The concept of difficulty vs number of activations is an intriguing idea. I have used the SOTA mapping site’s display of activation counts to do exactly what Christophe suggests. For my trip to Friedrichshafen I hope to bag a few F, DM, DL summits and Christophe’s suggested correlation seems to hold true for DM. Summits with large counts do seem to be less involved. If you want to grab some easy summits in my case, the high activation counts are the ones to look at. But it doesn’t hold so true for France. I think this is down to the fact that DM has had a bigger pool of activators to call on compared to France. We have a lot fewer activators in France and quite a large number of summits. This means the few activations will be spread over more summits giving lower counts. So there needs to be more that just the count, it needs a length of time and number of activators taking into consideration.
I did the activation counts for GM as I know the place. We have a small population (5million) and high number of summits (1214?) so we don’t have big figures. In fact if it wasn’t for Christophe’s point, I’d have not noticed we have just reached 100 activations for GM’s most popular summit. The table below is for 13 years data.
SummitCode Name Altm ActivationCount
GM/SS-064 Tinto 711 100
GM/WS-001 Ben Nevis 1344 55
GM/SS-165 Dungavel Hill 510 44
GM/SS-011 Ben Lomond 974 42
GM/SS-171 Allermuir Hill 493 39
GM/CS-001 Ben Lawers 1214 39
GM/SS-254 Cairnpapple Hi. 312 37
GM/WS-339 Druim na h-E. 288 37
GM/SS-125 Scald Law 579 36
GM/SS-056 Green Lowther 732 34
The correlation doesn’t hold for GM. The only one with a road to the summit is Green Lowther but the road is very private. Cairnpapple is 5mins walk from the car park. All the others involve effort.
I do like the idea of score that starts at one and increases for each unit of time the summit is not activated, monthly, weekly whatever. Though I think it needs a scaling factor to account for summits/activator ratio.