Bogley

[Scott P]

Quote: That's gotta be the biggest mis-statement of the year. You're probably the biggest non-noob around here.

Nah, not really. I was serious. Although some may get the wrong idea, really am mostly a noob when it comes to things technical. I guess I've climbed some fairly hard rock towers, but someone else was always leading. Have done some ice, but not that much. I have climbed glaciated peaks, but nothing harder than AD. I know there are many here (Brian included) that are way more experienced in climbing than I am.

I do consider myself to be an experienced hiker, but not an experienced (technical) climber. I was serious when I am claiming myself to be a noob.

Thanks for the compliment.

Quote: I wasn't accusing you (or really anyone on this board) of being anti-noob.

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't against noobs in case anyone might mis-understand.

Oh yeah, enough thread jacking from me too. Sorry about that.

[Brian in SLC]

Scott Patterson wrote: I thought you may had known about or heard of him. Writes a lot of mountaineering articles.

Dude, I spray a bunch on the 'net, and almost none of my stuff is vetted through a publisher! Doesn't mean I'm reliable.

Quote: Again, maybe on the massif, not on the mountain itself.

Quote: But, what makes you think that? So far you haven't shown anything to the contrary. What is so unbelievable about 1000 people dying on Blanc?

100 folks per day was a bit more unbelievable.

Given that it was ascended in the late 1700s for the first time, and they say in season, between 3 and 400 people per day try it, it certainly gets the traffic.

Interesting site:

http://www.markseaton.com/montblancadvice.pdf

Quote: What have you seen to the contrary?

Doesn't seem to jibe with accident rates. Unusually high number.

Quote: The guiding services claim that over 20,000 people climb Mont Blanc per year and another 10,000 try to.

Yet success rates are 50% is all?

Quote: I can start a Summitpost thread and see if anyone has some real data. Certainly it's available somewhere. Here is the thread, so we can follow along. Let's see if anyone can come up with a real source:
http://www.summitpost.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=374745#374745
There are many European members so hopefully someone at least knows of something and can post the source.

Good idear! Be interesting to see what bubbles up.

Thanks,

-Brian in SLC

[Brian in SLC]

kris247 wrote: price1869 wrote:
The innexperienced are such because they haven't done this stuff a lot. How do you expect them to become experienced if you don't let them try?


Not to get too far off topic, but this is something that I've always wondered about rock climbing. As a non-climber, reading various forums and going to gyms (The Front, etc) it seems like there is absolutely no tolerance for noobs. If you can't climb 5.10a on lead, you might as well go home. Experienced climbers always talk about how great and accepting the community is (unless your name is Tony) but it sure doesn't seem like that from the outside.

When I heard there was a Via Ferratta in Ogden I wanted to check it out. I know it's not "climbing", but it seems considerably more accessible to me (as a non-climber) and would be a decent introduction to actual climbing.

That's a pretty interesting viewpoint.

What some folks have a small amount of tolerance (to put it mildly, perhaps) is when someone who isn't experienced sprays advice or information like they are. So, might be more along those lines than a general intolerance of noobs. See rec.climbing and search for "Lord Slime" for instance.

I travel a bunch and get to "see" different climbing communities. SLC is by far one of the friendliest places. On the 'net? Not always. And, some of the vitriol is for fun for some folks, so, you have to sort that out too. But, really, as a beginner or not, this is a very friendly place to climb.

I can't really see the Via Ferrata thing as a gateway to climbing. Folks kinda diss climbing gyms as an intro to outside climbing, but, most hardcorp folk use them for training (a bunch!) and I think they're a great intro, given that some stuff is better learned outside. Via Ferrata is an artificial means to get position and/or ascend a formation (or descend). You really don't pick up the skills or learn the body position or movement beyond grabbing ladder rungs and steel cable. There is no sublety, etc.

Anyhoo, interesting. Climbers are constantly accusing each other of elitism. I've always thought that climbing has more rules than golf!

Pretty funny when you think about it.

-Brian in SLC

[Scott P]

Quote: Given that it was ascended in the late 1700s for the first time, and they say in season, between 3 and 400 people per day try it, it certainly gets the traffic.

Another interesting article on how popular it is:

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1578709.ece

PS, here is yet another calim that there have been 1000 deaths:

http://www.terragalleria.com/mountain/info/chamonix/mb-easy.html

See last part of "What makes this mountain so special?"

[gonzo]

jumar wrote: Quote: Honestly? Threating to cut someone's belay? That's not cool
Yeah I totally agree. Invitation stands to come with me climbing. I won't cut your rope :haha:

Thanks! My doctor would probably frown on me climbing right now (had my ACL reconstructed two months ago) but I would love to take you up on the offer in the future.

[Scott P]

I did find a few things of interest, but nothing up to date or comprehensive.

http://www.wemjournal.org/wmsonline/?request=get-document&issn=1080-6032&volume=012&issue=02&page=0074

Anyway here are some stats for some of the regions in the Alps as a whole, but nothing Mont Blanc specific. It has stats for Chamonix 1987-1997, but of course Chamonix covers more than Mont Blanc. On the other hand, the Chamonix side only covers the west (French) side of Blanc as the east side is in Italy. It does appear to be well under 100 though, at least for Blanc alone?

Either way, several hundred climbers die in the Alps each year. Scary. Be careful out there.