Spencer's Film (Red River Ruckus)

Post by **rockstar** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:26 pm

thanks sprag. the video is out in the spring sometime soon.

oh and how to do the back flip...get to the chains, grab with both hands, load up your feet, and let go.

Post by **TradMike** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:49 pm

I have though about it and I have to agree that a back flip is pretty benign. It’s too severely overhanging to hit anything and there’s plenty of rope out to reduce the impact loads. Just make sure to have a dynamic belay. The worst thing that could happen is the rope going between his legs but he held it out to the side. Great execution on his part and quite rad. Have you ever seen platform diving?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:51 pm

that stunt was carefully planned and executed with a heavy duty backup for the anchors. I don't recommend and hope people don't start doing backflips at the Lode.

Post by **TradMike** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:20 pm

davsa wrote:heavy duty backup for the anchors:

What did they do to back up the bolt? Did they equalize some trad gear with the bolt?

Post by **Meadows** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:23 pm

[edited]

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:43 pm

TradMike wrote:
davsa wrote:heavy duty backup for the anchors:
What did they do to back up the bolt? Did they equalize some trad gear with the bolt?

well Spencer told me that they rigged lines on the top of the cliff to back up the anchors, but I'm wondering now if he was BS'ing me. I just watched that part of the film frame-by-frame and I don't see anything but the chains...

If someone gets killed doing that kind of thing, kiss the Motherlode goodbye--and expect potentially larger repercussions... Yeah, if someone gets killed climbing there, same deal, but taking a 100' fall and landing within feet of the ground is a bit more dangerous than the average climbing fall. It was a cool stunt, no doubt, but I hope no one repeats it.

Anyway, I cannot wait to get this film!

Post by **Wes** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:34 pm

Why are people worried about the anchors? With that much rope out, the actual forces would not be all that high. Much less then a fall at the 2nd or 3rd bolt.

People who produce film or guidebooks or whatever do have to be carefull and balance free speech / coolness factor with potentionally negative effects. In this case, I don't think it is all that bad of a thing to have in the film.

The only thing that I would worry about, is that most of the other crazy stunts that I have seen were on some type of federal/state type land, and not private property. Just my thoughts.

Wes

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 6:22 pm

I'm not really worried about the anchors, but Spencer made a big deal about how they were reinforced. What concerns me is the small margain for error they left when they calculated how much rope to leave out. Clearly they did it successfully. I think Andrew landed within just a couple feet of the ground, and it was pretty outrageous. I'd just hate to see some dumbass screw it up and deck hard.

Post by **Paul3eb** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 6:35 pm

what about this possibility: show him smiling at the anchors and jumping, show (separately, later in the film) him falling, and at some other random time the backflip part.. i don't think you'd be able to tell what happened or just how big of a fall it really was. a lot of falls at the lode are big and you wouldn't be able to tell he took 100 footer. the way it looks now you don't really know what happened. get some outside opinions and see if they can figure out what he did from the trailer. i think you could leave that stuff in and no one would figure it out, at least not completely.

Post by **the lurkist** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:49 pm

I think people will start doing this more. Without the film they would, and now with the film they will more frequently and in bigger numbers. Probablity will suggest that if this kind of diving happens (and I am not talking about back flips, but the long falls that end within feet of the ground) someone will not calculate properly, not take the time a forthought, think it is behign (b/c after all it was in that cool video), and someone will deck. And then the Lode gets closed, b/c the landowner can not afford the potential liabilty of having a venue that encourages young people to do high risk activities that get them killed.
Free speech, cool videos and all, I am all for Spence to make a great film with the most spectaculat falls he can find. The margin for error here is something that I am not sure everyone will appreciate. Does his film demonstrate the amount of time and effort into the anchor redundancy, does it show Andrew coming within ten feet of the ground?
He needs to weigh his responsibility to the community and to other climbers who are not as knowledgable as him in his decision to encourage this kind of fall.
If he is committed to using the footage, he needs to do the standup thing and get informed consent from the landowner. I think the RRGCC and other interested parties should weigh in on this as well.
What does Bill Strachan think?