Why always Colorado instead of California mountains?

The Truth.... wrote:

So why is hardly anyone training in the Sierra Nevada compared to other areas at similar altitude? One reason is because Falstaff and Santa Fe are significantly further south, so warmer and less snowy. High altitude and low latitude is ideal, right? And contrary to what some think, Fort Collins/Boulder/Denver area may be cold but is semi-arid and it just doesn't snow as much. Even on the Western Slope of Colorado, so less of a rain shadow from the Pacific than the cities mentioned, I know of roads at 7500' that don't get plowed. I lived on one that has never been. Cold enough for snow, just never been enough snow.

Any road in the Sierra that's higher than 6k is either plowed regularly or simply closed for the winter. I live at 5555' in a slightly dry for this area (rain shadow just over a hill from Lake Tahoe) spot and my street gets plowed many times a winter. A mountain pass 3k' higher is plowed almost constantly all winter and still frequently closed for a day or more at a time. This is the highest pass in the State that is open all year. Talk about the skiing and snow quality all you want, but the actual amount of snowfall and depth of snow on the West Coast is much more than in the middle of the country at the same elevation and latitude. When I was into ice climbing years ago I did a lot in Colorado and usually found myself on roads that went over 10000'. There aren't any roads in the Sierra above 8500 that road crews can keep open. The Ocean keeps the West Coast wet, which is to say, not exactly ideal several months a year.

So weather is one reason it's not perfect here. So is lack of all those relatively flat roads mentioned in RWTB and seen in Seth Moore and Sage Canaday videos. Dirt roads that don't climb thousands of feet but are flat enough to keep a reasonable pace are more common around Mammoth but very rare here and non-existent in Yosemite, where I spent years on steep trails. Now hilly routes like Magnolia are cool, too, and you'll find more of that in the Sierra but dirt like is that less common than in Flag or Santa Fe or Boulder (I think, as I'm less familiar with those than I am with the Sierra Nevada). In fact, I run 99% on pavement. That's just what works here if I don't want to be on steep, narrow trails where it's hard to get rolling, but I'll admit maybe not physiologically ideal.

That's my 20 cents! Whenever you are, get out there!

The Truth.... wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

The consensus is that Tahoe is better I believe. The towns around Lake Tahoe are higher and have more to do. I wonder if Truckee might be more affordable and quieter though. Probably a lot of hidden gems in the CA, AZ, NM, and CO mountains for summer altitude training but for winter I'd rather be in a city like Flagstaff where almost all the trails aren't skiing only.

OK, I live nearby and Truckee is very much considered part of the Tahoe area. It's probably the most affordable situation around the North Shore. When I ran into an old rock climbing partner at a concert right on the shore of the Lake, several of the guys I would ask him about live in Truckee. There is more buildable land there because the Lake is not in the way, it's out of the Lake basin (water drains to Reno) which makes construction permits and regulations easier than they would be a few miles away. All that makes it cheaper than right on the shore of the Lake. Anywhere in this area you'll probably end up running mostly at 6-7k elevation.

Also, it right on I-80 so a very short drive to Reno at 4500' and a reasonable hour and a half to the Central Valley (which is actually at about 35 above sea level). In the Sacramento area are various tracks, of course but more significantly, a paved 50km long bike trail with big, visible markers painted every half mile. There's a section that's hilly, a few miles that is barely rolling (flat by my standards, compared to home), and about a half marathon worth that is pool-table flat. It parallels the CIM course. When I need to run on a flat sea-level route, that is where I go. And it's much warmer and snow-free, which is a consideration much of the year. Too far to do real regularly , but it's like Big Bear people going down into LA suburbs like B-Mart would, or Flag to Phoenix.

I am near South Lake Tahoe, which is also reasonable in the sense that a lot of working class people live there. There are rich, retired people, but there is so much residential land already built that housing is not at a super-premium. Like Truckee, there are regular grocery stores that have pretty normal prices. Reno is the airport in the area and I am an hour away, at the far end of the Tahoe area. SLT has a track on public park land (6300', although it borders a school and you're not supposed to go during school. I have seen people working out there - actually working out as a competitive runner would do - but usually I'm the only one there or a walker in the outside lane or kids playing in the long jump pit. There"s a flat, paved trail with a real good section about 3-3/4 miles long that has bikes but few runners. I should make some mile markers. Big-box stores are common in Carson City (where I go) and Reno (closer to North Shore).

Further south is Mammoth about which much has been written. The Kastors are there and the Halls were back when Meb was. The town is sloping, mostly about 7-1/2k elevation up to 8000. There is a track at about 7k a few miles outside of town and it's right by the Green Church Road made famous by the Mammoth Track Club and featured in Meb YouTubes. There have been a lot of pros there sort of like Flagstaff now, including Alistair and Amy Cragg, but it is often nearly unrunnably snowy and is far from airports, cities big enough for big-box stores, and anywhere near sea level for training best done there.

So why is hardly anyone training in the Sierra Nevada compared to other areas at similar altitude? One reason is because Falstaff and Santa Fe are significantly further south, so warmer and less snowy. High altitude and low latitude is ideal, right? And contrary to what some think, Fort Collins/Boulder/Denver area may be cold but is semi-arid and it just doesn't snow as much. Even on the Western Slope of Colorado, so less of a rain shadow from the Pacific than the cities mentioned, I know of roads at 7500' that don't get plowed. I lived on one that has never been. Cold enough for snow, just never been enough snow.

Any road in the Sierra that's higher than 6k is either plowed regularly or simply closed for the winter. I live at 5555' in a slightly dry for this area (rain shadow just over a hill from Lake Tahoe) spot and my street gets plowed many times a winter. A mountain pass 3k' higher is plowed almost constantly all winter and still frequently closed for a day or more at a time. This is the highest pass in the State that is open all year. Talk about the skiing and snow quality all you want, but the actual amount of snowfall and depth of snow on the West Coast is much more than in the middle of the country at the same elevation and latitude. When I was into ice climbing years ago I did a lot in Colorado and usually found myself on roads that went over 10000'. There aren't any roads in the Sierra above 8500 that road crews can keep open. The Ocean keeps the West Coast wet, which is to say, not exactly ideal several months a year.

So weather is one reason it's not perfect here. So is lack of all those relatively flat roads mentioned in RWTB and seen in Seth Moore and Sage Canaday videos. Dirt roads that don't climb thousands of feet but are flat enough to keep a reasonable pace are more common around Mammoth but very rare here and non-existent in Yosemite, where I spent years on steep trails. Now hilly routes like Magnolia are cool, too, and you'll find more of that in the Sierra but dirt like is that less common than in Flag or Santa Fe or Boulder (I think, as I'm less familiar with those than I am with the Sierra Nevada). In fact, I run 99% on pavement. That's just what works here if I don't want to be on steep, narrow trails where it's hard to get rolling, but I'll admit maybe not physiologically ideal.

That's my 20 cents! Whenever you are, get out there!

UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:

The Truth.... wrote:

So why is hardly anyone training in the Sierra Nevada compared to other areas at similar altitude? One reason is because Falstaff and Santa Fe are significantly further south, so warmer and less snowy. High altitude and low latitude is ideal, right? And contrary to what some think, Fort Collins/Boulder/Denver area may be cold but is semi-arid and it just doesn't snow as much. Even on the Western Slope of Colorado, so less of a rain shadow from the Pacific than the cities mentioned, I know of roads at 7500' that don't get plowed. I lived on one that has never been. Cold enough for snow, just never been enough snow.

Any road in the Sierra that's higher than 6k is either plowed regularly or simply closed for the winter. I live at 5555' in a slightly dry for this area (rain shadow just over a hill from Lake Tahoe) spot and my street gets plowed many times a winter. A mountain pass 3k' higher is plowed almost constantly all winter and still frequently closed for a day or more at a time. This is the highest pass in the State that is open all year. Talk about the skiing and snow quality all you want, but the actual amount of snowfall and depth of snow on the West Coast is much more than in the middle of the country at the same elevation and latitude. When I was into ice climbing years ago I did a lot in Colorado and usually found myself on roads that went over 10000'. There aren't any roads in the Sierra above 8500 that road crews can keep open. The Ocean keeps the West Coast wet, which is to say, not exactly ideal several months a year.

So weather is one reason it's not perfect here. So is lack of all those relatively flat roads mentioned in RWTB and seen in Seth Moore and Sage Canaday videos. Dirt roads that don't climb thousands of feet but are flat enough to keep a reasonable pace are more common around Mammoth but very rare here and non-existent in Yosemite, where I spent years on steep trails. Now hilly routes like Magnolia are cool, too, and you'll find more of that in the Sierra but dirt like is that less common than in Flag or Santa Fe or Boulder (I think, as I'm less familiar with those than I am with the Sierra Nevada). In fact, I run 99% on pavement. That's just what works here if I don't want to be on steep, narrow trails where it's hard to get rolling, but I'll admit maybe not physiologically ideal.

That's my 20 cents! Whenever you are, get out there!

I think you nailed it with the slight weather differences. I didn't think about that, but most of the Denver Metro area is runnable probably 350+ days per year. The snow storms in Denver are short and usually melt off fast.

I also agree with the other poster that Salt Lake is greatly underrated. I was shocked when I went skiing in Utah, and it was less than an hour from the city to the ski areas.