>>2605331- How PROMINENT was that mountain? As in, what elevation did you start from, and how much did it change on the way to the summit?
2- HEIGHT AND ELEVATION ARE DAMN NEAR MEANINGLESS IN TERMS OF DIFFICULTY.
Everest being the perfect example..... highest mountain ON EARTH and it's basically one of the easiest 8000m+ peaks that exist. There is practically 0 "technical" climbing involved, and Sherpas can fix ropes for 99% of the ascent.
Any one of Annapurna's 7000m+ peaks could be listed as "Far more dangerous than Everest", yet it's elevation comes in at 1000m less (the same increment you cite here
>>260519 and grossly underestimate what it really means) Do not go in with this mentality or it could very well get you killed.
>I have my suspicions that anything less than 4000m will not feel very satisfying.This is the one I was just talking about.
OP, we're not trying to bash your hopes here (I'm in nearly the same boat). We're just trying to make sure you don't waste your money and get ded. Everyone wants to do monumental things with their live, but you've got to decide what you'll be doing...... Mountaineering is something that takes practice, skill, devotion, time, and a whole heap of other things.
It's like saying "I want to be an astonaut, or a Formula 1 car driver!". Okay, that's nice. Now do all the hard work involved with it, prepare to give up your entire life in order to achieve these goals. They are not weekend expeditions, they are lifetime achievements. You cannot just grab an ice ax, crampons, tent and food and galavant up any mountain you like. Trust me, I've tried.
If you want to keep talking about how to get into mountaineering, I'll gladly stick around. If you want more surface-level bullshit and people telling you that with enough money and physical endurance you can buy your way up any mountain...... well, I'm sure someone will be glad to help.
