|
Philippe
|
 |
« on: 16, May, 2011, 09:03:44 PM » |
|
Hi everyone, hope you all had a good race and enjoyed this fabulous day in the mountains. It was a truly amazing experience that was definitely worth it. I wanted to know if any of the runners had an idea of the total elevation gain of the race. I have read 5000m, 4200m and then I checked on Kilian Jornet's website and read 3700m. I assume he's taken a shortcut, hence the good result  Let me know if you have any other figures. Cheers, Phil |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephane
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: 16, May, 2011, 10:00:39 PM » |
|
Hi Philippe
A great race indeed - my 3rd NF100 and can't get enough :-)...!! it's getting better every year no doubt...!
I got the entire course on my Garmin (405CX) and just downloaded and can confirm that the total elevation gain of 4,888m and elevation loss of 4,892m - so thats a total of nearly 10,000m :-). It is pretty acurate - to date !!
All the best
Steph
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Eddie
|
|
« Reply #2 on: 17, May, 2011, 08:49:14 AM » |
|
Are you sure?? This is insane. No wonder I cannot walk now
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher
|
|
« Reply #3 on: 17, May, 2011, 10:33:03 AM » |
|
Just to add to the elevation confusion, I also had a Garmin 405 and my total descent was 3992m and total ascent was 3961m...
Either way it's a long way down and up again!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephane
|
|
« Reply #4 on: 17, May, 2011, 10:47:22 AM » |
|
well i got the same elevations last year (give 100m) but with the same watch... so dunno what to think other than a lot of it :-)!
Maybe Tom can shed some light on this ...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel
|
|
« Reply #5 on: 17, May, 2011, 11:02:28 AM » |
|
Hi guys, I ran with my Forerunner 410... i did however lose satellite connection on the decent down to the valley prior to the Golden Stairs climb (Some thick coverage in there!). Anyway, for the record the elevation gain still showed as 4835m and elevation loss 4839m. Min Elevation of 210m & maximum of 1069m. Considering i lost connection briefly on the way down i would guess that the 4888m/4889m is pretty spot on! See you all again next year! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Philippe
|
|
« Reply #6 on: 17, May, 2011, 07:40:49 PM » |
|
Yes, if Tom could help us with that, that would be great, because I don't understand how you can have almost a 1000m difference, that's huge, it's like walking twice Kedumba Valley Rd, once was enough I thought...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephane
|
|
« Reply #7 on: 17, May, 2011, 09:33:44 PM » |
|
Daniel
looks like we must be close to the mark as getting similar results with different devices... :-)
either way a lot of climbs!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Paul
|
|
« Reply #8 on: 18, May, 2011, 10:07:14 AM » |
|
Similar discussion last year on another forum. Some measured it at around 4800, others at around 4000 - strange how it's consistently inconsistent. I'm sure Tom could clear this up but probably won't - not knowing how much elevation gain and loss there is adds to the mystique of the event.
Happy to be proved wrong though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Glen
|
|
« Reply #9 on: 18, May, 2011, 05:58:47 PM » |
|
My Polar watch clocked around ~3800m and the GPS track shows ~4600m
The Altimeter based reading is more susceptible to atmospheric changes, whilst the GPS one is likely to be wrong because of the terrain. The GPS could very easily get a reading that was ~5metres from your actual, and with the terrain we were on it could read hundreds of metres of elevation gain and loss.
Looking closely through the GPS files shows a few of those inconsistencies, so Id go with the ~3800m from the altimeter.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
|
|
« Reply #10 on: 18, May, 2011, 09:48:27 PM » |
|
I use a polar anx300, its a ski watch im pretty sure. Its fairly old, but has had the altimetre and barometer replaced/serviced recently. And i got nearly 4000m up and 4000 down. Wasnt exactly that, but it was up around that. Hopefully we can get an official measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Glen
|
|
« Reply #11 on: 19, May, 2011, 08:00:54 AM » |
|
Im just curious, how do you think an 'official' measurement would be done?
Using surveyors and/or differential GPS to measure the exact course would be very expensive/time consuming/difficult. So i'd imagine the 'official' measurement would be the organizer running the course with a watch!
Probably better to have everybody who has done it to post their results and then just take an average.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
|
|
« Reply #12 on: 04, August, 2011, 02:38:54 PM » |
|
Hi glen,
Im not sure how they would do an official measurement, but i remember reading somewhere on the 6ft track site that they got someone to do a more accurate measurement of it so im guessing it can be done, somehow.
But given that there was a course profile, im gathering that the organisers must have some idea as to what they think the altitude changes are.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
