What's Harder? Sub-3 or climbing Everest?

In these days the only thing you need is $ and a good condition...hundreds of people following a fix rope and there's even Wi-Fi on the summit lol

I bet more than 95% of people climbing Everest cant even run 10k sub 45.

I don't know which is harder, but I do know which is riskier.

BBC News today;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48395241

Run007xx wrote:

For Eliud Kipchoge, a 3 hour marathon is extremely easy. So for him climbing Everest is not only harder, but there’s a 4% chance he will die

This is not true. Everest death rate is close to 1% in this day and age. And moth deaths are due to avalanche. doing something risky does not correlate to accomplishment. As far a danger and difficulty Everest is not the hardest. It just has the mystique of being the tallest.

Here's some facts for you.

Seeing that line should answer the question for you.

If everyone had unlimited funds and time off work, the line would stretch down to base camp and beyond. With the right equipment and money to pay off others to do the hard work, its a moderately difficult hike within range of anyone who's not obese.

If I had paid all that money and reached the top to see that, I would seriously be bummed out. Suckaaaaaaas!!!!

Local tour organiser Keshav Paudel told AFP news agency that Bagwan had been "stuck in the traffic for more than 12 hours and was exhausted".

I think any sub 3 thoner could stand in line for 12 hours without dying.

Run for Jesus wrote:

Ha,ha

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7O91MzX4AEEqTd.jpg

Good weather and just line up. Just pay, you dont't run sub 3 without training.

Business idea : set up top ropes and drill easily accessible grips on El Capitan.

Racket wrote:

Run for Jesus wrote:

Ha,ha

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7O91MzX4AEEqTd.jpg

Good weather and just line up. Just pay, you dont't run sub 3 without training.

Business idea : set up top ropes and drill easily accessible grips on El Capitan.

Run for Jesus wrote:

Ha,ha

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7O91MzX4AEEqTd.jpg

Good weather and just line up. Just pay, you dont't run sub 3 without training.

It's probably a lot harder to stand in line for the Everest summit selfie than to train and run a sub 3 Marathon.

Lenny_ wrote:

sub 3 is way harder, Everest is just walking using fixed ropes

It's obvious you know nothing about high altitude mountaineering.

Running and mountaineering are separate talents with only partial overlap. Ed Viesturs, one of the most accomplished mountaineers of all-time, ran 3:15 at NYCM near his peak mountaineering fitness. Not sure how much training he put into that. I've met or have read about many of the Everest summiteers, but can't think of anyone who has done both. Steve Swenson certainly could have at his best (low-1:20s half marathon). Has Kilian even run an official marathon (also here seems some doubt about his summit of E). So the Big E/sub-3:00 double may still be hanging out there, much less the sub-4:00/E double (Nick Symmonds has announced his intentions on that one, I believe).

guy who assumes a lot wrote:

Edmund Hillary wrote:

It depends.

A lot more people have run under 3 hours than climbed Everest.

Just get up on Everest is more a matter of money these days. You don't really need to be much of a climber. You buy yourself into a commercial climbing outfit and they organize everything. You just need to come up with $60,000 -100,000. That's all.

Not true.

no one knows how their body will respond to altitude. Very fit people have failed because of what happens to them due to the high altitude and it doesn't matter if you're a world-class athlete or a wealthy businessman.

A lot of truth to that statement. The big unknown to people that have never been above 15,000 feet is that you have know idea how your body will respond to high altitude. Some people can adapt better than others some will never be able to adapt.

Huapango wrote:

What's harder? To qualify for the Boston Marathon or to get in with a charity? Climbing Everest is more similar to the "get in with a charity" answer. Money, baby.

Money just gets you to the starting line. After that it's up to you and if you can adapt to the high altitude. Some have it others don't.

Run for Jesus wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7O91MzX4AEEqTd.jpg

Good weather and just line up. Just pay, you dont't run sub 3 without training.

What do you think a picture of the finish line at the Boston Marathon looks like around the 3:00 mark?

Run for Jesus wrote:

Ha,ha

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7O91MzX4AEEqTd.jpg

Good weather and just line up. Just pay, you dont't run sub 3 without training.

Chortle!

And that's not the very top - that's just the queue for the all you can eat buffet just out of shot...

Seriously, what a joke. I don't suppose anyone paying big bucks for this "achievement" really wants you or anyone else to see this picture.

There would be a lot less sub-3 runners if it cost $80-100k to enter a marathon.

But question is wrong? sub 3 marathon it doesnt mean to much! For some people will be easy to go sub 3 for while for others no matter how hard they try it will be hard, and for another group of people it will be never possible to go sub 3 no matter how hard they try. This of course has to do with age, genetic Vo2 max, genetic BMI.

So a better question is : What's harder ? A marathon or climbing everest?

To me climbing everest is harder , not from a phisiological point of view, but of course you need to be in a decent good shape, is harder for others factors like altitude, cold, wind , storm etc..

A key role I think is the ability to survive at very low temperature, and the adaptation to the altitude.

These two factors, of course with a minimum climbing experience are more important than anything else.

I mean if you are a champion of the marathon and have an 80 VO2max, but you are not able to survive at -30°, -40° Celsius

or you suffer the high altitude, climbing Everest will be a torture

Grenio wrote:

The question needs to be more specific. How about this:

Given one year to train, can a greater percentage of men between 18 and 45 run a sub-3:00 marathon, or summit Mt. Everest with full sherpa assistance?.

^^^ Great post. And a great way to consider it.

As for everest, it looks like a line for freaking bathroom at a concert or something.How hard can it be?