Challenger Point is Not Ranked!

[mtnkub]

As for CMC bashing: To me, it makes perfect sense to have (i) a list of ranked cents and bi-cents and (ii) a different list of 14ers that includes all the ranked peaks plus a few select other ones, such as El Diente or North Maroon; or all the unranked ones with a name, if you will. (Those are separate list; and many like the list of 58 for their 14ers, but few think that Cameron should be a cent). The CMC reason for excluding Challenger from their 14er list also made at least some moderate sense to me. (It does feel like a subpeak of Kit Carson to me, and the LiDAR results support that notion).

But what doesn't make sense to me is this: excluding Challenger form the 14ers but including it in the cents. (Again , LiDAR may help fix that).

[gb]

If my understanding is right it's not only El Diente, but also Cameron, Conundrum, and North Eolus. Even though the LOMC doesn't listen to my thoughts, I'm not in favor of adding them. Based on all the prior discussions on this topic.

Nope. El Diente has been on the list of 14ers forever, the other ones listed never have been. The most recent change was adding Ellingwood ~40 years ago.

[JChitwood]

As for CMC bashing: To me, it makes perfect sense to have (i) a list of ranked cents and bi-cents and (ii) a different list of 14ers that includes all the ranked peaks plus a few select other ones, such as El Diente or North Maroon; or all the unranked ones with a name, if you will. (Those are separate list; and many like the list of 58 for their 14ers, but few think that Cameron should be a cent). The CMC reason for excluding Challenger from their 14er list also made at least some moderate sense to me. (It does feel like a subpeak of Kit Carson to me, and the LiDAR results support that notion).

But what doesn't make sense to me is this: excluding Challenger form the 14ers but including it in the cents. (Again , LiDAR may help fix that).

I don’t find a separate 14er list on the CMC site just the top 100. They have Challenger at # 34. How it makes any sense let alone perfect to include a peak as a 14er but not a Centennial is beyond me.

[dwoodward13]

As for CMC bashing: To me, it makes perfect sense to have (i) a list of ranked cents and bi-cents and (ii) a different list of 14ers that includes all the ranked peaks plus a few select other ones, such as El Diente or North Maroon; or all the unranked ones with a name, if you will. (Those are separate list; and many like the list of 58 for their 14ers, but few think that Cameron should be a cent). The CMC reason for excluding Challenger from their 14er list also made at least some moderate sense to me. (It does feel like a subpeak of Kit Carson to me, and the LiDAR results support that notion).

But what doesn't make sense to me is this: excluding Challenger form the 14ers but including it in the cents. (Again , LiDAR may help fix that).

I don’t find a separate 14er list on the CMC site just the top 100. They have Challenger at # 34. How it makes any sense let alone perfect to include a peak as a 14er but not a Centennial is beyond me.

https://cmc.org/MySummits/SummitCompleters.aspx

The CMC officially recognizes 54 14ers as the number required to be considered a list completer. We will accept climbers who pursue a 14er list with a different total, such as 55 or 58, as long as they complete the minimum of 54. The list of 54 includes all 52 named peaks over 14,000 feet with more than 300 feet of prominence, plus North Maroon Peak and El Diente Peak for their history and aesthetics. The CMC does not currently include Challenger Point, which is historically considered a subsummit of Kit Carson Peak.