Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

Sota Points/Summits


#1

Dear friends,

You will find there : http://pagesperso-orange.fr/f6eno/images/points_pays.jpg
a chart showing the distribution of points according to the Alt (ASL) for each SOTA country.

We can see that 5 countries (SV,OE,DL,F,HB and ZS) are drawn on the right of the layout
and the remaining 11 are on the left.
3 countries (ZS, GD & ON) have no 10pts summits.

When a chaser wins 10pts, it doesn’t matter if it is a (GI,DM,ON…) or a (HB,F,DL…) summit.

It’s not the same for Activators:
To win 10 pts in HB or F, you have to climb up to 2500m. In South Africa, if you climb to 3450m, you only win 8 points…
In EI, GI, GD, ON to win 10 (or 8)pts, you have to climb only 850m, but there are only a few summits there (I don’t want to speak of DM here).
In HB, F, DL, we can find a great number of summits, so it is easier to get points to reach Mountain Goat.
Is climbing 500m from 2000m to 2500m more or less difficult than climbing 500m from 350m to 850m ?

Best 73 to all

Alain F6ENO


#2

In reply to F6ENO:

“Is climbing 500m from 2000m to 2500m more or less difficult than climbing 500m from 350m to 850m ?”

There is no simple answer to this, it all depends on other factors. The most important factor is access, how high can you get before you have to start walking? One of the most extreme cases in the UK is a mountain called A’Mhaighdean GM/NS-013; at 967m it is worth 6 points but the climb involves a 43 km round walk with no road, just a very poor track through wild country. Also, in some countries 2000 m might be just above the cultivated zone and present no problems, in other countries it might be permanently under snow.

73

Brian G8ADD


#3

In reply to G8ADD:

The Sweden ARM seems to be the first one to include also column of prominence value in meters. From that you could make an xy-plot between the ASL height and the prominence to see if there is any correlation between these two parameters. The horizontal distance without need to work against gravity force would then be an other parameter. It think we need this kind of quantitative analyses if we want to discuss more on this issue.

73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL


#4

In reply to F5VGL:
Prominence is only relative to the next peak - it does not take into account the height of the highest access point by powered transport :slight_smile:

Roger G4OWG


#5

In reply to G4OWG:

Right. That gives us one more parameter. Usually this is the ascend given by the guide books
and web sites.

73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL


#6

Prominence in SM ARM is given from top to ground if it is a single peak -or- from top to highest situated saddle between two or more summits. Often it was very difficult from the poor maps i have used to determine the exact prominence. In the SM ARM i have rounded off the prominence, estimated 247 m, then I wrote 240 m in the table.

In many cases the ground itself may be high, for example 1400 m ASL, and a summit is lets say 1680 meters, but it may be easier to access the summit via another lower summit and along a ridge or a saddle rather than climbing a steep wall up to the summit.

A Summit may have an estimated prominence of 146 meters, on the map but can it be 150??! Only on site it may be possible to get the answer. I wish i had more accurate maps, then it would be possible that more summits could be added. This will be the project for next winter dark evenings.

73 / SM5KRI Chris


#7

In reply to F6ENO:

(I don’t want to speak of DM here).

Why not? We have to speak about the problems to resolve them.

Have a look on: http://www.sota-dl.de/sc/sota-dm.htm
and go on “REFERENZHANDBUCH”.

There you can find every DM-region and see
the number of summits/points for them.

For example: DM/ND =

Anzahl Gipfel mit 1 Punkt 30
Anzahl Gipfel mit 2 Punkten 0
Anzahl Gipfel mit 4 Punkten 0
Anzahl Gipfel mit 6 Punkten 0
Anzahl Gipfel mit 8 Punkten 0
Anzahl Gipfel mit 10 Punkten 0

(Anzahl der Gipfel mit 1 Punkt means number of summits with 1 point, etc.)

Mes amitiés et 73
Fritz dl4fdm,hb9csa


#8

In reply to DL4FDM:
My home region, G/CE, has just five one-point summits. We have a region, East Anglia, roughly the size of ON, with no summits at all. This is unfortunate but you can’t argue with geography! Mountains are where you find them.

SOTA is like DXCC or IOTA, in the final analysis it is based on an entirely artificial set of parameters. It works, and works well, but there are bound to be areas where there are few hills and others where there are plenty! I wish I had a few more available without a long journey but I would not be happy with a compromise that makes a SOTA summit significantly less special.

73

Brian G8ADD


#9

In reply to G8ADD:

If anybody is interested, here is our outing calendar for French Alpes (nothing to do with amateur radio). Climbing is typically 300 - 400 m/h.

http://club-ski.web.cern.ch/club-ski/rando/courses/avril00.htm

73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL


#10

In reply to DL4FDM:
hi Fritz,
now we changed the dm-reference list with affect on 1.Januar.2009 and also delete
the “extras” from german list. and you think now its peace ? :slight_smile: no , first we have to set all dm-summits to 1 point ! better then…maybe then its “peace” and no more bla-bla-bla´s starting again.maybe ?

to the points as an activator…that is so or so no really challenge.points,points…and then ?
for me for an example its more a challenge to reach most chasers as possible
in the activation time. i don´t go out for 4 or 5 qso´s . that is no good support
for sota, because the chasers want work summits, and with no chasers no sota.
maybe someone have fun , only go out to qualify a summit with a few qso´s , but wheres the fun ? a summit without a pile-up ? mmhhhhhh
by the todays mass of chasers its no really challenge to qualify a summit i
think.

and what i think about the activator points ? is there any possibility to delete all my activator points without take any affect to the chaser points in the database, i will start again from 0…for sure !

“I don’t want to speak of DM here”-

i´m also not, i only will activating here ! can´t you wait till 2009 ? many changes are made here, with many,many work for the region-managers , who do
it in there freetime. what will come next year…too many points in dm ?
ok, lets go !
my example and a idea from me …

for every summit one actiavtor point. and then for every qso on every band 1 extra point :-)- every summit count more times in a year, not only one time.
so activators in areas with not many summits can earn a few points more of these points

73 Klaus


#11

In reply to DF2GN:

Hi Klaus and all,

I too do not wish to reference my comment to any Association, but reading your post an idea just occurred to me which could be given consideration - that of points for every band on which the summit is qualified. So, there would be 2 possibilities for scoring - either 1 extra point for qualification on each band after the first band (so a 2 point summit would be 2 + 1 + 1 + … etc)or the bands become a multiplier (so a 2 point summit would be 2 + 2 + 2 + … etc). I think the first idea would be the better as you are not walking up the hill several times!

Just a thought.

73, Gerald


#12

hi,
another idea…

the uk-mt sets the “marylins” “prominence” -summit criteria as a standard to all
other assocs. a summit definition that is made for uk summits !

why they not set also the points per height list as standard to the other
countries ? so all is ok and no more discussions about these points.
sure, hard to understand why a summit at example here in DM gives 10 points,
and only a few kilometers away in F or HB9 only counts as 1 point. i really understand why some activators see there no sense .
so set the uk- hight/points table as standard to all other assocs, as you do
it with the summit-definitions.
so most F,HB9,DL-summits are 10 pointers, but by the way …why not ??

vy 73 Klaus DF2GN


#13

In reply to DF2GN:

hi Klaus,

mni tnx for the fb qso on saturday.

I agree 100% with your opinion, there will be no end
of the dicussion until every summit (in any association?)
counts 1 point.
Within this case I suggest to have only 1 German Association.

Have fun and vy73
Fritz hb9csa,dl4fdm


#14

In reply to DF2GN:

hi,
another idea…

the uk-mt sets the “marylins” “prominence” -summit
criteria as a standard to all
other assocs. a summit definition that is made for uk summits !

why they not set also the points per height list as standard to the
other
countries ? so all is ok and no more discussions about these points.
sure, hard to understand why a summit at example here in DM gives 10
points,
and only a few kilometers away in F or HB9 only counts as 1 point. i
really understand why some activators see there no sense .
so set the uk- hight/points table as standard to all other assocs, as
you do
it with the summit-definitions.
so most F,HB9,DL-summits are 10 pointers, but by the way …why not ??

vy 73 Klaus DF2GN

SOTA originated in the UK and uses the Marilyn list for UK summits because the Marilyn list was conveniently available BUT the prominence value of 150 metres was decided on first. Some other prominence such as 100 metres would have used a different list, such lists are available, we are great at making lists, it seems! The point is that 150 metres also works out to 500 feet which is also a convenient number, many of us older ones still think in feet, and after a long discussion by email amongst a group of enthusiasts the 150 metre prominence was decided on as it represents a worthwhile minimum ascent which is not just only possible for mountaineers. A hill with 150+ metres of prominence stands out amongst all the other hills in the area, it is clearly special. The prominence value is obviously extrapolatable to other countries, the effort in ascending 150 metres is the same everywhere.

The height bands here were set up specifically for UK conditions, our old and worn down mountains don’t reach much over one kilometre in height, but it was realised from the beginning that these height bands would make little sense in the Alps or Pyrenees, for instance, and the height bands were left to be set by each individual association. That is why you get big differences between neighbouring Associations. But there is another thing to bear in mind. The Alps are a clearly defined mountain range, they terminate on the north side in a clearly defined “front”, you can see the sudden change from the eroded “dekken” of the alps to the more gentle scenery of the low lands as you travel from Austria into Bavaria. It would make little sense to impose the same height bands on the young and rugged Alps as on the lower and older hills beyond the Alpine front. How these problems are solved is left to individual Associations, and this is right because there is clearly a difference in style and height between, say, the Bernese Oberland and the Stubai Alps. It is inevitable that the change between the bands for high mountains of the Alpine chain and the lower mountains elsewhere will lead to some odd looking juxtapositions, but we have to try to adapt to the extremes of geography.

As for your final question, Klaus, my own personal answer is that the highest score in points should reward the greatest effort, and to a first approximation height goes with effort, and whilst our highest mountain, Ben Nevis, is 1344 metres, in Bavaria you have busy main roads running through green rolling countryside at that sort of height.

73

B rian G8ADD


#15

FB explanation Brian. Your last point illustrates why it would be silly to automatically allocate 10 points to a series of summits that rise only 200/300m above a plateau that is itself over 1km ASL.

Moreover, it should be pointed out that all the AMs, together with the SOTA MT recently held a wide-ranging consultation that included these issues. All the proposed possible alternative scoring systems threw up as many, if not more problems and inconsistencies that they addressed, be they height-based, prominence-based or whatever. The matter is not closed forever though. The summary of those discussions does include that these options may well be reconsidered in the future.

For now, we need to apply the decisions already reached to improve the consistency, such as removing the summits identified in some asociations as being outwith the General Rules.

The one point per summit activated, and indeed per summit chased, is a sensible idea. It already exists in SOTA, on an ‘all-time’ basis. To view the tables for Uniques activated/chased (and your own logs), select those options from the ‘View Results’ tab on the SOTA Database. The SOTA Management Team envisages that as chasers pass through Shack Sloth, and activators achieve Mountain Goat, that both would be more keenly focussed on improving their Uniques scores rather than points. This certainly seems to be the case with UK participants that have gone through the 1000 points threshold in either section.

Tom

Tom


#16

In reply to G8ADD:

and after a long discussion by email amongst a group of enthusiasts the 150 > metre prominence was decided on as it represents a worthwhile minimum
ascent which is not just only possible for mountaineers.

When did this “discussion” take place Brian and how many in number was this group of enthusiasts? Hardly a fair consensus of opinion when carried out by private email amongst friends.

As for your final question, Klaus, my own personal answer is that the
highest score in points should reward the greatest effort, and to a
first approximation height goes with effort

Although I respect your personal opinion Brian, I disagree with it. How do you define “effort”?
What about the sometimes 20k or more walk-ins to some GM summits which hold a points value of 1 point, is that without effort, or the activator who sits for two hours or more under freezing/blizzard conditions, is there no effort in that? My personal opinion is that to base the points per summit ONLY on a worthwhile climb is not neccessarily always fair.

73 Mike GW0DSP


#17

In reply to M1EYP:
hi,
ahhh, sota is not for the points for most of the activators. more for uniques !
then i don´t understand the many moanings about the many points yu can get here in DM in one day . maybe they mean the many uniques, not points. why you get MG-status with the points , not with the uniques :slight_smile:
that all don´t help by the problems we have here at the borders to HB9 or F.
hard to understand for most activators why they earn 1 point there, and 10 points
a few km´s away. ohh, there are no problems with the point-system.i hope our friends in the other countries understand that and no more moanings in the future.
and what have a big climb to do with sota. if you want to have a good climb, forget your radio and go climb.
but sota is more to have contacts to the chasers, and not only climbing to
make a few contacts with a fm-handheld. but maybe others think different,thats
mine sight of sota.
more hamradio as sport. if i wan´t to have sports i let my radio at home.

and your prominence super-rule is absolut nothing for us here in the black-forest. in moment i work on the DM/BW list and all summits where you have a climb not qualify. we have here many touristic activity and that means,
that all summits , that are in the holy prominence rule are open for tourists
and wintersport. with mostly hotels and streets there.
the use of the same definitions for a summit in uk , deletes here any possible
climb to do sota.

mmhhh, but you are the MT…and you know !
to many rules disturbs everything.
sota is only a hobby for me, and should it also be for others.

so lets have 1 point for every activated summit , maybe more times in one year.the per qualified band 1 point extra. its fair for everyone.
and if you want to have a good climb, you can have it, because
sota is not for the points…

73 Klaus DF2GN


#18

In reply to GW0DSP:

In reply to G8ADD:

and after a long discussion by email amongst a group of
enthusiasts the 150 > metre prominence was decided on as it
represents a worthwhile minimum
ascent which is not just only possible for mountaineers.

mmhhh, enthusiasts ? i´m too ? not only one regular activator known by me was asked about that !

maybe we dont belong to this group of enthusiasts…

73 Klaus

ok ok, question was answered by brian… it took place before sota starts…

sorry :slight_smile:


#19

In reply to GW0DSP:
Taking the last point first, Mike, I think you would be very hard put to it to find any system at all that would be always fair, if that emotive word even applies. Take that 20 km walk-in, how much easier would it be on a mountain bike, or on ski in winter conditions, or with a 4wd, or even on horseback? Then again take some of the most remote peaks: for instance A’Mhaighdean NS-013 and Ruadh Stac Mor NS-021, with a round walk of 45 km to bag those two, the better approach surely is to pack in, camp and knock off these and then on suceeding days the surrounding peaks and suddenly that big walk-in becomes a manageable expenditure of energy.

Expenditure of energy on the climb is the key to the way I think of it. The energy expended in getting to the mountain seems to come from different reserves to the energy expended in climbing it, probably because it uses different muscles! You cannot predict how access is achieved by different activators but you know approximately how much effort the actual climb will take out of them!

Going back to your first question, Mike, this discussion took place before SOTA was established, on a reflector set up for the purpose, the old SOTA reflector. Off hand I don’t know if it is still accessible, but anyway I came to it after SOTA was established and made a point of reading all the early emails to try and understand why things were as they were. It was fascinating! Quite a few people contributed to the discussion, including from across the pond! I think the success of SOTA came from these thorough discussions, which carried on for months before the start date of SOTA was agreed.

Must go now, time to do the evening meal and its my turn to cook!

73

Brian G8ADD


#20

In reply to GW0DSP and DF2GN:

Mike:

When did this “discussion” take place Brian and how many in number was this group of enthusiasts?

Klaus:

mmhhh, enthusiasts ? i´m too ? not only one regular activator known by me was asked about >that !
maybe we dont belong to this group of enthusiasts…

The questions are not for me, but sri, I give my answer:
26 AM and RM from SOTA countries were involved; we had a long discussion (2 months) abt prominence and points. We had many proposals for a new points distibution, trying to have the same for all countries, but none were good.

Best 73
Alain F6ENO