14ers list by difficulty

[BillMiddlebrook]

Here are the updates to the "Routes by Difficulty" page:

https://www.14ers.com/routes_bydifficulty.php

... Did I end up having to create my own type of "R Points" behind the scenes? Sort of.

I disagree with some rankings (Lindsey easier than Wetterhorn?), but it looks like a useful list. I'm curious about your "sort of" route points formula.

It's Lindsey via the standard gully, not the NW ridge. That one could be a toss-up, I suppose, but Wetterhorn does require some moves that are more difficult than the Lindsey gully.

[mtnkub]

The factor discussed was "routefinding." .... Sunlight had some moves Cap' doesn't. ...

Routefinding was only one of the factors that Justiner pointed out in his explanation why he perceives a big difference between the two mountains (a perception that i share). But if you think that Sunlight had moves that Capitol didn't (other than the summit block), you may have been off route... explaining your subjective view of more difficult route finding on that one...

The difference between Sunlight and Capitol is pretty big in my book. There are a ton of no-fall areas in Cap, beginning with K2, and many of those spots are loose, so getting hit by a kicked rock is probably also higher. Routefinding on Cap. has been demonstratively harder. Whereas Sunlight is a ton more solid (relatively), and the summit block is one of the only real no-fall places.

In summary, while my opinion that Little Bear is harder than Capitol is completely objective, anyone who thinks that Sunlight and Capitol are even comparable is clearly misguided.

[Phill the Thrill]

Here are the updates to the "Routes by Difficulty" page:

https://www.14ers.com/routes_bydifficulty.php

I think it's a lot better than the confusing way things were ranked on the old page. Now, the routes are first grouped by Class, then sorted by overall difficulty/"effortculty"

"Effortculty" - adding that to my climbing lexicon!

[Cygnus X1]

Here are the updates to the "Routes by Difficulty" page:

https://www.14ers.com/routes_bydifficulty.php

I think it's a lot better than the confusing way things were ranked on the old page. Now, the routes are first grouped by Class, then sorted by overall difficulty/"effortculty"

Did I end up having to create my own type of "R Points" behind the scenes? Sort of. I still have to tweak some numbers because there are a couple of Class 2 routes that I feel should be changed.

Bill, there are only 57 peaks on your list. Are you dismissing the mighty Cameron?

[Phill the Thrill]

Bill, there are only 57 peaks on your list. Are you dismissing the mighty Cameron?

Yes, the "Cameron direct" route straight up the Cameron amphitheatre is especially worthy of note.

[BillMiddlebrook]

Cameron is part of the Lincoln West Ridge route!

[GeezerClimber]

Regarding exposure levels, why is Missouri rated 4? Seriously, exposure ratings are far more subjective than difficulty.

The standard Mizz route is rated 3/6 (not 4) for exposure. Even though that one pitch is only 20 feet or so, I think it's an "ok" rating.

Still lumped with Longs, Snowmass, etc. I think that is seriously misleading.

Dave

[LURE]

Regarding exposure levels, why is Missouri rated 4? Seriously, exposure ratings are far more subjective than difficulty.

The standard Mizz route is rated 3/6 (not 4) for exposure. Even though that one pitch is only 20 feet or so, I think it's an "ok" rating.

Still lumped with Longs, Snowmass, etc. I think that is seriously misleading.

Dave

Maybe misleading for some. I personally don't recall much in the way of exposure, though it certainly is a steep hill on the southwest side of the ridge as you walk across the slope. But for some not so much, you hear a lot about some hikers getting a little sketched on that southwest side of the ridge.

If a rating is maybe misleading, better to have it be misleading in a conservative manner.

[highpilgrim]

If a rating is maybe misleading, better to have it be misleading in a conservative manner.

That spot on Mizzou is just steep sidehill on crappy dirt. But once you start sliding or falling there, you're not going to stop for a while.

And if the conditions are variable, like a little icy or even wet, it would be moreso. I did it in the snow, and we took our time through there.

[AndrewLyonsGeibel]

As someone alluded earlier, I like the roach point system. Although I’m certain Bill couldn’t post that here without paying Roach, and I enjoy having access to the info for free.

I have no suggestions on how to make a real ranked list (by standard route), but in my experience something like Kelso Ridge doesn’t compare to the Crestones, even though it’s the same class and rated as less exposure.

[pmeadco]

I lean toward asking people about difficulty when they add peaks to their list. For example, if somebody has already climbed a peak, say Elbert, and they enter a peak with similar difficulty, say Massive, ask which peak they think is harder. Over time the list will bubble sort into a generally accepted ranking. I don't think it is worth quibbling over routes since most will do the standard route and alternates will fade into the background.

[HikesInGeologicTime]

If a rating is maybe misleading, better to have it be misleading in a conservative manner.

That spot on Mizzou is just steep sidehill on crappy dirt. But once you start sliding or falling there, you're not going to stop for a while.

And if the conditions are variable, like a little icy or even wet, it would be moreso. I did it in the snow, and we took our time through there.

I spent my summer working my way through (most of) the Sawatches. Since a repeat of Elbert was not among the ones I did, my list was a straight-up Class 2.

Of all the standard routes I followed (Yale and Columbia both somehow confounded me between the graded trails and the summits), Missouri's was the one that I'd rate Most Likely to Make Me Toss My Cookies. That spot was a head trip for someone as solidly below average at athletic endeavors as I, and the exposed ridge walk following it, with all that lovely loose dirt on unforgivingly slick stone, was more of a ridge shuffle (accompanied by hefty deep-breathing exercises) for me. Holy Cross and Harvard took me longer, but I personally didn't find them as difficult. In fact, the only standard route I've done that was more nausea-inducing for me than Missouri's was the Keyhole.

All of which is to say, I suppose, that there's no way to make a non-subjective difficulty rating for...well, anything. But I can't currently prod myself to make my own list for fellow below-average hikers, so the one on here will have to do.