3,000 foot rule question?

Items that do not fit the categories above.
Forum rules
Please do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website. For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
Post Reply
teamdonkey
Posts: 128
Joined: 8/29/2018
14ers:summits28 winter1 
13ers:summits18 winter1 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by teamdonkey » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:44 am

I like the spirit of the rule. No one on this forum would consider people who drive to the upper parking lot on Evans and walk the last few hundred feet as actually "climbing the mountain". But 3,000 feet is impractical. Too many of the standard routes up mountains don't hit that mark. If you have to take a non-standard route just to meet an arbitrary rule, it's not a good rule.
nunns
Posts: 1034
Joined: 8/17/2018
14ers:summits41 
13ers:summits4 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by nunns » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:51 am

OldTrad wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:26 am
nunns wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:45 am
pvnisher wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 5:49 am

I didn't view this as anything other than him saying that signs requiring masks weren't enforced. Which I feel is probably accurate.
You interpreted (and by that I mean simply read the post in English) correctly.
I made no comment on whether masks SHOULD be worn or not. I simply said that the mask ordinance is not enforced in public places in KC. Probably one reason why we have so many cases right now.
My mistake. Please accept my most humble and sincere apology.
No worries.

Sean Nunn
"Thy righteousness is like the great mountains." --Psalms 36:6
nunns
Posts: 1034
Joined: 8/17/2018
14ers:summits41 
13ers:summits4 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by nunns » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:53 am

teamdonkey wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:44 am
I like the spirit of the rule. No one on this forum would consider people who drive to the upper parking lot on Evans and walk the last few hundred feet as actually "climbing the mountain". But 3,000 feet is impractical. Too many of the standard routes up mountains don't hit that mark. If you have to take a non-standard route just to meet an arbitrary rule, it's not a good rule.
I agree. I use it as a general guideline. I just don't get caught up anymore in whether I hike 2800' or 3000' uphill if the difference is just half a mile extra hiking up a dirt road.


Sean Nunn
"Thy righteousness is like the great mountains." --Psalms 36:6
User avatar
shelly+
Posts: 313
Joined: 6/15/2018
14ers:summits23 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by shelly+ » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:59 am

teamdonkey wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:44 am
If you have to take a non-standard route just to meet an arbitrary rule, it's not a good rule.
this is one of the reasons i like the 3000' rule.... it forces me to consider alternative routes which would add a challenge or take me where i hadn't considered going. however, i dislike rules when they are dictates..... so there's that.
User avatar
rijaca
Posts: 3107
Joined: 7/9/2006
14ers:summits58 winter4 
13ers:summits244 ski1 winter3 
Trip Reports (1)

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by rijaca » Thu Oct 08, 2020 11:42 am

pturk wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 5:13 pm
The standards we set for ourselves are unique and personal. I liken the 3,000 foot rule to the following marathon analogy. One person may be satisfied with running it in 4 hours. However, another person may want to run it in 3 hours. Both are noble accomplishments. Heck, you've finished a marathon! However, there can be no denying that the person that threw down a sub-3 hour finish is in rarified air.

In the same way, a person that summits all 53 14ers, even if there was saddle jumping (e.g., Decalibron) or shortened/easy climbs (e.g., Mt Evans), has attained a noble accomplishment. That said, while we may not like the 3,000 foot rule and dismiss it as "stupid" or arbitrary, the person that climbs all 53 14ers separately by the 3,000 foot rule has cleared a much higher bar. To me, this is something to be celebrated and respected.
What about combining the Maroon Bells? Or Little Bear/Blanca? Crestones? Wilson/El Diente? All of those traverses are more difficult than doing them separately. And there isn't anything more special or difficult climbing/hiking LDB, or any of the other peaks that can be combined, than doing them separately.

Your marathon analogy is flawed. Most peeps don't consider climbing mountains to be a competitive sport.

edit: there are 54 14ers. (although I will consider arguments for 55) :mrgreen:
"A couple more shots of whiskey,
the women 'round here start looking good"
User avatar
stephakett
Posts: 708
Joined: 5/30/2014
14ers:summits28 
13ers:summits34 
Trip Reports (1)
Contact:

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by stephakett » Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:23 pm

shelly+ wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:59 am
teamdonkey wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:44 am
If you have to take a non-standard route just to meet an arbitrary rule, it's not a good rule.
this is one of the reasons i like the 3000' rule.... it forces me to consider alternative routes which would add a challenge or take me where i hadn't considered going. however, i dislike rules when they are dictates..... so there's that.
excellent point shelly-- this would also help avoid that whole, "there's too many people on 14ers" thing, too. non-standard routes are notoriously less-crowded. i feel some repeats coming on..
“My father considered a walk among the mountains as the equivalent of churchgoing.” (Aldous Huxley)
User avatar
shelly+
Posts: 313
Joined: 6/15/2018
14ers:summits23 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by shelly+ » Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:34 pm

stephakett wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:23 pm
shelly+ wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:59 am
teamdonkey wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:44 am
If you have to take a non-standard route just to meet an arbitrary rule, it's not a good rule.
this is one of the reasons i like the 3000' rule.... it forces me to consider alternative routes which would add a challenge or take me where i hadn't considered going. however, i dislike rules when they are dictates..... so there's that.
excellent point shelly-- this would also help avoid that whole, "there's too many people on 14ers" thing, too. non-standard routes are notoriously less-crowded. i feel some repeats coming on..
my goal when i finish the 58 is to start over and take alternative routes wherever possible.... or repeat alternative routes if i've already taken them. :)
User avatar
highpilgrim
Posts: 2873
Joined: 3/14/2008
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits82 winter1 
Trip Reports (1)

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by highpilgrim » Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:43 pm

shelly+ wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:34 pm
my goal when i finish the 58 is to start over and take alternative routes wherever possible.... or repeat alternative routes if i've already taken them.
A very wise plan, grasshoppah.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Hunter S Thompson

Walk away from the droning and leave the hive behind.
Dick Derkase
User avatar
shelly+
Posts: 313
Joined: 6/15/2018
14ers:summits23 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by shelly+ » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:04 pm

highpilgrim wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:43 pm
shelly+ wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:34 pm
my goal when i finish the 58 is to start over and take alternative routes wherever possible.... or repeat alternative routes if i've already taken them.
A very wise plan, grasshoppah.
yes, sir.
User avatar
highpilgrim
Posts: 2873
Joined: 3/14/2008
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits82 winter1 
Trip Reports (1)

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by highpilgrim » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:07 pm

shelly+ wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:04 pm
yes, sir.
Someone being polite in the forum? How interesting.

Oh, wait; I'm probably just projecting. I learned that from watching the news lately.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Hunter S Thompson

Walk away from the droning and leave the hive behind.
Dick Derkase
User avatar
9patrickmurphy
Posts: 76
Joined: 7/16/2018
14ers:summits37 winter1 
13ers:summits120 ski3 winter1 
Contact:

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by 9patrickmurphy » Thu Oct 08, 2020 2:07 pm

Conor wrote:
Sat Sep 22, 2018 10:06 am
This whole 3000' thing is boring.
This post could have ended the whole thread. I just climb mountains for the good views, pedantry be damned.
ltlFish99
Posts: 204
Joined: 5/22/2019
14ers:summits40 ski2 winter2 
13ers:summits48 

Re: 3,000 foot rule question?

Post by ltlFish99 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 6:05 pm

I think I'll hike decalibron 4 times, just so I can say I did each mountain separately.

I am fan of and adhere to the 3,000 foot guideline simply because in the beginning I did not know anything about the mountains, was very curious and heard/read a lot about this.
It just made sense to me in the same way a peak needs to a certain height above the nearest neigh bor peak to be ranked makes sense.
Post Reply