Re: Alternative HST "Cross-country Pass/Route" Rating System
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:37 pm
I like Mav's proposed rating system.
Here's why. 75% of the off-trail passes I'm considering doing in a given area of the Sierra are going to be rated (by Secor or by our community) as Class 2. The problem is that there is WAY TOO WIDE a variation in difficulty and danger between and among various Class 2 passes. To the point where a Class 2 designation is nearly meaningless!
I want it to be further broken down.
Think about it. You see that a pass is rated Class 2-2. If you don't like "loose" - and I sure don't - that shorthand allows me to immediately zone in on which passes to research with extra attention or to reconsider entirely, before I even include them in my planned route. Some examples of notoriously loose Class 2 passes that would definitely qualify as 2-2 regardless of current conditions/presence of snow, etc.:
Snow Tongue Pass,
Ritter Pass,
Kaweah Pass
Frankly, I'd see the Class 2-2 designation and I'd know to re-plan using a different pass. I just don't want to do very loose Class 2 with a full pack, or only rarely and with great care.
Likewise, the breakdown of Class 3-1 vs. Class 3-2 is instantly useful shorthand. Personally, I won't do a Class 3-2 pass with a full pack. I see the Class 3-2 designation and I can just cross it off from consideration. Boom. That just saved me a lot of work.
Here's another public benefit: Safety. Caution. I think the breakdown will discourage not a few people from taking on passes that are actually above their pay grade. "It's just a Class 2; how hard could it be?" - says a relative newbie to cross-country travel, about to do Kaweah Pass. Whereas if that same person manages to see the 2-2 rating, perhaps that alone will be enough to make him/her pause and reconsider.
Forcing a rating does not preclude one from also inserting detailed narration, the kind that helps us understand what the pass really looks like. We don't have to choose between the one and the other. Let's have the narratives AND the better rating system.
- Elizabeth
Here's why. 75% of the off-trail passes I'm considering doing in a given area of the Sierra are going to be rated (by Secor or by our community) as Class 2. The problem is that there is WAY TOO WIDE a variation in difficulty and danger between and among various Class 2 passes. To the point where a Class 2 designation is nearly meaningless!
I want it to be further broken down.
Think about it. You see that a pass is rated Class 2-2. If you don't like "loose" - and I sure don't - that shorthand allows me to immediately zone in on which passes to research with extra attention or to reconsider entirely, before I even include them in my planned route. Some examples of notoriously loose Class 2 passes that would definitely qualify as 2-2 regardless of current conditions/presence of snow, etc.:
Snow Tongue Pass,
Ritter Pass,
Kaweah Pass
Frankly, I'd see the Class 2-2 designation and I'd know to re-plan using a different pass. I just don't want to do very loose Class 2 with a full pack, or only rarely and with great care.
Likewise, the breakdown of Class 3-1 vs. Class 3-2 is instantly useful shorthand. Personally, I won't do a Class 3-2 pass with a full pack. I see the Class 3-2 designation and I can just cross it off from consideration. Boom. That just saved me a lot of work.
Here's another public benefit: Safety. Caution. I think the breakdown will discourage not a few people from taking on passes that are actually above their pay grade. "It's just a Class 2; how hard could it be?" - says a relative newbie to cross-country travel, about to do Kaweah Pass. Whereas if that same person manages to see the 2-2 rating, perhaps that alone will be enough to make him/her pause and reconsider.
Forcing a rating does not preclude one from also inserting detailed narration, the kind that helps us understand what the pass really looks like. We don't have to choose between the one and the other. Let's have the narratives AND the better rating system.
- Elizabeth