View Full Version : Young vs. Old
Just was wondering what other's think regarding when would it be the most fun to thru-hike? Would it be more enjoyable to hike when one is young, say having a more social experience by partying with other young people more, hanging out in towns, etc..., or would it be more gratifying by completing a thru-hike when one has become older, hopefully wiser, and maybe having to work a little bit harder at it physically, but socializing and partying a little bit less and being able to have been around longer to have the realization of being able to have the chance to be doing a thru-hike at all?
Wise Old Owl
02-06-2010, 20:25
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/MarkSwarbrick/2.jpg
All kidding aside, when you hike with a Hiking club it is very rare to see 21 year olds! At one moment I was WTC's youngest member at 13.
Interesting question and one I cannot answer since I will be on the trail for my first thru, God willing, this year. I have been communicating with someone who completed a thru two years ago at the age of 58. He told me that the younger hikers were more physically capable but the older hikers were perhaps more mentally prepared for the challenge.
I do know that at my age I have been thinking about since I was a boy/young man so in that sense maybe I understand how special this opportunity is for me maybe more so than if I had done it after HS or college. Hopefully there will be others who weigh in on this.
Jester2000
02-06-2010, 21:01
I would do both.
On the other hand, there's nothing to say you can't party with the youngsters when you're older. No one on the trail chooses friends based on age.
When you are young, partying interests you. When you are older, it doesn't. So there's no difference in whether it's better to hike when young or old because you can take what you want and leave what you don't.
As for working harder physically, is that a certainty? At the age of 45 I'm in much better condition than I ever was in my 20s. Research (I read this in Born to Run) also shows that runners reach peak condition early on, but the tapering off is so slow that at age 64 you have the same potential as at age 17. I can't see how it could be any different with walking.
Speer Carrier
02-06-2010, 21:17
[QUOTE=sbhikes;96590 Research (I read this in Born to Run) also shows that runners reach peak condition early on, but the tapering off is so slow that at age 64 you have the same potential as at age 17. I can't see how it could be any different with walking.[/QUOTE]
Are you sure about that? Last May while hiking with a group of other mid 60"s folks, we would leave a shelter area around 7:30 AM while the 20 somethings were still in their sleeping bags. By 10:00 they were passing us like we were standing still.
white_russian
02-06-2010, 21:18
On the other hand, there's nothing to say you can't party with the youngsters when you're older.
And on the other hand some younger folks are not partiers.
Just was wondering what other's think regarding when would it be the most fun to thru-hike? Would it be more enjoyable to hike when one is young, say having a more social experience by partying with other young people more, hanging out in towns, etc..., or would it be more gratifying by completing a thru-hike when one has become older, hopefully wiser, and maybe having to work a little bit harder at it physically, but socializing and partying a little bit less and being able to have been around longer to have the realization of being able to have the chance to be doing a thru-hike at all?
Several times, I partied with young people on my longest walk in 1993, and have done so from time to time when I had a chance in the decade plus since.
What significance is this? I don't have a clue.
Weary
johnnybgood
02-06-2010, 21:32
Definitely I'd think it more gratifying to do something while waiting , anticipating the opportunity ,to achieve a goal that one has dreamed of accomplishing someday.
The trail lends itself to all ages but the experience is different for everyone. I say hike the trail when you're young and experience the social atmosphere of it and then again when the opportunity lends itself . Hopefully the next time with a new found appreciation of hiking the trail with mother nature and of course , (sigh) father time.
For me ,I hope to finish the trail someday- doing it one section at a time.
fiddlehead
02-06-2010, 21:42
Did my first one when i was 27
Did my last one when i was 52
Had BIG fun on both of them.
Sure there were differences.
But I can't say that one was better than the other.
ps. did a few in between too and they were also BIG fun.
For what it's worth here is my take on this...I'm 51 will turn 52 on the trail..I've done more than enough to prove myself....this my friends...this thru hike...is my victory lap.:sun
Did my first one when i was 27
Did my last one when i was 52
Had BIG fun on both of them.
Sure there were differences.
But I can't say that one was better than the other.
ps. did a few in between too and they were also BIG fun.
A very wise report, Fiddlehead. I just wish I could do a final walk at age 80, soon to be 81. I'm sure I would enjoy it equally with my 64 walk. But at age 63 I had minimal encumbrances. Now I have many, health, finances, physical abilities, and responsibilities. Life is a wonder, regardless of age. I can still wander the woods and hills. Just not starting in Georgia.
Weary
AUhiker90
02-06-2010, 22:14
Agree with this. I like to have a good time and all but I wouldnt say I am down to party my face off every night.
Fun is not determined or limited by age. Other factors are at work.
The level of enjoyment one has hiking is not determined by age. Other factors are at work.
Appreciation, gratification and socializing is not limited by or limited to a specific age. Again, other factors are at work.
Age doesn't dfeinitely create an either/or proposition
Who says older people don't socialize or party? They just may do it a little differently or you just might be surprised to eventually experience someone much older who can out-party someone much younger.
garlic08
02-06-2010, 23:27
It sounds like asking if a marriage is better in the first year or in the 50th year.
It sounds like asking if a marriage is better in the first year or in the 50th year.
Well, I can attest that marriage certainly gets different as the decades roll by. My wife and I remain best friends, best companions -- And best lovers, for that matter.
But the intensity among the three perhaps has changed.
Weary
Are you sure about that? Last May while hiking with a group of other mid 60"s folks, we would leave a shelter area around 7:30 AM while the 20 somethings were still in their sleeping bags. By 10:00 they were passing us like we were standing still.
Here's the quote from the book (P. 239). A man named Dr. Bramble is saying this:
"We monitored the results of the 2004 NYC Marathon and compared finishing times by age. What we found is that starting at age 19, runners get faster every year until they hit their peak at 27. So here's the question--how old are you when you're back to running the same speed you did at 19?...It's 64....Isn't that amazing?...Name any other field of athletic endeavor where 64-year-olds are competing with 19-year-olds. Swimming? Boxing? Not even close. There's something really weird about us humans; we're not only really good at endurance running, we're really good at it for a remarkably long time. We're a machine built to run--and the machine never wears out."
I got the starting age wrong, but there you have it. Walking may not be exactly the same as running. But if marathon performance has any correlation to hiking long distances (and I have no idea if it does, but I'm guessing it might), being older is not a disadvantage toward completing a long trail and certainly not a guarantee that you'll have a physically more difficult time at it.
I'm 45 and female and I passed plenty of younger guys. Not all of them, but enough to know that I was every bit as capable as many of them. I could tell it drove some of them nuts!
johnnybgood
02-07-2010, 00:01
Well, I can attest that marriage certainly gets different as the decades roll by. My wife and I remain best friends, best companions -- And best lovers, for that matter.
But the intensity among the three perhaps has changed.
Weary
It's called maturity. The fun is still obviously present but has taken on a more mature form.
For what it's worth here is my take on this...I'm 51 will turn 52 on the trail..I've done more than enough to prove myself....this my friends...this thru hike...is my victory lap.:sun
Well said wudhipy....And I can't start my victory lap yet. I can only hope that I'm able when I get to the last lap.
Rockhound
02-07-2010, 09:47
Just was wondering what other's think regarding when would it be the most fun to thru-hike? Would it be more enjoyable to hike when one is young, say having a more social experience by partying with other young people more, hanging out in towns, etc..., or would it be more gratifying by completing a thru-hike when one has become older, hopefully wiser, and maybe having to work a little bit harder at it physically, but socializing and partying a little bit less and being able to have been around longer to have the realization of being able to have the chance to be doing a thru-hike at all?
What's wrong with being older and partying more? Or being younger and partying less for that matter? You asked when it would be the most fun to thru-hike. I feel someones age is irrelevant. As is weight, gear, money, sobo vs nobo, etc... Yes it may be a bit easier when you are younger, or lighter, or have more $ or better gear, but an individuals mindset is the #1 factor in determining, to what degree, someone will enjoy their hike.
garlic08
02-07-2010, 10:07
It's called maturity. The fun is still obviously present but has taken on a more mature form.
Definitely. I speak from the position of a 28-year marriage, and my wife (GreasePot, AT'02, PCT'04) has always been my best friend and partner. We even experienced a thru hike of the PCT together, and not a lot of married couples have.
As far as fitness of older hikers, I can attest to it. My current partner, Pickle was 64 when we hiked the AT in 106 days (our combined age was 114), totally enjoying every day. We both reflected that there was no way either of us could have done that level of hiking in our twenties or thirties. We didn't have the experience and maturity to have found some kind of positive aspect in the adverse conditions that we continued hiking through. Sort of like marriage.
I agree. I struggled on my first thru when I was 27. I was in no way prepared for all the challenges... most of them didn't even occur to me. Hey, I grew up in the Virgin islands where trails were nonexistant ... haha. Now, I feel fantastic and put together experience and strength as well as knowing when to give myself a break so to speak.
When it comes to speed, stamina, fun, enjoyment, gratification, appreciation, and socializing, and age, have you ever heard the story of the older and younger bull that were standing on a hillside overlooking a herd of cows? The young bull said to the older bull," look at all those cows down there, let's run down there and f$@k one." The older bull turned to the younger bull and replied, " NO, let's walk down and f$@k them all."
My question is, "which bull do you think is wiser, has more fun, enjoyment, gratification, appreciation, socializing, and partying? Which bull has the greater experiences?
Just a thought to ponder!
If my thru-hike goes as planned, I want to celebrate reaching Katahdin on my 61st or 62nd birthday (Sept. 24), but that's still 4-5 years away. I have a lot of prep to do in the next few years, but I will take the hike at my own pace. I've learned over the years to listen to my body more as I age, and if it tells me that no, you're going to have to complete the AT as a section-hiker, so be it. The one advantage I will have of hiking at this age is once it's over, I won't have to return to work.
Appalachian Tater
02-07-2010, 13:51
As a middle-age thru-hiker, it was interesting to observe the hikers both much older and much younger. All of the stereotypes of both groups are somewhat true as far as strengths and weaknesses on a thru but there were certainly older hikers who partied a lot or put down a lot of miles and some younger hikers who seemed extremely mature in their approach to the whole thing.
You don't very often hear regret about actually doing a thru-hike. You MAY be able to hike later in life but you can't go back in time.
And as usual, Weary's comments are worth paying attention to.
When I was a pot smoking hippie in the 1970s, we all thought it would be "groovy" (or "cool" which is still, oddly enough, used by young-uns) to thruhike the trail to be "in touch with mother nature"). Sure, we'd be high half the time, but the attraction was nature, not the "evil weed". I'm not so sure that's the case today. Most young hikers I talk with treat the thru as a social event or a marathon, or a combination of the two. I don't know if the "romantic" notion of being "out in the wilderness" for an extended period of time has the same draw it did when I was young. Technology seems to be widely embraced by young people today. When I was young we rebelled against it (along with just about everything else! :D).
We all wanted to be "at one with nature".
We were completely, blissfuly, innocently ignorant.
It was good.
I can still conjure up the feelings I had about nature way back then - only on occasion, unfortunately.
The romance may not be as strong, but the relationship is much, much stronger. This is what I've chosen to do with most of my adult life.
I don't have the time or funds to thruhike now, but, when I retire, if I'm able to pay down my debt, I will, and probably wander absent-mindedly, delightfully distracted by the sights and sounds of what I now rush through in an attempt to accomplish another "section" before I go back to the 9 to 5 grind.
Now WHAT was it you asked? :)
Blissful
02-07-2010, 14:59
I hiked it when I was older and glad I did as I enjoy scenery. But muscles and energy ain't what they used to be.
One thing I like about thru-hiker culture is that the shared experience of doing something kind of 'outrageous' --- and challenging --- makes various differences and barriers fall away. Rich people hang out with poor people and generally don't know the difference. Democrats get along great with republicans. Racial, age, gender, those things just seem to be less important against the shared experience of "we're both thru-hikers".
That said, on the PCT while I walked with both older and younger folks, I did find myself more consistently walking with people closer to my age. Part of that I think might be matching hiking 'style', process. As Speed Carrier said, my experience too was that to do the same daily mileage, older hikers would tend to be more disciplined, get up earlier and take more limited breaks. Younger folks (I'm talking in general here) often got up later and maybe took longer breaks during the day.
But I walked some decent miles with young people two, and three separate occasions. I love the intellectual stimulation of hanging out with, exchanging ideas with people I would ordinarily never talk to for any length of time.
Hey Garlic, I met Greasepot in Cascade Locks this summer. She gave me a ride to the grocery store. She camped at the Marine Park.
When I was a pot smoking hippie in the 1970s, we all thought it would be "groovy" (or "cool" which is still, oddly enough, used by young-uns) to thruhike the trail to be "in touch with mother nature"). Sure, we'd be high half the time, but the attraction was nature, not the "evil weed". I'm not so sure that's the case today. Most young hikers I talk with treat the thru as a social event or a marathon, or a combination of the two. I don't know if the "romantic" notion of being "out in the wilderness" for an extended period of time has the same draw it did when I was young. Technology seems to be widely embraced by young people today. When I was young we rebelled against it (along with just about everything else! :D).
We all wanted to be "at one with nature".
We were completely, blissfuly, innocently ignorant.
It was good.
I can still conjure up the feelings I had about nature way back then - only on occasion, unfortunately.
The romance may not be as strong, but the relationship is much, much stronger. This is what I've chosen to do with most of my adult life.
I don't have the time or funds to thruhike now, but, when I retire, if I'm able to pay down my debt, I will, and probably wander absent-mindedly, delightfully distracted by the sights and sounds of what I now rush through in an attempt to accomplish another "section" before I go back to the 9 to 5 grind.
Now WHAT was it you asked? :)
Cool, dude, now please pass the bong or roll me a doob:banana
Gator 65
02-20-2010, 08:35
Believe it or not, both age groups blend together very well on the trail. We old guys got up at sunrise and left camp, hiked our 15-16 miles for the day.(latter part of the trail). The younger folks got up1 - 2 hours later but met or passed us during the day. When we got to camp at night we has a great time together. When it was time to go into town for resupply or a "zero" day, we kidded about the old guys going to the Senior citizen center for bingo and the young ones hitting the bars. I throughly enjoyed the company of every young person on the trail. All were bright well educated, polite men and women caught up in a very bad economic situation we all are experiencing. I was amazed at the number who will , or have already served in places such as the Peace Corp, Africa and one young man who spent FOUR years as a volunteer in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
superman
02-20-2010, 11:52
In 1968 a guy hiked the AT and they had a full two page article with pictures about it. I'd just come home from Vietnam and was already dating my ex-wife. Her mother and I studied that article and talked about hiking the AT for years. Unfortunately I married her daughter and had kids, etc. instead of hiking the AT. After my sons were grown and I had a dollar 3.80, my ex-mother-in-law sent me that article from 1968. I got my trash together and hiked the AT in 2000. Unknown to me at the time, my ex-mother-in-law had been diagnosed with cancer and given two years to live. I had no idea why my son was so insistant that I keep a journal on line. After my hike I found out that my ex-mother-in-law had followed my hike through my journal. She died a short time later.
I still wish that I'd taken that hike when I was a young man but everything happens in it's own time.
Blue Jay
02-20-2010, 12:21
You don't very often hear regret about actually doing a thru-hike. You MAY be able to hike later in life but you can't go back in time.
And as usual, Weary's comments are worth paying attention to.
Actually I've NEVER heard regret about doing a thru. I have known many who have died waiting for retirement to attempt their dreams. You MAY be able to hike later in life but you cannot go back in time, might be one of the most important things you'll ever read. Hike NOW, no matter how much money you are making past what a dream costs, is quite simply not enough.
Blue Jay
02-20-2010, 12:26
In 1968 a guy hiked the AT and they had a full two page article with pictures about it. I'd just come home from Vietnam and was already dating my ex-wife. Her mother and I studied that article and talked about hiking the AT for years. Unfortunately I married her daughter and had kids, etc. instead of hiking the AT. After my sons were grown and I had a dollar 3.80, my ex-mother-in-law sent me that article from 1968. I got my trash together and hiked the AT in 2000. Unknown to me at the time, my ex-mother-in-law had been diagnosed with cancer and given two years to live. I had no idea why my son was so insistant that I keep a journal on line. After my hike I found out that my ex-mother-in-law had followed my hike through my journal. She died a short time later.
I still wish that I'd taken that hike when I was a young man but everything happens in it's own time.
Great story, for what it's worth, I completely apologize for my previous opinion of you. Sometimes it feels really good to be completely wrong.
I would do both.
On the other hand, there's nothing to say you can't party with the youngsters when you're older. No one on the trail chooses friends based on age.
That was my experience. One of the fascinations of hiking at age 64, was to suddenly be a compatriot of 20 somethings again.
Mrs Baggins
02-20-2010, 21:17
We're for older and wiser. We have the money to do it with town stops and hotels, and at the same time we won't be wasting our money on beer bashes and parties.
I agree most definitely older. I did my first thru at 27 and it was my toughest by far.
climber2377
02-20-2010, 21:42
i can only speculate here. i ll let you know how my first goes... at age 33. i guess i m kind of in the middle, between the new grads and the retirees. however, i dont think it matters much the age. if it is dream then just do it however, whenever as long as it gets done!
Actually I've NEVER heard regret about doing a thru. I have known many who have died waiting for retirement to attempt their dreams. You MAY be able to hike later in life but you cannot go back in time, might be one of the most important things you'll ever read. Hike NOW, no matter how much money you are making past what a dream costs, is quite simply not enough.
Don't let money be the factor. My boyfriend just found out all his money was stolen from his bank account. It was a cyber crime. Now he has no money. You can save and plan for "someday" but someday might not come. You might be poor in the future. You might be sick or dead. Do it now.