS - hit head on the pointy little boulder at the left side of the roof; once after coming off Patta's Arete when a heel-hook pinged (to this day I have never been able to find the rock my head hit).
Also had a few near misses when my head swept the ground on Pebble Wall and Crusis (the problem that slaps up the crack on the Virgin) - trapped heel-toe and head pendulum action.
Never occurred to me to wear a helmet - I have always found the ones I own to be an uncomfortable encumbrance. Just feel that it's not worth making every bouldering session more unpleasant, in view of a very small number of near-misses over many years. That said, I have never tried one of the ultra-light helmets - could change the balance of the matter. I am pretty paranoid about the risk of leg breaking after-all - careful about pad positions and making sure straps are tucked away and clip-stick the starts of everything at Malham and Kilnsey.
Shit, that's a lot of close calls! I think you do most of your bouldering on your own Moose? I didn't mention it when you originally asked about Unknown Stones as it seemed pretty obvious, but Sigsworth et al are not the sort of places you want to have an accident if you're on your own!
-
I do pretty much all of my bouldering on my own - well as alone as you can be at honeypots like Almscliff and Caley! It's why I have never tried problems at the top of my wish-list like Ben's Wall - just cannot be adequately padded without spotters. It doesn't strike me as too many incidents to be honest - over around ten years, including several years of unemployment when I climbed 4x week.
-
I had a near miss at Woodwell where I pinged off Rigpa and tumbled down the slope, as I stopped I was face to face (about 10 cm away) with a large pointy sharp limestone boulder...
Other than that, I had a rock fall on my head at Baildon Wank once - when toproping as a student (instant Karma one might suggest...)
-
Depends what you're doing. Risk of falling rock on grit, and probably the majority of established single pitch crags, is almost zero.
Sorry but got to cal that out Dave... maybe for you and for what you climb but not for the average punter. Grit quarries often have loose tops: on some starred routes at Millstone you need to be a ninja to avoid dropping something and in such cases it's more important for the belayer to have a lid than the climber (I'd add that a rope moving over such crap is rarely ninja-like when the seconder climbs). Even on the best crags, other people knock off and drop stuff that can hit a rock and shoot off at tangents... its a consideration to keep a lid on when under busy sections especially with novices. I've been hit a few times on grit by dropped gear (sometimes lidless) and have lost count of the gear Ive seen wizzing down the pretty solid Idwall slabs. The worst thing, when I was really glad for my lid, was shit from a startled owl at Chatsworth... how can such a smallish thing hold that much nastiness.
-
In my defence I was thinking natural grit not quarried grit (and Millstone is very much the worst case scenario), and I did say falling rock not dropped gear.....
-
Useful accident statistics for climbing are hard to come by, mainly because there are no rigorous methods of collecting data from people attending A&E, seeing their GP etc. The only useful data available is from Mountain Rescue, which is self selecting in that it tends to focus on the serious injuries. If you got concussion climbing at Stanage for example, you might get driven by your partner to hospital meaning your injury and the cause are never recorded.
All that aside, the MR data is pretty interesting. The injury and fatality rate as a result of rock fall is less than 5% - most injuries and fatalities are caused by lead falls. Head injuries are fairly common although nowhere near as much as lower leg injuries (not that surprising).
-
Useful accident statistics for climbing are hard to come by, mainly because there are no rigorous methods of collecting data from people attending A&E, seeing their GP etc. The only useful data available is from Mountain Rescue, which is self selecting in that it tends to focus on the serious injuries. If you got concussion climbing at Stanage for example, you might get driven by your partner to hospital meaning your injury and the cause are never recorded.
All that aside, the MR data is pretty interesting. The injury and fatality rate as a result of rock fall is less than 5% - most injuries and fatalities are caused by lead falls. Head injuries are fairly common although nowhere near as much as lower leg injuries (not that surprising).
Do they get any more specific in regard to lead falls i.e. do they mean decking out?
-
there are no rigorous methods of collecting data from people attending A&E, seeing their GP etc.
Not true.
There are Hospital Episode Statistics (http://www.hscic.gov.uk/hesdata) from the Health and Social Care Information Comissions which includes details of A&E attendance and subsequent hospital admissions and the duration thereof.
For GP contacts there is the Clinical Practice Research Data Link (https://www.cprd.com/home/).
Whether either record the cause of injuries to a sufficient level of detail (and both contain a lot of detailed information) is a slightly more nuanced question than the above assertion suggests is the situation.
-
Guy, apparently most accidents result from sweaty kipper hands slipping off holds after a lash for a jug (which turns out to be a sloper) :tease:
Alright, alright I have the following figures from 1988-99:
(http://i.imgur.com/6xCfYKj.jpg)
Apparently 105 rescues were due to ripped gear, 123 from ground falls (out of 450).
Slackline - unfortunately the only useful historical data from medicine was a small Scottish study based in a pathology unit. Usually an A+E dept are not focussed on whether a helmet was worn, if it was a lead fall etc, they are busy treating injuries. I'll have a gander at those links though, perhaps times have changed.
-
Slackline - unfortunately the only useful historical data from medicine was a small Scottish study based in a pathology unit. Usually an A+E dept are not focussed on whether a helmet was worn, if it was a lead fall etc, they are busy treating injuries. I'll have a gander at those links though, perhaps times have changed.
It was what appeared to me the broad assertion that there is no rigorous method of collecting data from A&E or GPs when there is.
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) can have as many as 16 reasons for an A&E attendance recorded (sometimes more). Whether they record whether helmets were worn when treating head injuries is as I wrote a slightly different and more subtle questions and I very much doubt they do.
Here are some publications I've got in my references database that I've tagged with 'climbing AND injury' (lazy copy and paste as I'm busy)...
✔ Rock Climbing Injuries
In Sports Medicine, Vol. 23, No. 4. (1997), pp. 261-270, doi:10.2165/00007256-199723040-00005
by MichaelD Rooks
✔ Rock climbing injury rates and associated risk factors in a general climbing population
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, Vol. 19, No. 6. (December 2009), pp. 850-856, doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2008.00851.x
by S. Backe, L. Ericson, S. Janson, T. Timpka
✔ The epidemiology of rock-climbing injuries
British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 42, No. 9. (01 September 2008), pp. 773-778, doi:10.1136/bjsm.2007.037978
by G. Jones, A. Asghar, D. J. Llewellyn
✔ Injuries to the Finger Flexor Pulley System in Rock Climbers: Current Concepts
The Journal of Hand Surgery, Vol. 31, No. 4. (April 2006), pp. 647-654, doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2006.02.011
by Volker R. Schöffl, Isabelle Schöffl
✔ Injury Trends in Rock Climbers: Evaluation of a Case Series of 911 Injuries Between 2009 and 2012
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Vol. 26, No. 1. (March 2015), pp. 62-67, doi:10.1016/j.wem.2014.08.013
by Volker Schöffl, Dominik Popp, Thomas Küpper, Isabelle Schöffl
✔ Pulley Injuries in Rock Climbers
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Vol. 14, No. 2. (June 2003), pp. 94-100, doi:10.1580/1080-6032(2003)014[0094:piirc]2.0.co;2
by Volker Schöffl, Thomas Hochholzer, Hans P. Winkelmann, Wolf Strecker
✔ Acute finger injuries: part II. Fractures, dislocations, and thumb injuries.
American family physician, Vol. 73, No. 5. (1 March 2006), pp. 827-834
by Jeffrey C. Leggit, Christian J. Meko
✔ Make or Break: Don't Let Climbing Injuries Dictate Your Success
(10 February 2015)
by Dave MacLeod
✔ One Move Too Many. How to Understand the Injuries and Overuse Syndroms of Rock Climbing
(2003)
by Thomas Hochholzer and Volket Schoeffl
✔ The epidemiology of injury in mountaineering, rock and ice climbing.
Medicine and sport science, Vol. 58 (2012), pp. 17-43
by Volker Schöffl, Audry Morrison, Isabelle Schöffl, Thomas Küpper
✔ Acute injury risk and severity in indoor climbing-a prospective analysis of 515,337 indoor climbing wall visits in 5 years.
Wilderness & environmental medicine, Vol. 24, No. 3. (September 2013), pp. 187-194
by Volker R. Schöffl, Georg Hoffmann, Thomas Küpper
✔ Injury risk evaluation in sport climbing.
International journal of sports medicine, Vol. 32, No. 10. (October 2011), pp. 794-800
by A. Neuhof, F. F. Hennig, I. Schöffl, V. Schöffl
✔ Evaluation of Injury and Fatality Risk in Rock and Ice Climbing
In Sports Medicine, Vol. 40, No. 8. (2010), pp. 657-679, doi:10.2165/11533690-000000000-00000
by Volker Schöffl, Audry Morrison, Ulrich Schwarz, Isabelle Schöffl, Thomas Küpper
✔ Injury in traditional and sport rock climbing
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Vol. 9, No. 1. (March 1998), pp. 2-7, doi:10.1580/1080-6032(1998)009[0002:iitasr]2.3.co;2
by Todd E. Paige, David C. Fiore, Jeffrey D. Houston
✔ The UIAA Medical Commission injury classification for mountaineering and climbing sports.
Wilderness & environmental medicine, Vol. 22, No. 1. (March 2011), pp. 46-51
by Volker Schöffl, Audry Morrison, Urs Hefti, Schwarz Ullrich, Thomas Küpper
✔ Estimation of finger muscle tendon tensions and pulley forces during specific sport-climbing grip techniques.
Journal of biomechanics, Vol. 39, No. 14. (2006), pp. 2583-2592
by Laurent Vigouroux, Franck Quaine, Annick Labarre-Vila, François Moutet
✔ Characterizing the Consequences of Chronic Climbing-Related Injury in Sport Climbers and Boulderers
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Vol. 24, No. 2. (June 2013), pp. 153-158, doi:10.1016/j.wem.2012.11.010
by Alex K. Folkl
The DOI's can likely be used in conjunction with http://sci-hub.io/ if anyone is interested in reading the papers in full.
Only the last one specifically mentions bouldering though and its the consequences rather than the causes.
-
OK, my comment was rather cavalier. There does not appear to much useful data in there. I've learnt that A&E admissions for "sport injuries" are higher at the weekends though.
-
We agree, because as I wrote I doubt they record the data of interest to the question being discussed in this thread. This is one of the major limitations of using routinely collected data.
I've learnt that A&E admissions for "sport injuries" are higher at the weekends though.
Standardised for increased participation rates or not?
-
Dan, the phenomenon you are currently experiencing is commonly known as "Slackbot". Statistics indicate it is most commonly encountered when Neil is having a slow day in the office ;)
-
Not in relation to bouldering nor the UK, but the NPS published similar data for Yosemite Valley in their guide to staying alive (easily found online, alas I'm on my phone on a ferry).
-
I have found the answer.
http://youtu.be/ub2jGvSW3no
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Or this....
(http://thumbs4.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/m/m5JJlW_tjl5XLDW6-_o8-Zg.jpg)
-
Or this....
(http://thumbs4.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/m/m5JJlW_tjl5XLDW6-_o8-Zg.jpg)
Yeah, but if you turn up at the crag wearing mine, you instantly get the place to yourself...
-
Not in relation to bouldering nor the UK, but the NPS published similar data for Yosemite Valley in their guide to staying alive
Does it come complete with lyrics sheet and dance steps?
-
I think one of these would be useful for bouldering at crags above sloping ground - no more bouncing down hill.
(http://i1.wp.com/militaryhistorynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20140826_140945.jpg?resize=266%2C300)
-
Nah, that's what Alain Robert gets his spotters to wear for extra encouragement.
-
I have found the answer.
http://youtu.be/ub2jGvSW3no
for people who with they still had dreads?
-
One of the problems when writing standards is that if you are too prescriptive, you stifle innovation, but I agree that there currently are some issues. For me, the biggest one is that because the test locations are fixed, you can add a great big hole in the shell elsewhere to reduce weight and increase ventilation. That's been fed into the discussion for the next review, and I also think a good compromise for off-centre impacts would be to up the requirement from 1/4 to 1/2 the crown requirement. Bear in mind that the crown requirement is pretty high - twice the protection compared to a cycling helmet for example.
I was reminded of this point when the mk2 sirocco was unveiled recently.
(http://gripped.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Sirocco-960x501.png)
http://gripped.com/gear/new-2017-petzl-sirocco-helmet-is-light-and-strong/
Petzl look to have used a rigid plastic kippah (http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/customs/yarmulke.shtml) to get it through the vertical penetration test rather than the conehead styling of the current version.
Aside from design fudges to meet standards, a helmet that looks like the Meteor but weighs little more than a bobble hat is a very attractive proposition. I'll almost certainly be getting one. Not black though.