3,000 foot rule question?

[pvnisher]

This post could have ended the whole thread. I just climb mountains for the good views, pedantry be damned.

May I refer you to my Pedants Unite thread?

https://www.14ers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=57781

[Old Hickory]

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.

This. I am old and not a hiker with any special goals other than to return to Colorado next year (Covid and crowds deterred me this year) and find mountains with few people on them. I have considered the 3,000 foot "rule" and understand ("pedantry be damned") that it doesn't matter to me. These days, I'm more attracted to 13ers.

[nunns]

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.

You must admit, HighPilgrim, that you don't always set a great example in this regard.

Sean Nunn

[teamdonkey]

This. I am old and not a hiker with any special goals other than to return to Colorado next year (Covid and crowds deterred me this year) and find mountains with few people on them. I have considered the 3,000 foot "rule" and understand ("pedantry be damned") that it doesn't matter to me. These days, I'm more attracted to 13ers.

Not to beat a dead topic, but I assume as the mountains get smaller people care less and less about the 3k "rule". Like is anyone diligently making sure they start at 9k when hiking 12'ers?

[nunns]

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.

But if you climb DeCaliBron and adhere to the 3000' rule, you will need to start well below Kite Lake every time.
I did that from Montgomery Reservior way back in the day (2003?). It was kind of fun. I only did it once though.

Sean Nunn

[sigepnader]

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.

This. I am old and not a hiker with any special goals other than to return to Colorado next year (Covid and crowds deterred me this year) and find mountains with few people on them. I have considered the 3,000 foot "rule" and understand ("pedantry be damned") that it doesn't matter to me. These days, I'm more attracted to 13ers.

Hey now... another Nashville guy who prefers 13ers?

Are we related?

[highpilgrim]

You must admit, HighPilgrim, that you don't always set a great example in this regard.

It's highpilgrim, Mr. Nunn.

I think your point was mostly the point of my point. I don't lack self-awareness in that regard. In fact, I'm perfectly happy poking fun at my shortcomings and I never lack material in so doing.

[rijaca]

Not to beat a dead topic, but I assume as the mountains get smaller people care less and less about the 3k "rule". Like is anyone diligently making sure they start at 9k when hiking 12'ers?

I can't speak for others, but I'm not aware of anyone doing 12ers/13ers/whatever, that is adhering to the '3000' rule'.

[bergsteigen]

Not to beat a dead topic, but I assume as the mountains get smaller people care less and less about the 3k "rule". Like is anyone diligently making sure they start at 9k when hiking 12'ers?

I can't speak for others, but I'm not aware of anyone doing 12ers/13ers/whatever, that is adhering to the '3000' rule'.

Nope, because it would be ridiculously stupid and pointless.

3k is only a thing with 14ers, because there really aren’t that many.

[Boggy B]

So, I've actually tried to gain 3,000' whenever possible, and by that I mean often intentionally starting lower than necessary.
The reality is that most 13ers require you to gain at least 3k anyway, with the exception of certain higher trailheads (Yankee Boy, for example).
Curious to see where I landed on that but the checklist download functions don't seem to be working.

[onebyone]

I tried to stick to the 3,000' rule. Even on Sneffels, I hiked down the road a quarter mile or so to get the 3000 feet.
I tried hiking well below the gate for Sherman and I think I still failed getting the 3,000 feet by a solid 300 feet or so. lol. Started at that intersection whatever elevation that is, if anyone knows,
For Democrat, Bross, etc, I didn't even bother trying to get 3,000 feet. Same with Bierstadt. At some point it gets silly. lol
For others, I started farther down the road. e.g. Antero, Uncompaghre, etc.

Having said that, climbing 14ers is totally arbitrary. Is there really a difference between a 14,005 foot and 13,960 foot mountain? Same with the 3,000 foot rule- totally made up. It's more about setting a goal for yourself and trying to achieve that goal imo.

[SchralpTheGnar]

I tried to stick to the 3,000' rule. Even on Sneffels, I hiked down the road a quarter mile or so to get the 3000 feet.
I tried hiking well below the gate for Sherman and I think I still failed getting the 3,000 feet by a solid 300 feet or so. lol. Started at that intersection whatever elevation that is, if anyone knows,
For Democrat, Bross, etc, I didn't even bother trying to get 3,000 feet. Same with Bierstadt. At some point it gets silly. lol
For others, I started farther down the road. e.g. Antero, Uncompaghre, etc.

Having said that, climbing 14ers is totally arbitrary. Is there really a difference between a 14,005 foot and 13,960 foot mountain? Same with the 3,000 foot rule- totally made up. It's more about setting a goal for yourself and trying to achieve that goal imo.

45 feet