| Author
|
Thread |
 
|
|
Nick Payne
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 2635
Location: Canberra, Australia5/7/14 6:37 AM |
Everesting a hill
Interesting idea. See
http://www.smh.com.au/executive-style/strive/everesting-a-new-mountain-to-climb-for-cyclists-20140425-379ip.html
. But the most elevation gain I've ever managed in a day is only a bit over half the required 8848m, and I found that hard enough that I wouldn't want to be doubling it. Plus I reckon that multiple ascents of the same climb one after another would get pretty boring.
I think some of the mountain stages in the Tour would probably exceed that amount of climbing, such as the final Pyrenean stage of the 2011 Tour, where I remember one of the commentators saying that the stage had almost 9500m of climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JohnC
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 1939
Location: Glastonbury, Ct5/7/14 9:21 AM |
Interesting. Kind of silly, and the number is arbitrary, since it's based on Everest's elevation above sea level, not the height of the mountain above its base (which is well under 5,000 meters, and maybe less than 4,000, depending on what you count as the base). The writer of the article is obviously a bit confused about this concept: "The magic number is 8848 metres; the elevation gain of Mount Everest."
I think you should introduce "MaunaKeaing" since that peak in Hawaii rises over 10,000 meters from its base on the ocean floor.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Payne
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 2635
Location: Canberra, Australia5/7/14 2:50 PM |
Actually, a local guy, Tim McCartney-Snape, after doing the conventional ascent of Everest from base camp, did his second ascent of Everest from sea level. He walked from the Bay of Bengal through India to Nepal, then to the base of Everest, then climbed the mountain. Took him about three months, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6593
Location: Westchester/NYC5/7/14 4:47 PM |
quote:
the most elevation gain I've ever managed in a day is only a bit over half the required 8848m, and I found that hard enough that I wouldn't want to be doubling it.
As mentioned in the article, half of Everest isn't 4000, it's over 5500.
quote:
Plus I reckon that multiple ascents of the same climb one after another would get pretty boring.
Some people don't mind it. They would happily do it "because it's there"!
I'm usually against all silly "record" attempts. But while I will never attempt this one, I find the concept perfectly reasonable.
We have metric century, full century (which is silly for countries never adopted Imperial measuring units), double metric, then full double century etc. It's really just any made-up distance you can attach some sort of label to! We've had marathon for ages, then as runners got better and faster, ultra-marathons start popping up here and there. Now it's kind of a big thing! Fellow cyclists had been making up all sort of distance goals to push themselves against. So why not 8000 some metre of climbing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dan emery
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 6935
Location: Maine5/7/14 5:22 PM |
I'm with Nick
I've done about 4800 meters in a day, I'd be more interested in halving it than doubling.
The concept doesn't appeal to me, but each to their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sandiway
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4902
Location: back in Tucson5/8/14 1:09 AM |
do-able
Thinking back to the hilly rides I used to do in NJ, I think it's perfectly do-able by amateur cyclists. You just have to find the right steady and a nice descent to take you back round to the bottom.
Sandiway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Payne
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 2635
Location: Canberra, Australia5/8/14 1:13 AM |
quote:
As mentioned in the article, half of Everest isn't 4000, it's over 5500
Doesn't compute. 8848/2=4424.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JohnC
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 1939
Location: Glastonbury, Ct5/8/14 8:55 AM |
quote:
Actually, a local guy, Tim McCartney-Snape, after doing the conventional ascent of Everest from base camp, did his second ascent of Everest from sea level. He walked from the Bay of Bengal through India to Nepal, then to the base of Everest, then climbed the mountain. Took him about three months, I think.
That is cool, Nick. I like that one.
I've ridden Haleakala, sea level to 10,000 feet in one stretch. I'm trying to imagine doing it 3 times in one day.
I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6593
Location: Westchester/NYC5/8/14 9:34 AM |
quote:
Doesn't compute. 8848/2=4424.
But you know perfectly well "doubling" something already pretty hard takes MORE than double the effort!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
