Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

3,000 foot rule in question

Trailhead conditions, directions, roads, parking, camping, etc. Trailhead Info/Status
User avatar
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: Boulder

Postby jwproulx » Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:06 pm

Holy crap! I just read the 14ers.com version of the 3k' rule:

For example, if you climb Grays and then hike over and summit Torreys, you have gained about 3,600 feet and bagged both peaks. If you are intent on gaining 3,000 feet on every peak, Grays and Torreys becomes a completely different task. Hike to the Grays summit, return to the Stevens Gulch trailhead and then start back up to climb Torreys.


Um .... that's not the version I've ever heard before! I've heard the version used by 14ers speed climbers such as Cave Dog:

1. The Colorado Rule:

a) one must ascend at least 3,000 feet in absolute elevation gain on foot from the base of the first peak of a series.
b) foot traverses of less than 3,000 feet are allowed between peaks through traverses.
c) one must descend on foot at least 3,000 feet in absolute elevation loss back to the starting point or end of a traverse.


(From the DogTeam 14ers Rules page; the same idea is described by Roach.)

I wonder how many people on this site that check the "Using the 3k' rule?" box know that it's different than the version Roach cites.

User avatar
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:13 am
Location: Djibouti

Postby harmfuljays » Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:45 am

iceman wrote:I hiked Mt. Sherman last Saturday and met the rudest most hateful woman I have ever met in the back country. I started at the gate. When I got back to my vehicle and was driving home I passed her walking to her car down at the “REAL" 3,000 ascent trailhead. My point being, going by the 3,000 rule does not make you a better person.


:lol: I was on Sherman that day as well.....was this the same lady that kept asking everyone what the elevation was? She had some guy with her who kept saying that all the hikers coming down were annoying.
Up the Irons!

Posts: 3864
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:56 pm

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby tmathews » Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:06 pm

Initiating Thread Necromancy!

User avatar
Posts: 917
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:39 pm
Location: Fremont County, CO

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby MUni Rider » Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:15 pm

whoop! There it is!

thread necromancer.jpg
thread necromancer.jpg (27.69 KiB) Viewed 1088 times
"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy course; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat." (Theodore Roosevelt)

"Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit." (Edward Abbey)

User avatar
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 8:12 pm
Location: Monument, CO

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby k9powerlifter » Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:35 am

The 3000 foot rule is crap...I'm implementing the 235 rule. A 14'er doesn't count unless you weigh 235 lbs or more; equipment not included so this is a naked weight. Now, if you choose to hike the 14'er naked then it counts at any weight.
When people get scared they call the cops; when cops get scared they call K-9.

User avatar
Posts: 388
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:31 am
Location: South Hero, Vermont

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby jrbren_vt » Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:04 am

I think this should be simpli
g wrote:
iceman wrote:I hiked Mt. Sherman last Saturday and met the rudest most hateful woman I have ever met in the back country. I started at the gate. When I got back to my vehicle and was driving home I passed her walking to her car down at the “REAL" 3,000 ascent trailhead. My point being, going by the 3,000 rule does not make you a better person.

I would've told her it was recently changed to the 4,000 foot rule. :P


I think it should be relaxed to the 1000 meter rule
*****************
Best Regards - John
*****************

Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:39 am

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby jblaze5779 » Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:52 am

k9powerlifter wrote:The 3000 foot rule is crap...I'm implementing the 235 rule. A 14'er doesn't count unless you weigh 235 lbs or more; equipment not included so this is a naked weight. Now, if you choose to hike the 14'er naked then it counts at any weight.


I can get behind this.

User avatar
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:22 am
Location: Louisville, CO

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby spiderman » Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:37 pm

I think that a climber must be carrying the equipment for two people on the way up and a kid on their shoulders on the way down to have it count. A large sack of rice can substitute for the kid if you don't have one of your own and can't yogi one from an exhausted parent. Also plan on reciting a 16 hour long story to add some additional challenge. Anything else is unfair to parents with youngsters.

For super-duper mountain karma, carry Roach on your back and start from sea level.

User avatar
Posts: 690
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:48 am
Location: Denver

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby jmanner » Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:01 pm

.
Last edited by jmanner on Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A man has got to know his limitations.-Dr. Jonathan Hemlock

User avatar
Posts: 430
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 2:03 pm
Location: Castle Rock, CO

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby colokeith » Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:09 pm

There are only a few peaks where it even matters (ie where you can cheat) those are generally uninteresting peaks to start with. So unless you are trying to claim a record whofriggincares. Do what ever makes you happy with yourself.

Saying you climbed a mountain when you didn't really climb a mountain is a lame stupid thing to do. So just be honest and stick with the spirit of reaching the actual summit of a mountain and putting in appropriate work to do so.
To climb is to push yourself in a way you might not normally imagine is possible. If your stamina, skill, and luck are sound you will get to stand on top. ... I realized that with climbing, I'd found something that nourished my soul and could forge me into a better version myself - Jim Davidson

User avatar
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:08 pm
Location: Lincoln, NE

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby RobertKay » Sat Aug 09, 2014 10:02 am

I have two simple rules:

1. Did I do the work to get there?
2. Did I have fun?

If the answer is "yes" then it counts.

Climbers in Nepal talk of a 3,000 METER rule so 3,000 feet isn't quite as impressive. I'm off to the gym.
Peakmarker.com

User avatar
Posts: 7264
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:23 pm
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: 3,000 foot rule in question

Postby Jim Davies » Sat Aug 09, 2014 10:07 am

jblaze5779 wrote:I can get behind this.

Awesome first post, dude. Maybe you can bump this thread next. :wft:
Some people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths. -- Steven Wright

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests