SoCalHiker wrote:
Sometimes I go on a long, streneous dayhike with 20+ miles, sometime just for an hour-long stroll along a stream and I enjoy both equally. Sometime I really want to go fast, sometimes I stope every 5 minutes and just marvel at the surroundings. The outdoors should not be seen as an outdoor gym. If you do, you will miss a lot actually.

I totally agree. I tend to be a slow hiker, in part because I want see where I am, to notice what is unique about the area.

The Chief wrote:To be down right honest with ya Gary, as far as the "tick list", summit numbers and the ratings deal, no.

I always have and do so today, seek the aesthetic process of it all, regardless the climb or route.

I never was a summit dude. Again, the process was and always has been my game. Those that have climbed with me, know that.

Maybe that is why I have enjoyed the adventure of the FA process or working what was once strictly an aid line into a clean aid line.

Many a time when someone approaches me regarding a route at a crag and ask what the rating is, I will tell em it is just another climb and that ratings are relative.

Anyone that has been at this game for a while will clearly understand that statement. An Alan Bartlett, Vern Clevenger, Bob Kamps or Tom Higgins etal BC 5.9 or 5.10 clearly defines that opinion.

Isn't chasing FAs just another variation of the numers game?

lisae wrote:

SoCalHiker wrote:
Sometimes I go on a long, streneous dayhike with 20+ miles, sometime just for an hour-long stroll along a stream and I enjoy both equally. Sometime I really want to go fast, sometimes I stope every 5 minutes and just marvel at the surroundings. The outdoors should not be seen as an outdoor gym. If you do, you will miss a lot actually.

I totally agree. I tend to be a slow hiker, in part because I want see where I am, to notice what is unique about the area.

Yep, totally agree with these two folks from California.

Sometimes, ya just gotta STOP and smell the damn coffee !

Buz Groshong wrote:Isn't chasing FAs just another variation of the numers game?

Chasing????

Who is chasing FA's.

Very apparent that you have absolutely no knowledge nor have you ever accomplished an FA.

I do not chase em... I spot potential, then get on em and get em done.

As a matter of fact, been working on the same one for well over a year trying to get it done clean and right.

Terrible and very ignorant anology BUZ.

But I expect nothing less from you.

lcarreau wrote:

lisae wrote:

SoCalHiker wrote:
Sometimes I go on a long, streneous dayhike with 20+ miles, sometime just for an hour-long stroll along a stream and I enjoy both equally. Sometime I really want to go fast, sometimes I stope every 5 minutes and just marvel at the surroundings. The outdoors should not be seen as an outdoor gym. If you do, you will miss a lot actually.

I totally agree. I tend to be a slow hiker, in part because I want see where I am, to notice what is unique about the area.

Yep, totally agree with these two folks from California.

Sometimes, ya just gotta STOP and smell the damn coffee !

Thanks you two

I am glad somebody sees it that way, too.

The Chief wrote:

Buz Groshong wrote:Isn't chasing FAs just another variation of the numers game?

Chasing????

Who is chasing FA's.

Very apparent that you have absolutely no knowledge nor have you ever accomplished an FA.

I do not chase em... I spot potential, then get on em and get em done.

As a matter of fact, been working on the same one for well over a year trying to get it done clean and right.

Terrible and very ignorant anology BUZ.

But I expect nothing less from you.

Sounds like I hit close to home.

Tick lists - sort of sometimes. Usually I think do I want to do this season (winter or summer) and try to do them. There are also mountains that I´d like to do for lots of reasons, so that´s a sort of to do list.
There are also a lot of things I want to do that have nothing to do with mountains but have to do with other aspects of my life - tasks, goals
No problem having goals I think. As for them turning into obsession, I´ll let you know after my weekly visit to my analyst.

The Chief wrote: (for my PTSD)

I am shocked, shocked to read you have PTSD. You sounding like my dad now makes sense

Ze wrote:

The Chief wrote: (for my PTSD)

I am shocked, shocked to read you have PTSD. You sounding like my dad now makes sense

Well dude, you spend 24 years of your life doing the nasty deeds in far away lands that I did to assist in the assurance of your freedoms and rights and you too would eventually surrender to the lurking destructive "monster" known as PTSD.

BUZ:

Please don't fondle yourself to much and blow a load of triumph on that one. You hit nothing other than the ignorance button.

FA's are a kin to painting and creating a piece of art on canvas. They have absolutely nothing to do with any "numbers" or anything of the likes.

You would know that if you indeed have ever partaken in accomplishing one.

Rick, I don't think anyone is really shocked that you have psychiatric needs. He was just messing with you.

Dow Williams wrote:Rick, I don't think anyone is really shocked that you have psychiatric needs.

Psychological not psychiatric.

Big difference as I haven't terminated any civilians as of yet. If I ever do, then it will definitely become a "psychiatric" issue.

The Chief wrote:

Ze wrote:

The Chief wrote: (for my PTSD)

I am shocked, shocked to read you have PTSD. You sounding like my dad now makes sense

Well dude, you spend 24 years of your life doing the nasty deeds in far away lands that I did to assist in the assurance of your freedoms and rights and you too would eventually surrender to the lurking destructive "monster" known as PTSD.

BUZ:

Please don't fondle yourself to much and blow a load of triumph on that one. You hit nothing other than the ignorance button.

FA's are a kin to painting and creating a piece of art on canvas. They have absolutely nothing to do with any "numbers" or anything of the likes.

You would know that if you indeed have ever partaken in accomplishing one.

The fact that you call it "accomplishing one" indicates that it is definitely one of those "list" or "numbers" things. An artist doesn't "accomplish" a painting.

By the way, all of the juvenile insults tell me (and everyone else) that I've definitely hit home.

Buz Groshong wrote:By the way, all of the juvenile insults tell me (and everyone else) that I've definitely hit home.

Really?

What ever Buzz, whatever.

Besides, like I posted, how would you know anything about an FA firsthand if you have never participated in one?

Now that really confirms your juvenile stance of ignorance.

Rather it be for one's own ego, for wanting something new on every climb, or for their own methodical goals they set. Why does anybody give a shit? If a climber sets his/her sights on 500 peaks, all class 2 and all less than 13k feet and that's their goal. Who cares? If someone else sets sights on all 8K peaks and nothing else, then to climb all 8k's again, who cares? If in the end their happy with their climbing and own accomplishments, that's what matters. It doesn't matter if some of you folks pat them on the back or have issues with their thinking. At the end of the day, all involved in climbs are hopefully able to sit and have a BS session about their day. You should be able to have one who climbed a 14K up a class 2, one who did a 10 pitch 5.10, another who climbed a 12K class 5 and another who did 20 miles round trip up a 10K walk-up and no egos get in the way of what each did.

I think there are two entirely different kinds of lists being talked about here.

The first is a list of goals. A list of items (climbs, hikes, etc.) that are appealing for one reason or another.

The second is a list based on numbers (e.g. 14ers, 8000ers, 5.14, etc) or boundaries (7 summits, state highpoints).

I think it is critical to distinguish between the two. The first, in my opinion, is quite logical, healthy, and leads to satisfying experiences. The second is quite irrational. After all, 14,000 ft is 4,267 m. 8,000 m is 26,247 ft. They are human measurements and the cut-off makes no sense if you switch the measurement. Is a 13,999 ft peak less exciting than a 14,000 ft peak? The only convenience of such lists is to spray to others your accomplishment (it's easier to convey "I've climbed XX 14ers" than "I've done a bunch of awesome routes"). It's the same deal with political boundaries.

No offense to anyone who is shooting for a numbers-list, but wouldn't it be much more exciting to go for the ## best/most appealing routes rather than the ## peaks above a certain elevation?