Walking down then up - Does it count?

Ysgrifennodd "RW" <[email hidden]> mewn neges
newyddion:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One
of our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

IMHO, yes. You climbed it by foot once (and once by cable car) on your way
back from summit B.

A Local example would be going up Snowdon by train, Descending to
Pen-Y-Pass, ascending Glyder Fawr , back down to PYP and then ascending
Snowdon via one of the choices of tracks open to you. (and then descending
by train). In that case, you definately would have climbed Snowdon once and
stood on its summit twice. The only thing that's strange is that you've
physically descended the mountain before you've climbed it... I'll stop
while i'm sort of ahead. ;-)

T Dave R

--

Walking routes in Snowdonia
www.walkeryri.org.uk

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

--
Artificial intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

Bootlaces said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Quite right - everybody know that the "rules" mean that every ascent has
to be done from sea level. Makes the South Glen Shiel Ridge a bloody
hard day though - what with the walk to and from Shiel Bridge between
each summit!

druidh

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:37:53 GMT, druidh <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Quite right - everybody know that the "rules" mean that every ascent has
to be done from sea level. Makes the South Glen Shiel Ridge a bloody
hard day though - what with the walk to and from Shiel Bridge between
each summit!

Perhaps what one should do is dig a whole, down to sea level, between
each summit?

Judith
(Still trembling with fear from the last time the "cheating" thread
came up.)

Judith said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Quite right - everybody know that the "rules" mean that every ascent has
to be done from sea level. Makes the South Glen Shiel Ridge a bloody
hard day though - what with the walk to and from Shiel Bridge between
each summit!

Perhaps what one should do is dig a whole, down to sea level, between
each summit?

Doh. In my pathetic attempt at trolling I couldn't even spell HOLE!

Judith

RW <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

I think it makes a farce of the whole idea of claiming 'summits'.
Well, you asked!
--
Gordon Harris

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:48:35 +0100, Gordon <[email hidden]>
wrote:

| I think it makes a farce of the whole idea of claiming 'summits'.
| Well, you asked!

IMO claiming 'summits' is itself a farce.

--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
"Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*.
"Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*.

Quoted message said:

IMO claiming 'summits' is itself a farce.

Its just a game... Lighten up

And you make your own rules!

Richard Webb

Richard Webb said:

And you make your own rules!

Richard Webb

I think it was Paul Saunders who suggested it but a good suggestions
was if doing a marilyn you should ascent as much as the classification

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:37:53 GMT
in <news:[email hidden]>
druidh <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

Bootlaces said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Quite right - everybody know that the "rules" mean that every ascent has
to be done from sea level.

No. Everyone has their own set of 'rules'.

--
The passive voice is to be avoided.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Richard Webb said:

And you make your own rules!

Richard Webb

I think it was Paul Saunders who suggested it but a good suggestions
was if doing a marilyn you should ascent as much as the classification

I looked at Paul Saunder's website and on
http://www.blencathra.org.uk/ukrw/lists.html he states that Alan Dawson
defined a Marilyn as being any hill that has a drop of at least 150 metres
on all sides, regardless of distance,absolute height or topographical merit.

On that basis, summit A does not count because I descended / ascended a mere
125m.

RW.

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One
of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Out of curiosity, why doesn't summit B count in your book?

RW.

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:57:44 GMT, [email hidden] (Richard Webb)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMO claiming 'summits' is itself a farce.

Its just a game... Lighten up

As is Usenet.
--
R
o
o
n
e
y

"I always knew the entire Green party were nutters" - Ken Livingstone

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the
wonderful person druidh <[email hidden]> said
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quite right - everybody know that the "rules" mean that every ascent
has to be done from sea level. Makes the South Glen Shiel Ridge a
bloody hard day though - what with the walk to and from Shiel Bridge
between each summit!

Plus having to wait for the tide to go out, so you can actually get down
to MSL to start with. 8>.

Oh for heavens sake, make your own rules - the folks landing on
sea-stacks from helicopters certainly did ..

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:09:22 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway. One
of
our mountain trips consisted of the following:

1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)

4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
6) Cable car down from summit A

Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a conquest?

What do you think?

RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Out of curiosity, why doesn't summit B count in your book?

RW.

You used a cable car. Like I said - everyone (can) make their own
'rules' <g>.

--
Succeed in spite of management.

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:09:22 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

> My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway.
> One
> of
> our mountain trips consisted of the following:
>
> 1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
> 2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
> 3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)
>
> 4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
> 5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
> 6) Cable car down from summit A
>
> Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a
> conquest?
>
> What do you think?
>
> RW.

Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.

Out of curiosity, why doesn't summit B count in your book?

RW.

You used a cable car. Like I said - everyone (can) make their own
'rules' <g>.

Surely your 'rule' implies that if someone used a helicopter to get to
Everest base camp they cannot claim any subsequent peak that they climb :o

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:58:10 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:09:22 +0100
in <news:[email hidden]>
RW <[email hidden]> wrote :

Quoted message said:

"Bootlaces" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100
> in <news:[email hidden]>
> RW <[email hidden]> wrote :
>
>> My wife and I have just returned from a very nice holiday in Norway.
>> One
>> of
>> our mountain trips consisted of the following:
>>
>> 1) Cable car up to summit A (1125m)
>> 2) Walk down to a tarn at 1000m
>> 3) Walk up to summit B (1605m)
>>
>> 4) Walk back down to the tarn at 1000m
>> 5) Walk back up to summit A (1125m)
>> 6) Cable car down from summit A
>>
>> Summit B qualifies as a conquest, but does summit A count as a
>> conquest?
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> RW.
>
> Neither count in my book. Your book may have different rules.
>

Out of curiosity, why doesn't summit B count in your book?

RW.

You used a cable car. Like I said - everyone (can) make their own
'rules' <g>.

Surely your 'rule' implies that if someone used a helicopter to get to
Everest base camp they cannot claim any subsequent peak that they climb :o

I've never had occassion to consider a helichipper as part of a (hill)
trip. Therefore it does not need consideration in my 'rule base' (from
my point of view). Your mileage may, of course, vary.

--
I was thinking of the legendary British Weather,
with the four seasons of winter, mud, rain, and damp.
(Rev. Peter da Silva)

RW said:

On that basis, summit A does not count because I descended / ascended a mere
125m.

RW.

But just checkout the Nuttall classification...

The definition of a Nuttall is "any summit of 2000ft (610m) or more
which rises above its surroundings on all sides by at least 50ft
(15m)".

Only 15m of ascent!!!!!

David.

RW <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Surely your 'rule' implies that if someone used a helicopter to get to
Everest base camp they cannot claim any subsequent peak that they climb :o

I tried that in Flight Sim 2004 and just couldn't get the height!

I managed it in a Cessna, but it took a lot of finesse, and I buried the
nose of the plane on the first attempt. That sloping landing strip is
a b******.
--
Gordon Harris