LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Leaders by Category

LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:58 am

Not sure if this will catch on, but as an experiment, I thought up a 2010 game for our top 80 peakbaggers in 2009. Eight teams of ten, assigned so that group totals are evenly matched, and members are not likely to hike with each other. The goal? To climb the most distinct new ranked peaks as a team (it benefits team members not to hike with each other because a peak can only count once for the team). Designed to encourage members to try something new in terms of summit selection.

Attached is the team assignment.

Here is a summary with drilldown from team down to members down to summits completed:
(link removed)

Team names and logos, google maps with color markers corresponding to members in a team, etc could make things more entertaining.
Attachments
LoJ_PB.xls
(39 KiB) Downloaded 134 times
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby susanjoypaul » Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:29 pm

Love it! Looking at the spreadsheet it's amazing you were able to put together such evenly-matched teams, with just a single peak of variation between them.

C'mon Team 2 - let's get some peaks!
So much to climb - so little time!
susanjoypaul
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby TWorth » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:01 pm

Kinda fun. As long as nobody takes it too seriously.

Only downside is this rewards going for many easy peaks over remote/time consuming ones. It'd be interesting to see a measure that motivates people to tackle difficult peaks, and not necessarily just technical. Good luck defining a difficult peak. :worms:

Looks like a couple 40-50+ milers I'm looking at for this summer will really cut into my productivity, oh well. :toothless:
TWorth
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 4:27 pm

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:29 pm

TWorth wrote: It'd be interesting to see a measure that motivates people to tackle difficult peaks, and not necessarily just technical. Good luck defining a difficult peak. :worms:


I thought I'd wait and see how much people get into this, then maybe expanding categories if demand is there. The long approach thing is kind of problematic unless the peak is completely isolated - in other words, any one peak might be a long approach, but it may have others near it that are easy add-ons. Then the question is which peak is the one that counts as a long approach? Then there are alternate forms of transport, trespassing to get closer, etc - Worms indeed.
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby susanjoypaul » Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:01 am

TWorth wrote:Kinda fun. As long as nobody takes it too seriously.

Oops... we're not supposed to take it seriously? But I already started harassing the other teams on Facebook.

And I like that it's simple - at least right now. We're all going to end up doing some long approaches, and some technical peaks, etc. - in addition to the easy ones - anyway. I mean, who in their right mind is going to blow through seven El Paso county summits every weekend? Oh, never mind...

I guess what I'm saying is... we're all gonna do what we're gonna do, regardless of any competition. We may just try to add more ranked peaks along the way.
So much to climb - so little time!
susanjoypaul
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby Steve Knapp » Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:02 pm

Could be interesting to watch, like many of the other competitive stats on the site. Not sure if it will inspire anyone to do more peakbagging than they otherwise would, but who knows? Jamie, get busy! :-D

susanjoypaul wrote:I mean, who in their right mind is going to blow through seven El Paso county summits every weekend?

Yeah, that is crazy. What kind of nuts would do that? :disturbed: Perhaps an anomaly of the El Paso list not likely to be repeated.
Steve Knapp
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:52 pm
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:13 pm

Steve Knapp wrote: Perhaps an anomaly of the El Paso list not likely to be repeated.


I have a round 2 scheme :shh:
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby Haikudude » Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:13 pm

Hey, sounds like a blast. Go team 7. Are we allowed to openly conspire with our teammates? Without waiting for a reply, I'm hopefully good for the rest of Boulder County (53 to go), plus some more Larimers and some Gilpins. Hope that doesn't overlap too much with the rest of you team 7'ers...
Haikudude
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:07 pm

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:53 pm

Haikudude wrote:Hey, sounds like a blast. Go team 7. Are we allowed to openly conspire with our teammates? Without waiting for a reply, I'm hopefully good for the rest of Boulder County (53 to go), plus some more Larimers and some Gilpins. Hope that doesn't overlap too much with the rest of you team 7'ers...


Conspiring is the name of the game :wicked:. No Boulder (other than IPW) or Gilpin for me, done with those. Larimer probably ok too as I've knocked out a lot of the stuff closer to Boulder county.
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby Ryan Kowalski » Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:13 am

whoo hoo. Go Team 7! Wait. Does this mean you don't want to hike with me John? :tongue: :-D

I'm down, at the very least it'lll be interesting to see if a random assortment of people split up into "equal" groups remain ever remotely "equal".

As for team startegy, I'm not so sure I wouldn't do a peak I wanted to hike simply because someone on the team had already done it. I tend to hit a variety of areas with Chaffee County being a usual staple throughout the year.
Ryan Kowalski
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:17 pm

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:29 am

Ryan Kowalski wrote:whoo hoo. Go Team 7! Wait. Does this mean you don't want to hike with me John? :tongue: :-D


I don't know if I can forgive you for your register comments on Peak X - claiming a summit before me on the same day - shameful :x . Just means we have to do twice the number of peaks we usually would :disturbed: . A stealth of those Salida East quad unclimbed peaks could be interesting. I'd be down for some Fremont County stuff as well.

I suppose I could change the algorithm to calculate stats on all peaks, regardless of how many times the same peak is done by different members in a group. The main impetus is to get more of the unexplored peaks in the database explored/photographed/documented. Moreover, this setup is only one metric for the groups - I can definitely consider making additional roll-ups/stats categories.

Any thoughts on a team name?
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby Haikudude » Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: Team name ideas for Team 7...

Okay, here goes. In 1960 there was a shoot'em up western called "The Magnificent Seven". Even more obscure, the same year there was a Disney movie called "Ten Who Dared" (about John Wesley Powell exploring the Colorado river). For all you young folks, these titles probably are laden with dust, so feel free to discard at will.
But I thought that numerically either one works, plus they each carry the requisite machismo.
Haikudude
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:07 pm

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby John Kirk » Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:33 pm

Haikudude wrote:In 1960 there was a shoot'em up western called "The Magnificent Seven". Even more obscure, the same year there was a Disney movie called "Ten Who Dared" (about John Wesley Powell exploring the Colorado river). For all you young folks, these titles probably are laden with dust, so feel free to discard at will.
But I thought that numerically either one works, plus they each carry the requisite machismo.


Ten who Dared is pretty classic - though we'd have something to prove with a name like that. There is an even older movie "Seven Samurai" (I think the western is loosely based on this Japanese original), but it doesn't end very well for them, plus it is seven in their group versus ten. Better than "Obsessive-Compulsive Worm Attack" aka OCWA
:worms: :worms: :worms:
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby susanjoypaul » Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:56 am

Team 2, you out there?

Strategy: Divide and conquer. I'll take Colorado Springs south to the Mexican border.

As for a team name, I'm kind of partial to "Peak Baggin' Byitches of the L.O.J."
So much to climb - so little time!
susanjoypaul
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: LoJ 2010 Peak Battle

Postby AzScott » Fri Jan 08, 2010 12:09 pm

I was leaning towards sleeping in and doing some heavy tailgating prior to Sunday's Cardinals playoff game which starts at 2:30...but now I'm going to have to hit some nearby desert crag so I can start pulling my share of the load for team 6...not sure if I like this :-P

In all seriousness, I think the diversity of peaks climbed is going to be interesting. Good idea, John, we'll see how this goes.
Mountains complement desert as desert complements city, as wilderness complements and completes civilization. - Ed Abbey
User avatar
AzScott
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Tempe, AZ

Next

Return to LOJ Member Stats

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest