BG length

[XRunner]

BG at the official distance of 72.

Where does this "official distance of 72" come from?

Bob Graham Round website states:

The Bob Graham Round of 42 peaks is one of the most demanding challenges in England.With a ascent of app' 28,500ft and a app' distance of 74 miles.

I have read that the distance could be as low as 61 miles.

However the distance is not important as the challenge is to reach all 42 peaks from the start to the finish within 24 hours.

[Devon Cream]

65, 66, 68...72 miles. How can you give a physical length measurement to such varied rugged and hard terrain. 65 miles on road or 65 miles over the Lakeland Fells - there is no comparison. I feel that whatever the distance people need to be prepared for something that is really hard and if 72 miles makes them think they need to do a little more prep then all the better.

Having done the Fellsman this year at around 62 miles (what a great event) I can assure you that the Bob Graham Round is a lot further than just another 3 miles, and I don't mean simply distance......

[Mark Smith]

Fresh from doing the BGR this weekend, my GPSs (had to swap at Wasdale when the juice ran out) had the total length as 66.4 miles, including a slight detour in the clag, wind and rain off Ill Crag and another one of Pillar

The oft quoted 6 mile road run in is not quite 5 miles and that's from the farm at the road head.

Not that it's that important.

[Full Moon Addict]

Where does this "official distance of 72" come from?

Bob Graham Round website states:



I have read that the distance could be as low as 61 miles.

However the distance is not important as the challenge is to reach all 42 peaks from the start to the finish within 24 hours.

the distance doesn'tmatter if the BG is viewed in isolation - then the challenge is just to get round within 24 hours whatever the distance is. However, it does matter when comparing the BG with other rounds. The oft quoted 72 or 74 miles inflates the difficulty of the BG compared with other rounds. Also the 61 miles underplays it - thats based on map packages which aren'tas accurate as GPS systems measuring the route actually taken.. thats why I think its important that we stop calling it 72 or 74 miles. 65-66 miles is what it actually is so lets start using the accurate figures!

[Bob]

I tend to agree with you - the mapping packages measure map miles rather than miles on the ground. Presumably GPS takes into account slope etc. I've changed my site to indicate 65 - 66 miles (though I may have missed one or two references and individual sections are still from Memory Map so don't add up to the "new" total).

Variants on the route taken, of which the three largest are:

1. The route from Gt Calva to Blencathra
2. The route between Dollywagon and Fairfield
3. The order in which High Raise and Sargeant Crag are taken

Probably only amount to around 3/4 of a mile total if you take the longest route in each case. Pretty well all the other route choices are six vs. two threes and depend more on what type of ground you like.

[Mark Smith]

I'd add Stake Pass vs more direct route up Rossett Pike, but yeah, in the grand scheme of things these variants do little to affect the total distance.

ST

[Margarine]

I think the mountains are getting smaller so it is shorter than when Bob did it.

[XRunner]

I think the mountains are getting smaller so it is shorter than when Bob did it.

Blame global warming and the rising sea level.

Do mountains actually get smaller if the sea level rises?

[XRunner]

Is there a list of check points with approximate distances, height gained and lost between these points?

The road crossings could also be included as check points.

[Bob]

Mountains do get smaller with rise in sea levels, or at least the height attributed to them does.

http://www.aqvi55.dsl.pipex.com/run/bgr_facts_c.htm but the values are in km & metres. The distances/heights are taken from Memory Map, the height gains don't take into account small dips just the bigger ones so may be slightly under.