Well in 2024 a total of 860 people climbed Everest and 9 people died trying to do so (which was lower than most years). So around 1 in 90 died trying to climb it. Therefore, I wouldn't describe it as an 'easy' accomplishment.
Though it would be funny if Nick got within a couple of meters of the summit and found Mohammed Aman out of his head on drugs, blocking his path, lol.
Without sherpas, oxygen, or a well-defined route with fixed ropes, climbing Everest is harder than running a sub 4 mile.
But if you have all that, it's easier than running a 5:30 mile provided that you have the money and vacation time. Heck, an 80 year old man and a 73 year old woman have summited Everest, and there are no 80 year old men or 73 year old women who've run a 5:30 mile or its 1500 equivalent.
Getting killed in an avalanche, storm, freezing to death, even murdered by an ice axe don't make a climb "difficult." Those forms of bad luck take no effort at all.
That's difficult like running a road marathon with the course not fully closed and cars randomly driving through it. You might get ran over but it's still just a marathon.
Getting killed in an avalanche, storm, freezing to death, even murdered by an ice axe don't make a climb "difficult." Those forms of bad luck take no effort at all.
That's difficult like running a road marathon with the course not fully closed and cars randomly driving through it. You might get ran over but it's still just a marathon.
You are forgetting about the Death Zone.
Even climbers with oxygen have problems above 26,000 ft.
Heck, an 80 year old man and a 73 year old woman have summited Everest, and there are no 80 year old men or 73 year old women who've run a 5:30 mile or its 1500 equivalent.
This is all you need to know. If you are talking about athletic/physical achievement, Everest on guided tour is just not impressive. Still very dangerous--you could definitely die--and also very uncomfortable--you will be cold and oxygen-starved. But not very difficult physically.
Very few people have ever run under 4:00 minutes for the mile. You either have the genetic ability to do so or you don't. A much wider range of people have summited Everest, even without supplemental oxygen. Reinhold Messer, the first person to do so, along with Peter Habeler, was widely reported to have a very average Vo2 max. But, obviously he had extreme mental toughness and ability to acclimatize well. The account of his solo climb from the north without O2 is incredible. If you were to look across a large population sample, the ability to run a sub 4:00 minute mile would be a much smaller percentage that than the ability to climb Everest, even without oxygen. Ed Viesturs summited all 14 8000 meter peaks without oxygen and has elite hobby jogger run times.
Getting killed in an avalanche, storm, freezing to death, even murdered by an ice axe don't make a climb "difficult." Those forms of bad luck take no effort at all.
That's difficult like running a road marathon with the course not fully closed and cars randomly driving through it. You might get ran over but it's still just a marathon.
You are forgetting about the Death Zone.
Even climbers with oxygen have problems above 26,000 ft.
The usual O2 flow rates required to keep normal people moving in the death zone on supplemental oxygen will consume a standard cylinder in about 6 hours, faster if you really start to struggle.
Getting stuck overnight is usually the end of the road.
Annapurna has the highest death rate at 32% but that number has been skewed by a single avalanche in 2014 causing 43 deaths. Up until then the total count was 61.
K2 is #2 at 23% fatalities.
Very true, but there are a few things that i want to add to supplement the info you just gave.
Nobody knows, for certain, how many people have died on everest. We have approximations of the last 75 years. Tribes have been tinkering around on everest for several millenia.
Before I lost weight and started competing again, I was into mountaineering. I successfully scaled Pico De Orizaba and Aconcagua.
Regarding K2, there are definately people out there who FEEL that K2 is more difficult to climb than everest simply because if the way the mountain is cut. Even though it's lower down than everest, it's very jagged and requires alot technical skill.
Everest is simply insanely HIGH up. The elevation alone is what makes it so tough. Overall, for bragging rights, I would much rather choose Everest. I also personally believe the elevation makes it the more difficult peak to scale.
This is all you need to know. If you are talking about athletic/physical achievement, Everest on guided tour is just not impressive. Still very dangerous--you could definitely die--and also very uncomfortable--you will be cold and oxygen-starved. But not very difficult physically.