UKH

My Facebook is being bombarded with reports of a new 'world record' for the completion of the 14 8000ers.  Anyone have any non hyperbolic reports on this ? Preferably without the word "conquered" in it. A shade over 3 months seems rapid, even with pre prepared routes and O2.

Self-evidently the greatest mountaineering achievement of all time. She is the true inheritor of Messner's legacy and mantle.

Well, that would be the hyperbolic report.....

I'm just interested in just what HAS been achieved here.  14 summits in 3 months doesn't seem like nothing, on the face of it.

She's a very strong and fit ex cross country skier who wanted to make a speed record on the 14 8000ers by using standard routes with fixed ropes, heavy sherpa support, supplementary O2, and lots of helicopter assistance to go from one base camp to the next or sometimes flying all the way back to Kathmandu inbetween for recovery. I don't think the project was ever meant to demonstrate a high level of alpinism or mountaineering skill, but simply to make a new speed record by whatever means it would take. That's basically it I think....

I was also curious about this.  I recall hearing about her attempt a few months ago and a friend sent me a headline about it yesterday.

I was pretty surprised that Nims' record was beaten by so much, but I'm wondering about the how much more help she had than him (prepared lines, helicopters etc).

She has also made a point of going to all of the true summits, which apparently Nims did not do.

Succinct - next step would be simply helicoptering all 14 in a time record pursuit. 

I hear that Nims is now trying to set a new speed record for doing all the 8000ers again sans O2, so I maybe this will be a her next project 😅

A comparison of the style and ethics between KH and Nims is interesting. From my understand, and from information available in articles:

-both used oxygen on most peaks. KH didn’t use O2 on one of the Gasherbrums, other peaks unknown but assume O2 used. Nims used O2 used on all/most(?) peaks.

-both were accompanied by Sherpa(s) on every peak. I think often (always?) by more than one for both KH and Nims. One Sherpa accompanied (worked, guided*) KH on all peaks and therefore shares the record, his name is Lama Tenjin Sherpa. Nims swapped out his Sherpas and so none shared his record. 

-both used fixed ropes on the majority of the routes on the majority of peaks. Short sections on some peaks for KH were not fixed by her team or by previous teams and so KH’s team proceeded without fixed ropes. For example for the later part of the journey to NP summit. Both KH and Nims, and both of their employed Sherpa teams, were sometimes the teams setting the fixed rope and breaking trail. Nims sometimes ‘lead from the front’ and had a more significant role in setting fixed ropes. In this sense he was sometimes a part of a rope fixing team. From what I’ve read KH had less involvement in the rope fixing work, but was often with the rope fixing team.

-both used helicopters to transfer from cities/towns to BCs, and from BC to BC. Both KH and Nims ascended and descended on foot from BC > summit(s) > BC for all peaks.

- KH additionally gained, perhaps indirect, advantage from the use of helicopters when a number of Sherpas were transported to higher camps by heli in order to speed up the fixing of rope that she would then later use. This happened on Annapurna and Manaslu. The Sherpas in her team fixed ropes both up and down from their heli drop off points on those occasions.

-KH reached the true summits of all 14 peaks during her 92 day effort. Nims, in his original 6 month+ effort failed to reach 2 summits, he reached the fore-summits of Dhaulagiri and Manaslu. In the case of Manaslu this is non trivial. The time it took Nims to reach the true summits of all 14 peaks was a year or so, the exact duration is out there, I just can’t recall. 

That’s my effort at an initial comparison. I’m sure it’s not perfect, it’s based on bits if picked up from articles. Mostly those on Explorers Web. Happy to be corrected by those that have more, or better, information. 
 

Fair enough.  Although I find this particular element less important than the level of involvement in route prep and amount of leading.  I guess it depends on the particular summit though.

Interesting... more similar than I would have thought.

Frankley, this as inspiring to me as someone claiming to have climbed every route at Stannage by virtue of walking along the top. 

I don't think you're in her target group of people she was trying to inspire anyway 😆 But the way I see it, everyone has their own climbing or mountain projects that they are passionate about and this was hers and she chose a particular style to accomplish her goal. Other people's goals don't have to appeal to everyone...

I'm working on setting the record of taking the longest amount of time possible to climb all 14. I'll get round to it eventually. 

That’s not how it plays in the media

I don’t think she’s trying to inspire anybody but her own profile. Himalayan mountaineering should be about climbing not some reality TV stunt. Using helicopters to provision a route, ferry all the climbers and then fixing ropes downwards for the rope sliding virtuosos to prussic up is below contempt. No wonder modern real  climbers have moved away from the 8000m peaks, leaving them to rich bucket list tickers. Possibly the greatest Himalayan climb of the 20th C wasn’t even on an 8000m peak. Now Sherpas who aren’t from the Karakoram are subjugating K2 to the Everest treatment in a push for even larger paydays. Coming to an 8000er near you, the boys from Kathmandu with kilometres of fixed rope.

if this is indeed what happened I m with you and have little , sorry , no interest in this . 
this week me and the kids have  bumped into a couple of parties of Gurkhas on adventure training and had a really good chat with one of the  Nepali mtb leaders and a few of the chaps  . I was chatting to my kids about who they (the Gurkhas)   are and about their probable journeys from Villages in Nepal to be biking the red at whinlatter . As far as I’m concerned any one of thier  journey is far more of an adventure and way more interesting to me than anything about this story .

Has anyone really improved on Messner's 8000m peak record? All without oxygen, two solo, several others pure alpine style. I'm not sure to what extent fixed ropes or sherpa support was used on some of them. I also imagine that improvements on style are going to be problematical without avoiding the standard routes or normal seasons given the safety net of people and fixed ropes in situ.

Never judge a man (or woman) until you have walked a mile in his (or her) moccasins.

This is obscene. How much does a Sherpa get paid to climb Everest or K2? About $5000 a year. And you begrudge them even that. Ffs

That is a bizarre inference from the previous post. And what about the high altitude porters in Pakistan? They don't have a hope of competing against the big commercial organisations coming in from Nepal to push clients up K2.

Here you go Rob...

"Has anyone really improved on Messner's 8000m peak record?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Kukuczka

Yes, I think that does it, assuming use of oxygen on Everest isn't an automatic disqualification!

thought Kukuczka only used O2 on the descent? Also several new routes and a few in winter? Bonkers.

That's a very good summary!

This also is an excellent piece on the whole scene that gives some context:

https://explorersweb.com/just-collecting-8000m-peaks-no-longer-has-any-real...

As a positive contrast, last week Kazuya Hiraide and Kenro Nakajima made the first ascent of the massive north face of Tirich Mir (7708m), one of the world's great mountains. Alpine style, no one else on the mountain, no porters, fixed ropes, no instant updates or helicopters.

News and photo of the line at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CvPdbrOomyo/

https://explorersweb.com/hiraide-nakajima-summit-tirich-mir/

http://publications.americanalpineclub.org/articles/12198105100/Two-Polish-...

This says their oxygen ran out at the south summit on the way up.

I wasn’t trying to defend her style....just stating facts.

Maybe you need to tell the media they've got it all wrong, not me?

I have been involved in some quite tricky climbs in my life.

I set speed records leading routes at Stanage by down climbing every route from the top, placing gear on lead as I went, till I reached the bottom. I then had a speed winch to get me to the top for the next route.

Why isn't there more noise being made about this?

Probably because he isn't sponsored, so he doesn't generate any publicity for associated companies who won't use his, possibly less attractive face, in their advertising campaigns?

Because he is just "a boy from Kathmandu with kilometres of fixed rope.... pushing for an even larger pay day" by facilitating the boosting the social media profile of a rich westerner. I suppose.

Yes, it was a rhetorical question. In the media circuses around these stunt records the people who always get relegated to supporting cast members are the actual professional mountaineers who can look after themselves and their rich clients.

Harila has improved since she began. It's the coverage of the project that too often omits Tenjin. 

Some perspective here just gone up: https://explorersweb.com/kristin-harilas-speed-record-perspective/

His real achievement was the number of 8000er firsts in winter.  Simply an unbelievable man.

Or a massive pile of cash and a lot of helicopters.

Same as always: western gaze 

Strikes me as more akin to a new record for the Cuillin traverse or some other non technical endurance record.

It's nothing like that at all. The Cuillin Ridge is quite a technical thing to do really fast without dying and requires some proper mountaineering skill. And you can't beat it into submission with money.

You don't think some mountaineering skill is needed to get up 8000m peaks ? Fixed ropes or no.  It's not cutting edge by a long way, but then neither is the Cuillin traverse.

Apparently very little.

No, but it requires some sound skills and basic competence.

There is no comparison between the Cuillin Ridge and an 8000er. I did the Cuiilin traverse recently for the fourth time. It's physically and technically straightforward over two days.

By contrast I did Gasherbrum II in 2001 (without oxygen), when I was at my physical peak, and lost 10-12kg over the seven weeks it took. I was wrecked when I got back to the UK. 

Anyone who thinks an 8000er is physically easy has never been on one and is just fooling themselves. 

That said, using oxygen would make a huge difference. But, several of 8000ers are much higher than GII and significantly technical. 

Go climb Makalu and see if you still think it requires "very little" mountaineering skills.

Nobody is saying an 8000er is physically easy

I am sure an 8000er is physically very hard indeed, even with oxygen, far harder than the Cuillin Ridge. 

But it is not physical difficulty that was being discussed. 

Try doing the Cuillin Ridge in under three hours. That is what is being talked about, not a two day traverse.

A new record for the Cuillin would be more impressive for me in all honesty.

Nobody is saying they are easy. But it is undeniable that this record requires a lot of support, a lot of money, and is largely about conditions/helicopters. As I understand, the time is not time used for recovery (which would make it a physical challenge) the time variable is how the conditions are, the state of rigging on each mountain, and getting between them.

How can you compare a three-hour effort with climbing the 14 highest mountains? There is no comparison in terms of what is being attempted. 

Even the Munros in 30 days is very different, although that's getting closer. There is very little mountaineering required there. 

So what? Getting to the base camps is the least of it. The recent Munro running record required a lot of support too. 

I find Usain Bolt's hundred metres record more impressive than this 8000er record, and that took less than ten seconds.

I think you are missing the point.

But, probably for no-one outside the UK. The 8000ers are a world thing and no amount of British churlish parochialism will change that!

How many people do you think there are physically capable of beating the 8000er record given unlimited support?

How many people do you think are capable of beating the Munro record?

Now you are deliberately missing the point.

That record has precisely nothing to do with mountaineering or climbing. Nor has Magnus Carlsen's ELO rating, which is equally impressive.

Very few.

Very few, but probably many more than the above.

There are other fundamental differences like the risk. No one is likely to die running the Munros. Despite the oxygen and fixed ropes, the 8000er are extremely dangerous. Look at the fatality figures.

It's a different ball game altogether. 

Again you are deliberately missing the point.

Anyway, it was you who avoided addressing the technical mountaineering difficulty question by bringing up physical difficulty!

Here's my point. I climbed GII. Okay, piece of piss. Anyone could do it. Very little mountaineering skill required. Walk in the park. And yet, Felix Inurrategi, a top mountaineer died on it:

https://www.everesthistory.com/climbers/felixinurrategui.htm#:~:text=Basque....

So, not a piece of piss at all. Far from it.

And, here's what I could do:

Cullin Ridge: in about 12 hours.

All the Munros: in about 6-8 months.

All 14 8000ers: totally and utterly impossible.

PS 100m "sprint": about 30 seconds.

What's your Elo rating?! (He says, always curious about hill/chess crossover stuff.)

You just insist on conflating more and more things to deflect from the original point being discussed, which was whether more technical climbing skill is required to ascend fixed ropes from bottom to top of an 8000er or to do the Cuillin ridge. Not physical difficulty, not objective danger. Just actual climbing skills.

My view is that it’s an impressive achievement but in a style I have little time for. There is huge risk involved, and the fitness required is immense. I have a lot of respect for what she achieved and I don’t think many people at all could do it, but I don’t think it’s worth even comparing to ascents done in alpine style on more technical peaks. It’s just a completely different thing, like trying to compare Carlson’s ELO to Bolts record, both impressive, for different reasons.

The style bothers me a lot though. I think climbing 8000m peaks in the fixed rope expedition style is quite vile. The amount of rubbish left on the mountains, the way Sherpas are exploited, and the really toxic ‘conquer the mountain attitude’ is just a bit shit. If you can’t climb a mountain without leaving rubbish up there, covering the mountain in fixed ropes etc, then don’t climb it.

I don't think anyone is denying that what KH is doing is physically impressive, I think the point of contention is that in terms of the wider mountaineering scene, as well as the climbing scene, these speed records aren't particularly impressive.

Take for example recent technical ascents such as the Moonwalk traverse in 2021 soloed by Sean Villanueva O'Driscoll, a route which required top level climbing as well as negotiating altitude and mountain conditions. As a climber and someone who is interested in mountaineering, this feat is far more of an impressive accomplishment than hiking up a massive mountain on fixed ropes that other people have set up.

It is impressive, but it is not anywhere near as impressive and progressive as what others are doing completely on their own.

It was 1850 when I played 35-40 years ago. I played a bit online recently and my blitz rating was about 1300. But, generally, unless I contrived a checkmate in the middle game or got to a very easy ending I would lose on time.

Okay, I missed that point. Definitely more climbing on the 8000ers. Albeit the vast majority is on snow, ice or mixed terrain. 

You're living in a total fantasy world if you think the Cuillin is technically harder than K2. Fixed ropes or no fixed ropes. 

I broadly agree, although I think everyone is underestimating the achievement. Running the Munros is not progressive either. Neither is running the Cuillin ridge.

I may be missing something here, but what part of ascending a fixed rope is technically more demanding in a climbing sense than leading the Thearlaich Dubh gap?

That's a very decent grade. I've never threatened that level - I was in the upper 1600s for a while on the Chess Scotland list also 35ish years ago, but I've settled into a lower level these days. Am 1513 on the new CS list which means I've been in the 1500s for 20 of the past 23 seasons - I could well be the most consistent player in the country in grading terms.

Generally online grades are markedly higher than OTB ones - I've only started playing online since Covid but I'm in the mid-1900s for rapid on Lichess (I don't play blitz or - yikes - bullet). I don't think I'm any stronger online than OTB, so there appears to be a 400ish grading hike online, which fits with a lot of other people I know who also play both.

(Are you playing with an increment online? Even two or three seconds should help considerably with clock woes. I almost exclusively play 10+5 online - just one five-round Swiss tourney per week - and the five seconds is frequently very useful in terms of winning won positions or surviving level ones.)

Agreed, I don't think the comparisons are particularly helpful in conveying the point being made. I agree that it is definitely an achievement and not something that I am nearly fit enough to do, but more a show of endurance and mental strength rather than technical mountaineering ability (not just climbing but rope work and leading etc.) 

Personally, on an alpine climb I would rather have a partner who could do the Cuillin ridge in 3 hours rather than ascend the fixed ropes on the 8000m peaks very quickly. No disrespect to the achievement, and that doesn't make one more impressive than the other, just impressive in different ways.

Mostly you use the fixed rope for protection. You are still generally free climbing. You can jug up some particularly steep bits, but it's too exhausting to do for long. I've also climbed Ama Dablam and if you can't climb the grade, you'll not get up the route. You can't jug it all. You have to climb and use the rope for protection.

I can't describe to you the effort to make a hard move at 6000m and above. One member of the team on Ama Dablam gave up because she kept falling asleep on the climb.  She was a strong alpinist.

Big boots, crampons, middle of the night, cold, little oxygen, lack of food. It all adds up.

The TD gap is a 20m pitch. It's ludicrous to compare that with the climbing on K2.

The Cullin is great, but it's a children's playground even in comparison to the Alps. And the Alps is a playground compared to the greater ranges. 

I'm outside the UK  

Presumably because you are not a millionaire. 

So are you saying that this idea of punters who have never worn crampons before paying their money and turning up and ticking an 8000er by just putting one foot in front of the other is a misconception; a myth to denigrate the 8000er "circus".

Yes, of course, but there is technical climbing in The Cuillin and snow plods in the Alps. I mentioned the Thearlaich Dubh gap because I've done a lot of climbing in the past to a decent standard in the Alps including some respectable solos of big routes, but I'm not sure I would solo the Thearlaich Dubh gap!

Not actually running as far as I'm aware, but earlier this year someone died less than a fortnight into an attempt on a continuous Munro round.

Folks, it's essential to acknowledge the significance of embracing modern advancements in mountain climbing, especially when some older climbers argue that it dilutes the true spirit of mountaineering. What we often fail to realize is that, like any other field, climbing is continuously evolving. I refrain from claiming that traditional climbs were inherently superior to today's approaches. We should recognize the vast array of technology and tools at our disposal, enabling us to conquer mountains worldwide.

It's misguided to theorize that using these tools diminishes the authenticity of a successful summit attempt. In a rapidly changing world, clinging to outdated beliefs can be limiting. Many seasoned climbers seem fixed on the notion that true achievement comes from unsupported climbs or avoiding supplemental oxygen at high altitudes – but this perspective doesn't hold true anymore.

We mustn't forget that if these older climbers had access to today's resources, they would likely employ them to reach their summits as well. It's reminiscent of Charles Darwin's words: "It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is best able to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself."

When we venture into the mountains, our goal isn't to face unnecessary risks or perish but to enjoy the views while minimizing hazards. Embracing the latest methods allows us to make the most of our experiences and enjoy the journey safely.

Kristina's accomplishment challenges the traditional norms and beliefs about climbing, where some purists may argue that using helicopters or other modern tools diminishes the authenticity of the achievement. However, as mentioned earlier, the evolution of climbing and the availability of advanced technology offer new opportunities for exploration and accomplishment.

Oh dear. Where to begin........

Don't feed the troll dude.

I played mostly 5+3, but I can't move in much less than 5 seconds. I should have changed to 10+5 but I got hooked on the blitz! 

I was enjoying the switch from d4 to e4 with white. I had a lot of successful mating attacks in the Italian game. The Caro-Kann and Scandanavian are tough nuts to crack, I found.

I've been in the mountains, UK and Alps for 10 of the past 12 weeks, so haven't played for 3 months.

Everest is a circus, but GII was different. Almost everyone was a strong, independent mountaineer.  And GI had almost no fixed ropes on it. I don't know what Cho Oyu or Shishapanga are like, but I doubt you get novices on the others. 

One of the reasons the Sherpas go to K2 is that the Pakistanis are generally useless. Or, at least, they were. There was a couple attached to a Japanese expedition who were different. But, we had effectively no support on summit day  apart from the British expedition leader. And, they forgot the food. That was frustrating because I was more than capable of carrying my own. But  we relied on them and had no food for two days - summit day and the day before.

GII is largely non technical, although you are climbing very serious alpine terrain. We, without Pakistani support, found the route to camp I through the ice fall. That took 3 days. After that we had support getting things to camp I, but it's very different from a commercial Everest trip. 

I did that when I was 38. I'm 60 now. Could I climb G2 now? I don't know. All 14 is unimaginable. Even back then, I'm not sure I could have successfully climbed GI as well. Let alone Broad Peak, K2 and Nanga Parbat. Even if I was helicopters to the base camps.

A lot of people do - eg I have a friend (in his 70s) who plays 50-odd games of 3+0 most days and often loses games that he would surely win at 3+2. He's a better 10+5 (or longer) player but seems to like the thrill of the no-increment fast stuff. I'm a bit Soviet School-ish about such things and steer clear of blitz myself.

I was a Caro-Kann player in my youth but long ago switched to the French against 1 e4 and have stuck with it through thick and (quite often) thin. I'm very much a 1 d4 player with white apart from occasional 1 b4 efforts when I'm feeling frivolous.

Reasonable excuse!

Pero has a point - the fixed ropes are mainly for protection (and not to be relied on after a couple of days exposed to sun and rockfall). On Broad Peak, for example, there are rocky sections that would be a scramble in North Wales but are challenging at 6000+ m in crampons with a 20kg rucksack. Someone who has never worn crampons is not going to have a good time!

At the risk of attracting an angry response here....

I struggle to view this sort of thing as mountaineering at all (it's certainly not climbing). I don't doubt it's physically hard and dangerous but to me mountaineering requires a massive skillset, both technical (as Robert says being able to put on a pair of crampons doesn't really cut it) and perhaps more importantly in judgement that is impossible to achieve when guided by large teams of professional sherpas in the presence of endless fixed ropes talking pretty much all responsibility for decision making.

Whist thinking about this I was reminded of something Mark Twight wrote ages ago  (4th and 7th  para if you can't be bothered to read the whole thing) http://www.edhartouni.net/justification-for-an-elitist-attitude.html

Right, but stuff in the style of a commercial Everest trip - supplementary oxygen plus a large and expensive team to smooth the way as much as possible - is essentially what we're talking about here, right?

I've got no horse in this race and the whole thing still sounds like a gruelling effort at the very least, but I don't think your experience of GII is directly comparable.

Vintage enjoyable UKC thread. The TD gap compared to the Hillary step and mischievous digressions into chess rankings. Please continue folks.

Not an angry response, just a simple statement that I'm free to enjoy my mountaineering without needing your approbation or acceptance. I would claim that even plodding up the Allalinhorn is definitely mountaineering. What else is it? It's simply a low level. It's more mountaineering than climbing an E9 at Burbage.

And I don't have to be doing the North face of the Grandes Jorasses to call myself am alpinist. 

For some reason you keep on taking stuff to be personal criticism of you for your own ascent of G2, which may have been in impeccable style for all we know.

I very much agree, people can do whatever they want and call it whatever they want. I've got no problem with people getting into the hills and enjoying them as the see fit.

However my issue here is that this is being touted as some sort of world class Mountaineering achievement whereas it makes a mockery of pretty much everything modern alpinism is about (unlike the guys actually fixing the ropes and doing the guiding). I only make the point as this cheepens something I care deeply about as it has given me so many amazing experiences over the years.

I don't doubt it's hard and an amazing personal achievement, but it's not much more than that.

I agree to an extent but I still think what KH is significant, just not ground-breaking nor that interesting. I would struggle to say it was simply a personal achievement, just not one that I would personally consider that significant.

Yeah, poor phrasing on my part, I ment an amazing athletic physical achievement but not a mountaineering one.

I'm not sure it is being touted as a great mountaineering achievement. Is is just being taken as one by people who don't know any better.

A few years ago I wrote a piece about people who were on the Scottish chess grading system and had also been round all the Munros - it was quite a long list. For some reason there seems to be quite a hefty crossover between hills and chess generally, even though they're very different activities. The secretary of my club (Stirling) has, for instance, been up the Matterhorn and has done two rounds of Munros. There was a spell not too long ago when the top three boards for Stirling B were all Munroists.

Anyway, back to the TD Gap vs the Hillary Step, sorry.

It is certainly a great achievement. To climb even one 8000m peak takes great fitness, determination, some mountaineering skill, some luck. To do all 14 in such a quick time is an impressive feat.

However, to the knowledgable observer it feels a bit of a fraud and it seems to somehow sully/diminish the achievements of “greater” mountaineers. I think one issue is that as climbers we like to see things done in increasingly better style rather than increasingly worse style. Style of ascent really matters in high altitude mountaineering.

What I/we would be more impressed by is someone doing all 14 8000m peaks unsupported, in winter, without O2, in any amount of time. 

OK..... there's the Knight's Move on Tryfan

Ha, yes - and there's the Bishop on Barf. There's also this:
https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crags/wharncliffe_crags-85/en_passant-79...

The Czech Direct on Denali, the list goes on.

Already done earlier in the thread!

Don't forget The Knight on Place Fell

Soz, missed it. Did we do Fischer's Folly? The Golden Pillar of Kramnik?

Of course. Suspect there are loads of these.

(Anyway, I'm off out to play summer chess in the park - maybe, depends on the drizzle.)

In the unlikely event that I ever put up some new routes, there are some chess terms that would make good route names.

En passant 

Zwischenzug 

Zugzwang 

Stalemate

Etc.

There ought to be a crag somewhere with this theme.

PS Accelerated Dragon!

TD gap doesn’t have ladders and fixed ropes on it. Certainly speed things up.

Great idea. I'll donate to the ladder fund.

The UK has a relatively strong ethic on things. But, the UK has no glaciers, or mountains of alpine let alone Himalayan scale. Mocking the efforts of those who climb in the greater ranges because you can climb a 20m pitch of severe strikes me as British parochialism.

If records are being sought, that nails it and is a possible logical step forward when compared to Messners record, which so far has not been bettered. And bear in mind the Himalaya was a far more remote area back then with no hope of rescue, but that wouldn’t get coverage in the mainstream media, or credence from the uninformed, as it’s not instant or “snappy” enough. These current stunts must cost an unbelievable amount of money and bring the mountain down to a level achievable by lesser climbers than Messner. He could climb hard rock, technical big walls, difficult alpine peaks and 8000m mountains. Non of the current “record breakers” can match this.

Indeed, something that seems to be missing in these record attempts. The style of ascent is important, if you are going to compare something, and consider it a “better” record.

Record for best use of helicopters and fixing ropes from above etc.

You could spin that around and make the case that the people valorising these record attempts are making a mockery of people with technical climbing ability who value self-reliance over summit bagging

I was guiding in the cuillin earlier this year,  with a couple who struggled with the technical skills required,  and didn't feel up to doing a traverse. It happened to be the 10th anniversary of them both sumitting Everest.  They had both done other 8000m peaks too.

That is fascinating. But, your logic is somewhat awry. Saying K2 is technically harder than the Cuillin is not refuted by evidence that Everest is technically easier.

You're going a bit Cathy Newman vs Jordan Peterson on this one.

Which of them do you think he is?

A lot of mention about whether 8000m is harder/easier. However, if you use supplemental Oxygen, that 8000m mountain is no longer 8000m. Maybe 7000m.

Possibly a 7000m K2 is still harder than the Cuillin traverse.

I know what you're implying but bear in mind that people do age and the effects accelerate as you get older. A decade ago I could still just about get up e-grades but now I'm flopping around on grassy slopes.

I don't feel mocked. If this woman had laughed at my feeble achievements in the Alps, then I would object. But, she's not doing that. Stealing the limelight, perhaps.

In fact, perhaps the nub of the matter is this. I feel somewhat humbled by these and other achievements. And my reaction is to give credit where credit is due. As opposed to reacting with bitter resentment.

"So you're saying that the Cuillin is harder than K2?"

Not to mention that 6 months can be enough time to leave a person at a totally different level of fitness let alone 10yrs

I agree, and I think comparing technical difficulties of two completely different routes is not very useful. 

I think most of the negative reaction is not due to the achievement itself, but the recognition it is gaining over other, much harder and more technical achievements that were done without support.

I guess it is the nature of 8000m+ peaks that they will always be the subject of public fascination, more so than the hard technical routes which occupy the minds of high level alpinists.

Either way, KH has achieved something very difficult, even if the response is annoying.

Yes, so Cathy Newman repeatedly telling Peterson he had said something he hadn't. Just checking.

Credit is not due for this high altitude circus. Quite the opposite. Do you actually believe this person could lead climb these mountains, as opposed to just  ascending fixed ropes of which they had no part in placing, while being babysat by Sherpas? And it most certainly is possible to “jug” up ropes without being able to climb the grades, as hundreds of Everest and lately K2 ascents prove. It is not bitter resentment, it’s maintaining a true perspective, upholding traditions of established mountaineering ethics and most importantly, respecting the mountains and mountain environment.

UK climbing ethics are usually used to criticise other people climbing. Mountaineering is a personal challenge and should be climbed in a manner you feel mitigates your risk while giving you enjoyment without ruining it for others.

I don't understand why we are comparing 8000'ers to The Cuillin Ridge. Irrelevant. I've never been anywhere near as high as 8000m+ but I think at that altitude I would find tying my shoelaces more technically challenging than most of what the UK has to offer.

But surely the point is that the way in which most people climb 8000ers does ruin it for others.

It ruins it for genuine, independant minded climbers, as opposed to adventure tourists, who might otherwise climb these mountains in Alpine style were it not for the fact that the place is heaving and draped in piles of sh*t.

It ruins it for anyone who thinks maintaining the mountain environment in as clean a condition as possible is important.

And it also ruins it for elite mountaineers who might be able to attract the sponsorship necessary to fund their groundbreaking expeditions were it not for the fact that all the media attention goes to those involved in the "circus" because the public doesn't understand why jugging up fixed ropes on oxygen isn't as hard climbing a new route in Alpine style in winter.

Your argument is a bit like saying why shouldn't we bolt trad routes, you don't have to clip them if you don't want to.

I would agree. But I'm not making an argument for or against guided expeditions on big peaks.

She's never claimed she could. 

Everest is largely non-technical.  We all know that.  It's always been about physical stamina.  It would be interesting to look at the credentials of those who are climbing K2 these days. 

I'm sorry to say that your bitterness is self evident in your posts.

Ethics established by whom? You're simply raising your own beliefs to a perceived accepted code.  I'd say that you are intolerant of those who have a different perspective on climbing than you.  You're not alone in this.  UKC is a hotbed of judgemental intolerance.  Like your earlier point that the Sherpas have no business in the Karakorum.  Is that an established ethic?  Or, just your personal prejudice?

I'm going to wade in once more with my 2ps worth on this, allthough the article Damo shared in a previous post says better why this sort of thing is nonsense.  Clearly the 'mountaineering community', for want of a better phrase, is based around a shared set of cultural beliefs. It's a broad church and these are myriad but on a fundamental level they revolve around the idea of self reliance and exploration. If someone comes along who's exploits absolutely craps all over these ideas (in this case with the use of extreme rope fixing and the complete dependence of guides just to start) is it really that surprising that people take issue? 

You have done a very good job on this thread of misrepresenting the views of others and complaining about people having views that they don’t appear to hold.

GrahamD stated that on balance, he would be more impressed by someone setting a new Cuillin Ridge record. You proceeded to completely misrepresent this as a “Cuillin Ridge harder than K2” claim and suggested equivalence of a perfectly respectable, but not exception two day traverse, with a truly exceptional sub 3 hour traverse.

I’m with Graham. Although I am impressed by the logistics and the fitness of this achievement.

If all the ropes, camps and food are in place along with Sherpa babysitters, the same type of clientele will climb K2. Guaranteed. It’s a bit steeper than Everest with higher objective danger, but that won’t put people off. I do disagree with Sherpas turning the Karakoram into their money spinning workshop and there may well be future strife. And talking about intolerance, on Everest, Sherpas were about to physically assault Uli Steck because he wouldn’t obey their instructions.

Missed out, most importantly oxygen.

I never intentionally misrepresented what anyone said.  I thought I was responding to the arguments being made in each case.

Actually it was the position of the Pakistan government several years ago, denying visas - which derailed the plans of a number of climbers using smaller Sherpa companies - until the biggest Sherpa companies bribed their way around it, just like they do in Nepal. Google that, and you'll also find reference to Balti people and Pakistan agencies complaining about Sherpas taking their work, which has been somewhat 'officially' ameliorated by Nepali companies taking on local men for HAP work.

An indication of it at: http://altitudepakistan.blogspot.com/2016/06/summer-2016-climbers-blacklist...

And Felix Inurrategi died on G2 when a fixed rope broke as he was descending, not because the climbing was difficult, which you implied.

And as others have stated, the farcical state of 8000m mountaineering now does impact those not taking part in it, wrt to access, environmental impact, insurance, media etc.

Most guides in home countries have stories about clients who've recently summited Everest and can't tie a figure-8 or toprope a basic climb. There are now clients like this on K2, and certainly on other 8000m peaks, incl. Nanga Parbat.

As seen just a few weeks ago...

A Pakistani climber that was part of the fixing team fell and was hanging upside down for over an hour. They managed to pull him back up. At first he was alive but he couldn’t be saved. Then everyone had to step over him to head towards the summit. 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CvYoLULIo5G/

Absolutely f*****g awful. Literally climbing over the bodies of poorly paid locals to get an Instagram tick. I know I'd rather be in the cuillins.

I never implied that.  I only pointed out that even a great climber can die on one of the easiest 8000ers.

He died the year before I went to GII and his brother was back when I was there (to climb GI).  Alberto could walk up things in boots where I needed my crampons.  I could never understand why either of them would need to pull on fixed ropes, if a punter like me could climb GII without doing that.  I was thinking about Felix all the way down and I was being so careful not to pull on the rope.  Maybe if I hadn't heard about him I would have been careless coming down.  The anchors can melt out so easily in the Karakorum.

Why was he relying on fixed rope?  Maybe you can answer that question.  I can't.  As you say, the climbing wasn't difficult - especially for someone of his ability.

Perhaps my view of the 8000ers is 20 years out of date.  Maybe maxing out on oxygen and reliable fixed ropes makes all the difference and allows you to jug up like it was sea level?  Maybe GII basecamp is now full of investment bankers who can't tie a figure of eight.  Maybe the whole thing is the circus that Everest has been for some time?

Gasherbrum wasn't a circus when I was there.

I'd like to jump in and say that I appreciate Pero's perspective.  He's making valid overall point.  No 8,000er is going to be easy.   Way to stick to your guns, Pero.

Yes, the technical challenge/mastery to lead a ridge with some hard steps requires a different skill set, but it's seems fruitless to compare the two.  They're just so different.

Personally, I am most impressed by the hard technical climbs on remote 6000 and 7000 meter peaks, without oxygen, with as little outside support as possible, in whatever style is appropriate (big wall, alpine, and so on). 

Those climbers are operating at a different level.  It seems like they really push the boundaries of what humans can do.

Oh, and that post from whoever/whatever about how this recent record pushes the accomplishements and technology of humans and so forth....that's just BS.  In my view, it adds little to mountaineering history or human achievement 

At the risk of derailing the general trend of the thread thus far, this would actually be quite a gutsy achievement, wouldn't it? 8000m+ isn't easily helicopterable, right?

apparently a helicopter landed on Everest in 2005

Thanks. I admit that I'm too blunt at times, but that's more open than anonymous dislikes that imply I'm a liar just because I have a different point of view. Or, that I'm deliberately misrepresentating what others say. 

The dislikes of my post way back about not judging someone until you've walked in their mocassins sums up just how egregiously judgemental this forum can be.

Feel free to trash anything you don't understand might be the UKC response to that native American wisdom. 

I don't think dislikes imply any such thing, it sounds like you're reading far too much into them. Generally, I view dislikes as an extremely approximate barometer of the level of agreement or disagreement with a post, and that's the way I apply them when clicking them myself as well. Anyone who tries to draw more than that from them is just going to get upset for no good reason.

On the summit, yes, but I think you'll find that was a special machine, not like the average machine in Nepal

Going against the grain here, but I'm seriously impressed. What a spectacular feat of logistics and perseverance from the helicopter pilots and Sherpas involved.

It was an Airbus AS350 B3, and it is now the best-selling civil helicopter in Nepal. 

I think that is the whole point. I'm not sure anyone would argue against it being impressive. Just not in mountaineering terms.

Thanks a lot for the update!

Although I’ve criticised the motive I was seriously impressed by the planning and logistics. Anyone care to guess the cost?

Yes, but iirc it was heavily modified, with everything non-essential stripped out, one pilot and the absolute minimum of fuel to do just that one thing? 

Not a setup to do any actual work.

Bruno,

When did anyone say it was 'easy'? You're opposing a statement that no one made. This misunderstanding always crops up in these debates and it's maddening. No one says that. It's not the issue. The issue is the nature and impact of the methods used in terms of the culture and traditions of climbing, and the validity of claiming and comparing 'records' that involved vastly different parameters.

Obviously they're different - but in the big scheme of things not that different. Fwiw, I've been on both a Gasherbrum (G1 in 2007) and the Cuillin Ridge (1994) - and independently on 7000m and 6000m peaks in between. I've seen guided clients on many peaks and some of the clients now are much less competent than even 10 years ago and I know many of the clients on these Sherpa-led 8000m trips now couldn't carry their own pack even part way along the Cuillin, let alone manage the TD Gap. If they could even find their way to the start of the ridge in the first place.

But the comparison does point to some relevant issues, about climbing ability and the value of claims made. A principle in climbing, in many sports or activities, when comparing abilities, especially when claims, comparisons and chronicling are involved is (put bluntly for the sake of brevity here, sorry) is  "I can do what you do but you can't do what I do". If you can do both, then you are 'better'. Harila and most of the 8000m clients can't do both, so might want to check themselves when making big claims in the mountaineering world. Plenty of other people have done the Cuillin and climbed an 8000er, or climbed E3 or WI6 and climbed an 8000er (or several), and that is not considered earth shattering in terms of achievement in the mountaineering world, so it's understandable that such a narrow and mechanically manipulated claim such as Harila's (and Nims') puts some people offside, or just elicits a collective eyeroll and "meh".

I know Harila and other 8000er clients may not care about such technical or traditional skills (nor need them on 8000m normal routes, which might be a more telling point for debate) but the basic principle is still there in the culture and community they are using as a vehicle for their ambitions. Particularly if you make claims to some kind of mastery or superiority over predecessors, as 'record' claimants are doing - Harila beat Nims who beat Chang-Ho who beat Kukuczka - and even more so if the parameters of the feat are so different.

These are mountaineering claims reported in the mountaineering world and will be judged by existing mountaineering standards - whether the protagonist likes it or not.

You can't claim in a deliberate and professional media campaign to have 'beaten' a 'record' then get all offended at scrutiny and say you're not trying to compare yourself to anyone and you're just doing it for yourself. This is dishonest and entitled hypocrisy.

Just to be clear, for my final words on this.

No one has said that climbing 8000m peaks is easy - however it's done.

But that is not the point.

Probably shouldn't try to extend the whole comparison of the Cuillin ridge to 8000ers here, but on the subject of "If you can do both then you are better" - I think its worth mentioning that Kristin did a number of solo ridge traverses in Hurrungane back in 2020 before she went to Everest for the first time and ones that would be comparable to the Cuillin in terms of difficulty and length but her focus was only ever on doing long days in the mountains as training rather than bragging about doing alpine-type ridge traverses solo. So she probably could do the Cuillin traverse no problem

Thanks for your well-written and well-reasoned post. 

I have a small quibble (see bottom) but in general I agree with everything you expressed.

It may be true that nobody said, "Climbing an 8000er is easy" but I do think some people made that suggestion.  There is undoubtedley a common sentiment in the climbing world that the clients on these expeditions just show up with their money and are essentially "carried" up the mountain without having to lift a finger.  This if often accompanied by a condescending superiority and belittling judgement on the part of "real climbers."  Important discussion about history, style, ethics, and so on can extend from this all this, but that's not my goal here.

It might be true in some cases that paying clients on 8000 meter peaks are dragged up the mountain, although I doubt clients of this type are often sucessfull.  I immagine that the group of people who pay to go on expeditions like this is diverse.  Some of them must be incredibly determined, driven, hard-working people, willing to endure great suffering, make great sacrifices, and take great risks to reach their goals--traits we usually admire in the mountaineering world.  You might have some mega-rich person who would struggle to tie an overhand knot, but they might also pay a coach, work out twice a day for two years, put on a mask to limit air flow, fill up a backpack with weight, and spend hours marching up and down stairwells in tall office towers to prepare for their expeditions.  I rememeber reading several profiles about people like this on popular training site.  On the same site, based on years of experience, they estimated the fitness and hours of training required to climb Everest.  Doing so without oxygen was obviosuly a super-human feat.  Doing so with oxygen still required an enormous investment of training and effort. 

My point is that many are often too quick to dismiss the paying clients on 8000 meter peaks as weak, entitled, pretenders.  Sometimes true, sometimes not.  We can't paint them all with the same brush.  Getting up an 8000 meter peak is always going to be a big challenge, and it seems that we agree on that. 

What is my quibble?  It's related to the general argumentation style on UKC.  Here, people love to focus on a single idea, statement, or point of fact, strip away all context and related ideas, and argue endlessly about that one thing, as if proving their single isolated case proves all larger points as well.  In one way, I appreciate it; before a rational discussion can begin, one needs to clearly define the issue at hand.  In another way, I think it's often a way to avoid engaring with the deeper meaning of what others are saying. 

OK, that's all, carry on. 

All these miserables refusing to acknowledge a very significant mountaineering achievement!

If it was a simple achievement it would have been done years ago, not now. Comparing her achievement with a Cuillin traverse is comparing oranges with Wednesdays.

Gotta love a good old UKC thread to bring out the armchair misery merchants!

That is because they don't think it is a significant mountaineering achievement. Kind of the whole point being made.

Maybe because nobody thought it was something worth bothering with. Or marketable. Or because the commercial infrastructure needed wasn't available.

I think you have missed the point of the comparison.

Maybe because it is all rather sad.

I think it's been pointed out several times already, but, again what was actually stated was that they would be more impressed by a new cuillin traverse *record*. That means soloing up and, more importantly, down the hard bits (including the steep side of the innpinn) and completing it in less than 3 hours. There are very very few people with the skills and fitness to even consider attempting such a thing. To people who don't know much about mountaineering, fell running, or the cuillins in particular, it might not seem like that great a challenge, but that's exactly at the heart of this discussion.

I think you've got this the wrong way round. Do you think it would have been possible for George Mallory to attempt something like this? No, of course not, because the technological and logistical support that made this possible didn't exist 100 years ago. It didn't exist 20 years ago. It exists now, and moreover what also exists now is social media and an enormous market for outdoor gear and experiences which creates the opportunity for mega sponsorship deals. As with someone else above I'm fascinated to know how much this cost and I think that the logistical operation is self-evidently extremely impressive.

That said, I think it's OK to be miserablist when we see the impossible being murdered yet again.

It's a question of style.

It's comes across expression of people looking hard to find reasons to belittle something on the basis that it is not their thing.  It's small minded and negative. It is on the other hand totally possible to recognise significant achievement in something that is of not interest.  Golf and football are of no interest to me whatsoever, but that does not stop me recognising significant football or golf achievement when I see it and calling it for what it is, significant achievement.  I guess at the end of the day it boils down to whether we are glass half full or glass half empty types, whether we like celebrating achievement or others, or not. 

Golf and football are not bastardisations of mountaineering.

Anyway, I don't think anybody is saying it is not an achievement of sorts, just one that that they have reservations about celebrating.

I don’t entirely disagree with what you’re saying, and I feel like a lot of the comments are very dismissive of what is a great personal and logistic achievement, however I don’t think this is a good analogy.

If someone scored the most goals in any premier league, but did so because they had a team of people running ahead and holding all of the defenders back, it would no longer be nearly as impressive. Of course it’s still a good physical achievement, and they still had to have the skill to score the goals, but it’s not a groundbreaking achievement.

KH is obviously very talented and physically fit, I don’t doubt that she could climb these mountains without all the help, however when this record is being touted as a big step forward in mountaineering I understand the backlash. When people who have dedicated a long portion of their life to achieve much more technically and physically demanding summits and routes, without any help, are being sidelined behind someone who has the money and the luck (along with the fitness etc) to do something flashy, it comes across as unjust.

It’s not something I feel personally angry about, nor am I going to try and get annoyed at anyone else for appreciating the achievement. I do however understand the backlash.

Here is an important view from Melissa Arnot.  If you don't know who she is look up her name.  Quoted from her Instagram.

In the last week I have been asked constantly for my opinion on the record set by @14lama.tenjen and @kristin.harila . So this is my opinion - not the one I want you to have, just simply my opinion.

The effort, drive and constant logistics management alone to complete these climbs so quickly is extraordinarily impressive. Add to that the physical effort and endurance. The fact that Kristin had to also not be too proud, not be too loud, not be too consumptive, not be too supported, not be too delayed with proof and so on was the true challenge and that challenge is just starting. She will continue to be critiqued in all of those ways, while she is perhaps lauded in others. We love to root people on but stand ready to pick them apart if they fall short of perfect in our hero’s gaze. Especially women. ESPECIALLY WOMEN. The constant critique, questioning and nit picking of her project has become a pastime for many and it fills me with a little quiet rage each time. Can you imagine if she acted with 1/10th as much bravado as the previous record holder? She would be crucified. As Kristin takes some well deserved rest and her first of many chances to share her story I know she will continue to dodge the critique with the same grace she has shown all along. To me, the style and support and resources she used to complete her goal are an interesting topic but I’m much more interested in how she conducted herself as a human. As far as I can tell she was always kind. She was always honest. She kept her head down and her heart up and at the end of the day, I hope that is somehow included in her bio.

which says  nothing about this being a very impressive feat of logistics rather than of alpinism

Apart from the very first sentence, which explicitly acknowledges exactly that, even using the actual term 'logistics'...

"The effort, drive and constant logistics management alone to complete these climbs so quickly is extraordinarily impressive. Add to that the physical effort and endurance."

It's astonishing how perfectly you represent the nit-picking that I mentioned above, as well as the behavior called out by Melissa Arnot.

Classy.  Real classy.

While I think many of the points raised about needless nit-picking are valid, I also think to dismiss all criticism as such is dishonest and ignores genuine concerns that many in the mountaineering community have. 

Of course the UKC forums can often become vitriolic or heated, but that shouldn't hide the fact that there are genuine ethical questions to ask when approaching a mountain in such ways, as well as how this impacts the wider mountaineering community.

I have no issue in saying that what KH achieved is incredibly impressive, and a feat of fitness that I could not replicate, however I also think that the means by which the record was achieved aren't helping in the commodification of mountaineering and the spread of the Everest circus. I believe that these concerns are further than simple nit-picking and, if done respectfully, are important points of discussion.

This just feels like a huge strawman tbh. What nits have been picked?

As for the comparison with how Nims' record was received I don't see much difference. Indifference coupled with a sadness that these sort of expeditions are the ones hitting the headlines and concern about the increasing commercialisation of high altitude mountaineering. What you seem to be saying is that everyone should either raise their voices in praise or stay silent. That's pretty unreasonable given the publicity around KH's achievement and similarly was unreasonable in the face of the huge media operation around Nims. Their own media machines have made this a topic of conversation.

And if they are not silent, they will be branded as sexist. A cheap tactic.

I just looked up KH's instagram.  Nothing more to be said--she's a dog lover!  Great

Hopefully she'll bring her pooch over to the UKC for some off leash strolling through the meadows and hills (emmm...mountains?)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/10/record-speed-mountaineer-deni...

The Guardian usually does mountaineering better than that. Hassan was not a 'sherpa'. The use of small 's' sherpa to denote a high altitude worker is not really done anymore. It's Sherpa, if of the ethnic group, or something else.

Also, the most detailed account yet published...

https://kristinharila.com/what-happened-on-k2-27-07-2023/

I think these speed records have removed some of the mystique surrounding the 8000ers, but there are still teams attempting interesting new routes. It appears in images from K2 this year that the bottleneck traverse was much snowier than the icy traverse seen in videos from previous expeditions (it looks like many climbers dont't carry axes now?) Long lines of climbers queuing beneath the serac seems like an absolute disaster waiting to happen.

Nice post Bruno illustrating that there are lots of other issues worth exploring on this subject.

I didnt want to steam in on the debate without getting some more background on Harila herself, but couldn't find much via Google bar a Youtube video (link below).

youtube.com/watch?v=ZklPLyrklqw&

Her trajectory into serious mountaineering is fascinating and a little accidental (in part because she won a competition prize whilst workign in a shop), and whilst she is clearly a quite extraordinary athlete (that dimension is worth always bearing in mind as Pero has pointed out with relevance for high mountains), nowhere is either the motivation for, or justification of her record project explored in the Youtube interview..

I should point out that I'm deliberately trying to be careful about what i am about to say next and I am not trying to court controversy, but the extravagance of such 'record' exercises raise many questions about the purpose and value of such projects, so it's a little disappointing that these issues are not touched on an otherwise wide ranging interview..

Has anyone else seen any interview coverage that discusses these issues?

Correction: Apologies, at the end of the Youtube video Harila does in fact explore some of the feminist motivations for her record project, and, on reflection, this seems both fascinating and worth exploring.....

KH's words in the statement she released raise so many question about that incident and the whole 8000 world in general.  It's hard to know what to beleive, or who to trust for insight. 

I'm going to look to Melissa Arnot, a mountaneer I trust and admire, for some insight into KH's character.  Arnot wrote that KH acted like a decent person throughout this record.  Therefore, I think KH's words are presented in good faith, and that she describes the circumstances as she experienced them. 

Terrible situation.  It sounds like some people tried hard to save the injured climber, and others were unaware of events or exhausted.  And even if there had been a super strong team, it probably would have been impossible to change the outcome.

"...even if there had been a super strong team, it probably would have been impossible to change the outcome."

I agree. While I think the whole scene up there is terrible, as is some of Harila's media, the reality is it was a particularly tough spot to do anything. The crowds on the fixed line made everything worse, which is another angle in itself. It's not like lowering an immobile client down the slopes on Everest.

Having once come across a collapsed/exhausted climber at 6300m myself, after coming down from 7100m on Peak Lenin, I know I could not personally lift, carry or rescue another person in such a situation. When I see Sherpas lifting or dragging clients near or above 8000m I'm just in awe and consider that a f%&king miracle for those rescued. The actions of Harila and others up there were not great, but I don't think she deserves the pile-on of abuse she's been getting the last 48hrs on Instagram and Twitter.

Hassan was a desperate man, it seems, but his employer Lela Peak Expeditions (and Alex Abramov's Seven Summits Club?) are responsible for equipping him sufficiently and making sure he sticks to the plan. Note that a similar incident (almost) happened on Nanga Parbat a couple of months ago, where a local HAP went to the summit of his own accord woefully ill equipped and needed help on the descent. The need for the money/fame for these guys is seeming to prove too much, which anyone who has travelled in Pakistan will understand.

But for another view of someone who was nearby, I think Stefan Nestler always presents an informed and fair view on things:

https://abenteuer-berg.de/en/willi-steindl-on-the-lack-of-a-rescue-operatio...

You are missing the point here. KH seems impressive in many ways and I am sure she is capable of challenges like the Cuillin Ridge. Completing the Cuillin Ridge isn’t a world beating performance. The original suggestion was along the lines of “I’d be more impressed by a new Cuillin traverse record” which doesn’t actually make a comparison, but is something very different from just completing a Cuillin Ridge traverse. The problem that people have with this time record is that it is being promoted as something better than those that went before, it isn’t it is something very different. It is impressive, but it isn’t comparable to those that went before who did it slower, but in much better style. Style seems a superficial term, but in climbing it has a real concrete meaning.

This was mostly to comment on something that Damo wrote in an earlier post; 

"I've seen guided clients on many peaks and some of the clients now are much less competent than even 10 years ago and I know many of the clients on these Sherpa-led 8000m trips now couldn't carry their own pack even part way along the Cuillin, let alone manage the TD Gap. If they could even find their way to the start of the ridge in the first place..........

But the comparison does point to some relevant issues, about climbing ability and the value of claims made. A principle in climbing, in many sports or activities, when comparing abilities, especially when claims, comparisons and chronicling are involved is (put bluntly for the sake of brevity here, sorry) is  "I can do what you do but you can't do what I do". If you can do both, then you are 'better'. Harila and most of the 8000m clients can't do both, so might want to check themselves when making big claims in the mountaineering world."

You might have to correct me if you disagree, but I think there is a general view on UKC that people who go on commercial expeditions in the Himalayas (not just the 8000ers) using Sherpa support and fixed ropes are incompetent mountaineers - this has also come up in a thread from some years back. Sure, maybe there are an increasing number who probably have summited an 8000er but probably couldn't tackle an alpine-type ridge, but I think it seems unfair to assume that all commercial 8000er climbers - including Kristin - fit into this category. I think most people have formed an image of her mountaineering experience simply based on the way she has climbed the 8000ers in the last few years, but without having a clue about what else she has done prior to this.

A lot of the discussion on this thread, including the whole comparison to the Cuillin ridge, has been about the fact she is getting a lot of publicity for a record that was not done in better technical style than her predecessors, which is very true but going back to my very first comment - I tried to empahsise the fact that this was never what she was trying to achieve. Her project was purely about breaking the speed record that Nims had set a couple of years ago, not trying to break his record without O2, sherpa support, fixed ropes etc. I don't think she has ever declared that her project has advanced high altitude mountaineering in terms of the style aspect either. The media has maybe portrayed it in this way, but I guess the media are free to twist stories to make headlines.

A Ridge record would be a much more impressive example of what it is than the 8000er record is of what that is

I object somewhat to the commercialisation and lack of style of this new record. To some extent that is the game these days. But I don't need to like it.

Doing them all without oxygen? That would be very impressive. Doing them all without fixed ropes and alpine style? Same. But this would be like me jumar-ing el cap on a fixed rope and claiming an ascent of the face. Is it impressive? Yes, absolutely. She had to be very fit for it, extremely athletic. Is it realllly in the style we'd admire? No. Fair play to her though.

Thanks for that link.  The perspective is great, and think we can all admire the approach of Steindl. 

Maybe the worst here are the expedition companies who do not guarantee that their high altitude porters are properly equipped, insured and paid.  That would go some way to eliminating the desperation that seems to have contributed here.  That said, if they are local companies, they are propbably just struggling to survive tghemselves.  If they are for-profit foreign companies, however, it's a different story.

I hope Steindl can shift the needle, if only a tiny fraction.

In my opinion, the worst are the clients who support this sorry state of affairs by putting their meaningless ambitions above the lives of other people. They share just as much blame as the companies they're using to fulfil those ambitions.

Hey Tehmarks.  I agree with you--when that is the case--and I considered adding that in my post.  However, I think that many clients are ignorant of the conditions of the porters--they may be told that "everything is professional and fine." There may well be clients who would be conserned and hesitant if they knew the true conditons for the porters and other local workers.  Now, if it's really is a case of ignorance or naivety, theese clents deserve some blame, for sure, for failing to educate themselves and perform due diligence.  But they may not always be purely self serving and amoral.  Some people are, of course.  That's true everywhere.  And then there is the whole question of what climbers owe each other under such extreme circumstances...they have all asumed the risk.  I'm not making the argument that it should be every man for himself, but many experienced mountaineers have gestured in this direction.  It's just complicated.

I couldn’t really comment on guided clients on 8,000m peaks, but Damo is one of the better qualified people on these forums to comment on such things.

The media are generally quite uninformed on high altitude mountaineering and will generally follow the narrative of the press release.

This discussion seems to me to be missing the point, which to my mind is that going in for this sort of thing stamps the perpetrator as a narcissistic, attention-seeking t**t. If the future of high-altitude mountaineering is fixed ropes, helicopters and 'world records', it shouldn't have a future.

jcm

Attention-seeking is kind of the point. This expedition required a high level of sponsorship (it is reported to have cost £1.3m) and the point was to obtain publicity for the sponsor. Of course the sponsored climber also benefits.  That required a simple objective which anyone can understand, whether or not they have any interest in mountaineering.  "All 8000 m peaks" is a clear and simple objective which Nims' Netflix film has already raised awareness of. "Fastest", "female" and "world record" all attract attention.  The wider public neither knows nor cares about the niceties of style which concern us. The result is global publicity - job done.

I don't think this is "the future of high altitude mountaineering" although I think it is the future of some aspects of it. There can be only a limited number of objectives which can attract the sustained level of public interest this level of sponsorship requires. Everest now attracts mainly criticism in the mainstream press, so it would have to be something exceptional to attract interest. K2 possibly because of its reputation as the "killer mountain".  The other peaks aren't well known and I suspect the wider public would be fairly indifferent.

The 14 8000m summits record will become more and more of a circus, until the level of technical intervention becomes so obvious that even the general media start to ask questions, and perhaps potential sponsors themselves.  However I think the majority of high altitude achievements will be of little interest to the wider public (and therefore to sponsors) and will have to be done in a style which is acceptable to the mountaineering community in order to be recognised. I hope.

This expedition required a high level of sponsorship (it is reported to have cost £1.3m) and the point was to obtain publicity for the sponsor. Of course the sponsored climber also benefits.  That required a simple objective...

As written, you've got that backwards, as if it was driven by sponsors and they created the goal. It was not. It was driven by Harila, for herself. She sold her house then added sponsor money, and crowdfunding. That is very different to a sponsor initiating a project for 'publicity (which is actually an outdated approach in modern expedition sponsorship). The point was not to obtain publicity for a sponsor, it was for Harila to do her thing, for whatever personal reason. Her benefit was not secondary, it was primary.

Also, 1.3M does not necessarily 'require' sponsorship these days. One of the features of the latest cohort of clients is that they are paying for these trips themselves, through personal wealth. There are actually very few people or trips with a visible major sponsor providing cash, as in years past.

I'm not suggesting that this was purely driven by sponsorship. Something like this demands considerable personal commitment and I'm sure it is an objective she wanted to achieve for its own sake.  However to obtain corporate sponsorship on this scale it needs to be an achievement which would attract significant public interest, which means something the wider public with no interest in mountaineering can easily understand. The same probably goes for crowdfunding, although perhaps to a lesser extent.  If the wider public recognises the achievement concerns from the mountaineering community about the style in which it was achieved don't carry much weight.

If her objective had been to climb an established route in a clean style on an obscure mountain this would have been of little interest to anyone outside the mountaineering community and I very much doubt she could have obtained a similar level of sponsorship to afford the amount of logistical backup she enjoyed on this trip, and criticisms about style would have carried far more weight.

I take your point that increasingly extremely wealthy people are turning to mountaineering and aree able to self-finance their expeditions.  However either they are going to go for the big-name mountains which attract public attention, or they are going to go for genuine mountaineering achievements which will be judged by the mountaineering community.

I think these circuses will remain largely confined to a few specific achievements where a record will appear significant to a lot of the general public - in particular the 14 summits, Everest, K2.  I don't believe many other objectives will capture the public imagination in the same way and claims to have achieved them will be judged by mountaineering ethical standards.

Howard, I agree with your points. 

(Side note: people like KH selling her house or Nims re-mortgaging his house are taking crazy financial risks!  Sure, it's different than walking below a serac, but it still scares me!)

What would a modern 8000er record of the sort popularized by KH and Nims look like?  I think there are at least four key components. 

(1) The starting and ending points for each mountain climbed would have to be clearly defined, logically the Base Camp and the summit.  The climber going for the record would have to climb up and down each mountain under their own power between these points.  If these points are not defined, the records and compariosons would lose significance. 

(2) The climbers could fly between base camps--although I don't like it, I see this as the inevitable direction things are going.  And let's remember that the approach of helicoptering between big faces was pioneered in the Alps in the 80s or maybe even before.  So in the future climbers would probably fly from base camp to base camp.

(3) The routes would be fixed from top to bottom.  It's such a weird mix of fixed, semi-fixed, or unfixed terrain on these ascents anyway.  I honestly don't know of a "pure" ascent of any normal route on an 8000er is possible.  For record attempts, I think just fixing and using gear would make more sense.  Once again, let's recall that asents done for speed like the Matterhorn or the Courmayer to Chamonix crossover often have fixed sections and/or are extensively rehearsed.  The precedent is there, it's just the scale, altitude, logistics, and so on that are new. 

(4) Oxygen or no oxygen.  Big difference.  There would likely be records with and without supplemental oxygen. 

Many other questions remain: How many support climbers?  In what capacity?  How are camps filled, by people or by helicopters?  I don't like the idea of stocking camps with helicopters.  On one hand, it would seem to deprive local people of work.  On the other hand, it might reduce risk for porters?  Difficult call.  These decisions would probably form the strategy of individual teams.

Maybe the people impassioned by these sorts of records will put in place some guidelines to make things more clear. 

FKT on all the 8000ers. 

I know it sounds crazy, but I'd rather somebody dedicate themselves to that then getting rich in finance or real estate or tech or whatever. 

It was done few times by pros for records. Then it stopped. More recent similar feats have involved cycling or other human-powered travel between peaks.

Every year in Nepal there is an 8000er normal route with no people on it. Maybe not in April-May, but all the Nepal-Tibet 8000ers have been climbed many many times in Sept-Oct.

The impact of a few individuals (or dozens of them) selfishly pursuing corrupted and damaging objectives in finance or real estate would be a drop in those vast oceans. They would fit right in. Nobody would notice, let alone complain. But the highest mountains are a smaller, finite and relatively vulnerable resource - more so their doable routes in the right season - so the impact of a few individuals, and their army of paid helpers, on this small resource is far greater and has more impact on both the mountains and on others around them not operating in the same way.

You're missing the point.  It's not about whether or not such endeavors are palatable to me, you, or others, it's what form they will likely take in the future. 

We all have our opinions.  And yet the world rolls forward. 

Because opinions never affected anything.

Yes, you are corrrect.  The opinions epxresed in this forum will create a groundswell of opossition to Himalayan record setting, and the nature of climbing in the greater ranges will change. 

The likes/dislikes here are fun.  Some words come to mind:

"Armchair purists"

"Sticking heads in sand."

"Isolated on small island in Atlantic."

"Badgery nitpickers"

"Sexist codgers."

And so on.

I think dismissing the likes of Damo and others as 'armchair codgers' is pretty disrespectful, and downright wrong. 

Either way I'm really not sure what you're point is? You seem to admit that helicopering between prestocked camps and ascending ropes fixed by others with the help of massive support teams by mega rich clients is pretty crappy. But we just need to shut up and accept it that's just the way it is nowadays? That seems pretty nihilistic. 

People may be posting from their armchairs, but many will have a strong mountaineering background, an awareness of history and care about the future of mountaineering.

Just the opposite.

An island with a pretty strong record in mountaineering.

So criticising industrial scale commercialisation of 8000m peaks is mere nitpicking?

To suggest that anyone's criticism of the nature of this record is motivated by sexism is downright offensive.

You wrote:

"But we just need to shut up and accept it that's just the way it is nowadays? That seems pretty nihilistic."

You're free to complain about anything you want!  Just don't labor under the false impression that it makes any differences beyond the confines of this chat.

If that's true why have you spent so much time on this thread strenuously trying to put across your point of view?

It's almost as if you've realised that you've failed to convince anyone here with your arguments so you've decided to dismiss the conversation as irrelevant.

Hi Pancake.  You wrote:

"If that's true why have you spent so much time on this thread strenuously trying to put across your point of view?"

Quite simply, because I love climbing, mountaineering, call it what you will.  I love doing it, training for it, talking about it, and so on.  Posting here is entertaining!  It's a great distraction from life!

Also, one can learn a great deal on the internet.  I've learned lots from UKC and MP, about technical stuff of course, but also more general issues and ideas.

I've changed by views a time of two, for example, about taking my dog to the crag, or about that repeat of a winter route that generated so much controvery somewhat recently.  So I am living proof that you can teach an old dog new tricks. 

So I post for fun, to learn, and to exchange views with other climbers.

Nonetheless, I absolutely don't think my views are significant in the grand scheme of things, or that what we talk about here will have any consequences in the real world.  This conversation is relevant, in the sense that we are a small, contentious community, but we arent going to change the course of Himalyan mountaineering (or much else).

Why did I join this particular thread?  Well, I was simply curious at first, and then as I read the comments I was triggered by the fact that one of the few people here with any real experience on these mountains was essentially shouted down, which is, as I beleive you Brits would say, "Rather rich."

Your closing words.

"It's almost as if you've realised that you've failed to convince anyone here with your arguments so you've decided to dismiss the conversation as irrelevant." 

This is not a debate or competition to convince others of one's point of view.  One does not "summit" UKC by winning arguments--although it might satisfy one's ego.  I see this more of an exchange of views.  I don't expect to convince many people of my views; therefore, I have no ulterior motive to dismiss the conversation.

Last, I think your words are hypocritcial.  You accuse me of dismissing the conversation to avoid the arguments, and yet you resort to a facile and illogical attack to avoid engaging with any real discussion.

Yet you did completely dismiss the conversation with your earlier post personally insulting everybody who disagred with you. Which was weird after your rant about the 'argumentative style of ukc' upthread. 

Hi Robert,

In your recent post, you have most expertely demonstrated the very traits that I have called out here. 

Let's start with this:

I wrote, "Isolated on small island in Atlantic," and you responded with, "An island with a pretty strong record in mountaineering."

Now, I will adpot the argumentative style of the badgery nitpickers on UKC. 

How do you jump from "isolated island in the Atlantic" to "strong record in mountaineering"?  I didn't make any claims about England's mountaineering history--I was only pointing out that England is surrounded by water.  This is an established fact!  Can you possibly argue otherwise?  Whether or not England has a mountaneering history is beside the point!  Nothing was said about that!  The issue in question is whether England is or is not an Island in the Atlantic.

In my view, this is what posters here did with the whole 8000ers record vs the Cuillin ridge thing.  What began as the OP simply stating that the achievement was more similar to some kind of record on the Cuillin ridge or an endurance event descended into a very long-winded and narrow discussion of a requisite technical skill of a winter record on said ridge vs that required to set a record on the 8000ers.  This is ridiculous, and if you step back from this thread, you might see that clearly. 

As this example shows, context and what is suggested and implied is important.  Obviosuly, what you assumed I implied with my comment prompted you to write the response that you did. 

So what can we make of the context and implications of the discussion of the KH record? 

I think a good part of the criticism directed at KH is motivated by sexism.  Here are some reasons why. 

When a woman accomplishes something big like this, I think that for many people they feel like the achievement is devalued, and not worthy of respest.  If a woman can do it, then it must not be that hard.  I'm quite sure it angers some people up that a woman beat a man, moreover, no less a man than Nims, a Ghurka, a freak of nature!  Just think of how his physical accomplishments, drive, bravery, leadership skills and so on were was romatacized, even fetishized, in the media.  And here comes a female cross country skier and does it faster, with less fanfare, and in somewhat better style.  Instead of congradulating her, people dismiss her achievement.  Did sexism play a role in the general reaction to her feat?  I think it did. 

But not here, right?  Not on UKC?  Yes, here as well.

Let's return to the Cuillin ridge.  Much was said about a winter record.  What about a women's record?  I may be wrong, but it appears that Kelli Roberts has the women's record.  Does a women's winter record even exist?  If not, it makes even less sense to compare what KH achieved to a woman climbing the ridge in winter.  But let's just stay with the women's summer record.  It's about six hours, right?  Do we think KH could break that?  I have a suspicion that she could, perhaps rather easily. 

But that wasn't discussed, was it?  That is, a woman's perspective, approach, opportunity, goal, whatever, wasn't taken into account.  And nobody even noticed!  If this isn't an example of the way that women's concerns are just sort of blithely and routinely passed over, I don't know what is.  Oh, but wait, the discussion was about the very specific question of what requires more technical mastery, a new winter record on the ridge vs climbing all the 8000ers.  What this person, this woman, accomplished, or could or could not do, is irrelevant....

That's just one example from this thread. 

Your use of England here is classic trolling. 

As much as I'd love to accept you compliment, I have to say, I used "England" out of pure ignorance.  What the hell should we call "that place over there" now?  The United Kingdom?  The British Islands?  The commonwealth?  It's all hopelessly confusing.  

Just walk into a bar in Glasgow and ask them what part of England you are in. They will soon set you straight.

https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/whats-the-difference-between-uk-brita...

Britain is fine. I’d say that your assumption that the reaction to the record is based on sexism is pure ignorance as well.

The island part of it is Great Britain.  There is another island called Ireland, most of which (but not all of) is a separate country.  

The naming conventions haven’t really changed since 1920 or so.

England isn't surrounded by water. It has a land boundary with Scotland to its north and another with Wales on its west side. So England isn't an island, it's part an island (or isles). Either you are ignorant or you are trolling. 

Edit, just noticed all the replies including your own. Call it the UK or British Isles if that's what you are referring to.

Yes - see the comments on the article about Jamie Aaron’s record breaking feat. 

Please point out anywhere where anyone mentioned a *winter* record on the cuillin ridge.

You're moving the goalposts and inventing conversations that haven't happened seemingly to imply sexism in order to discredit people who disagree with you. And then attacking other people for being typically argumentative nitpicky UKCers. Maybe take a breath and consider your own position.

You have badly misrepresented most of the points that people have been making in this thread.

Your accusations of sexism are too low to be worthy of further comment. I would argue that there has not even really been any actual criticism of Harila herself (and there has been a general acknowledgement of her impressive physical and logistical achievement). It is more just a lamentation that the 8000ers circus  has come to this sorry state; Harila is just caught up in it.

At Pancake,

You're right! 

I did a quick scan, and I there seems to be no mention of a winter record.  I think that I just assumed that's what people meant after watching this video of Usidean Hawthorn (cool video by the way):

youtube.com/watch?v=dAvQRcwWgN0&

So my moving of the goal posts was absolutely unintentional.  Apolgies. 

However...do you all mean to say that you have been comparing a summer record on the Cuillin ridge with doing all the 8000ers? 

That's funny.

You wrote:

"Your accusations of sexism are too low to be worthy of further comment." 

What a great way to evade a meaningful discussion.  That seems to be your style. 

This is a discussion forum, non? If we limit ourselves to discussing only things that we have direct influence over...it's going to be rather dead as a discussion forum.

I don't really see the issue with a cohort of people who are passionate about the mountains and passionate about the values of mountaineering airing their thoughts on a record that has been achieved entirely outwith the values of mountaineering as many understand them.

I totally agree with you.  I just don't think such airings will change things. 

Well you asserted sexism. So the onus is one you to point out a single comment which would not have applied equally if she had been a man. 

Robert, you've missed the point, intentionally, I suppose.

In all of your banging on about the Cuillan ridge, did it once occur to you once to reflect on the women's record, and mention that?  Evidently not, despite your dismissal of KH.

Yes, yes, you will say it is irrelevant...I think it's highly telling.

Appreciate this has been cleared up now, but I just wanted to say I’m impressed with your ignorance there, considering one of the correct, commonly accepted answers is literally the name of the website you are posting this on…

The only person who's brought sex into the discussion is you, though. It's not sexist to criticise someone who happens to be female for things that have nothing to do with them being female. Do you genuinely believe that the response would be more positive if she happened to be a he?

People don't like it because it has naff all to do with the game of mountaineering as people understand it. It's got nothing to do with genitals.

You wouldn't say that a calling someone a "narcissistic, attention-seeking t**t" who's "not trying to inspire anybody but her own profile" while being "babysat" by sherpas is criticism?

It's interesting looking over this thread while remembering the old saw that nothing that comes before the word "but" in a sentence really counts.

I don't recall that in the thread and I've failed to find it scanning through again. If it is there, could you point me to it please. And yes, if someone did post that, I think it is uncalled for and unpleasant criticism.

The dismissal is of the record as the sort of mountaineering achievement which should be celebrated. 

It is completely irrelevant to what was being discussed.

As predicted.

Here are quotes you mysteriously "failed" to find.

So why do you think it is relevant to a discussion about whether the 8000er record or the Cuillin record involves more mountaineering technicality? It may have been a rather fruitless discussion, but it had nothing to do with gender.

Thanks. I think the language there is unacceptable. I hope the "likes" were all for the second sentence with which I entirely agree.

But the tone of the thread has generally been overwhelmingly one of unhappiness with the direction the 8000er circus has taken, culminating in this record, rather than personal criticism of Harila.

There've been a few comments bluntly dismissing any suggestion of sexism.

What I'm struggling with as a very beginner female mountaineer (who has indeed just 'plodded up Allalinhorn', guided - and I am happy with that!) is that the coverage of KH seems to have involved *so* much criticism while Nims seems to still be hero worshipped. If the comparison of styles above is correct, there don't seem to have been that many differences between them.

What am I missing? 

Just a thought - is that within the actual climbing community or actually in the wider non-specialist media? I've climbed for over 30 years, when younger read a lot about Himalayan climbing, even tried pretty unsuccessfully to climb in the Himachal Pradesh myself once. But I know next to nothing about Nims, beyond Osprey make a big rucksack named after him and they did a Netflix show about him. What I did read about his record was in mainstream media not in the climbing media. My impression is that (like Harila ) he isn't really seen as a 'climber' within the climbing community. So I'm not totally sure who is hero worshipping him. 

You could say that for a Nepalese person doing this is more impressive - a south Asian man coming from an immensely poor country, than it is for another white European (coming from about the richest per capita country in the world) to achieve this. There are sexists but not all criticism of Harila is driven by that. There are racists but not all criticism of Nims is racist.

I saw a lot of similar criticism of Nims' project possible as well, for very similar reasons. More so, actually, when it later emerged that he didn't actually summit Manaslu. I certainly haven't seen any hero worship of Nims in this thread. As I said (much) earlier I think the reaction to both records has been comparable, at least on this site and in this thread. That's not to say that in general and in the wider discussion there isn't an element of sexism in the way that KH is be being treated, but I see very little evidence of it here.

I was only vaguely of Nims' project at the time, but heard about it afterwards. As has been said, there was a Netflix film (which I havn't seen). In contrast I seemed to be bombarded with updates on Harila and hence the impression of a slick social media machine. But this may have just been an accident of the facebook algorithm. I imagine the Netflix film gave Nims wider coverage than Harila with the general public who are less aware of the problematical nature of this stuff in the mountaineering world. I really don't see any difference between Nims' and Harila's projects, though there might, I suppose, be some dismay that Harila's beating of the record means that Nim's project has not just turned out to be a one off and that there will no doubt now be further record attempts. I also wonder whether there may have been a reluctance to criticise Nims' project because he is Nepalese and so invite possible accusations of racism (or I suppose he might be seen to be reclaiming the 8000ers from rich westerners).

Robert doesn't have sexist bone in his body..

Your comments are generally really insightful Bruno. I was really enjoying your discussion up to this point. Any chance we could just move on?

John C

Thanks John. To be fair, I didn't think I was being accused of sexism. I just took issue with him seeing sexism in the thread in general when I really don't think there is any evidence of it.

hey buddy. You are most welcome, and I also thought you had a lot of good points that were being evaded. 

I don't see the sense in slinging mud when there is so many substantive issues to get to grips with (not that there aren't a great deal of sexist issues to address more broadly). 

JC

... the coverage of KH seems to have involved *so* much criticism while Nims seems to still be hero worshipped. If the comparison of styles above is correct, there don't seem to have been that many differences between them.

What am I missing? 

I just want to reiterate that there was plenty of criticism of Nims' methods and media, but it just got swamped by the hype, especially after the film was made. Nims followed what some others have done (eg. Colin O'Brady) and used social media as a vector for compromised claims that then go straight to mainstream media, who know almost nothing about mountaineering, but understand numbers, love a pretty face and see a social justice angle. Such claimants just bypass traditional climbing/adventure media and ignore forums full of bitter old armchair codgers (or whatever the term above was) and soak up the fame - which is why they're doing it in the first place. Not that that is new.

There are plenty of other issues with Nims, his backstory, his behaviour as a person in real life, his glaring lack of skills, the mistruths in his claims, and no doubt those things will come out in time. The truth always does. Some may say such things are irrelevant, but they have influenced how he has gone about his expeditions and curated the image he has. Personally, it's both disheartening and sickening how so many people have bought his crap, climbing details aside.

Harila has copped a lot of more obvious criticism, especially by anonymous ignoramuses and angry incels on social media, probably exacerbated by a few factors:

- an affluent young white woman has beaten the local hero Nims

- the incredibly impressive feat she and Tenjen achieved - 14x8k in record time - had a built-in high profile ready to be understood as a brand and benchmark by the general public, thanks to Nimsbro.

- her logistics are even more over the top than Nims used, eg. using helicopters to deposit gear and Sherpas at higher camps (on Manaslu and Annapurna) so her staff fix down the mountain having flown part way up it. A significant advantage.

- she is making claims to 'strong women' and other gender stuff but has several men doing all the physical work for her in a feat that is (supposed to be) all about the physical. Obviously Nims had the same, but of all the shyte claims he makes, gender excellence was not one of them. We in the armchair mob love a good bit of hypocrisy to grab the pitchforks and light up the torches...

- she was right up front in the queue that stepped over poor Hassan who fell and died at the Bottleneck on K2 last month. A difficult situation for anyone, but her explanation was a little too self-serving for most, and the fact remains that if it were her that had fallen and become incapacitated, her rescue would not have been deemed 'impossible'.

Welcome to mountaineering, Your Majesty

They keep changing the name of  Virginia to New Amsterdam or  Canada or something too. Really so tiresome and confusing 

Hi Damo.  Thanks for the great post.

Happy to move beyond the rancor and discuss these interesting ideas.

The most compelling and important issue for me is the question of how to approach crises and deaths on these high mountains. 

As always in these cases there are different stories, and we are left to figure out what we think in a cloud of uncertainty. 

Whatever happened up there definitely seems wrong to me.  My feeling is that if sombody is in difficulty, all other ambitions of all other expeditions should be set aside to help that person.  However, I am not entirely comfortable judging this situation, or project my feelings into the high mountain environment. 

Some points.

Personally, I would rather stop and help somebody in difficuty rather than continuing an ascent.  And I think that people who knowingly ignore and abandon others are behaving unethically.  However, it's true that KH in this situation, or more generally others in these types of situations, might genuionely beleive that all care is being given, that they can not contribute in any way, and that their presence might be a hindrance.  I'm not saying that was what took place here, just that it's a possibility, a legitimate thought process that might lead somebody to continue their climb.

Your point that things would likely have played out differently had KH fallen ill is important.  We have seen expedition leaders, well known climbers, or high paying clients (not impoverished emploees) fall ill on mountains, and others have simply continued past.  And we have also seen great, professional mountaineers come to the aid of others, including porters and Sherpas.  So, on one hand, it does not seem completely clear.  But, on the other hand, it's hard to beleive that if KH had been the one to collapse a huge rescue effort would not have been mounted.  This casts a shadow over everything.

I wonder what we really object to here?  Is what takes place on these mountains really so surprisiong or unprecendented?  As much as we might not like it, all humans are not treated equally, do not enjoy the same opportunities, do not have access to the same resources, and so on.  Terrible inequality is part of our world.  I do not agree with, but anticipate, the argument that treating people differently basd on their status and wealth is simply part of huiman nature, and we should not expect otherwise. What we object to, therefore, really has little to do wth mountaneering, but rather with inequality in general.

Then there is the whole hypothetical question of whether or not a rescue wouId have been possible at all.  I don't know enough to make an informed judgement.  Yes, a large rescue operation could and should (in my view) have been initiated, but is there any chance that it would have been successful?  The answer to this question is important, in a way that may not be comfortable for many.

For example, let's say that a rescue would have been simply impossible, and that this was immediately clear to anybody there.  What should one do then?  Should you stay with somebody and comfort them until they die?  Would they even know you were there?  Should you initiate a rescue knowing it is futile as a gesture of respect?  Should you do so to help process your trauma and grief, or to help others on the mountain with their feelings, or to ensure that family and loved ones feel that everything possible had been done?  Do you leave the body there as a sign of respect for local culture or beleifs?  Or do you just continue on, because death is part of mountaineering?  Why should you give up just because somebody else died?  Why should you, still living, not be free to pursue your goals?  What would anybody gain if you stopped?  To who do your obligations extend?  To your team?  To your sponsors?  To yourself alone?  Recall, this is a hypothetical situation where death is inevitable.  I'm not sure there are clear answers. 

Further interesting discussions extend from this: one could argue, as many have in the past, that in the "death zone" everybody has willingly accepted the risk and must accept the consequences, which may include be abandoned.  This the the history and fact of Himalayan mountaineering.  But can an impoverished employee ever be said to be "free" in their choice?   Perhaps we owe these workers, bound by their circumstances, more than we owe people who voluntarily climb mountains.  Basically, are people who face great hardship ever really free to make their own choices?  This question has great economic, political, and ethical import. 

I would like to think that I would have helped as best as I can, but I can't pretend that I know what I would have done.  To me the hero of the story is the German cameraman.

Well, yes! Stepping over someone dying and just carrying on seems entirely inhuman to me.  Isn't this obvious? The only exceptions I see are if waiting exposes you to more danger or (as possibly happened here) there are others around.

I totally agree with you.  I did training to work on an ambulance when I was 17, and have been involved in one way or another with the provision of emergency first aid for 33 years.  Fortunately or unfortunately, I have had many occasions to use these skills, sometimes in quite serious and potentially risky situations.  So, as I said, I like to thinkthat I would stop, I do think that I would stop, but I also know that you can never be sure until you're actually there. 

It's the second part of your sentence, "The only exceptions I see are if waiting exposes you to more danger or (as possibly happened here) there are others around," where is gets complicated.

Just being at that altitude is dangerous.  Spending more time there would definitely be dangerous.  And there were many others around. 

Also, although It seems inhuman to you and I, there are of course people who would take the view that, "I can't do anything, I can't make any difference, and so why not carry on?"  There's some practical honesty in that view, however unpalatable it might be.

While not providing an excuse for folk stepping past a dying climber, is there also classic 'diffusion of responsibility' at play where there are huge volumes of folk?

I don’t think you’re wrong and it would provide some insight but I’ve always thought that mountaineering was an exception, at least due to the ethics that most follow.

I guess this is another argument against the Everest circus, having plenty of inexperienced folk who aren’t aware of mountaineering ethics won’t help. You would’ve thought at least that those qualified, Sherpas, KH etc would have the empathy to at least stop the summit push.

record or not, it has always been my understanding that as soon as something happens to someone on the mountain, attention goes towards saving them, even if you are on a summit push 

But if you are planning to go higher and spend more time at altitude anyway you aren't increasing the danger.  I had more in mind if the location was particularly dangerous (e.g. stonefall risk).

I don't think you can ever say that if someone is alive.  People recover from all sorts of improbable situations and conditions and having someone present will only increase the chance.

I think that is most most thought-provoking thing anyone has written on this.

Basically MG, as I said, I agree with you!

Thought experiment:

We seem to agree that had KH been involved in the accident, the scenario would have played out differently, and that stopping to render aid would have been the right thing to do.

How would this crossover to something like providing rescue services to migrant boats approaching Europe or the UK?

Not trying to be contentious or provacative.

Personally, I find the deaths at sea a tradgedy, and the lack of coherent respnse a reflection of human nature, much like passing a sick climber and marching toward the summit.

Am I wrong to conflate these two topics?  I think that both are fundamentally linked to inequality.

What if she had arrived at the scene to find that aid was already being administered, and that to offer her unqualified services would have done little but increase the congestion at a critical part of the route?

If you think she should have stopped, do you think the dozens of other climbers at that part of the mountain should also have stopped to help? 

Hey Harry.  First, you might read my post above, where I talk about the complexity of this situation.  I appreciate the hypothetical points your raise.

In a perfect world, yes, everybody would have stopped to help carry the victim down.  It would likely have required a large team, with fresh members rotating in to help those too exhausted, sharing of oxygen bottles and other equipment, and so on.

In that place, in that time, could a tream have hauled the victim laterally on the traverse, and them packaged him and brought him down?  I think the answer is, "very likely not," but as Damo pointed out, had it been KH, they very likely would have tried. 

I understand my view may not be shared by everyone and I don't expect everyone to feel the same, but If someone was dying on the route I was doing and there was nothing I could do to help then I would turn around. It's hard not getting to the summit but the thought of stepping over someone and continuing while they are dying isn't something I would be able to carry on my conscience.

Everybody? Really? Given the circumstances, the situation and the likelihood that many of the guided climbers would not have been technically or physically capable of helping with a rescue at 8000m, it seems to me that asking everybody to participate would have been both impossible (how on earth would you organise dozens of reluctant rescuers) and potentially very dangerous. As I understand it, the terrain at the site of the accident is challenging, to say the least. 

It seems to me were were many failings, by many people, many of which were brought about the commercialisation of the 14 8000m mountains and the exploitation of Sherpas and Pakistani HAPs. I am old enough to remember when expeditions to K2 were just that - expeditions - with no guarantees of success and a strong likelihood of failure. Things are very different now and I'm not convinced they are for the better. 

Given how many people die or need rescuing you are going to have to accept the fact that you stand 50:50 chance of having your trip ruined by some merchant banker who’s taken their midlife crisis to 8000 meters. If you are an ambitious record breaker you will know this and have decided on a course of action before setting out. 

We do, or at least the RNLI, provide rescue services to migrant boats. A small proportion of the UK population would prefer that those services were not provided. There is a name for those people and they are unlikely to be involved in this current conversation.

I'm not in favour of this level of armchair speculating on something so extreme and dangerous, in a place and height I've never been. But I'll just add that over the years several people, including an IFMGA guide last week who has summited a couple of 8000ers, has noted that often steeper ground is easier to lower someone that a long flat route (like Manaslu, Shishapangma etc). But I know that might not be enough.

If Hassan could have been pulled back up quicker, stabilised with another's O2 mask, let the 100 people jumar past for an hour or so, then a few Sherpa drag him into position to lower him down the steep slope below the Bottleneck, then back down the easier slopes to (this year non-existent) C4, then he might have had a chance. Lowering him through the Black Pyramid, House's Chimney, all that stuff would have been difficult, but he possibly might have revived by then and could descend himself. We'll never know.

But none of that happened because there was no imperative to save Hassan, because it would mean losing the summit, using up spare O2 etc. That kind of thing is possible for paying clients, but not a low-level employee of a local company who the Sherpas warned not to come up. That's the terrible reality of it.

Another thing that has been lost in this tragedy is that snow conditions up there were terrible, and quite a lot of climbers turned back - nearly 100? They figured there were too many people moving too slowly in terrible snow conditions. Those who pushed up put themselves - and their paid Sherpa servants - in an extremely marginal position. If a large part of the serac above the Bottleneck had fallen, as in 2008, chances are it would have been the largest death toll in the history of mountaineering (>41). As a growing practice, and not using a C4 but pushing earlier from C3 due to more Sherpas and more bottled O2, is just one of those things that will cascade together with the other things and lead to a massive 'accident' somewhere down the line.

An aside? The Gilkey Memorial at K2 BC, so often photographed, with all the plates carved with dead climbers' names. In 1953, Art Gilkey became ill and incapacitated at 7775m (approx. near/belowcurrent C4 near The Shoulder) and his seven friends, began lowering and carrying him down, but he died on the way.

1953 - leather boots, hemp ropes, no bottled O2. They tried because they wanted to.

Thanks Damo, that's great perspective.

What you wrote here is what I find interesting:

"But none of that happened because there was no imperative to save Hassan, because it would mean losing the summit, using up spare O2 etc. That kind of thing is possible for paying clients, but not a low-level employee of a local company who the Sherpas warned not to come up. That's the terrible reality of it."

This was the point I was trying to make.  This is really about inequality and human conduct, not necesarily mountaineering.

That's why I raised the topic of migrant boats (just to transpose this into a different context, not start a political back and forth).

If a boat started sinking off the Mediterranean coast of Italy, Greece, Spain, France, or the UK, I think the response would be very differnent if it was filled with 50 affluent tourists or local citizens compared to 50 poor refugees.

So part of what some object to in these Himalayan climbing endeavors is really about inequality, I think.

That happens regularly and there are normally strenuous efforts to rescue people. The RNLI certainly doesn't discriminate. Recently a Greek response was strongly criticised for not helping sufficiently, and possibly making things worse.

Yes, I think a charity like the RNLI would not discriminate.

But the police or government response if a rescue was needed, and the media attention and public sympathy if a tradgedy did occur, would be markedly different in the two scenarios.  I think this is clear.

And that's what makes this so difficult.  First, you have an impoverished porter making a desperate choice, and then you have a dangerous scenario...sort of like traying to rescue a migrant boat in a blowing gale.  That might be a more apropriate analogy.

Anyway, I don't want to belabor the boat thing--Damo really said it best above.

Inequality is absolutely the key point here. I don't really want to criticise Kristina's decisions that were made around the accident because I imagine the extreme altitude and difficulties in communication would mean making good decisions is very difficult. 

However, the whole culture of commercialised 8000m bagging absolutely stinks. For me the bottom line is that people are paying to have the risks reduced for them. The risks are reduced by having local guides and porters take on more risk for themselves and the only reason this is possible is due to inequality. The starkest example of this is the Khumbu icefall where Sherpas and porters spend lots of time taking massive risks preparing/maintaining the route so their clients can pass under the seracs as quickly as possible. 

To me there is absolutely no glory in mountaineering if you are paying someone much poorer than you to shoulder most of the risks.

Interesting perspective on Everest here:

https://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2023/08/13/nepal_increases_everest_fee/

On Mountain Project post somebody wrote the following words:

"Yeah, I think it’s really hard to judge the decision. Not having been there, it’s impossible to really understand all the factors that play into those tough calls...That being said, I can help but compare it to Nims Purja a few years ago where he went out of his way time and again to rescue climbers during his 14 peaks record attempt. Different conditions, different team, different decisions, but there’s no question about his priorities or character. Really inspiring stuff, to be sure."

That's an angle that hasn't been explored here...was Nims more ethical in his behavior regarding rescues?

"There are obvious ways to address safety that would have little impact on revenue. ... Also, rotating 'rangers' at South Col to watch for theft and serve as a deterrent to potential bad actors while being available for rescues."

Bloody hell. Has it come to that?

Isn't this asking for trouble!?

"Another change will be the requirement that operators must bring dead bodies down from the mountain."

Yes. But mainly it's another thing that operators can charge for, and the people making these regulations will get a kickback each time, especially if it has to be signed-off for in some way. If Body Recovery it finds its way into expedition insurance policies (if it's not already in) then we'll all end up paying, just like the helicopter 'rescue' debacle. 

Interesting but that wasn't quite my thinking

If you were concerned about the safety of a rescue-recovery team stationed that high, how about on K2 then?

https://explorersweb.com/k2-local-rescue-team-bids-to-bring-down-bodies/

Sorry, I was being silly.  The wording implies if you didn't have a dead body you need to get one, leading to the odd murder.