“Irrelevance”.. well put. When it comes down to it, since the very first time every following Everest summit is redundant except to the summiteer. If one wants, surely there’s some new random “first” that can be tacked onto it (first to the top with a hula hoop?). As far as I can tell, the summit is really an achievement of an individual vs. themselves.

My limited experience mountaineering tells me safety is often one of slim margins. Climbers push those margins enough already. Climbers on Everest push them even further. Add to that some idiotic competition, and its almost a guarantee somebody is working without a net. As Peak Freaks reports, “This season we have three competitions… I just learned that there are three Western Australians climbing. The first to reach the summit will be given the title of the third Western Australian.” Really? The third? This is irrelevance reaching a new level of stupidity and if it drives them to push already thin margins.

I had asked about differences in guides & companies as I find myself drawn into this game. I’m seriously questioning the judgment of Tim Rippel and Peak Freaks because they seem to have fed this game by promoting an early push and engaging in a little cloak and dagger. Not good judgment or maturity in my opinion.

Thanks Alan for providing a window into this arena. I may benefit more from observing behavior on the mountain than reading any brochure. For my money, solid decision making skills are priority #1. I don’t want a guide that is willing to sacrifice slim margins for cheap competitions, or anything else for that matter.