In reply to a lakeland climber: I like the purity of the 3 peaks.. it's just a run.. its a classic mountain running I guess.. more than fell.. I see why people dislike it.. but I just liked its no nonsense style.. just run hard.. no nav.. no technical sections, just hills.
Carnethy is in the pentlands.. lovely fell running area, probably one of the highest quality fields there is. This year they are picking entries.. so its not so easy to get in, but means it will be true quality.
I've not actually done the race.. 2 failures.. once even got to the start line but was throwing up.. second time broke my arm just before, but my sister lives nearby so run there a lot. I just love the place.
In reply to Jim Hamilton: Snowdon.. aye its a classic.. but its another classic mountain race.. rather than a fell race, so probably like the 3 peaks in that respect. If you appreciate those races for what they are, I think they are great.
8 minutes.. self timed.. and the record holder refused to ratify the record of someone who beat it due to questionable timing.. by himself..
In reply to ablackett: Aye there's so many.. I love the High peak marathon.. such a unique team event.. then the 3 peaks yacht race.. I won't do them too often, but classic experiences.
In Scotland Stuc a Chroin, Jura, Ben Nevis and goat fell were justifiable classics.
But years ago I did the two breweries and really enjoyed that.
In the peak I'm still to do (well finish edale skyline), but I really enjoyed kinder trog.. again a more traily fell race. But I like mixing it up, so also do the classic trail, mountain and road races..
Strangely Scafell pike never gets that strong a field, of the 3 highest peak races that's by far the smallest and low key. Nice race still.
Hi tony, the Carnethy 5 is on the 16th of February this year. Thought I'd shout up! Ballot selection started yesterday and today. Entry was through the Si Entry system. I was lucky to get a place in it, check out the Carnethy page for info
I take a bit of issue with your criticism of race organisers Iain particularly your use of the word 'joke'. They're in a bit of a difficult position with a great deal of responsibility.
Several have been sued up in the lakes after the deaths of competitors and that is a situation I would never ever want to be faced with.
They give up a lot of time to put on these events and it takes far more effort than people give credit for, and the marshalling that goes on too.
If they feel that conditions may leave themselves or the competitors vulnerable then if they want to scale back the race that is their choice. If you don't like it you can run it anyway- just not in the race environment. I know this goes against the ethos of fell running being independent and taking responsibility for yourself but seemingly waivers or responsibility don't seem to count for much legally....
"Several have been sued up in the lakes after the deaths of competitors and that is a situation I would never ever want to be faced with. "
This has never actually happened, has it?
I have been a race organiser in Scotland and to my understanding it would not be likely for this to ever happen to an organiser in Scotland. The law might work differently in England but I am not aware of an actual case against a race organiser.
To the best of my knowledge there have, sadly, been only three deaths in Lakeland fell races in the last 25 years. The first was on the Kentmere Horsehoe when it was run much earlier in the year and in the opposite direction to the current race - the changes were made following the inquest. In this instance, the deceased's husband offered his support for the RO, there were no legal proceedings. See pages 204 & 205 in Feet in the Clouds.
The second was last year on the Buttermere Sail Beck race when an elderly competitor died. The circumstances haven't been determined yet, I don't think the inquest has concluded.
The third was again last year on the Ian Hodgson relays when a competitor, Darren Holloway, suffered a cardiac arrest and despite the best efforts of other competitors and passers by died. (I think it was the same condition suffered by Fabrice Muamba)
ROs are in a difficult position, they send a group of scantily clad runners off on a course and hope that they all return. Invariably they do, whether by luck or judgement is hard to tell. It's not helped where runners turn up with no safety kit even though it's stipulated in the race notes and for longer races in the FRA rules.
I'm not happy to discuss specific cases on an open forum as i'm not in posession of all the facts- much of what i've heard has been through the grapevine.
Regardless my original point still stands. Race organisers need support and should be supported by the fell running community and if they decide due to conditions that a race should be shortened or cancelled I support them and their decision.
I totally agree with what you are saying that race organisers need support and having carried the role out know that it often feels like a very thankless and unappreciated task.
I am aware of the cases above but to my knowledge no race organiser has been sued as a result. To say so is not going to help ease the mind of current organisers and future organisers when considering what decisions to take in race management and organisation.
Apologies if i've alarmed you. I haven't heard directly of any race organisers being sued but i'm aware that certainly in my fell running community the threat of such action against race organisers has been discussed or mentioned as a possibility- I mistakenly thought that it had actually occured so as a result my original comment was somewhat alarmist and I retract that statement.
The link I posted above seemed to give a very good overview of the current situation in my mind though. Maybe worthy of a wider debate in the fell running community?
The course was ran in wet cloudy weather.. most front runners were dissapointed. As winner I said.. 'I understood the decision, it was the organisers to make, I just disagreed'..
I used my name.. no hiding.. no attacks..
Re the wild use of abbreviations.. it makes it more dangerous.. as does shortening races prematurely.. runners can start to think that if a full course is run its safe.. the runner should take responsibility..
Re the abbreviations.. if a runner starts to think 'well NS doesn't actually mean anything' when they see NS when its actually needed they could be in the shit..
I was out today near glen clova, A classic race, cancelled, it was very serious, in cloud you could end up in a number of different glens.. that was NS..
I saw a local race in North Wales.. NS.. its a trail race..
> (In reply to jjmacewan)
> Good overview here:
> I'm not happy to discuss specific cases on an open forum as i'm not in posession of all the facts- much of what i've heard has been through the grapevine.
> Regardless my original point still stands. Race organisers need support and should be supported by the fell running community and if they decide due to conditions that a race should be shortened or cancelled I support them and their decision.
I think they should.. but runners should feel free to say what they think.. the organiser made the call from the valley floor.. as a runner up top I was in a t shirt all day.. never cold at all..
Yeah the nav would have been hard.. as the organiser said 'winds were 35-40 mph'.. so strongish.. nout more.. 10 C.. so not cold.. so I thinkits fair enough for runners to say 'no we want to run in those conditions'
Fell running isn't mountain running, its the whole package, nav, mountain sense, ability, fitness.. so let runners run in the clag..
At the moment there is too little focus on runners.. their ability to nav, the gear they have, and the trust the place in marshalls and organisers..
In reply to Mr Ed: Ed also.. in Trail running last month was a post from a reader about 2012 highlights..
'Running the pedol Peris.. I'd never ran that far even in a whole weekend'
So a MIC doesn't get in.. lack of experience.. yet someone who has done follow the leader (I know the person who posted), very inexperienced.. got in..
It's partly why I'm opposed to fell running taking its own lead in guiding initiatives.. to be a fell running guide you now need to do a 2 day course... no assessment.. no requirements to be first aid qualified..
To be a walking guide over the same terrain its a tried and tested ML training and assessment.. plus first aid..
One ticks boxes.. one is fit for purpose.. which one is a threat to the sport?
> It's partly why I'm opposed to fell running taking its own lead in guiding initiatives.. to be a fell running guide you now need to do a 2 day course... no assessment.. no requirements to be first aid qualified..
> To be a walking guide over the same terrain its a tried and tested ML training and assessment.. plus first aid..
> One ticks boxes.. one is fit for purpose.. which one is a threat to the sport?
OK, i'm going to bite. This thread was about me asking about beautiful, classic fell races and has turned into an argument based on one decision to not let a mountain guide enter a race. That's how this forum works, fair enough.
But - I don't understand how an apparently unsuitable fell running guiding qualification is a threat to the sport? Please explain.
I know commercial guides who list this as their qualification.. it makes a joke of the FRA's ability to 'manage' the sport safely, which they generally do an excellent job of.. but adding this then brings it all into doubt.
It also threatens the development of the sport.. the requirement for qualified runners to lead club runs.. which I think we'll see more from. even if that qual is a joke.. Strangely due to the litigious society we live in people are scared of being sued so would rather have the protection of unfit pieces of paper than nothing.. removing common sense and personal responsibility..
The moment someone goes out with a 'leader', I think the psychology changes, they are being lead, and trust that person.. the old informal way was far safer.. the new 'leader' way can only work if appropriate training and assessment is given.
How can it take 10 days or training and assessment and log book experience to lead a walk over the same terrain that you could lead a run with a 2 day non-assessed course?
Sarah did start the qualification and was distinctly unimpressed, it basically went on about drills and stretching.. so its a coaching qualification.. not a leadership qualification, but the UKA/FRA have decided that this is suitable for commercial guides (in the words of the guy responsible)..
I think we will see more deaths in fell running.. especially the winter side.. people running in just microspikes.. no axe.. no actual winter mountaineering experience.. lack of nav.. to make it worse a fell running leader has no remit.. they can guide a run in burbage or over the munros in torridon in winter and be covered by the insurance provided by that course..
So what if an accident happens.. they then test the qualification.. we all know its poorly lacking..
Sorry for the hijack, just explaining my point why some issues are a joke..
Like the LiFR course, the overuse of abbreviations and shortening any race in cloud..
In reply to ablackett: Anyway enjoy the year.. I like keeping my racing varied.. I tried one year to do as much as possible.. did 50 races but died towards the end. I found I was turning up to races just going through the motions and not mentally prepared to race hard. for me, I reckon I have 10-15 hard races a year and maybe double that as training events.. before I get too stagnant.. others far far more (Carl Bell) others less..