If take 500 feet per mile as a conversion, add that to the miles and multiply by 5 minutes you get a number which is very close to the lakeland fell race records - IMHO closer than the comparison at 700 feet - so I reckon 500 feet is a better conversion, and is the number I use to translate my own flat performance to fell with fair accuracy. But then maybe I am a cr*p climber!Originally Posted by gej
I would be interested in an elite fell runners view of that
In any event it does not alter the fact that from the OP - 2 miles in 24 minutes on good track on a good descent gradient is probably too slow to make sense of the BG generally.
To verify that statement take the section from sergeant man to harrison stickle - assuming high raise - sergeant man - thunakar - harrison which is level with 100 -200 foot climbs and descents
That is a distance of 3 miles and on the accepted schedules that I know of is targetted at 7 min, 14 min , 8 min - which is around 30 min and 6 miles per hour.
On that basis taking 24 mins for the descent past skiddaw house - a net loss of at least 700 feet? on good track and good gradient is simply not fast enough for 2 miles
PS - I dont have the schedules so all of that is from memory - hope it is right.!
Anyway the proof of the pudding.
Lets see others take that descent at what they feel is stage 1 BG pace and see what time they do.
Reply With Quote