50@50 - the extra 8 peaks??

[Bob]

Thanks for that, I'll add it to the site tonight. A subtly different set from the others. Scoat fell is still in every set!

[DazTheSlug]

one can only speculate as to why Bob Graham didn't count Scoat Fell

one explanation might be that he was loath to count peaks closer than half a mile apart, so felt unable to count both Steeple and Scoat Fell (and also explains why Black Crag was not counted on the way over to Pillar.
(although, having said that, both GreatGable-GreenGable and HelvellynLowerMan-Helvellyn look to be closer than 0.5M )

while we're in that area...
I'm a bit surprised nobody has added Haycock - it doesn't look like a massive effort...

[Joe]

one can only speculate as to why Bob Graham didn't count Scoat Fell

one explanation might be that he was loath to count peaks closer than half a mile apart, so felt unable to count both Steeple and Scoat Fell (and also explains why Black Crag was not counted on the way over to Pillar.

Steeple, Scoat Fell and Black Crag are all tops of the same mountain, so it's not that surprising he only included one as a summit for his round. The oddity is that Steeple isn't the highest. Either he thought Steeple was the proper summit in the group (not noticing it's smaller than Scoat Fell, or ignoring this fact in favour of the better summit), or he got the name wrong (on the modern 1:50,000 map Steeple is the big name near the summit of Scoat Fell, the name Scoat Fell is smaller letters and further away), or perhaps he did count Scoat Fell and the list we have isn't the exact 42 summits he counted (see earlier in the thread).

[MorganW]

Ive also have a copy of a 50 round schedule, clockwise, starting at 18:15 with the name I. Blunk in bracketts at the top. Presumably this person was a pacer. This round includes Skiddaw Little Man & Scoat Fell. I wonder does anyone know this person & whom he/she might have been pacing?
duncan

Duncan

Inken Blunk is a name that has long been associated with long distance mountain endeavour.

She is vastly experienced and from memory is married to Mike Cudahy.

I wonder if it might have been a Cudahy production or someone from Macc Harriers?

[Bob]

Morgan - BG counted High White Stones and High Raise which are essentially the same fell. However, Low White Stones is a "slight" rise to the north of the trig point on High Raise, maybe "High" sounded better than "Low".

I wouldn't put too much store on the exact location of names on the 1:50K maps - the OS put the names as close as possible but they may "appear" to be attached to a different feature. The 1:25K map has the highest top (814m) as "Little Scoat Fell" and a prominence (802m) to the south west is named as "Great Scoat Fell". The text "Scoat Fell" is to the south of this but appears to relate to the whole of the fellside rather than a particular high point.

The original 42 of Bob Graham included: High White Stones; Hanging Knotts; Looking Stead & High Snab. These have been replaced with: Whiteside; Helvellyn Lower Man; Broad Crag & Ill Crag. Quite why he omitted/didn't count the first two when he had to pass over them is a mystery.

Hanging Knotts is less than 500m from Bowfell and not much further from Rossett Pike so it doesn't look as if the "half mile rule" is a contender.

[Joe]

or he got the name wrong (on the modern 1:50,000 map Steeple is the big name near the summit of Scoat Fell, the name Scoat Fell is smaller letters and further away)

I found some old 1-inch maps on the web and Steeple and Scoat Fell are quite clearly marked:

http://www.npemap.org.uk/tiles/map.html#316,512,1

Which kinda kills that theory of mine!

UPDATE: These are 1940s OS maps, so post Bob's round. You'd have to check earlier maps!

[ydt]

For those geographically inclined try the historic maps appearing in:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/map...m=1&x=549&y=36

Scoat Fell as well as Steeple were almost exactly the same on 19th century maps as on medern OS ones.
BGSec, you will find maps on this site useful.
Yiannis

[MorganW]

Whilst looking over "42 Peaks" for unrelated purposes, I stumbled across the following words in the section dedicated to 50@50 and related rounds (pp 37-38)

"Each attempt is a personal challenge and a private celebration. The choice of tops and starting points is a matter for each individual."

I will see if I can find out whether this is as "policy" or just a statement of how things have been.

Morgan

[DazTheSlug]

Whilst looking over "42 Peaks" for unrelated purposes, I stumbled across the following words in the section dedicated to 50@50 and related rounds (pp 37-38)

"Each attempt is a personal challenge and a private celebration. The choice of tops and starting points is a matter for each individual."

I will see if I can find out whether this is as "policy" or just a statement of how things have been.

Morgan

I haven't got/read "42 Peaks" but am very much in agreement with the sentiment of that quote.

short of absolute topographically defined "prominence" there is never going to be any way of deciding whether a top is "worthy" of inclusion or not - it's going to be a matter of opinion/grey area

for instance, personally I'd be tempted to count Mungrisdale Common, but I'm not going to say why

[Nee Bother]

"Each attempt is a personal challenge and a private celebration. The choice of tops and starting points is a matter for each individual."


Morgan

This is my view also.

Ken