Unfortunately, we seem to be getting shortcuts from experience and expecting it more.

All tree stands at one time, if not advertised, required some judgment from the hunter climbing the tree. A hunter was expected to eyeball a tree, and notice how it tapered into less width, as it ascended.
And that took experience and practice. Can you believe hunters were expected to judge the width of the tree at the various heights to be climbed?

The problem for some is the width of the climbing stand is constant and the tree, many times, is not. Why a hunter was to eyeball how much angle he had from the tree to the stand, at the beginning of the climb. And a number of times it was greater than a 45 degree angle.

For some, asking for a little mathematics computation, is asking a lot.

Hunting is suppose to be simple. Well when did the advertisers say otherwise.