Am I completely nuts for bringing up the idea of trekking up one of the Himalayan peaks? I heard of this one called Everest...
What I was thinking was that I'd want at least 2 years to train and get in shape before attempting Everest. I'm not totally convinced that I want to do it, but a training schedule of several years would allow me (us?) to just get in great shape and hike some of the local peaks (Whitney for me) and experience a new type of adventuring. I guess for you Ian, the local mountaineering may be old-hat but I have been chomping at the bit myself to get up into some of the mountains down here in SoCal and the Sierras. After maybe a year or so of hard training and getting into the mountaineering world, then maybe I'd have enough information to make a better decision about whether a trek to Nepal would be feasible or not.
So I put it to you all: give me a reality check, how crazy is this?
-B
2 comments:
While I'm not necessarily interested in venturing all the way up the mountain, I 1) have for the past two-ish years wanted nothing more than to go to the Himalaya's, and 2) would probably be pretty good at being base camp manager. I'm in. Plus, I always love to have something to train for.
Ya, a couple years ago, a friend posed the idea of just doing a trek to Base Camp, that alone would be a pretty good trip. If we end up wanting to attempt a summit, it may be smarter and more economical to do one of Everest's neighbors.
Post a Comment