In message <[email hidden]>, Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Blimey! After reading the Marilyn Hall of Fame. I suppose 600 minimum, I can become a member! Problem is remembering which Marilyns, I've done over the years ;-)
600 is not as easy as you think. It means a lot of Scottish Highlands outwith the Munros and Corbetts - and/or a dedication to everything in Wales - and I mean everything - with barbed wire fences, wind farms and bulls in fields .
I still think, I've got at least 600 under my belt ;-) no problem.
The message <[email hidden]> from "Craven" <[email hidden]> contains these words:
Quoted message said:
Blimey! After reading the Marilyn Hall of Fame. I suppose 600 minimum, I can become a member! Problem is remembering which Marilyns, I've done over the years ;-)
Are you sure?
I thought when I first heard of the HoF that I would have a respectable total but found at that time less than 300 to my name. Most Marilyns are in Scotland but even the Munros only account for some 205 and Marylyns are pretty thin on the ground in England and Wales. Munros plus England and Wales complete is not enough so I don't stand any chance of getting there even if my current knee trouble does go into remission. :-(
I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins? Corbetts to check how many. And the rest etc, etc. ;-) -- Regards, Chris
The message <[email hidden]> from "Craven" <[email hidden]> contains these words:
Quoted message said:
I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins? Corbetts to check how many. And the rest etc, etc. ;-)
It was 202 for the Munros and 3 for the tops when Alan Dawsons book was published but the SMC has subsequently upgraded the 3 tops - the minor summits of Buachaille Etive Beag, Beinn Alligin and Beinn Eighe.
Corbett numbers almost match. AFAIK the only difference is the equal height pair of Gairbeinn and Corrieyairack Hill which count as one Marilyn but things change and I have not kept my list up to date in all respects.
-- Roger Chapman so far this year 27 summits New - 16 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 11) Repeats - 11( Marilyns 2, Sweats 6, Wainwrights 11) Knackered knee - 3 times
In message <[email hidden]>, Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Roger said:
The message <[email hidden]> from "Craven" <[email hidden]> contains these words:
> Blimey! After reading the Marilyn Hall of Fame. I > suppose 600 minimum, I can become a member! Problem > is remembering which Marilyns, I've done over the > years ;-)
Are you sure?
I thought when I first heard of the HoF that I would have a respectable total but found at that time less than 300 to my name. Most Marilyns are in Scotland but even the Munros only account for some 205 and Marylyns are pretty thin on the ground in England and Wales. Munros plus England and Wales complete is not enough so I don't stand any chance of getting there even if my current knee trouble does go into remission. :-(
I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins?
Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they would not be merely Tops!
Quoted message said:
Corbetts to check how many.
All the Corbetts count.
Quoted message said:
And the rest etc, etc.
But many Donalds do not
Quoted message said:
;-)
And they wont let you include any Irish Marilyns in the 600 total.
All Corbetts' ? I'm there then ;-) -- Regards, Chris
In message <[email hidden]>, Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Roger said:
The message <[email hidden]> from "Craven" <[email hidden]> contains these words:
> Blimey! After reading the Marilyn Hall of Fame. I > suppose 600 minimum, I can become a member! Problem > is remembering which Marilyns, I've done over the > years ;-)
Are you sure?
I thought when I first heard of the HoF that I would have a respectable total but found at that time less than 300 to my name. Most Marilyns are in Scotland but even the Munros only account for some 205 and Marylyns are pretty thin on the ground in England and Wales. Munros plus England and Wales complete is not enough so I don't stand any chance of getting there even if my current knee trouble does go into remission. :-(
I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins?
Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they would not be merely Tops!
Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though! -- Regards, Chris
Apparently, all of the sea stacks have been climbed at one time or another. Trouble is that most of the recorded ascents were by native St Kildans, in the age when there was no nature conservancy about.
These days, there is lots and lots of nature conservancy, and absolutely no St Kildans!
I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins?
Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they would not be merely Tops!
Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though!
It's not a case that Munros have a criteria but that the 500 ft reascent criteria of Marilyns means that they are significant and that tends to mean that the ones over 3000 ft in Scotland are Munros and not tops. -- Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks" 95/284 5/219 c.100/300 (>900m with drop>100m )
Martin Richardson wrote: > Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
>> I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to >> start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins? > > Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they > would not be merely Tops!
Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though!
It's not a case that Munros have a criteria but that the 500 ft reascent criteria of Marilyns means that they are significant and that tends to mean that the ones over 3000 ft in Scotland are Munros and not tops.
My minds' a boggling! I thought a Marilyn has only a 150 descent on all sides? I think, I'll stick to watching 'Some like it Hot' ;-)
150 metres, or to be precise 152 which is 500 ft. Stll reckon youve got enough for Marhof status? -- Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks" 95/284 5/219 c.100/300 (>900m with drop>100m )
> I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to > start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins?
Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they would not be merely Tops!
Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though!
It's not a case that Munros have a criteria but that the 500 ft reascent criteria of Marilyns means that they are significant and that tends to mean that the ones over 3000 ft in Scotland are Munros and not tops.
My minds' a boggling! I thought a Marilyn has only a 150 descent on all sides? I think, I'll stick to watching 'Some like it Hot' ;-) -- Regards, Chris
> Martin Richardson wrote: >> Craven <[email hidden]> writes
>>> I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 >>> to start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins? >> >> Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they >> would not be merely Tops! > > Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, > when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though!
It's not a case that Munros have a criteria but that the 500 ft reascent criteria of Marilyns means that they are significant and that tends to mean that the ones over 3000 ft in Scotland are Munros and not tops.
My minds' a boggling! I thought a Marilyn has only a 150 descent on all sides? I think, I'll stick to watching 'Some like it Hot' ;-)
150 metres, or to be precise 152 which is 500 ft. Stll reckon youve got enough for Marhof status?
Phil Cook <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:
Quoted message said:
Craven said:
Martin Richardson said:
Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> I'll get back to you on my total in a week! :-0 205 to > start with then. Any tops classed as Marylins?
Tops - no. If there were 500 ft of reascent then they would not be merely Tops!
Sorry! Munros' didn't have a 500 ft reascent criteria, when I completed many years ago? Corbets' do though!
It's not a case that Munros have a criteria but that the 500 ft reascent criteria of Marilyns means that they are significant and that tends to mean that the ones over 3000 ft in Scotland are Munros and not tops.
IIRC all 3000ft Marilyns are now Munros. But there are many sub- Marilyns all of which are chosen subjectively. Sort of.
IIRC all 3000ft Marilyns are now Munros. But there are many sub- Marilyns all of which are chosen subjectively. Sort of.
Nothing subjective about them. Sub-Marilyns have between 140m and 149m of re-ascent. Alan is simply allowing an extra 10m of re-ascent in case of inaccurate surveying. By doing all the subs you more or less ensure that any summits that get promoted to Marilyn status in the future (due to resurveying) you will already have done. Summits with less than 140m of re-ascent are highly unlikely to acquire Marilyn status due to resurvey.
"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:c9stva$1h7$1 @news5.svr.pol.co.uk:
Quoted message said:
Adrian Tupper said:
IIRC all 3000ft Marilyns are now Munros. But there are many sub- Marilyns all of which are chosen subjectively. Sort of.
Nothing subjective about them. Sub-Marilyns have between 140m and
149m
Quoted message said:
of re-ascent. Alan is simply allowing an extra 10m of re- ascent in
case
Quoted message said:
of inaccurate surveying. By doing all the subs you more or less
ensure
Quoted message said:
that any summits that get promoted to Marilyn status in the future
(due
Quoted message said:
to resurveying) you will already have done. Summits with less than
140m
Quoted message said:
of re-ascent are highly unlikely to acquire Marilyn status due to resurvey.
Sorry to confuse. I meant the ones given Munro status are chosen subjectively from the list of sub-500' (nut not necessarily 140m) Marilyns. Agreed that Alan Dawson's method stands up to much more scrutiny than the SMC's.
I've run off the list of Marilyns, and ticked off the ones I've already done, but I'm wondering just how practical they are. I did all the Shropshire ones last week, but are they all feasible or plagued with access problems? Anyone here done them all? Bardsey Island looks like a gem. Is there a ferry to what is presumably a private island, with no rights of way?
If you are to be a marilyn bagger you soon relegate the goml to that of a petty annoyance, like a midge. I have yet to get gomled and have a Welsh set.. Some are awkward, but that can be fun. Stealth techniques are needed on some in Wales.
You have the easiest bit behind you.. Shropshire and Herefordshire are very liberal re access, although ownershio changes have rendered one hill outside Hereford very difficult, they are always catching baggers in a place I used to visit without worry.
Bardsey/Ynys Enlli is accessable by boat trip £20 ago. They used to go from Porth Mewdy but may operate out of Pwllheli now. No problems , one on the island explore at will, and you are right..its a gem.
In message <[email hidden]>, RJ Webb <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Martin Richardson said:
In message <[email hidden]>, Craven <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Blimey! After reading the Marilyn Hall of Fame. I suppose 600 minimum, I can become a member! Problem is remembering which Marilyns, I've done over the years ;-)
600 is not as easy as you think. It means a lot of Scottish Highlands outwith the Munros and Corbetts - and/or a dedication to everything in Wales - and I mean everything - with barbed wire fences, wind farms and bulls in fields
Met the lot.. In Wales!
You could have moved them out of the way for me!
-- Martin Richardson 239/284 Munros - 15% to go 34/34 'Furths' & 439/439 Nuttalls - 0% to go 240/89 Donalds - 53% to go 0/? Himalayans - 100% to go 241/1552 Marilyns - 72% to go
In message <[email hidden]>, RJ Webb <[email hidden]> writes
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>600 is not as easy as you think. It means a lot of >Scottish Highlands outwith the Munros and Corbetts - >and/or a dedication to everything in Wales - and I mean >everything - with barbed wire fences, wind farms and >bulls in fields
Met the lot.. In Wales!
You could have moved them out of the way for me!
The bull moved :-)
And then it came back.
-- Martin Richardson 239/284 Munros - 15% to go 34/34 'Furths' & 439/439 Nuttalls - 0% to go 240/89 Donalds - 53% to go 0/? Himalayans - 100% to go 241/1552 Marilyns - 72% to go
I've run off the list of Marilyns, and ticked off the ones I've already done, but I'm wondering just how practical they are. I did all the Shropshire ones last week, but are they all feasible or plagued with access problems? Anyone here done them all?
They are an incompleatable list. Aside from the technical difficulties and the distances involved *they* won't allow you on some of them.
Its being worked on.. "They" are the least of the problems... Gomls can be ignored, the ocean cannot!
