UKH

I know that Munro bagging is a daft thing to do, trainspotting in the mountains and all that. But if you live in the Highlands and you want a reason to keep plodding up things when the motivation to climb is in its twilight. It's been fun and I've always liked arriving at the top of something new.

Anyway, is it usual to get to around 240 of them and then...... you just can't be bothered any more, even in winter!!!! I've replaced my quick draws, have snorkelling gear at the ready - it's not looking good for the round.

Don't know. Only at 215 or thereabouts so no idea how i will feel at 240. By which time I may be 240. The tally has only crept up marginally over the last 2 years.

Got my roller blades ready...

I'm still bashing through the Grahams. Bloody hard work; few paths and plenty of bush-wacking. 

Bothy bagging; it's the future.

I need to increase my Bothy bags. Hike out to middle of nowhere then a  nice cup of tea and bun; sleep outside if lots of company then onto the next. I visited a few in the Cape Wrath Trail

Doesn't really matter what excuse we use to muck about in the hills I suppose. 

I got to 85 or so in reasonably short order and in winter, albeit inefficiently (climbing Bidean three times before even hearing about the Munro concept -- imagine!), then haven't done one in years. Kids, the distance from S England, taking up road biking, all the usual excuses. Now I'm starting to wonder if I'll ever do one again.

I feel I know a lot of people that have got well in the 200s and have been there for years or over a decade. Seems that finishing them off needs a push.

The 250 Munros mark has similarities to the 20-mile mark in a marathon - quite a few people seem to get a second wind and push on for the finish from there. I was sort of like that - got to 222 Munros in seven years and 240 in ten, then spent 12 years over the next ten. Significantly the In Pinn was no.249, so with that out of the way I put on a spurt of sorts and did the remaining 35 Munros (it was 284 at the time) in just under three years.

The later stages became entangled with the nonstandard idea of finishing the round on my 1000th Munro, so it wasn't a typical example - but 250 Munros did feel like a significant landmark, far more than 100 or halfway or 200 had done.

It's pretty easy when you're starting out to get up to, say, 100 as there are plenty of multi-hill days to go for, plus 'they're all new hills' i.e. you can go anywhere and get new ticks, no particular area to have to travel to. If you're living in Scotland and focussed then you could tick them off fairly quickly, especially if you avoid repeating hills and didn't do any/much climbing or other activities.

Change of location (assuming you lived in Scotland) and circumstances may be the main reasons for reduced impetus. Location for obvious reasons, although this may just reduce convenience but increase drive (in both senses). Circumstances is variable, could be family, job or just finding other interests, the latter maybe as a result of changing location. 

I've been sitting on 283 for about 10 years, change of location the main reason, although not an excuse as I could relatively easily travel up and tick the last one. However, I'm honestly not too fussed; if I went north then I'd rather go and do some of the more interesting (to me) Corbetts or other hills. I never thought I'd write that back when getting that next tick was what it was all about.

For the past six or seven years I've said, "this is the year..."

Currently got 29 left, or about 15 hill days (several multiples in a day left). I've been on less than 40 for about 8 years. Maybe this year...

Migt it be that pschologically there's a fear of the gap that is left by completion?

Kevin will have his own take on it, but for me it was certainly a slightly odd feeling having finished - and also in the build-up to completion eg the realisation towards the end that I'd never have another day with say three new Munros. I got straight back on the horse however - went for a wander round the Bhuiridh/Creise pair the following weekend, then cooked up the notion of climbing 100 Munros in the year (the only time I've done that) which required 36 in the five months after finishing, so that kept me busy and not pondering too much.

Certainly glad I did finish rather than sitting for ages or forever on M-1. Over a decade on I've found it quite a satisfying thing to have done, like having finished some kind of apprenticeship (not that you ever stop learning, of course).

I heard a rumour that Andy Nesbit has done all the Munros at least 7 times...!

Not sure if it's true, but, in 2013 it seems he was on his 5th round! - https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/features/60_years_of_andy_nisbet-5521

Still (just) five at the last reckoning:

https://www.smc.org.uk/hills/completionist/107

43 years between two different completions is impressive.

I took 34 years between completing my first round and updating by climbing the promoted Beinn Teallach. I've been on 281 for my second round for 14 years now (Just Beinn Teallach to go again), I've been on 280 for my third round for about 5 years (Ladhar Bheinn and Beinn Teallach again to go). At about 215 on my fourth round.

Reminiscent of another popular human activity. 

Good stuff, big numbers. Beinn Teallach's actually quite nice...

On a similar theme I know someone who once said to me that if he went to Skye and climbed the In Pinn every day for a week he'd come home with his tally of rounds having jumped from one to eight.

I wouldn't know about that.

Ah, tristesse...

Yeah. very possibly. Before I finished I was pretty single-minded and driven on getting them all done. As soon as I finished, I realised there weren't going to be quite as many great mountains to see with completely new eyes. So I'm now going through the Corbetts slowly! There are still quite a few brilliant hills I'm looking forward to climbing for the first time. I look across to Garbh Bheinn in Ardgour every day now and still haven't been up it

I think all compleationists vary with regards to when the "tunnel vision" kicks in and one gets obsessed with finishing them. I had a truly desultory "campaign" spanning 2 decades. Once I became a car owner, getting 50 was easy. When I got to about 75, rock and winter climbing took over and I remember getting about 2 done in a 3 year period. They then started to "trickle" back, mostly due to moving from Glasgow to Inverness. However, the 200 mark was the defining moment for me - I simply had to finish them! I even drew up a proper list of days out, managing 35 in my 2nd last year (2012), many of which were remote and/or fairly far away (I didn't quite "kill off" the ones near Glasgow when I lived there!). My mountain bike was invaluable (cheers Dave for the tips!). The other landmarks did feel good too (100, halfway, even 150) but 200 did seem to focus the mind.

I suspect many on here will have a similar pattern of a rapid accumulation of Munros followed by a long fallow period when climbing takes over. It was certainly the case with me; I think I did about 30 in my first two years then another 15 over the following 5 years because of climbing. Walking has long since set back in but as said above, I tick them in bursts. This year...

I think you definitely have to make quite a push at the end to get the last 30-40. I'm betting that as you are in the NW highlands, most of your remaining ones are further south and east- with minimal motivation to travel that far when there's so much on your doorstep.

Munro-wise, I ran out of money and time with about 25 in the NW highlands left (finished university, working crappy hours for min wage). Then I conveniently got a good job in Inverness and the last few were a breeze - I was able to do about half of them after work!

For the Corbetts (and Grahams, which I subsequently started adding into the same walks), I had a similar problem, although all of the unclimbed ones were down south. While I always enjoyed being out, I did get a bit single-minded about finishing them in the final year or two, and got a bit fed up of always having to travel south. Paid off though, as I doubt I would have finished with a more relaxed attitude.  I mean Cowal is a nice area, and relatively unexplored by me, but I was never just going to have a day out down there on a whim. Same applies to the Southern Uplands. In the end I just had to take a few days off and backpack through these areas, which was actually quite interesting but wouldn't have been my first choice of places to go camping for a few days.

The Cowal Grahams above Loch Eck will certainly test anyones' fortitude..........

I know several folk where the final motivation was by setting the date for the final one and plan the party accordingly. Worked out well for them as planned realistically and was the motivator.

However, plan carefully as when I did Ben More on Mull there was a party of 25 up top from all over the U.K. who where having the weekend on Mull with the celebration party dinner for the compleation. Problem was it turned out not to be the compleation as the two guys who were due to finish on Ben More that day had left two Fisherfield Munros to be done the weekend before. Late winter snow had prevented them getting them done. 

As for me, I got to 100 and then slowed down! Got there in the end, but it was more I had to plan ahead with dates so I had committed myself to getting out on the pre planned weekend. I also got sidetracked with the Cuillin! Became addicted to it for a long time and did over 30 trips specifically to just be in the Cuillin doing new bits and repeats with different routes, and helping friends with the Munros there.

You're bang on there! Driving south through Torridon to go walking elsewhere takes an application of the blinkers We now have a campervan so that will help a lot! A lot of hills will involve a a bivvi or wild camp which is motivating

The Cuillin will sidetrack me alright, have been browsing the newish guide to scrambles and easy climbs, had some cracking trips in the 90s with the likes of Pinnacle Ridge. There're a few hills on the main ridge I haven't done so the thought of getting up them by a good route has me slavering!

Totally agree there. It may be an oft-repeated saying but it is true that "The mountain always has the last word". I never planned a compleation party, but had chozen Ben Chonzie as a last one (an easy one to allow as many people as possible to come along). Once I got the second last one done, I practically rushed to get to the finishing line. It was such a rush that I was surprised how many made it!

Can you start your third round before you've finished your second? Or should you reset and start from zero?

On a different note, my last few (not that I'm counting...) were part of interesting long days out: Steven Fallon's website has some good ideas for linkages. Ticking "Fallons" is as much fun as ticking Munros.

This approach taken to Corbetts takes on a whole new level. They really don't like being tagged together.

My take is simply that each round is a record of the number of times you have done the full set so you can start a second round while still on the first.

Yep - I'm 1 hill into my 17th Graham round!

So which one have you done 17 times?

I'm one hill into my 1268th Graham round! The cumulative vs restart debate is an old one and both are fine (don't believe anyone - usually in the restart camp - who tells you otherwise). Restarting from scratch has tended to become known as a "golfer's round" in recent years, in that generally golfers start at the first hole each time. This makes sense if you've been pretty "linear" with your initial round and have maybe fewer than 20 Munros or whatever repeated. If you've done lots of different repeats however, or a big number of one hill, feeling obliged to reclimb them/it again for a second round can seem a bit silly.

Incidentally the people I know who have the biggest totals of Munros aren't the linear repeaters such as Steven Fallon - generally their lifetime totals are of the form rounds multiplied by x (where x = 15 just now in SF's case) plus a fair few repeats. It's been a while since SF gave me an overall total but I'd imagine he's somewhere between 5000 and 6000 just now. I know two people up around the 8000-Munro mark and they've both just done one round.

Fantastic!

In reply to Kevin Woods:

For years the only hill I'd done over there till my completist Munro completion (Munros, Tops and ex-Munros/Tops) freed me to get exploring the rest. And what you miss when obsessed with height!

http://www.petestack.com/blog/?s=ardgour

Of course. Some people say no, but that strikes me as daft and contrived. If you've climbed a mountain 5 times, then you've climbed it 5 times.

Yes, it amazes me I still have this enormous tract of mountain to properly explore... I have a cheap Corran ferry ticket (just the one, courtesy of a friend), when the spring weather comes around I think I'm going to go over for a period and get walking.

Good blog by the way. Liked your sentiments about the island tops. I made it my business to go around Harris and Lewis and finish all the HuMPs, as I'm often there for two weeks in summer for HebCelt. There is a lot of moor, but there are some crackers, too. And they are hard hill days, as well.

The correct terminology, and I realise I'm being pedantic - but it's compleating under discussion so pedantry is central to the issue, is that I might have climbed Cairngorm 30 times, but I am on my second round. I won't start my third round until I have finished my second, but I might well be well on my way to finishing it. Glad to get that off my chest.

I worked through a number of the Ardgour hills last year (not that I'm counting) and I cannot wait for this season. They're not so good for the sociable hillgoer, however: I've yet to meet anyone on any of my trips there.

Further to Steven Fallon's overall Munro total, rummaging back through old stuff I've found that he'd climbed 2883 at the time of his tenth completion (the eastern Vorlich, 1 September 2002). The number of Munros in a round changed a time or two during those ten rounds, but working on the basis of 280 per round that's only 80-odd repeats at that stage. He kept ploughing on at that kind of rate for another few years (the next three rounds ended in 2003, 2004 and 2006), then things started to thin out and his only rounds since then have ended in 2010 and 2012. His guiding work in recent years will certainly have made him less linear and will have increased the proportion of repeats, but that estimate of between 5000 and 6000 still looks reasonable - next time I swap email with him I'll try and remember to ask.

The current mega-linear equivalent is Hazel Strachan who completed her first round in 2005 (when she was Hazel Holmes) and has since added eight more in 2008, 2010 then every year 2012-17. That's just over 2500 Munros in terms of the actual rounds. I don't know her at all, but there's a fair chance her overall total isn't much more than 3000, possibly even below that mark. Still a huge number of course, but very linear.

Yes I'm looking forward to getting stuck in, just waiting for the bright sun and spring snowfields, which doesn't feel so far away now. (Maybe more-so today as the mist is down to sea level!)

In reply to Dave Hewitt:

I was just thinking about this lately. I recently crossed my 1000th (Earn Vorlich), and that was across 2 and 2/3rd Munro rounds. That makes it in the region of 350-odd repeat Munros.

The highly riveting Carn na h-Easgainn, which is very close to home. Handy as it has nice views and I can be up and down it in less than an hour.

Not very interesting next to Dave H's Ben Cleuch effort!

It's free for foot passengers - I'm sure you could do a good sub-24 hour round from the ferry terminal

Which is itself small fry compared to some others - eg I know of someone with 3000 Ben Lomonds, someone else with 2000 Tintos, and plenty more along those lines. I've not even got the highest known Ben Cleuch tally - there are at least two people with bigger numbers, and quite possibly others that I don't know about or who haven't kept count (eg runners).

No, I think what you mean is that you can start, say, your 3rd round without actually being "on" your third round.

That sounds like brutality!

Fair enough, although there seems to be some basic contradiction that having "started" a round you can't then be "on" a round. Maybe until you finish the round before they should remain Unros.

Actually I reckon you're being unkind to Carn na h-Easgainn, the birch wood on the obvious way up is a lovely place, and as you say, the views are good.

Great bothy though! Certainly adds interest.

It's not a bad hill at all to have close by, but definitely not one you'd want to drive for hours to reach. I haven't stayed in the bothy yet, but had lunch in it a few times.

Mate and I took a climbing friend up Aodann Cleirig near Fort William (cue raising of eyebrows from the unenlightened) on Saturday. He was suitably impressed that it took more than five hours up and down in lots of soft snow. ''That was a good mountain day'' was his summation. ''Aye, they're just like other hills, only smaller,,'' I replied.

With nearly 70 Grahams ascended, I have to say the ''wilderness experience'' is much greater than the bulk of the Munros and many of the Corbetts.

You hardly see a soul on the Grahams. That said, we met another two guys on Stob na Boine Druim Fhinn at Lochgilphead a couple of weeks ago and they were just as surprised to meet us as we were them!

''Can you start your third round before you've finished your second? Or should you reset and start from zero?''

A fair point. Surely you have to go back to the start? Doesn't matter if you have climbed Bidean or the Ben 20 times as far as I am concerned.

What's the official line on that? Maybe Dave Hewitt can tell us?

Oops, Sorry. I hadn't got that far down the topic!

What would people generally class as a separate repeat of a hill? For example, would you class it as 2 ascents of one hill if you go out-and-back to another top as part of a day walk? Or camping on a high col and nipping up to the top in the evening and again the next day?

Why would you want to pretend you hadn't climbed it 19 of those times? Totally mad!

I would want to have returned to a "major" valley.

Might be even more surprised to discover that it's no longer a Graham either, for want of about 450mm of prominence! It's still probably the pick of the bunch in that range though, and one I'd like to go up again.

Does it really matter? Unless, perhaps, you're specifically counting/claiming multiple rounds/ascents...

In reply to Robert Durran:

While appreciating the uncontentious appeal of that approach, it's arguably also illogical. Let's say you traverse a ridge like the Mamores; you climb/claim all the peaks along the way while never descending lower than necessary to get to the next one. So what's that different about traversing such a ridge (or parts of it) multiple times without returning to 'valley' level and claiming whatever number you did? Of course you could take it to extremes by oscillating between the least well-defined classified peaks you could find, but who'd want to? But then again (as above) does it really matter unless you've some need for indisputable repeats?

In the end it's just aesthetics - what feels right. And that might vary from person to person.

Indeed, and really irrelevant to me because I'm not 'counting' like that so don't personally have to address these issues. I could tell you which hills I've done once, twice or many times (properly many times by any criteria!). but not how many without some careful checking of records. In which case I would have to address these issues, which isn't happening because 1. I don't need to know and 2. they're not wholly soluble even if I did!

Had to look that one up but have done it as part of a two dayer taking in Meall Onfhaidh, Gulvain and Meall a'Phubuill.

Agree re the wilderness experience. Having recently gone back to repeating munros, the paths come as a surprise, as do the people. 'I just have to follow this?'

It doesn't matter at all, I was just curious. For example if you traverse Aonach Eagach, turn round at the end and traverse back again, is it 2 Munros or 3?

Limit baggings to separate trips. What makes a separate trip? Tricky, but should be obvious. It's important that we address these issues before sponsors begin to ask questions.

In my experience the vast majority of people would regard that as two - similarly if you went along the seven Munros of the South Cluanie Ridge in whichever direction, then turned round at the last summit and came back along, that would still be seven Munros rather than 13 (but arguably a better day out than walking/hitching back along the road). I tend to see it along the lines of each hill having a component "from the bottom" part to it and that can only be used once on each outing - so if you go along a ridge with summits ABC then come back over B it doesn't count in reclimbing/bagging terms even though you've clearly been there twice, as you've already used its from-the-bottom aspect; similarly if you go CBAB - B again doesn't count.

I've only ever met two people who have seriously argued for same-day repeats counting, and one of these is Hamish Brown, who usefully did so in print in his Mountain Walk book (which is my favourite hill book, and I admire Hamish greatly even though I disagree with him on this). During his 1974 trip he went over the three Munros of Benn a'Ghlo then - because he was wanting to drop to the Tilt - came back over the middle one; "Always another Munro after all", he wrote, and he definitely counts it as he then mentions that his year's eventual Munro tally was 344, his highest ever and clearly by implication including that double ascent.

There are a few places where ABA happens fairly naturally - Ghlas-Lawers-Ghlas is one, although much less common than it used to be before the bypass path was upgraded. Benyellary-Merrick-Benyellary is possibly the most common example in Scotland. On the Ochils the Law-Cleuch-Ever loop is a standard thing to do (I'm intending it again later today in what look like being nice conditions), but quite a few people go either Ever-Cleuch-Ever or Law-Cleuch-Law (the latter is surprisingly common given the steepness lower down). I hardly ever do either of these retreats but if I did then I wouldn't dream of counting the second Ben Ever or Law ascent as a proper tick in my overall tally.

Hi Dave, 

I'm with Hamish, so you can add me to your two (unless I'm already the other one - we may have had this conversation before?). I would argue that you've put in the same amount of effort to do a second ascent of something as you did to traverse a summit between two others, when you do it is irrelevant. In your example you've already used the "from the bottom" part more than once that day as it counts in the ascents of A, B and C, so another re-use is no different. I would only count a same day reascent if I'd climbed another hill in between though, not just nipped down to the col and back. For instance I once did the NE Ridge of Aonach Beag by coming in over Aonach Mor and dropping down into the corrie, then returned over Aonach Mor again - that seemed to me to be enough effort to justify counting AM again. As said above though, in the end bagging is a personal game and you can set your own rules, the main thing is to have fun in the hills.

Hi there - hope all's well. No, it wasn't you previously - the other person was a bloke met on a hill somewhere years ago, can't now remember where or who! Interesting take on things anyway.

In my example I'd say that although the bulk of the "from the bottom" component is usually used in the ascent of hill A, there's a residual part of it for B, C etc but once you've used it on any of these hills it's gone for that particular hill for the duration of the trip.

My equivalent of that - where things start to get fuzzy for me - is the related question of descending to a road between ascents. If I dropped back to the point I'd started from I'd definitely count a second ascent; if I reached a road that was higher than the starting one then turned round and went back up, I dunno. One example of this (which I've not done) would be going up East Lomond from the west side, dropping to the big car park on the eastern shoulder (only 100m or so down from the summit), then going back over the top. Personally I think I'd still just count that as one ascent. However at some stage I'm keen to do something like this: climb High Street from the Kirkstone, drop down the east side probably via Harter Fell and end up at Mardale Head, then go back over High Street via the Rough Crag ridge. The second road is much lower than the first one of course and I think I'd then count it as two High Street ascents - although would wait to see how it felt once I'd actually done it!

Of course - I get annoyed at the increasing modern trend in various hardcore bagging circles to invent rules (which invariably fit in with the legislators' own preferences and habits) and then to try to impose them on others. Incidentally, there are (I think) quite firm rules about not repeating summits in various of the longer running traverses, eg the most-Munros-in-a-day record - it has to be different tops each time which seems a fair enough rule in that instance, otherwise someone could just shuttle between Tom Buidhe and Tolmount all day.

Anyway, off to the Ochils - the sun's out.

However at some stage I'm keen to do something like this: climb High Street from the Kirkstone, drop down the east side probably via Harter Fell and end up at Mardale Head, then go back over High Street via the Rough Crag ridge. The second road is much lower than the first one of course and I think I'd then count it as two High Street ascents - although would wait to see how it felt once I'd actually done it!

I had a great day doing something similar - was camped near Hayeswater and went over High Street, down over Harter Fell & Kentmere Pike into Longsleddale, up the scramble on Tarn Crag and over Branstree to Haweswater, then back up Rough Crag and over High Street again. Haweswater was so low you could walk across it through the village remains. Definitely counted two ascents of High Street after that.

Have fun in the Ochils.

With you on that.

Finish a round and it's back to zero.

But in the grand scheme of things ... 

Spot on, Dave! At which point I'll give you one of my own without trying to impose it on anyone... a Munro round without the Tops is 'Munro lite'. If others are happy with just the 'separate mountains' (and the vast majority clearly are), so be it, but Munro wasn't and I wasn't...

Yes, as keeper of the relevant Scottish Hill Runners records pages, I can assure you that 'different' is implicit in the 'most' and we wouldn't accept shuttling (nice word... better than 'oscillating'?) between Tom Buidhe and Tolmount! Though that might make a different challenge for the insane?

Please could someone at least attempt to rationalise this utter madness.

It's munro bagging it's inherently irrational.

shuttling between Tom Buidhe and Tolmount! Though that might make a different challenge for the insane?

Hi Pete,

You do realise that someone's almost bound to do that now! An utterly ludicrous challenge but there's plenty of pretty daft people out there. 25 of each?

edit: I suppose it's more scenic than running round a track for 24 hours and that isn't uncommon.

So is rock climbing, but we have sensible and pretty rational agreements on what, say, constitutes a flash or redpoint. So I don't see why we shouldn't for Munro bagging as well. There's no way I'm ignoring maybe 700 perfectly good Munro ascents just because I havn't yet complete my second round.

Say you've completed the Munros once, twice, thrice or whatever (instead of one/two/three rounds) and it doesn't matter...

But it doesn't matter anyway!

Starting again just seems more sporting. 

(It also makes me go back to the southern Highlands which I wouldn't do if I could just count those multiple repeats I did when I lived in Glasgow) 

I don't think you have to. While I don't think you can logically claim to be on your third round till you've completed your second, that doesn't necessarily preclude counting earlier multiple ascents towards subsequent rounds (i.e. you'll be on your third with however many climbed more than twice already counting once you've completed your second). The two are not incompatible when it strikes me as more a matter of semantics than what you've actually done.

Did Philip Tranter (first person to complete the Munros twice) do two rounds by Roger's definition or yours? While I suspect by yours, I'm not actually sure, but don't even care because he was indisputably the first known double Munroist!

Ah good. In that case we're in total agreement! Asc soon as I've done the one Munro needed to complete my second round I'll be on my third round with two to go!

Except that it is apparently not indisputable (because some odd people dispute it.!)

Just two different schools of thought .

One of which has to be the same one? So down to the nearest major valley, back up, and you'll have one to complete your third... :-P

Because they say he didn't do it or he wasn't the first? (Thought I'd covered myself by saying he was 'indisputably the first known double Munroist'!)

I'm actually planning to leave it (Beinn Teallach) so that I can complete my second, third and fourth rounds on the same day. Obviously I shall have to return to a legitimate point in between the ascents - probably best to play safe and make it the road.

no longer a Graham...

Might explain why it is not listed on the hill lists on walkhighlands and scottish hills websites. That did puzzle me since it is in Dempster's orginal guide to the Grahams as well as the SMC's glossy tome!

Nobody is saying ''in between'' ascents don't count. But they only count as additional ascents (if you are counting/bagging/compleating and every hill day is to be cherished whether it's a first time up or the 100th.

Surely you have to finish what you start before you do it again?

I know at least one guy who is claiming he has only a dozen Munros to go for his second round. All fine and dandy. But how can he then say he has only 30 to do to claim a third round?

Anyone on here know what the ''official'' line is for the Scottish Mountaineering Club's keeper of the list?

I know someone who completed his 3rd round before his 2nd round!!

For his 2nd round he was using the pre 1997 list and had one left to do (that was subsequently deleted). Meanwhile he started a 3rd round and completed on a hill that had been promoted, before completing his 2nd round last hill. If you see what I mean.

Utterly preposterous, I know. But entirely in the spirit of Munro bagging!

Splendid! And I just can't see how anyone could logically dispute that you'd completed four rounds of the Munros if you did...

Though we could spoil everything by taking an ultra-purist, beyond back-to-zero standpoint where only rounds completed continuously without returning to everyday life count (like, for example, a Cuillin ridge traverse should be continuous to get the 'traverse' tick)? Which would leave very few Munroists!

Because, while he can't really claim to be on his third before completing his second, he'll have completed three when he's done the 12 and 30.

Don't know, but would be very surprised if it's not number of Munro completions rather than 'linear' (to borrow Dave's adjective) rounds.

Love it.

No. I see it like, say, writing two books or building two boats - there is no reason why you shouldn't be working on both simultaneously.

A bit like asking what the official government line on brexit is...

But I think it goes with Robert. 

Didn't someone do a round starting every Munro individually from sea level?

Dunno... it's the sort of thing that gets proposed in discussions like this as logically purist, but sounds like such a lot of effort I doubt it's actually been done.

Also remember reading many years ago about a guy who'd visited every 3,000ft ring contour!

I know there was someone doing them all in a logarithmic spiral, which ruled out lots of the obvious links. He got most of the way round then one of the revisions messed up the plan.

Good effort - big day out. Funnily enough after suggesting the Kirkstone/Mardale idea it struck me that I'd be more likely to do it from Hartsop, which would plunge me into a bit of a dilemma given that the road there is about 100m lower than the road at Mardale Head - but on balance I suspect I'd count it as two High Street ascents provided I went through the gate and on to the tarmac before turning back

Was very nice, esp once the chilly northerly eased after lunch. Quite springlike in the afternoon. Got round five summits, none repeated...

I know the guy who did them in reverse order of height - finishing on the Ben of course (in terrible conditions - I was there and I've rarely been out on such an unpleasant day).

Re one or two other points (rather than replying to different posts), as far as I'm aware the SMC line on restart vs cumulative is that they have no official line, ie each is fine. I'm not in the SMC (just a humble researcher/observer) but in my dealings with them on this kind of stuff I've found them to be happily open-minded and non-doctrinaire about such things, which is more than can be said for various of the more modern bagging groupings. The relevant SMC people are Derek Bearhop - still keeper of the list as far as I'm aware - and Dave Broadhead, clerk of the list, but I'd be surprised if either broke cover and offered any opinion on such matters.

Sorry Pete for forgetting that you were the keeper of records re hill running stuff - didn't mean to be rude. Re Tolmount/Tom Buidhe, for all that they're pretty adjacent there must be closer/quicker pairs - the Easains, perhaps, or a pair on that ridge north of Ben Alder? For Wainwrights there are some very close-together ones , eg COM/Brim, Swirl How/Great Carrs, Rampsgill/Kidsty.

Tranter's two rounds ended just three-and-a-half years apart - 14/4/61 on Ben Hope, 26/9/64 on Ben More Assynt - so the second one could well have been cumulative, although I'm not sure. Pete's keenness for Munros Tops rather than just Munros (and of course all main Munros are also Tops) should make him a fan of Eric Maxwell of the Grampian Club, an underrated and semi-forgotten figure who not only invented the people list (and maintained it until it reached 100 - it wasn't originally an SMC thing) but also was the first person to do all the Tops twice (26/5/57 on Chno Dearg, sometime in July 1966 on - I think, not entirely sure - the since-deleted Faochag), and all this despite never having learnt to drive. It was his son David who came up with the Furth Munros list too.

Nothing rude in what you said, Dave!

(And it's only the long-distance/big round stuff I look after.)

Probably, yes, but they still seemed a perfect pair for a pointless challenge!

Yes, of course. But it's convenient shorthand to talk about Munros and Tops rather than the 'separate mountains and subsidiary tops listed in Munro's Tables'.

Somewhere in the big list of Munroists is a person for whom the date for their Tops precedes the date for their Munros - which suggests that neither they nor the clerk at the time quite understood the concept! (I'll have a rummage when I get chance and see if I can find the relevant entry.)

Sadly couldn't resist checking to see if I'd done that (900m on the 1:50000 sheets). 20 left, the 9 random hummocks on the Moine Mhor being the only really silly ones, the rest being on logical routes up the hill. I rather like wandering around  the Moine Mhor so might try and finish them. There's one on the N Ridge of Tom a' Choinnich that's a pig to get to and must almost never get done but is on a nice looking ridge. Pleased to find I've done all the tops with more than one contour without ever intending to - most are tops/ex tops so probably quite a few people have done the same.

Have to confess I've also done quite a few unlisted quasi-tops, but haven't kept any firm record of them beyond GPS tracks from days I had that running.

I've not kept a record either, and hadn't looked until this evening. Most unlisted ones are on obvious ridges and you would naturally take them in if doing that ridge. Most of my 20 are on broader eastern ridges or plateaux where you might dodge round them to save height. I usually don't and have probably done a few of them but haven't counted them unless I'm sure.

Sounds like a retirement project Iain.

Good excuse to poke around in some nice places.

So how did you check? Maps/digital maps for the whole Highlands? You realise I meant (but didn't quite say) every ring contour of 3,000ft or higher, so lots of higher single rings too? But knowing you, you've probably still just got 20 to go!

I've thought for a while about trying to compile a list of isolated 3000ft contours that aren't Munros or subsidiary Tops - the 3000ft equivalent of the appendix to Donald's tables of 2000ft tops (sadly omitted from the most recent edition of Munro's Tables) - but it sounds like Iain's already done this!

The idea of Donald's appendix was effectively to list things that weren't in the main list but would be islands if the sea level rose to exactly 2000ft. There are a fair few equivalent things for a 3000ft sea level, eg there's a 918m bump on the NW ridge of Carn Gorm above Glen Lyon. Incidentally, to combine two parts of the discussion on this thread, 613m Greenforet Hill west of Blairdenon was in Donald's appendix and is also the summit I most often cross twice on one outing, as several times a year I go up Blairdenon from the Sheriffmuir road and Greenforet is on the natural line there and back even if deviating lower down. Iain, you and I would have done that during our raid to help your r2 Donalds last July - and I now have a vague memory that this did prompt a discussion of double-summiting, so I had actually encountered the idea being supported by three people, not two - you, Hamish and whoever it was saw things that way years ago.

But many 900m contours won't reach 3000ft.  910m would be better, but you really need to look at 3000ft contours on the old 1 inch maps. One thing that certainly should't be arguable is that Munros are all about 3000ft!

I would never claim something like this unless I thought there was the prospect of a 100+ reply thread bickering about the semantics of it

Wouldn't trust the accuracy of the old 1 inch maps as most of the contours are interpolated, so I used the 900m line as at least that way I knew I'd include all the 3000ft ones, just with maybe a few extras.

Baggers obsessive? Who knew?

Fair enough, but why not 910m? As a matter of interest, how many are there?

Yes, looked through all the Highland 1:50,000 maps and included higher rings. Not as big a job as you might expect (an hour or so) as Munros are concentrated on a fairly small number of sheets and the 900m+ land is mainly on ridges or on isolated summits with few or no subsidiary tops (with the obvious exception of the Gorms). Actually listing them would be a bigger job (over to you Dave?), just wrote down the ones I'd missed (12 Gorms, 5 Central Highlands, 1 NW, 2 in your neck of the woods).

The two I'd missed on your patch, by the way, are the bump at the W end of the summit ridge on Meall a' Bhuiridh and the knobble by the lochan on the south flank of the Grey corries at 254 731 - bet hardly anyone goes to the latter!

Just for the round figure, I suppose. If I'd used 910m I'd have wanted to extend it to the 900m ones anyway. There were a lot fewer unlisted ones than I expected - I didn't do a total (but maybe I should now). Well under a hundred, so with tops and ex-tops maybe 650/700? How many on your list Pete?

Also on Munro-related stuff, possibly of interest...

https://munros-scotland.com/dave-hewitt/munroists-by-year-and-by-month.html

Good thread!

I had a read, a think, a consult of my Munro book - hmm, since 2010 I seem to have been up 27 Munro's to obtain that all important tick, still got 42 to do  - perhaps I had best speed up the rate at which I'm getting through them though. 

Whats the weather forecast for this weekend?

Lots of work putting that together, cheers Dave.

Anecdotal I know, but quite a few people that spend more time on Munros than I do maintain that they have been less busy the last few years than a decade ago, and your stats seem to fit with that. 

OK, couldn't resist, went through digitally at a higher magnification and found a few more. 819 total by my reckoning. Had to estimate the Cuillin as the 1:50000 is useless but I know them well enough to be fairly sure what would count.

Which list, Iain? I haven't listed unlisted rings, but there were 601 on my all-time Munros/Tops* list... 602 now with the promotion of Mullach Coire nan Cisteachan at Drumochter, but I'd already done that.

*Yes, this includes some that are now known to be sub-3,000, but I had to do as having been listed.

Not totally surprised. That's a couple of hundred never-listed bumps.

Quite a lot of the extras were extremely minor bumps on the crumply schist hills in the southern highlands, plus I'd been inconsistent in the initial look and not included ones on hills 900 - 914m, although I'd counted 900m tops on Munros. 38 I'm not sure I've done now (6 of which I probably have). Still a feasible (if silly) objective - runs up against all the same objections as Nick Wright's English 2000 list (Tynehead Fell - exactly which 5 peat hags count?).