This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Fatality stats (whilst this is a hot topic) run at about 10% of the 2000 or so sumiteers.
Does anyone know stats of how many O2 free and/or unsupported ascents there have been ? (only 60 O2 free in '96)
Does anyone know stats of how many O2 free and/or unsupported ascents there have been ? (only 60 O2 free in '96)
In reply to GrahamD:
No one know ? my guess is more people die attempting Everest than manage it without o2.
No one know ? my guess is more people die attempting Everest than manage it without o2.
In reply to GrahamD:
I think you will find it is very few - certainly all those on guided expeditions would use supplementary oxygen. It would take a massive level of stamina to reach that height without oxygen, however if you look at the stats I think you will find it is not any more dangerous - I think I read somewhere that a lot of fatalities occur because those on O2 run out - look at the 96 storm, Boukreev summited without and was still strong, whereas those on oxygen got into trouble.
However, I myself have not gone up everest so dont assume what I say is fact.
I think you will find it is very few - certainly all those on guided expeditions would use supplementary oxygen. It would take a massive level of stamina to reach that height without oxygen, however if you look at the stats I think you will find it is not any more dangerous - I think I read somewhere that a lot of fatalities occur because those on O2 run out - look at the 96 storm, Boukreev summited without and was still strong, whereas those on oxygen got into trouble.
However, I myself have not gone up everest so dont assume what I say is fact.
In reply to GrahamD:
I never really got the without O2 thing. Why? Because there's not a lot up there and its possible to do it without?
Very few clothes shops up there either - why not wear less?
No food - do it on a diet
No fuel - do without melted drinks
No techical gear
etc
So why oxygen? Seems very artifical and not really a thing to be proud of. I'd use it if I wanted to do Everest
I never really got the without O2 thing. Why? Because there's not a lot up there and its possible to do it without?
Very few clothes shops up there either - why not wear less?
No food - do it on a diet
No fuel - do without melted drinks
No techical gear
etc
So why oxygen? Seems very artifical and not really a thing to be proud of. I'd use it if I wanted to do Everest
In reply to Yorkspud:
"Very few clothes shops up there either - why not wear less? "
And I hear the standard of the nightclubs is appalling.
"Very few clothes shops up there either - why not wear less? "
And I hear the standard of the nightclubs is appalling.
In reply to Yorkspud:
Interesting perspective. I guess its just another aspect of Games Climbers Play. The rules are arbitary but, in the case of O2, its generally seen as a purer endeavour without. Where you draw the line is difficult to say - what if someone invents a drug which allows us to use less oxygen for instance.
I'd still like to know the percentages, though, in an annaly retentive bored at work sort of way.
Interesting perspective. I guess its just another aspect of Games Climbers Play. The rules are arbitary but, in the case of O2, its generally seen as a purer endeavour without. Where you draw the line is difficult to say - what if someone invents a drug which allows us to use less oxygen for instance.
I'd still like to know the percentages, though, in an annaly retentive bored at work sort of way.
In reply to Yorkspud:
Great train of thought. Why not get a team of Sherpas to dump oxygen for you every few hundred metres so you can ascend as though climbing at 500m ABSL.
> (In reply to GrahamD)
> So why oxygen? Seems very artifical and not really a thing to be proud of. I'd use it if I wanted to do Everest
Great train of thought. Why not get a team of Sherpas to dump oxygen for you every few hundred metres so you can ascend as though climbing at 500m ABSL.
This thread was started in the wrong forum and has now been moved.
Please could you try and post in the correct forum, it makes life easier for both users and moderators.
Forum descriptions - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/info/forums.html
Please could you try and post in the correct forum, it makes life easier for both users and moderators.
Forum descriptions - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/info/forums.html
In reply to Yorkspud:
Probably for the same reason that climbing a route using aid after it has been done free is seen as less of an achievement. If there aren't a lot of holds but it has been shown to be possible to do the route using the holds that are there, then adding even temporary holds of your own is "cheating".
As GrahamD says, it's one of the games climbers play (see article & book of the same name).
> I never really got the without O2 thing. Why? Because there's not a lot up there and its possible to do it without?
Probably for the same reason that climbing a route using aid after it has been done free is seen as less of an achievement. If there aren't a lot of holds but it has been shown to be possible to do the route using the holds that are there, then adding even temporary holds of your own is "cheating".
As GrahamD says, it's one of the games climbers play (see article & book of the same name).
In reply to Yorkspud:
Yeah, kinda occurred to me too, that did. It is purer, in my view, to do climbs with less, you and the mountain. Having said that, it does seem a tad odd to want to do it without oz but have the latest down clothing, heated hand and foots warmers, fixed lines etc. In those extremes, a person picks what they want to do it 'without' and that is it. Doing it with oz but in a pair of speedos is much purer than fully kitted without oz. Yeah the oxygen level is lower, but the temperature is too, yet it is OK to be purely pure and protect yourself from lower temps. Why, oh why, then, are 'pure' mountaineers allowed to be called so when the guard against lower temps, or lower anything else for example.
It is actually impossible to grade it. The only, real and ultra pure ascent is to summit (and this is ridiculous, but true) with nothing. We have to keep warm, have to breath, have to drink, have to eat. So when all these factors become absolutely critical on high mountains, who has dictated that the breathing part is most important. To ascend with oz but without one of the other three factors is just as pure, in my view.
Yeah, kinda occurred to me too, that did. It is purer, in my view, to do climbs with less, you and the mountain. Having said that, it does seem a tad odd to want to do it without oz but have the latest down clothing, heated hand and foots warmers, fixed lines etc. In those extremes, a person picks what they want to do it 'without' and that is it. Doing it with oz but in a pair of speedos is much purer than fully kitted without oz. Yeah the oxygen level is lower, but the temperature is too, yet it is OK to be purely pure and protect yourself from lower temps. Why, oh why, then, are 'pure' mountaineers allowed to be called so when the guard against lower temps, or lower anything else for example.
It is actually impossible to grade it. The only, real and ultra pure ascent is to summit (and this is ridiculous, but true) with nothing. We have to keep warm, have to breath, have to drink, have to eat. So when all these factors become absolutely critical on high mountains, who has dictated that the breathing part is most important. To ascend with oz but without one of the other three factors is just as pure, in my view.
In reply to Yorkspud:
Hard to believe that you don't get "the without 02 thing." Read about Messner and Habeler's ascent of Everest without using bottled oxygen and the why that motivated them to attempt it.
Hard to believe that you don't get "the without 02 thing." Read about Messner and Habeler's ascent of Everest without using bottled oxygen and the why that motivated them to attempt it.
In reply to Col: It seems as if there are 2 ethical standpoints: -
Expedition (siege) style:- (fixed ropes, oxygen etc. etc.)
Alpine Style: - (everything needed is carried by the climbers, no oxygen)
Anything in between is a compromise.
If I wanted to climb it, I know I'd rather do it alpine style, but it's damn near impossible and I have aabsolutely no urge to ever go near Mount Qomolangma or Everest if you like.
I think the current situation is digusting!
Expedition (siege) style:- (fixed ropes, oxygen etc. etc.)
Alpine Style: - (everything needed is carried by the climbers, no oxygen)
Anything in between is a compromise.
If I wanted to climb it, I know I'd rather do it alpine style, but it's damn near impossible and I have aabsolutely no urge to ever go near Mount Qomolangma or Everest if you like.
I think the current situation is digusting!
In reply to Alasdair Fulton: I do agree to a point about the 'no O2' fixation.
If no O2 is combined with a true solo attempt then fair enough, but it's only part of the whole equation, porters, gear, solo, style of climbing are also important factors.
If no O2 is combined with a true solo attempt then fair enough, but it's only part of the whole equation, porters, gear, solo, style of climbing are also important factors.
In reply to Yyonnx:
I do in parts. But on a big mountain, eating, drinking, breathing and keeping warm are essential. Of those four, doing it without Oz is the easiest. To use oz and not eat, not drink, or wear nothing is harder. I'm sorry, but sticking to bare facts via intelligent thought dictates this. Bear in mind that without something means without it, none of it, not just less of it. This is impossible to define. Messner is a man I admire a lot, but his solo ascent of Ev in winter with out oz is spectacular for me because it was solo and in winter, extra oz or not. The oz part is silly, as the warmth given to a body by extra oxygen is too subjective; it is dependent on the body and we all know they come in many varieties. Solo, however, is solo-on your own, no doubt there. Winter is winter, much colder than summer, no doubt there. That was an amazing climb, but it belittles it to put no Oz before 'winter' or 'solo' IMO
I do in parts. But on a big mountain, eating, drinking, breathing and keeping warm are essential. Of those four, doing it without Oz is the easiest. To use oz and not eat, not drink, or wear nothing is harder. I'm sorry, but sticking to bare facts via intelligent thought dictates this. Bear in mind that without something means without it, none of it, not just less of it. This is impossible to define. Messner is a man I admire a lot, but his solo ascent of Ev in winter with out oz is spectacular for me because it was solo and in winter, extra oz or not. The oz part is silly, as the warmth given to a body by extra oxygen is too subjective; it is dependent on the body and we all know they come in many varieties. Solo, however, is solo-on your own, no doubt there. Winter is winter, much colder than summer, no doubt there. That was an amazing climb, but it belittles it to put no Oz before 'winter' or 'solo' IMO
In reply to Col:
I'm not sure how to respond because I don't see the connection your reply has to what I said in my post.
Messner wanted to climb the mountain by "fair means" or not at all. For him, that meant climbing to the summit without bottled oxygen. Using bottled oxygen reduces the effective height of the mountain to something less than 8847m.
I don't admire Messner but his accomplishments stand alone.
I'm not sure how to respond because I don't see the connection your reply has to what I said in my post.
Messner wanted to climb the mountain by "fair means" or not at all. For him, that meant climbing to the summit without bottled oxygen. Using bottled oxygen reduces the effective height of the mountain to something less than 8847m.
I don't admire Messner but his accomplishments stand alone.
In reply to Col:
I don't think you can compare eating, drinking and wearing clothes as 'aids' in the same category as using bottle oxygen. You cannot survive on Everest without eating, drinking or wearing clothes no matter who you are. It is however possible to climb it without bottled oxygen.
I don't think you can compare eating, drinking and wearing clothes as 'aids' in the same category as using bottle oxygen. You cannot survive on Everest without eating, drinking or wearing clothes no matter who you are. It is however possible to climb it without bottled oxygen.
In reply to Col:
Messner soloed Ev in August - 2/3 the way through the monsoon. That is summer, not winter. Winter is Dec-March. Those who have tried Ev in Aug report it significantly warmer than in April/May, just dangerously loaded with snow and crap weather up high. Sept-Oct used to be popular but Sept had bad avo danger and Oct was getting cold.
D
Messner soloed Ev in August - 2/3 the way through the monsoon. That is summer, not winter. Winter is Dec-March. Those who have tried Ev in Aug report it significantly warmer than in April/May, just dangerously loaded with snow and crap weather up high. Sept-Oct used to be popular but Sept had bad avo danger and Oct was getting cold.
D
In reply to Yyonnx: In the context of this debate it is perhaps interesting to look at Bonatti. He saw the style of alpanism of the 30's as the pure form, and despite operating in a later period (late 40's to 65) claims all of his climbs are in the spirit of those earlier climbs. Messner has also talked extensively about 'giving the mountain a chance'.
In reply to Stormmagnet:
I've never climbed in the greater ranges, only the alps, but if I ever did I would rather climb a 7000m peak alpine style than siege my way up a 8000'er with a bottle of oxygen on my back. There is something pure and inspirational about 2 climbers forging their way up a Himalayan peak carrying everything they need on their back and with no outside support.
That said if someone offered me a free go at Everest siege style I would probably be off there like a shot!
I've never climbed in the greater ranges, only the alps, but if I ever did I would rather climb a 7000m peak alpine style than siege my way up a 8000'er with a bottle of oxygen on my back. There is something pure and inspirational about 2 climbers forging their way up a Himalayan peak carrying everything they need on their back and with no outside support.
That said if someone offered me a free go at Everest siege style I would probably be off there like a shot!
In reply to Simon22: I agree completely.
In reply to Simon22:
You are right, completely. It just bugs me that a no oz attempt is seen as pure. I just don't think it is. It is much harder, but that is all. Anyway, the climbing is what matters to me. Messner did some cool stuff, but he was a god-awful hippie. Give the mountain a chance...jaysus. It's a lump of snow covered rock..end of story. You give yourself a chance, period. You judge the weather, knowing how it is affected by shapes of rock and pressure variations, use your experience and skill, good judgement, training and as always a lump of luck and go. The mountain plays no part. It just sits there. Your decisions affect things completely. The weather plays a part for sure, but its up to the person to judge their actions on what is happening. Anyway, a bit off point, but people who believe in mountains as living entities and that you can...'anger the mountain' or 'the mountain lets you know when you can climb' etc. bugs the living shit out of me (I am talking about non-buddhist westerners here who use other religious thoughts and mantras to apportion blame on a circumstance where they did not summit...I am not insulting sherpa or pagan or buddhism here at all)
You are right, completely. It just bugs me that a no oz attempt is seen as pure. I just don't think it is. It is much harder, but that is all. Anyway, the climbing is what matters to me. Messner did some cool stuff, but he was a god-awful hippie. Give the mountain a chance...jaysus. It's a lump of snow covered rock..end of story. You give yourself a chance, period. You judge the weather, knowing how it is affected by shapes of rock and pressure variations, use your experience and skill, good judgement, training and as always a lump of luck and go. The mountain plays no part. It just sits there. Your decisions affect things completely. The weather plays a part for sure, but its up to the person to judge their actions on what is happening. Anyway, a bit off point, but people who believe in mountains as living entities and that you can...'anger the mountain' or 'the mountain lets you know when you can climb' etc. bugs the living shit out of me (I am talking about non-buddhist westerners here who use other religious thoughts and mantras to apportion blame on a circumstance where they did not summit...I am not insulting sherpa or pagan or buddhism here at all)
In reply to Col:
Your reasoning is bollocks. If you go down that road, you become goal orientated rather than experience orientated. Of course the mountains play a role. They set the challenge. The way you take on that challenge is just as crucial as the mountain itself, because it dictates just as much the experience you're going to have. Just as your choice of mountain, route, season, gear. Messner style *was* purer in the same way as the british way of climbing (trad) is purer. If you allow yourself all the tricks in the book (expansion bolts, oxygen, fixed ropes, army of sherpas, funicular to the summit...) you will set a different set of rules and a different challenge altogether, which is IMHO inferior in worth and value, exactly in the same way as choosing a normal route vs a technical line.
A.-
Your reasoning is bollocks. If you go down that road, you become goal orientated rather than experience orientated. Of course the mountains play a role. They set the challenge. The way you take on that challenge is just as crucial as the mountain itself, because it dictates just as much the experience you're going to have. Just as your choice of mountain, route, season, gear. Messner style *was* purer in the same way as the british way of climbing (trad) is purer. If you allow yourself all the tricks in the book (expansion bolts, oxygen, fixed ropes, army of sherpas, funicular to the summit...) you will set a different set of rules and a different challenge altogether, which is IMHO inferior in worth and value, exactly in the same way as choosing a normal route vs a technical line.
A.-
In reply to Simon22:
Totally agree with you. For me it's all about route grade and interest. Given the choice I'd rather summit Ushba South Alpine style than summit Everest expedition style. It would be more rewarding knowing that I got myself to the summit without the need for a Sherpa to fix rope the whole way and carry my gear. I've been on a commercial expedition before and would never join one again. From my experience you pay more, have a smaller window to summit and have no idea about the competency or fitness of your fellow climbing colleagues. Not my idea of a good climbing experience.
Everest is a rip-off anyway. You can climb Nanga Parbat (or try!) in Pakistan on a commercial expedition for $3000 all inc which puts things into perspective. If physical challenge is what people crave then there are 7000m peaks which are physically harder than Everest anyway such as Pik Pobeda in Kygyzstan.
Totally agree with you. For me it's all about route grade and interest. Given the choice I'd rather summit Ushba South Alpine style than summit Everest expedition style. It would be more rewarding knowing that I got myself to the summit without the need for a Sherpa to fix rope the whole way and carry my gear. I've been on a commercial expedition before and would never join one again. From my experience you pay more, have a smaller window to summit and have no idea about the competency or fitness of your fellow climbing colleagues. Not my idea of a good climbing experience.
Everest is a rip-off anyway. You can climb Nanga Parbat (or try!) in Pakistan on a commercial expedition for $3000 all inc which puts things into perspective. If physical challenge is what people crave then there are 7000m peaks which are physically harder than Everest anyway such as Pik Pobeda in Kygyzstan.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...