Hiking the Pennine Way

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by LLoyd, Jan 29, 2006.

  1. LLoyd

    LLoyd Guest

    Can anyone give me some advice regarding hiking the Peninnine Way this
    summer? We hope to camp and spend about two weeks on the trail. All comments
    and advice welcome.
    Dave
     
    Tags:


  2. LLoyd wrote:
    > Can anyone give me some advice regarding hiking the Peninnine Way this
    > summer? We hope to camp and spend about two weeks on the trail. All comments
    > and advice welcome.
    > Dave
    >
    >

    Peewiglet, who used to frequent this group, wrote an excellent account
    of her trip up the Pennine Way in 2004. Have a look at:-

    http://www.the-sty.com/pennine/index.html

    --
    Dave McLaughlin

    Homo Sapiens Non Urinat In Ventum
     
  3. > Peewiglet, who used to frequent this group, wrote an excellent account
    > of her trip up the Pennine Way in 2004. Have a look at:-
    >
    > http://www.the-sty.com/pennine/index.html


    And there's a podcast about it here:
    <http://www.backpackinglight.co.uk/page71.asp>
     
  4. Woollyzone

    Woollyzone Guest

    "Dave McLaughlin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > LLoyd wrote:
    >> Can anyone give me some advice regarding hiking the Peninnine Way this
    >> summer? We hope to camp and spend about two weeks on the trail. All
    >> comments and advice welcome.
    >> Dave
    >>
    >>

    > Peewiglet, who used to frequent this group, wrote an excellent account of
    > her trip up the Pennine Way in 2004. Have a look at:-
    >
    > http://www.the-sty.com/pennine/index.html
    >


    Anybody know why Peewiglet no longer frequents this group?
     
  5. > Anybody know why Peewiglet no longer frequents this group?

    Finally broken the usenet habit?
     

  6. > Anybody know why Peewiglet no longer frequents this group?


    Not sure, but I see she is a frequent poster on the Outdoorsmagic
    forum. Perhaps the forum is better regulated - this one tends to go
    awry on a frequent basis.

    Steve
     
  7. Phil Cook

    Phil Cook Guest

    [email protected] wrote:

    >> Anybody know why Peewiglet no longer frequents this group?

    >
    >Not sure, but I see she is a frequent poster on the Outdoorsmagic
    >forum. Perhaps the forum is better regulated - this one tends to go
    >awry on a frequent basis.


    This is totally unmoderated. We can go where we like and say what we
    like. I think that is why PW left - somebody said something she didn't
    like.
    --
    Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"
     
  8. AndyP

    AndyP Guest

    "Phil Cook" <[email protected]> wrote

    > >> Anybody know why Peewiglet no longer frequents this group?

    > >
    > >Not sure, but I see she is a frequent poster on the Outdoorsmagic
    > >forum. Perhaps the forum is better regulated - this one tends to go
    > >awry on a frequent basis.

    >
    > This is totally unmoderated. We can go where we like and say what we
    > like. I think that is why PW left - somebody said something she didn't
    > like.


    I believe I may have been the last person she replied to. She was having a
    circular argument with Peter Clinch claiming he was deliberately distorting
    her words. Ever the voice of reason, I said: "Why not just assume people
    misinterpret things and put different emphasis into what others post on
    occasion? I'm sure the whole world isn't really out to get you." which she
    apparently took as being deliberately intended to upset her and disappeared.
    Although maybe she was just being ironic.

    So, it's all my fault and I shall banish myself to 2 months in New Zealand
    as a punishment. Bye.
     
  9. Graham Seed

    Graham Seed Guest

    "AndyP" <[email protected]> wrote > > So, it's all my
    fault and I shall banish myself to 2 months in New Zealand
    > as a punishment. Bye.
    >

    Really? Lucky abstrad.

    Graham
     
  10. Gordon

    Gordon Guest

    AndyP <[email protected]> wrote
    >
    >I believe I may have been the last person she replied to. She was having a
    >circular argument with Peter Clinch claiming he was deliberately distorting
    >her words. Ever the voice of reason, I said: "Why not just assume people
    >misinterpret things and put different emphasis into what others post on
    >occasion? I'm sure the whole world isn't really out to get you." which she
    >apparently took as being deliberately intended to upset her and disappeared.
    >Although maybe she was just being ironic.
    >
    >So, it's all my fault and I shall banish myself to 2 months in New Zealand
    >as a punishment. Bye.
    >

    There is only one way to deal with circular arguments with Pete -
    Drop out of them! ;-)
    --
    Gordon Harris
     
  11. Judith

    Judith Guest

    On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:36:43 +0000, Gordon <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >>I believe I may have been the last person she replied to. She was having a
    >>circular argument with Peter Clinch claiming he was deliberately distorting
    >>her words. Ever the voice of reason, I said: "Why not just assume people
    >>misinterpret things and put different emphasis into what others post on
    >>occasion? I'm sure the whole world isn't really out to get you." which she
    >>apparently took as being deliberately intended to upset her and disappeared.
    >>Although maybe she was just being ironic.
    >>
    >>So, it's all my fault and I shall banish myself to 2 months in New Zealand
    >>as a punishment. Bye.
    >>

    >There is only one way to deal with circular arguments with Pete -
    >Drop out of them! ;-)


    And I bet they continue for another couple of days before he notices!

    ;-)
     
  12. Gordon

    Gordon Guest

    Judith <[email protected]> wrote
    >On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:36:43 +0000, Gordon <[email protected]>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>>I believe I may have been the last person she replied to. She was having a
    >>>circular argument with Peter Clinch claiming he was deliberately distorting
    >>>her words. Ever the voice of reason, I said: "Why not just assume people
    >>>misinterpret things and put different emphasis into what others post on
    >>>occasion? I'm sure the whole world isn't really out to get you." which she
    >>>apparently took as being deliberately intended to upset her and disappeared.
    >>>Although maybe she was just being ironic.
    >>>
    >>>So, it's all my fault and I shall banish myself to 2 months in New Zealand
    >>>as a punishment. Bye.
    >>>

    >>There is only one way to deal with circular arguments with Pete -
    >>Drop out of them! ;-)

    >
    >And I bet they continue for another couple of days before he notices!
    >
    >;-)


    LOL!
    --
    Gordon Harris
     
  13. pennineway

    pennineway Guest

    You should be able to find the info you need on my website at:-

    http://www.davidgibbins.btinternet.co.uk/

    Which, incidentally, cant be found on Google at present for some reason - it
    previously (for over two years) came up second in a search for PENNINE WAY -
    anyone know why Google completely take out a site and if there is any way to
    get it back 'in'?




    "LLoyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Can anyone give me some advice regarding hiking the Peninnine Way this
    > summer? We hope to camp and spend about two weeks on the trail. All
    > comments and advice welcome.
    > Dave
    >
    >
     
  14. Gordon Burns

    Gordon Burns Guest


    > Which, incidentally, cant be found on Google at present for some reason -
    > it
    > previously (for over two years) came up second in a search for PENNINE
    > WAY -
    > anyone know why Google completely take out a site and if there is any way
    > to get it back 'in'?
    >

    Google usually counts the number of hits a site gets before including it in
    any results. My own photo album has suddenly appeared in second place on the
    appropriate page, presumably because I asked a couple of questions
    regarding some photos, and the hits went up, and triggered Google. I did
    nothing at all!

    Of course you can always pay Google to put your site higher up the
    list.......
     
  15. In article <[email protected]>,
    pennineway <[email protected]> writes
    >You should be able to find the info you need on my website at:-
    >
    >http://www.davidgibbins.btinternet.co.uk/
    >
    >Which, incidentally, cant be found on Google at present for some reason - it
    >previously (for over two years) came up second in a search for PENNINE WAY -
    >anyone know why Google completely take out a site and if there is any way to
    >get it back 'in'?
    >


    It is still in their index (24 pages are)

    Search for "pennine way" site:http://www.davidgibbins.btinternet.co.uk

    However how they choose where to rank the results is up to them and they
    don't tell folk how it works.

    Search for a specific phrase from one of your pages and it turns up
    trumps

    Search for "the Pennine Way leaves the road and follows"

    --

    Dominic Sexton
     
  16. On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 07:57:44 +0000 (UTC), "pennineway"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >You should be able to find the info you need on my website at:-
    >
    >http://www.davidgibbins.btinternet.co.uk/
    >
    >Which, incidentally, cant be found on Google at present for some reason - it
    >previously (for over two years) came up second in a search for PENNINE WAY -
    >anyone know why Google completely take out a site and if there is any way to
    >get it back 'in'?
    >


    It's there, but on page 11.

    The main ranking criterion these days seems to be how many other sites
    link to it, so I site with many links appears high up.
    A backward links search on your home page comes up with 6 links, the
    top rated site has 28.

    But as someone else said, it's up to Google how they sequence results,
    and they keep adjusting the formula to stop people manipulating things
    to get a high rating.

    S.

    --
    Oppose ID cards and the database state
    http://www.no2id.com/
     
  17. Hi Lloyd, I did it (N-S) with a friend a couple of years ago. We used
    YHAs and travelled fairly light and did 9 days. I suffered a fairly
    deep blister on a haglunds deformity (pump bump) but had a sac full of
    dressings to keep it going.

    Another friend of mine did it many years ago - and his achiles heel was
    the same as mine. He also used a sac full of dressings to keep himself
    mobile.

    So, know your weaknesses and plan to manage them.

    Whatever advice you take - and there is much available, my advice is to
    travel as light as you can without compromising safety. Carrying a tent
    etc is good for the spirit but it can become a heavy session.

    We did N-S because on the map it looked downhill. :)

    We were also 'going home' and that felt better than going 'away from
    home' if you get my point.

    There are some longish stretches without obvious hostels. I guess a
    tent is tempting but travelling light and perhaps covering more ground
    to make the overnight stops may make more sense.

    I have trecked using tents also on other long(ish) trips, and getting a
    shower, washing the undercarriage, and having a good night's sleep is
    more rejuvenating than crawing into a wet pit.

    We also used the maximum daylight available. Rising early and setting
    off with first light, getting the fullest days possible, and often
    getting in under torchlight after dark.

    Not sure what you mean by 'about two weeks' but even if you mean 14
    days you need to be sure you are not carrying anything that isn't
    absolutely necessary.

    I know that taking one's time, and say doing the PW in 3 weeks is more
    leisurely, but Denis, my mate had a race on the Sunday (the 10th day)
    and he had entered so we had to be back. (I know. I didn't speak to him
    for 2 weeks when he told me (part way through the first day!!!)

    Hope helpful and good luck

    Peter
     
  18. In message <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] writes
    >Hi Lloyd, I did it (N-S) with a friend a couple of years ago. We used
    >YHAs and travelled fairly light and did 9 days. I suffered a fairly
    >deep blister on a haglunds deformity (pump bump) but had a sac full of
    >dressings to keep it going.
    >
    >Another friend of mine did it many years ago - and his achiles heel was
    >the same as mine. He also used a sac full of dressings to keep himself
    >mobile.
    >
    >So, know your weaknesses and plan to manage them.
    >
    >Whatever advice you take - and there is much available, my advice is to
    >travel as light as you can without compromising safety. Carrying a tent
    >etc is good for the spirit but it can become a heavy session.
    >
    >We did N-S because on the map it looked downhill. :)
    >
    >We were also 'going home' and that felt better than going 'away from
    >home' if you get my point.
    >
    >There are some longish stretches without obvious hostels. I guess a
    >tent is tempting but travelling light and perhaps covering more ground
    >to make the overnight stops may make more sense.
    >

    Why not try to find out how many people on the ng live within a few
    miles of the PW and might welcome an overnight visitor?

    --
    Martin Richardson
    272/284 Munros - 4% to go 34/34 'Furths'- 0% to go
    56/89 Donalds - 37% to go 494/1554 Marilyns - 68% to go
    376/525 Hewitts - 28% to go (E=178/178; W=137/137; I=61/211)
     
  19. pennineway

    pennineway Guest

    Thanks for that. Strange thing is, the criteria, number of backwards links,
    etc. hasn't changed. For a couple of years the site was receiving around
    300-400 hits per week and coming up at worst 4th in a 'PENNINE WAY' search,
    most of the time 2nd.

    It occasionly dropped off for a week at most but always came back.

    Now it has been dropped, its struggling on bout 60 hits a week.

    The backward links, incidentally, dont all come up on a google backwards
    link search. There are over 20 to my knowledge.

    As you say, google keep changing the formula. Quite a drastic change that
    puts a site from page one to page 11 though!

    Then, in November, it dissappreared and has never come back
    "Simon Caldwell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 07:57:44 +0000 (UTC), "pennineway"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>You should be able to find the info you need on my website at:-
    >>
    >>http://www.davidgibbins.btinternet.co.uk/
    >>
    >>Which, incidentally, cant be found on Google at present for some reason -
    >>it
    >>previously (for over two years) came up second in a search for PENNINE
    >>WAY -
    >>anyone know why Google completely take out a site and if there is any way
    >>to
    >>get it back 'in'?
    >>

    >
    > It's there, but on page 11.
    >
    > The main ranking criterion these days seems to be how many other sites
    > link to it, so I site with many links appears high up.
    > A backward links search on your home page comes up with 6 links, the
    > top rated site has 28.
    >
    > But as someone else said, it's up to Google how they sequence results,
    > and they keep adjusting the formula to stop people manipulating things
    > to get a high rating.
    >
    > S.
    >
    > --
    > Oppose ID cards and the database state
    > http://www.no2id.com/
     
Loading...
Loading...