They might have made it to the top, but it wasn't a successful climb because they didn't make it back down.

wingding wrote:They might have made it to the top, but it wasn't a successful climb because they didn't make it back down.

You read my mind.

MoapaPk wrote:

wingding wrote:They might have made it to the top, but it wasn't a successful climb because they didn't make it back down.

You read my mind.

Aye...

Isn't it like summiting is optional, getting your arse back to BC is mandatory??? They might've achieved the first feat, but the facts are pretty solid against them on that second, most important part. To me, Hillary/Norgay still stands like a rock, simply because of the fact that they were the first ones able to produce a nice wee TR. Unfortunately for us, it was still 48 years BSP. I bet it would've easily gotten a 99.5% score by now...

Cheers,
Clint.

MoapaPk wrote:

wingding wrote:They might have made it to the top, but it wasn't a successful climb because they didn't make it back down.

You read my mind.

Reaching the summit has surely nothing to do with getting back down. It is of course preferable to do that too, but if someone is first to climb a hill, i.e. reach the summit, then they´re the first.

Diego Sahagún wrote:Yes, a famous climber (I don't remind who was now) said: you don't climb a mountain till you descend it (more or less). And I think he was right. Also my thought is that is better a good partner than an experienced one but not useful. With this, I don't want to say Odell was a bad partner. Hasta luego.

"Summiting is optional. Getting down is mandatory." Ed Viestures

I think he was older than Viesturs

charles wrote:

MoapaPk wrote:

wingding wrote:They might have made it to the top, but it wasn't a successful climb because they didn't make it back down.

You read my mind.

Reaching the summit has surely nothing to do with getting back down. It is of course preferable to do that too, but if someone is first to climb a hill, i.e. reach the summit, then they´re the first.

Exactly. A first ascent is just that - a first ascent. It's not called "first ascent and descent." Certainly getting killed on the way down a mountain is failing on a number of levels, but it does not change the fact that someone was the first to climb it.

Andinistaloco wrote:Certainly getting killed on the way down a mountain is failing on a number of levels, but it does not change the fact that someone was the first to climbit.

Not to mention cutting down on your book deal, sponsorship and/or lecture tour opportunities...

Everest is not descended in a day by everybody. Many of the climbers don't reach CB the same day of summit

I personally have to say that all the circumstantial evidence points to the fact that Mallory and Irvine never made the top of Everest. Most likely senario is that high winds and lateness in the day forced them to turn back On the descent one of the two, most likely Irvine slipped and fell dragging his pardner off too. These were gutzy guys but their clothing and boots were no match for the conditions on Everest. The high winds near the summit would have cut through their woolen clothing, and their leather, uninsulated boots would have frozen along with their feet very quickly. No sign was ever found at the summit or above the Second Band which indicate they got there.
As to the debate about "Is it a first ascent if the climber or climbers never make it down alive?" I can only say that reaching the top first does qualify as a first ascent, but it sure as hell doesn't qualify as a successful first ascent. If achieving the top is more important than coming back alive it is in my opinion a hallow achievement. Cimbing is a sport, not a death wish. The German teams on the Eiger in the 30's represent the worse senario in the sport. The "Reach the Summit or Die" approach to climbing is in my opinion not good for climbing. There will always be great risk in extreme climbing, but
there is a point when the chances of reaching the summit and coming back alive are so low that prudent climbers say, Turn back today and try again when conditions are better.

gingerking wrote:

Dingus Milktoast wrote:I hope no answer is EVER found. I wish people would stop looking. I like the enduring mysteries of our sport. If I found the ice man I wouldn't tell anyone.

DMT

+1

humans and this terrible itch we have to know. its not important and, IMO, the people who discover the greatest things in life are those who accept that there are things they will never understand. they dont chase ghosts untill they can prove that ghosts are just loose sheets in the wind, they enjoy that there are still wild things and unknowns in the world.

if i found a 1950s lookin camera on everest (never gonna happen) i would smash it to pieces. why? its not important.

they tried. they had more balls than anyone else. give them the respect they deserve and drop it out of respect. dead men have no pride so all that can be gained from knowing is just that, knowing. a cure for the itch of your curiosity. what a selfish sentiment.

+2

gingerking wrote:

Dingus Milktoast wrote:I hope no answer is EVER found. I wish people would stop looking. I like the enduring mysteries of our sport. If I found the ice man I wouldn't tell anyone.

DMT

+1

humans and this terrible itch we have to know. its not important and, IMO, the people who discover the greatest things in life are those who accept that there are things they will never understand. they dont chase ghosts untill they can prove that ghosts are just loose sheets in the wind, they enjoy that there are still wild things and unknowns in the world.

if i found a 1950s lookin camera on everest (never gonna happen) i would smash it to pieces. why? its not important.

they tried. they had more balls than anyone else. give them the respect they deserve and drop it out of respect. dead men have no pride so all that can be gained from knowing is just that, knowing. a cure for the itch of your curiosity. what a selfish sentiment.

+2.5. If the camera wouldn't be important for you. Why smashing to pieces Why not leaving for other who consider it would be important No, I wouldn't break thought its film could be fogged

humans and this terrible itch we have to know.

having to know, would probably be one of the main reasons mallory and irvine were there in the first place. I would have thought exploration is the pursuit of knowledge.

Search For a Frozen Camera Could Rewrite History Books On Everest's First Climbers.

http://www.velocitypress.com/mallory_ir ... #A127_Film