DQ the cheats

[Rob Furness]

It's a shame you weren't there to explain this to the bloke who so selfishly 'chose' to inconvenience the MRT at Langdale this year - nevermind the fact that you can see the inside of your knee joint, just keep going because that's less risky. Brilliant.

He did say minor breaks, and he is actually correct. If you can move, you get off the hill unless help has reached you or you're 100% that help are on the way and know how long they will take. If you can't move then obviously there's not much you can do but hope for the best as it sounds was the situation for the guy with the serious knee injury. MRT do a very good job and are always appreciated, but in an ideal world I would sooner be rescued from the tamest environment I could drag myself to rather than rely on them reaching me in time.

I cannot see the purpose of windproof. It's like water resistant - it means very little in my book. Perhaps handy on a clear blue sky at times as you get the wind on the tops but my waterproof does the same as the windproof + more.

We are not like walkers with poles, accessorising. This is safety kit, we can carry limited kit, so I would always go for waterproof jacket.

I always have waterproof with me and with good reason - I'm not the most experienced, but I've done 2 races in the Howgills where 16C in Sedbergh and clear skies became around 8C, wind and rain on the tops and had similar at Fairfield a few years ago.
In both cases I was delighted that I had a waterproof jacket with me and it has no consequences in terms of weight and packability.

At the FRA Relays in Ennerdale I ran the whole NAV leg in the jacket and it was perfect - I'd have really struggled in a windproof.

Windproof kit is actually excellent. I have a featherlite marathon jacket and the great thing about it is that it keeps you warm even when soaking wet (providing you're moving) and because it's much more breathable than a waterproof jacket I can run in it much more comfortably and tend to don it much sooner than I would a full waterproof. I wouldn't expect to use it in poor weather, nor in a race calling for a waterproof, but neither would I dismiss it completely.

The debates on the merits of windproof v. waterproof, getting off the hill as a priority, taking all kit to a race, seeking clarification from the RO are all constructive. However, in race registration this year, I have heard dozens of runners ask "Do I need to take kit?" not, "What sort of kit do you want me to carry?" In most cases the weather was poor, or deteriorating. How do we educate this potentially dangerous minority (as in putting RO insurance and license at risk, endangering fellow competitors, marshals, and even MRT). They seem to lack basic common sense and knowledge. It takes little effort to study the rules, or research safety in the hills. If it takes a ban to prevent them continually putting others and the sport at risk, then so be it.

That's really the crux isn't it. Kit talk is all very good, but if you can't choose suitable kit yourself judging by the conditions then it's likely that all the kit rules in the world won't make you safe. However, the problem still stands of accidentally falling foul of a kit check because your opinion of waterproof is different to somebody else's. I tend to carry a H2O jacket for waterproof, but have a cheap fully waterproof cag in the back of the car in the event that somebody think's that isn't waterproof enough. I know what I feel safe with.