Solo rounds

[Donkarlo]

Iain,

You've not thought of another way either. Remember those panniers we saw on that dog in Langdale I'm sure you could load up the dogs and technically not use road side support !

Karl

[FellShoeShuffler]

You should be aware that dogs have been banned from certain fell races for that very reason.

[Fat Tony]

At the moment the solo idea is appealing. I'd love to do one of the rounds solo and reckon the BGR is the most amenable to run solo.

Now to be strictly solo is that just running without any pacers, food carriers etc, so no hill support. Does support at road crossings mean it is no longer solo? Or would that be solo supported?

Would solo unsupported be a solo run with no road support, but are prior food drops acceptable.

I did a sort-of solo Ramsay, but with a mate at Loch Trieg 8 hours in and again at Loch Eilde Mor at 16. Yet I can't really claim it as solo in any sense because someone came with me over the Ossian 3 for company. Did the other 21 on my tod. I can't remember if he carried anything or not, but it didn't make much odds. When I was alone everything I needed went in the Buffalo top pocket. But it was solo enough! It added to my sense of achievement that I'd got myself over the Ben and Grey Corries in the dark, and the Mamores in the wet, instead of being escorted round. Well-meaning pacers twittering at you and shoving bananas down your neck every ten minutes can get a bit wearing when you're just trying to focus.

[Baggins]

I reckon the Ramsay would be preferable as a solo. Solo on the BG is just ignoring lots of walkers on the fells and traffic on the roads.

I agree with Bob plus

Its harder to get support for a Ramsay and not as many people know the short cuts.
I think it would be much more satisfying, apart from the Ben you'll see very few people, real sense of being on your own.

Then we have a fast BG, lots of people know the route and live near it so you'll be able to get plenty of support (leg 4, Navigate only, no carrying of water or food )

Whatever you decide enjoy it

[IainR]

Iain,

You've not thought of another way either. Remember those panniers we saw on that dog in Langdale I'm sure you could load up the dogs and technically not use road side support !

Karl

I was thinking of organising a club relay on the PBR and getting everyone to take Fly on their leg, It'd be brilliant for the PBR record to be held by a collie :-)

[ydt]

Ian,
Best to solo the Ramsay, where you will have a chance to enjoy actual solitude. When I soloed the Ramsay, Rob Woodall was in Lochaber and I had asked him to meet up with me anywhere he wanted for spot checks. The weather was quite bad on and off and we never saw one another, although I followed his studmarks for a while.
Doing it solo also saves you having to organise support that far from home and with travel being so expensive.

Let's not introduce too many designations into such pure eandeavours. Let's keep the traditional two: solo/accompanied and supported/unsupported. As Bob said, solo means doing the whole distance on your own and supported means picking up supplies (from supporters or stashed by yourself). Unsupported, as Martin Stone would say, means carrying everything from start to finish.
Yiannis

[Fellhound]

Although I don't really regard these designations as important, I would take a slightly more liberal view of what constitutes "unsupported". When I did the Integral de Sierra Nevada in 1989 (when????!) I was completely unsupported - no caches, pacing or other assistance en-route - but a number of challenges have been inaugurated in Bowland over the past few years (many of them by Duncan Elliott) and pre-stashed caches have become a popular feature of these.

If the caches were placed by you and you have no other support on the day I would regard these as "unsupported" efforts.

[ydt]

..........If the caches were placed by you and you have no other support on the day I would regard these as "unsupported" efforts.

Is that not a bit unfair to the person who carried everything?
Yiannis

[Fellhound]

Is that not a bit unfair to the person who carried everything?

No, because if you've taken an interest in what that person has done you will know they have carried everything. What is more unfair is simply boiling everything down to 'solo/accompanied' or 'supported/unsupported'.

I think the important thing is not to get too hung up on designations (what are they for, anyway?) each of these endeavours is unique - that's one of the things that makes mountain challenges so much more interesting than, say, records on the track, where everything has to be tightly controlled and wind speed is measured to a metre per second in case it gives someone an 'advantage' or creates a situation where two efforts are not "directly comparable".

[ydt]

......I think the important thing is not to get too hung up on designations (what are they for, anyway?).

Trundler,
Simple! just call it solo and nobody will question you whether you were supported or not. That way you avoid too fine a terminology. When I soloed the Ramsay clockwise I picked up one lot of food I had left at Fercit and Martin Stone (who is one of very few who have done unsupported challenges) made it clear to me that my Ramsay was 'supported'. I totally agree with this.
Yiannis