UKC

I'm struggling with this one. Both involve transporting large numbers of people to the heart of the lakes by road, dump large numbers of people on the hill at one time on a limited number of routes and both rely on local 'good will' to sort out problems.

Why is the OMM defended to the hilt on this forum and the Three Peaks 'Challenge' so derided ?

In reply to GrahamD: the omm is held on 1 weekend in a different venue each year, therefore there is 1 weekend of many people wherever it is held, this probably brings in some money to local communities through people buying some food/petrol locally in some instances.

The 3 peaks challenge is held potentially most weekends through the summer season and often involves late night noise in the Lakes followed by no money being spent as the nature of the event precludes stopping in the lakes before/after

In reply to GrahamD: The three peaks challenge is a long term strain on the same area - same paths, same villages, same rescue teams.

They cause noise at night, leave toilets a mess and generally put a strain on things.

In reply to Beowulf:

>.......and generally put a strain on things.

Isn't that exactly the critiscism being levelled at the OMM ?

In reply to GrahamD:

I think the 3 Peaks always puts a strain on things; the OMM did this year in exceptional circumstances. Another difference I would cite is the immense skill/fitness/competence of the OMM competitors compared with the relative 'amateurism' of most 3 Peakers.

In reply to MattG:

I don't buy the local communities thing. Unless someone can show differently, I don't see why support groups for Three Peaks 'Challenge' should spend less money. The OMM competitors are out all weekend so they are hardly on a spending spree. In truth neither event is going to support the economy to the same extent as Mr and Mrs average staying in b&B and pottering round Ambleside all day.

I would like to think there WAS a difference (snobbery ?) but I don't see it as all that clear cut. At the end of the day dumping large numbers on the hill for any event is going to be a strain.

In reply to MattG:


So dont 3-peak challenge groups ever buy petrol, occasaionally stop for a quick pint or go to Keswick chippie?





Not in the Lakes, but I suspect most 3-peak groups stop for a night either before or afterwards, in Fort William or in Snowdonia.

In reply to GrahamD: The OMM wasn't a strain as much as a shock - semantics I know. There's nothing unexpected about problems arising from the three peak challenge, as it's going on regularly throughout the summer.

In reply to Beowulf: Sorry, that's not that clear what I meant. I was getting at that the repeat nature of the event is the problem, with repeated callouts for one team.

In reply to RichardBennett:

The three peakers are capable of walking up a hill by a big path in mid summer, the OMM competitors are capable of cross country in bad weather in October. The competence is proportioate with the 'challenge' in hand.

In reply to GrahamD: The big difference seems to be the OMM dumps a lot of people in one place, but that place changes from year to year. The TPC has a constant stream of people going to the same place every week.

Not making a judgement but there's the difference.

In reply to GrahamD:

'Challenge' so derided ?

I suppose one difference is that 3PC is arranged by lots of individuals rather than an organisation. I think you are right though both have equal responsibilities to society and the environment and both are failing to an extent to meet them.

In reply to GrahamD:

Surely the OMM competitors spend more in the local community ALL YEAR ROUND. Nearly all will have competed in some or many fell races during the year and go racing or training every weekend. A pint, or two, after is mandatory, together with camping etc.

For a lot of the TPCers it is the only time they have been in the hills, which is why for them it's a so called 'challenge'.

Cheers, Ali

In reply to Papillon:
There's a constant stream of people going to the top of Ben Nevis, Snowdon and Scafell Pike anyway. I wonder what proportion of walkers on these hills in the summer are 3peakers?

Surely the main problem with the 3PC is the constant stream of people arriving in Wasdale at anti-social times of night?

In reply to GrahamD:

Except they don't both rely on local good will when things go wrong, or certainly not in the case of the OMM. For the 2,000 competitors a grand total of 13 appear to have needed rescue which I suspect is about par for the course. The fact that locals offered potentially drier shelter was very welcome I am sure, but not the same as those people being unable to look after themselves.

In reply to tony:

That's the sort of thing I meant.

In reply to MJH:

Its pretty much the same isn't it. If they had really been able and willing to look after themselves they wouldn't have felt the need to accept the shelter.

In reply to MG:

Actually quite a few three peaks events/challenges are organised by charities. A few years ago I was heading down to Wasdale from Scafell and the route up Scafell Pike was being marshalled by people in hi vis jackets emblazoned with the charity's name.

ALC

In reply to MG:


So when you are walking along a road in the freezing cold and pooring rain and someone says to you "Would you like a lift and a cup of tea and a sit round my nice warm fire until the weather clears?", do you instinctively say "No thanks, I am quite happy freezing my nads off in these elements and I am positively looking forward to crawling into a wet tent before tucking into a museli bar."

In reply to Jon Dittman:


Depends. But if I accepted I wouldn't then claim to be entirely independent.

In reply to MG: Not at all the same. Why refuse willingly offered assistance? That doesn't change the fact that without that assistance the competitors would have been fine (if wetter). Unless of course your point is to prove that these people "needed" rescuing...

In reply to MJH:

Do you know the equivalent ratio for 3peakers?

In reply to tony:

Its not really comparable, the OMM competitors are far more experienced and prepared, but equally they are not sticking to easy paths and it's harder navigating. Plus its at a tougher time of year than most Peakers usually set out.

In reply to Al Evans:

I know they're not comparable in terms of the nature of the event and abilities of the participants. However, there seems to be an idea that 13 rescues out of 2000 makes the OMM somehow okay. All I'm wondering is what the equivalent figures are for 3peakers?

In reply to GrahamD:

"The competence is proportioate with the 'challenge' in hand"

And so, doesn't that answer your question: the OMM is lauded because of that greater competence, versus the relative 'amateurism' (I don't want to say incompetence as that wouldn't be fair to all) of many 3 Peakers? I have no evidence, but I am sure that the 'per competitor' MR call-out rate is far higher amongst the 3 Peakers.

In reply to GrahamD:

Firstly I'll put my cards on the table:

I'm selfish about the hills. I like the hills to myself.
I dislike the hills being used for large organised events.
I am under no illusions that I am am somehow 'not part of the problem' of overcrowded hills and traffic jams.

From that perspective (and I don't think that its a unique perspective)a mountain marathon and a 3PC are equally intrusive. I still haven't heard a convincing reason why opinions are so polarised, with the runners somehow being the good guys of the hill whilst the 3PCers somehow being the lowest of the low. IN LARGE NUMBERS both are a menace.

In reply to MJH:


No its not. My point is events (and individuals) don't operate in a vacuum and consideration of the possible effects on others should be taken in to account if things go wrong. This is as true of OMM as it is for three peak challenge events.

If one possibility is several hundred people stuck in a valley, this should be planned for and a contingency plan made I am sure the farmer at Gatesgarth would rather not have had his barn full of runners but felt he had no choice but to accommodate them - he could hardly say "no, go and swim in that field for 10 hours" when he had a barn available. The OMM imposed on him. In a similar way 3PC impose on facilities at Wasdale to a disproportionate extent.

In reply to GrahamD: You want differences though - which are primarily frequency and location. In a Mtn Marathon the other difference is concentration in a particular place - despite what some have said you don't get everyone from the whole OMM in one particular place except from start and poss mid-camp (sometimes different classes have different mid-camps). This is because of the array of classes, possible routes, staggered start times, ability etc

In reply to MG: But that is a fallacy - you are making entirely unfounded supposition. There is really no suggestion at all that there was anyone "stuck" in the valley. The fact is that if people couldn't look after themselves or be prepared to get wet and have a miserable night's sleep then they shouldn't have been there.

Why do you feel the need to make it out to be a drama that it clearly wasn't (except to those who know little about MMs).

In reply to GrahamD: (Generally) The 3 peaks challenge stock up a van, they drive to each area and barely spend anything bar the start and finish. We've worked quite a bit with challenges this year, not a huge fan, but the money's good so we do the work. The people who complete act differently to those who complete a single stage event. IMO they are more mentally tired, almost relieved, rather than the elation and pride you see at single stage walks.

The OMM will give money to the area. Stocking up before hand, B&B's before and after, campsites, toilets brought in.

I agree it's a strain on any area. So is climbing. Look at a climbed crag and an unclimbed crag, the ecological impact of climbing is considerable. In fact probably more so than walking. In walked areas there is vegetation surrounding the paths. On well climbed crags the cracks (normally the location of soil accumulation and therefore flora and therefore fauna) are stripped. Any out door sport leads to erosion.

The OMM also sends people over different routes where as 3 peakers almost all use the same routes, that could be argued as a good point or a bad point (i.e. concentrated on maintained paths). However as said I think the OMM event is too big.

The OMM is one location. Many won't travel that far. For the 3 peaks everyone travels at least from home > Scotland > Wales > home. For the OMM many will travel inside 2-3 hrs there, 2-3 hrs back.

My main criticism of the 3 peaks is there is too much car time compared to hill time and it's a mentally long tiring day. I took a group up Snowdon a while back and some of the group really didn't seem to enjoy the morning despite glorious weather.

In reply to MJH:

There is plenty of suggestion and photographic and video records. I don't know why you are trying to deny this. If they could leave the valley why would they choose to stay in a cramped, cold barn?



It clearly was a major failure in organisation. It is stupid to deny this. I am supportive of people taking responsibility for themselves. The reason I am making a issue of it is that if MMs and other events pretend they have no effect on the outside world when they clearly do, they will be regulated by people who don't understand them. Surely much better to acknowledge the potential problems and manage them themselves?

In reply to GrahamD:

Have to say that I tend to agree with you thus far, I tend to avoid being part of any large group when in the mountains, be it climbing, skiing, moutain biking or walking - 2 or 4 seems the right number AFAIAC

2000 does seem a pretty big number, but what you have to remember is that it is once a year, and in differant locations every year, and they avoid the most popular months of the year. The residents of Seathwaite and Wasdale rightly complain about the numbers of people, every weekend, throughout the summer.

The big problem of the TPC for me is the fact that it involves so much motoring as part of a mountain challenge.

In reply to MG:

I'd guess the OMM organisers approached him and asked permission as a landowner for access for an organised event on open access land, as is required by the CROW act. If his fields were used for parking then he most probably received payment from the OMM.

In reply to IainRUK:

What I'm getting from your post (you might not have ment it this way !) is that the difference is a matter of degree rather than one of being of polar opposites ? In both cases improvements can be made by controlling numbers.

BTW To balance up the local economy argument you missed the fact that the 3PCers raise considerably more for charidee.

In reply to GrahamD:

I doubt that over a year 3PCrs raise more than fell runners, plus other sorts of runners.

In reply to MG:
The farmer at Gatesgarth has been paid to provide his farm as the overnight campsite and event centre - which was all set up for this long in advance. Under the cirumstances the runners were allowed in the barn, instead of only the officials/volunteer helpers being in there.

There are portaloos there and everything else needed for an overnight accommodation of the competitors.

In reply to Matt R Horn:

Not really know. They'll fuel up a minibus and that will get them to Snowdonia easily. All the groups we have guided so far have mainly akll left the area after a shower and food. They were entirely stocked up. I doubt any of them purchased anything at all in the lakes.

In reply to Heike:


Ah. Fair enough. Was the slate mine involved too?

In reply to GrahamD:

I agree the OMM is too big. I won't do it at the moment, I intend to do more MM's but would go for the GL3D, Rab, HMM ahead of that. It does attract people because it's the popular one, the name. I also think it attracts the 'extreme sports' market. When in fact many of the classes are basically hill walks.


While I agree, I think there are far better challenges. We ALWAYS recommend alternatives to the 3PC, but we also accept the jobs as money's money.

In reply to IainRUK: On what basis are any of the classes hill walks Iain? Length? That would make the majority of FRA events walks.

In reply to Beowulf: Time and length. Have you done some of these MM's. Some walk around. Short distances done at walking pace, therefore it's a hill walk.

In reply to Al Evans:

Hmmm. Restricting this to Mountain Marathons and 3PCers, though ? how many runners in the OMM are sponsored for charidee ? pretty much every 3PCer is.

In reply to IainRUK: Several, thanks! The winners of classes like the C tend to be very competent and fast orienteers. The distances are only short relative to the longer classes, they'd be AL if they were fell races.

Anyhow, the Saunders has FAR shorter classes, AND a walking class.

In reply to Beowulf: The elite in the Saunders is brilliant, because you can overnight at any of the checkpoints!

In reply to Beowulf: yes and the Saunders is a smaller event held in July.

Only just an AL. C is 40 k over 2 days, 20k/day, 12 miles? with what 1000m per day ascent? maybe less.

The Elite is normally a marathon per day with 3000m ascent over 2 days. The classic Al's would be 2500m of ascent.

Interesting what happened at the GL3D this year. I think it was made harder on purpose to make it a higher standard event. Maybe the OMM should go that way as it's held in a period of often bad weather. make it harder, less of the easier classes.

In reply to IainRUK: Be very careful Iain - you take away a large percentage of people that do MMs with that. I am also not sure that it is very helpful to compare fell running and MMs - MMs are so much more than fell running.

For example you can do relatively well in a MM by being reasonably hill fit, but good at route planning and navigating - that is a facet to MMs that I would hate to be lost (partly because I am no longer a good fell runner!).

In reply to MJH: I know. I totally agree. The problem is by having shorter classes people see them as ideal ways to enter the sport so you do attrack novices out into the hills in October.

Either they leave them as they are and just let people get themselevs out of the shit, or they make them harder so only experienced people will be tempted to enter.

I'm not comparing fell running with MM's beowolf was.

In reply to IainRUK: But ALs are one day events without carrying your kit and food. It isn't a valid comparison.

There are two issues here - sheer numbers (which you could limit regardless of class) and difficulty (which you could remove easier classes). All the agreement has been about sheer numbers. There has been no suggestion that those in lower classes got into any more difficulty than those in harder classes.

In reply to IainRUK: C this year was advertised as 20km, 1450m of ascent, which is comfortably AL (380ft per mile, against the requisite 250ft per mile).

In reply to MJH: Look, beowolf brought up the = AL.

In reply to IainRUK: I'm only comparing them to fell running as you introduced the idea that some classes just involve walking. I'm on of the many people who are more than capable of completing the top classes, but choose to to a shorter class like B or medium score so we can do it a decent racing pace.

In reply to IainRUK: I guess then it is down to how rigourously applied the vetting is. Anyone entering should have some degree of experience.

As I said I don't think there is any suggestion that the less difficult classes got into any more difficulty than the harder classes.

In reply to MJH:

And yes there has been. There have been questions that maybe not everyone was experienced enough to cope and my view (and others) of let them make a call for themselves is harsh. If that was the case then the easiest way is to make the event harder. Entry requirements are easy to get around, lets face it finishing a short AL isn't hard.

On the TV/in the press a number of competitors were complaining, I'd hazard a guess that these will have been from the easier classes the 'I was scared' rubbish. One guy was saying he didn't think it should have gone ahead, yet he set off. Total lack of personal responsibility. For me the most dissapointing thing about this is that some of the runners themselves have been complaining. A minority thankfully. You don't want to run in bad weather, you don't run. As I said earlier, I woke up on the morning of one AL, and just couldn't bring myself to run in that weather that day, so decided not to start. Other times I've entered long races and loved the bad weather.

Obviously at the moment the OMM is attracting people who aren't prepared for what it entails. Maybe not much, but definitly some. rather than change these events for those who want to run, those who want led around a course in perfect safety should somehow be put off.

In reply to MJH:

Why not have the OMM as an end of year best of class race? Have the other MMs as a league and the best ten/twenty teams from each class over the season get to go in the OMM. Not sure how many classes are in the OMM but lets say eight, so either eighty or 160 teams.

Benefits - you only get committed MMers entering; the numbers are much less and more manageable.

Downsides - would increase numbers in and pressure on other MMs as people tried to get series points; people who only tend to do the OMM would be excluded; it woulldn't be as accessible.

ALC

In reply to GrahamD:
Read this might help you make sense of it......
After the OMM
By Rob Howard

When the 2008 OMM came to an end at Seathwaite on Sunday most competitors returned along the road from Seatoller, having walked over Honister Pass from Cockermouth or Gatesgarth. Some spent the night on the pass, others at the Lakeland Sheep and Wool Centre or the school at Cockermouth, and most in the barn at the overnight camp at Gatesgarth. Those in Cockermouth School were even provided with a cooked breakfast before setting off back!

Something that has been largely overlooked is the fact that the flooding was more severe than even the valleys were used to, or expecting, and many local residents were flooded out and needed assistance. (One of the difficulties the police had was that they had to make decisions on how to spread thin resources and this may have contributed to their criticism of the OMM.)

As I spoke to Graham race organiser Jen Longbottom walked passed and heard the comment about their being stopped at Honister. “It would have been better they’d let them come here,” she said. Clearly she felt that the competitors had been stopped from returning to HQ where they could be accounted for and looked after - even if they did have wade deep water to get there. (Teams were stopped on the pass first by the owner of the Honister Slate Mine, and later by the Police.)

In the registration barn those who had retired had their Sportident tags cut off and their return registered and they were kept supplied with a constant supply of tea and soup. Some racers had spent the night there rather than camping and one was Brian Leyton, who was completing his 97th mountain marathon. He was aiming to run his 100th at the next LAMM ... and he still is, reasoning that as he hadn’t retired this event still counted as completed! (Not sure that one will hold up Brian!)

Outside registration the Cockermouth MRT were coordinating with Jen Longbottom and Roger Smith to complete the checking off of returning racers. At this time there were only a few still to be checked in and they were discussing putting out appeals on local radio to ensure they were not sat in a B&B somewhere nearby.

There was some frustration about this checking process on all sides. The Police didn’t seem to understand the nature of the event and felt everyone should be quickly accounted for. But then they were fielding the calls from worried relatives (resulting from the clichéd, overhyped and inaccurate media coverage) and unable to answer them and the information from HQ was not reaching them ... or the national media.

On the other hand when the Police contacted Mike Parsons to tell him everyone had left the Sheep and Wool centre and he asked for the names of those who stayed there ... he was told they’d not been taken!

Earlier in the day an RAF Sea King had passed over, clearly searching for the remaining competitors, and at one point it landed so the crew could talk to the rescue team. (It was not asked for by the race and as has been said in the forums the RAF supply this service as part of their training. There is no additional ‘taxpayer cost’ and the MRT teams are all volunteers supported by public donation.)

In fact several MRT members were competing, including the leader of the Cockermouth Team, who called them up when he got to the mid-camp at Gatesgarth.

Here there was an injury to a volunteer from the Glossop Scout Group, sustained when both mess tents blew away, injuring his leg and knocking him unconscious. (This may have been the head injury reported in the press.) He was dealt with by other members of the mid-camp team initially, and then by the event first aider Andrew Wilson - a serving paramedic - whilst awaiting the arrival after 40 minutes of the local ambulance service. Andrew and the local staff then decided to take him off to hospital with suspected knee and neck injuries.

According to Mike Parsons the condition of the mid-camp was really the tipping point for the decision to call the race off – rather than the weather conditions on the hill. The rising flood water forced vehicles to be moved and then threatened the power supply for the cabins installed at the two finishes, then the accident took place and the organising team felt maintaining the mid-camp was no longer feasible in the conditions.

The press accounts of 13 injuries may have been inflated by being combined with other incidents not related to the race, but the full details on this have yet to come out. Cockermouth MRT told me they attended two fractured ankles and one marshal with mild hypothermia, and the female competitor rescued after being washed downstream was helicoptered out with other walkers (not competitors)who were in difficulties.

There was also a major rescue undertaken by the Kendal team who sent me this comment;

Whilst the media were hyping up the search for missing people that never was in the Borrowdale/Honister/Gatesgarth area, across the way in Langdale the real search was on for three genuine missing, under equipped walkers in upper Oxendale/Red Tarn area.

Both Langdale, Ambleside & Kendal MRT's were involved all night. The walkers were found by a search dog at about 3am cut off by a raging torrent in Crinkle Ghyll, tired, cold, wet and frightened. It took Kendal MRT's full swift water rescue squad to get to them and bring them to safety in the dark. When we got home and reported it to the media they were not interested! Your "missing" 1700 was a much better story than one of Kendal MRT's most technical rescues for a long time. Long Live The OMM!

P.S. The Police had asked us to bring our Land Rovers to Honister to help with the evacuation to the Sheep and Wool centre but after talking with Keswick MRT we decided to stay at home where we were really needed!

One pair who did not need rescuing were Dave Prentice and Trevor Smith (both 64), a pair who have completed 29 KIMM and OMM’s (the most anybody has). They were one of the last pairs to walk in and by this time the media had arrived in force, so they were met above HQ by two photographers and accosted by newspaper, radio and TV reporters when they walked into the farm yard. (They were milling around having arrived as the last competitors left, looking for the story they themselves had fabricated.) They were not going to get much controversy out of Dave!

“We aced it!” was his comment to me. “We were wondering whether to retire and when we passed Black Sail YHA it was too good to resist, so we went in there. They were very good, letting us send them a cheque later by post, and we played cards and drank G&T’s all night!”

When I asked Dave if the conditions were the worst he’d encountered on the event he thought about it for a long time. “I think the rain was worse in Galloway and the wind worse in the Howgills,” he said, “but for both combined these were just about the worst conditions.”

The pair were soon on their way home, which could not be said for the unfortunate competitors who parked at a dip in the road where the floods were worst. A number of cars were filled with water, but they were not the only ones caught out, there were abandoned cars all over the area and many others down Borrowdale after the floods subsided. Another unfortunate incident was that the farmer (who was busy helping competitors get out) lost a number of sheep to the floods.

Now the 2008 OMM is all over the analysis and repercussions will rumble on for some time and opinions will remain deeply divided on the rights and wrongs of the decisions taken, but looking at my photos from Seathwaite one thing stands out. Most people were still smiling. They’d come for an adventure and to test themselves, and that is what they got ... along with some press notoriety!

In reply to Beowulf: "I'm only comparing them to fell running as you introduced the idea that some classes just involve walking."

Quite clearly some do. look at the timings. 7-8 hrs or so to cover 12 miles. 1.5 miles per hour. That's a hill walk. That's not elitist. I'm just saying that that isn't running.

The percentage dropping out increases considerably as you move through the classes, therefore I think it's fair to say the lower categories generally didn't cope as well.

In reply to IainRUK: I would say there was more scope for reducing the size of the other classes to be more similar to A class - around 150 teams. Then introduce a blanket entry requirement for the race of a certain number of summer MMs or some of the longest fell races. That's if the race did need reducing in size, personally I don't find it to be a problem.

In reply to a lakeland climber: I am not sure how you would compare the races - they each have slightly different styles and different class structures. The other thing is location - I have not been able to do some MMs because they were just too far/difficult to get to/from without taking more time off (not always possible).

You then risk favouring committed rather than the best.

Personally I think the way the KIMM/OMM does it is fairer which provided you apply for an appropriate class and it is over-subscribed then you go into a ballot (which IIRC is weighted to favour past winners and those who didn't get in last year).

In reply to IainRUK: I agree with you that people shouldn't be entering if they aren't prepared or able to take personal responsibility. We were umming and ah'ing whether we would go, but we decided the conditions would probably actually help us (we were prepared to suffer and neither of us is in great shape) - the point being we thought it through and made a choice. Didn't get to go because my flight back to the UK got cancelled, but I was absolutely gutted.

I think your supposition that those who were complaining is unfounded.

You eventually end up asking who is better placed to compete in a MM - a fit, experienced walker who is good at navigating or a fell runner with perhaps ropier nav skills. I don't think there is a one size fits all answer to that (not that I am suggesting you are saying there is!).

In reply to MJH:


I think there is. The experienced walker any day. Something fell runners fail to understand. I've discussed this frequently with RO's who seem to hold to this silly rule of past race experience. I know one RO who refused a very experienced and qualified climbing guide entry into a local race..

In reply to MJH:

I'm not saying that's how you *should* do it, just a suggestion.

I don't think there's a big problem with the numbers at the moment - at least on the hill where the different courses mean that you are unlikely to get more than a few competitors at any one location.

The main problem, as I see it, is at the overnight camp and the event centre where by the nature of these things everyone is concentrated together.

What's the current limit? 1500 teams? Maybe reduce it to 1000.

ALC

In reply to IainRUK: The winners of the elite using the same calculations you seem to have used last year averaged 3.7 mph on day 1 (if you use the listed distance which will be wrong, but then so will yours). That's still walking pace, and that's the winners.

In reply to dazza72:

Actually I'm not trying to hype up this particular event and it does seem tha there has been a lot of over reaction. I was more interested in exploring the differing attitudes of posters between mass participation organised mountain marathon events such as OMM and mass participation organised walking events such as the 3PC.

There is a slight whiff of hypocricy in the air. Either organised mass participation events in the hills are a bad thing or they are not. They don't become 'good' just because its your particular hobby.

In reply to GrahamD: The major difference as has been repeated several times is the frequency and location of the two.

OMM - once a year, different parts of the country, often in odd parts of the country, e.g. didn't see a single non-competitor in the Lowther Hills

3PC - regularly throughout summer. Same place, same roads, same paths, same rescue teams, same public toilets, same towns, weekend after weekend.

In reply to Beowulf: 3.7 mph is not walking pace in the hills. 3.7 mph may just be walking pace on the flat, but certainly not when averaged out for a day on the hills. 1.5 mph is. Look at Jura. 16 miles, 4 hrs get a whiskey glass, only the elite do sub 4, that's 4 mph.

In reply to IainRUK: You have still picked the very slowest time out of three hundred people which is hardly rigorous. I'd agree that anyone taking that length of time to complete the course should maybe not be there, but that's hardly a reason to remove the class considering the majority are doing it in a perfectly adequate time.

In reply to Beowulf: Still a huge number of people in the lower classes fail to complete. It must have been near to 50%, compared with 10% at the higher classes. That does suggest they struggled with the conditions more compared with the elite entrants.

Someone the other day said 'People who enter the OMM are the cream of the fell running world' or words very similar. This is the sort of view that encourages people to try and do it when maybe they aren't up to it. The OMM does have the name and prestige that no other event has, and maybe this isn't a good thing.

In reply to Beowulf:

Do you think that difference is sufficient to condemn the 3PC and wholehartedly support mass participation marathons in the same areas ?

In reply to IainRUK: I completely agree with you that there are probably people in the lower classes who simply shouldn't be there, but I think a more stringent vetting process is the answer rather than removing those classes all together.

In reply to GrahamD: As it stands at the moment, yes. If three peaks challengers were willing to use a different set of summits (some are) I would feel differently - http://www.globalchallenge.uk.com/typical-events/3mountain.php is a more responsible take on it.

Having said this, I have significant reservations that driving makes up so much of the event, and that time can be made up by simply driving faster.

In reply to IainRUK: I don't know the conditions or terrain for Jura, but both those factors will influence the results massively, particularly the conditions.

If you look at LAMM results for 2007 3 from 16 elite and 5 from 21 novices failed to complete...not too dissimilar despite opposite ends of the scale.

In reply to Beowulf: http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/news/article.asp?UAN=1505 sums up most the objections quite well.

In reply to Beowulf:

Not any more. The groups we had were so fustrated and being sat doing 60 in a restricted mini bus

In reply to IainRUK: Haha! Now that I can cope with, fair enough.

In reply to GrahamD:
Can't be bothered reading the whole thread so someone's probably said this already.

"rely on local 'good will' to sort out problems"
The OMM did nothing of the sort. Apart from half a dozen people with injuries, left to our own devices we'd all have sorted ourselves out. The problems only started when (possibly well-meaning) people unconnected with the event decided to help out, by preventing people returning to the event centre, and bussing them all over the lake District instead.

And there was a comment about people not spending much in the area. Most competitors seem to stay in B&Bs/hotels on the night before the race, eat in local restaurants, and drink in local pubs. This was especially so this year I think, I spoke to someone who tried to book a hotel when they saw the weather forecast, and ended up staying in Whitehaven as they couldn't find anything closer with vacancies. So that's a few tens of thousands of pounds for the local economy straight off. I bet one or two stopped off in Keswick to replace damage/defective gear as well.