Three Peaks Fell Race

[Feet in the Cowclaps]

I liked Yorkshire Thug's answer.

[Stolly]

Just curious - but as the race categories in the bible are based on continuing ascent/descent, should the 3 Peaks not be a cat B race given the amount of "flat" between Peaks 1 and 2 rather than a cat A?

I think you'll find that flat bit undulates alot. Have a look at the profile here 3 Peaks Profile - its definitely not flat, thats for sure.

[Fellhound]

should the 3 Peaks not be a cat B race?

Yes.

[Baggins]

I think you'll find that flat bit undulates alot. Have a look at the profile here 3 Peaks Profile - its definitely not flat, thats for sure.

What would the profile for the Wasdale be like

should the 3 Peaks not be a cat B race?

Is it not a trail race this year

[Antisocial]

I think you'll find that flat bit undulates alot. Have a look at the profile here 3 Peaks Profile - its definitely not flat, thats for sure.

I have recced and raced it before, it may not be flat but it does not meet the A requirements.

Having read a lot of the comments on various threads between the rules is rules to the sod it we do what we like brigade (see kit) I appreciate this would cause hackles etc to rise - however the question still stands if technically it should be a B race given its ascent /descent why is it an A?

In the greater scheme of things it does not really matter in the face of more important debates (should I risk death by not carrying my cagoule or just piss the organisers and the FRA off) but I was just curious. I am not after a debate just the history.

[Stolly]

But the race would be easier if the distance was shortened sufficiently to get the average feet of climb per mile higher! And if it was made cat B, you'd then have the bonkers situation of a cat B race being harder than most cat A's.

[Graham Breeze]

I have recced and raced it before, it may not be flat but it does not meet the A requirements.

Having read a lot of the comments on various threads between the rules is rules to the sod it we do what we like brigade (see kit) I appreciate this would cause hackles etc to rise - however the question still stands if technically it should be a B race given its ascent /descent why is it an A?

In the greater scheme of things it does not really matter in the face of more important debates (should I risk death by not carrying my cagoule or just piss the organisers and the FRA off) but I was just curious. I am not after a debate just the history.

This has been debated many times before, not least in the FRA Committee.

Some points:

-the categories are meant to be indicative of severity to inform competitors. Moses did not bring them down on the tablets The PPP is a hard race and it would be perverse to categorise it as a "B" ie easy when it isn't. Someone once died in the race.

- it has actually got longer but not higher in recent years because of route changes.To illustrate this point- if it were made 20 miles longer it might become a "C". So easier? Would that be helpful to potential entrants?

- virtually no fellrace is accurately measured so if one gets pious about the PPP one should apply the same criteria to ALL 750 fell races.

- but to return to my first point, it really does not matter. The PPP is tougher than say Three Shires or Langdale and so Category "A" indicates it is a tough race.

Frankly, anyone who finishes the PPP and thinks it is just a "B" in a real rather than a statistical sense just hasn't been running fast enough.

[Stolly]

This has been debated many times before, not least in the FRA Committee.

Some points:

-the categories are meant to be indicative of severity to inform competitors. Moses did not bring them down on the tablets The PPP is a hard race and it would be perverse to categorise it as a "B" ie easy when it isn't. Someone once died in the race.

- it has actually got longer but not higher in recent years because of route changes.To illustrate this point- if it were made 20 miles longer it might become a "C". So easier? Would that be helpful to potential entrants?

- virtually no fellrace is accurately measured so if one gets pious about the PPP one should apply the same criteria to ALL 750 fell races.

- but to return to my first point, it really does not matter. The PPP is tougher than say Three Shires or Langdale and so Category "A" indicates it is a tough race.

Frankly, anyone who finishes the PPP and thinks it is just a "B" in a real rather than a statistical sense just hasn't been running fast enough.

Here here

[Fellhound]

I'm surprised at you Graham. That's not up to your usual knowlegeable standard

The categorisation has TWO letters, not just one. The length of the race is denoted by the second letter - L, M, or S so the length of the Three Peaks should not be an issue when debating its A, B or C status. We have always been told that the A/B/C category is decided by feet of climbing and how much of the race is on true fell and how much on road/track.

Yes, the 3 Peaks is a hard race but based on what I understand of the FRA's categorisation system it's definitely a BL.

When you think about how much artificial surface you are running on I even think it borders a CL!!

The reason it has been given an A status is more to do with it's long-standing fame in the fellrunning world as a tough challenge. Should this justify it's A status? I don't think so - not if the categorisation is to be considered logical and not just subjective.

[Stolly]

Then maybe the fault is in the FRA grading system . Okay I've not done any Wasdale or Ennerdale races but the 3 peaks is definitely tougher than last year's Borrowdale (lite), the Langdale Horseshoe and the Tour of Pendle, only based on my experience of course.

Were I a virgin to the 3 peaks, I'd kind of want the FRA grading system to give me a grading of what to expect relative to other tough races and calling it BL would be plain wrong.