Harvey Lewis - 2018 AT Supported FKT Attempt

[Just Bill]

Home stretch! Best wishes for a safe finish to Harvey.

Hikers (back when we read maps) have a saying; 'Between the contour lines'.
The North end of the Long trail is a great example; in bit of trail between each 50' contour line interval you may find yourself stepping down 5' to climb a 15-20' ledge, rising up 70' over a hump then dipping back down 20' feet after it to come back to 'level'. We use a roundabout guestimate of miles based upon the area to round up from map to actual.


I did site work with a Trimble system for a few years. x and y (2 dimensions) were always pretty accurate... well under an 1" of actual location. But elevation (even in Illinois) was always messy. At best you'd be within a tenth (1 1/4") on any given shot (ping). That's if you don't get any interference. For the most part even in ideal conditions (open pancaked building site) it would work for about half the day. When the satelites got into the wrong spot, a cloud or tree got in the way, etc... you'd get a 6-18" bounce in location. As a result I'm always pretty impressed that a device like a Spot puts you as close to the trail in dense woods as it does.

With all the micro up and downs "between the contour lines" you'd need one hell of an impressive overlay on top of the geodesic GPS grid to sort out a trail like the AT.
I'd think you'd need a dozen or more 'tracks' worth of individually shot hikes to average out and evenly generate a fairly accurate x,y,z line for the AT. Might even take several re-shoots in places.

Point being- 5 miles over 2000k is mighty impressive as a result.
Tell your buddy good enough indeed.

I'd probably guess the data book is at fault too... you measure enough sections in tenths of miles and some rounding errors are bound to accumulate.
That happens on most of the self supported hikes we track.

[Odd Man Out]

Recently someone posted a pretty cool web page for charting distances and elevations.

https://bentwells.shinyapps.io/atdata/

This is where I got the data for my spreadsheet. I copied and pasted into a spreadsheet. He said it is based on the 2018 data from the ATC.

[TrailRunnerGuy]

15-Jun 16 Bearwallow Gap/BRP 90.9 41.4 16 749.1 39.7 VA 43 - Mile 90.9 -1.7

Just a very minor correction, this stop was actually Mills Gap, which is a mile or two short (south) of Bearwallow Gap. I got this picture at the start of the day https://www.facebook.com/harveylewis...type=3&theater and I know Harvey took a photo at the end of the day before, because we had to camp elsewhere. I mention it not to be picky, but in case you are trying to compare the GPS track to this log and are off a couple of miles here, you'll know why.

[TrailRunnerGuy]

Since it looks like Harvey may be pushing the end of day 49 to finish in under 50 days, I'm wondering about Baxter State Park rules. I know he needs to get a permit card in person at the ranger station. Are there only certain hours for that? If he gets to the park after that time, does he need to wait until morning, which would put him over 50 days? I took a quick look at the park web site and saw the part about the permit card but I didn't see anything about hours.

[TravisRex]

Recently someone posted a pretty cool web page for charting distances and elevations.

https://bentwells.shinyapps.io/atdata/

This is where I got the data for my spreadsheet. I copied and pasted into a spreadsheet. He said it is based on the 2018 data from the ATC.

Ooh that's a great application!

Since we're almost wrapped up, I'll walk you through some of the technical approach that we used for this, and by all means if you want more of an explanation, I'm glad to explain what I can.

The original version of the "trail line" came from this - https://thetrek.co/thru-hiker-resour...teractive-map/ One of the GIS guys (Louis) grabbed the KML file and converted it to a File Geodatabase using ArcGIS. This gave us not only the trail line but also an indication of "parking areas." We looked at a couple of other "trail lines" including http://topofusion.com/at-gps.php but despite having 300,000+ way points gives the length of the trail as only 2109.94 miles. But ultimately the trail line we used would be 2189.1 miles - close enough.

During a section where Harvey appeared to be off-track, we realized that the trail line we were using didn't include the most recent updates, so we grabbed the latest version from the NPS. https://nps.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html

(When we first started, the GIS page at the ATC didn't have the link available otherwise we would have just used that - https://appalachiantrail.org/home/ex...trail/gis-data, but in retrospect, getting the data with the parking areas was a huge help)

From there we manually entered all of the road crossings from the 2018 AT Data book into a database which allowed us to easily know the distance between points. Using some kind of GIS magic, one of the guys (Matt) was able to highlight on the map all of the roads which crossed the trail, and with the data from the data book we were able to correct the mileage for each of those crossing (seriously, magic).

We then took and added way points for the daily stops for Stringbean, Jurek, and JPD (We didn't include Speedgoat for reasons I don't remember) so we could see where Harvey was ahead/behind of the goal.

We took and generated a couple of versions of the plan - one breaking each day using "Price is Right" rules (as close to 52 miles each day without going over), one that followed Stringbean's mileage but using road crossings instead of campsites, and a version that was frankly just a bit of "eh, that sounds good."

Once we got a hold of the InReach tracker, Matt started playing around with it and was able to get each waypoint written to an AWS database. So every 10 minutes a new point gets uploaded to inReach, we read that point from that site, and write it in to our own database (among other things this gives us a complete and permanent record that we don't have to pay inReach to store). Then in more "magic," Matt wrote a KML layer that reads data from the database and plots each point on a map with the most recent timestamped location getting the "Harvey head" marker and everything else indicated with a triangle.

So we had a map where we could track Harvey, see his position, and see where he was compared to others. Cool.

Then the work began to create a streamlined version that we could embed in the RoadiD tracking site that simplified the map a bit and removed any information about road crossing or competition. Matt worked with one of their developers and created the version that you see at https://www.roadid.com/pages/wheresharvey.

There's a few other projects that we spun up for this (we kind of used this as a bit of a "real-world" learning exercise):

- Creation of a "Where's Harvey" skill for Alexa that allows someone to use the Alexa functionality to get an update on Harvey's current mileage. This was surprisingly useful (at least for me) to just be able to yell at Alexa and get the up to date mileage.

- Creation of a Perl based "HarveyTrack 3000" where from any starting point it would chart out the next 3 days with road crossings in a particular range (say 38-58 miles with a goal average of 51 miles per day). The final decision was made by Harvey's dad and the rest of the crew but we were at least able to tell them when a particular stop had the potential to cause problems down the line.

- A 3D tracking map. Not a lot of functionality but it looks cool.
3d_map.PNG

- Automatically embedding Facebook posts on the map based on timestamp. This one never got fully implemented, but we did a proof of concept where if Harvey did a video at 9 am, you would see a little icon on the map and be able to click it and watch the video.

And yes, the irony of spending hours of programming and technical skills on what fundamentally is a walk through the woods is not lost on me. I've spent hours inside to help others (who are also inside) be able to track the one guy who's moving all day long.

[TravisRex]

Just a very minor correction, this stop was actually Mills Gap, which is a mile or two short (south) of Bearwallow Gap. I got this picture at the start of the day https://www.facebook.com/harveylewis...type=3&theater and I know Harvey took a photo at the end of the day before, because we had to camp elsewhere. I mention it not to be picky, but in case you are trying to compare the GPS track to this log and are off a couple of miles here, you'll know why.

That's for that! I'll update my notes.

[Angle]

TravisRex,
Not a big deal, but if you want to correct the data for June 30th he stopped at Mt. Easter Rd. mile 1486.3 not West Cornwall Rd.

[TravisRex]

TravisRex,
Not a big deal, but if you want to correct the data for June 30th he stopped at Mt. Easter Rd. mile 1486.3 not West Cornwall Rd.

Updated. Thanks!

[jdx1177]

Ooh that's a great application!

Since we're almost wrapped up, I'll walk you through some of the technical approach that we used for this, and by all means if you want more of an explanation, I'm glad to explain what I can.

The original version of the "trail line" came from this - https://thetrek.co/thru-hiker-resour...teractive-map/ One of the GIS guys (Louis) grabbed the KML file and converted it to a File Geodatabase using ArcGIS. This gave us not only the trail line but also an indication of "parking areas." We looked at a couple of other "trail lines" including http://topofusion.com/at-gps.php but despite having 300,000+ way points gives the length of the trail as only 2109.94 miles. But ultimately the trail line we used would be 2189.1 miles - close enough.

During a section where Harvey appeared to be off-track, we realized that the trail line we were using didn't include the most recent updates, so we grabbed the latest version from the NPS. https://nps.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html

(When we first started, the GIS page at the ATC didn't have the link available otherwise we would have just used that - https://appalachiantrail.org/home/ex...trail/gis-data, but in retrospect, getting the data with the parking areas was a huge help)

From there we manually entered all of the road crossings from the 2018 AT Data book into a database which allowed us to easily know the distance between points. Using some kind of GIS magic, one of the guys (Matt) was able to highlight on the map all of the roads which crossed the trail, and with the data from the data book we were able to correct the mileage for each of those crossing (seriously, magic).

We then took and added way points for the daily stops for Stringbean, Jurek, and JPD (We didn't include Speedgoat for reasons I don't remember) so we could see where Harvey was ahead/behind of the goal.

We took and generated a couple of versions of the plan - one breaking each day using "Price is Right" rules (as close to 52 miles each day without going over), one that followed Stringbean's mileage but using road crossings instead of campsites, and a version that was frankly just a bit of "eh, that sounds good."

Once we got a hold of the InReach tracker, Matt started playing around with it and was able to get each waypoint written to an AWS database. So every 10 minutes a new point gets uploaded to inReach, we read that point from that site, and write it in to our own database (among other things this gives us a complete and permanent record that we don't have to pay inReach to store). Then in more "magic," Matt wrote a KML layer that reads data from the database and plots each point on a map with the most recent timestamped location getting the "Harvey head" marker and everything else indicated with a triangle.

So we had a map where we could track Harvey, see his position, and see where he was compared to others. Cool.

Then the work began to create a streamlined version that we could embed in the RoadiD tracking site that simplified the map a bit and removed any information about road crossing or competition. Matt worked with one of their developers and created the version that you see at https://www.roadid.com/pages/wheresharvey.

There's a few other projects that we spun up for this (we kind of used this as a bit of a "real-world" learning exercise):

- Creation of a "Where's Harvey" skill for Alexa that allows someone to use the Alexa functionality to get an update on Harvey's current mileage. This was surprisingly useful (at least for me) to just be able to yell at Alexa and get the up to date mileage.

- Creation of a Perl based "HarveyTrack 3000" where from any starting point it would chart out the next 3 days with road crossings in a particular range (say 38-58 miles with a goal average of 51 miles per day). The final decision was made by Harvey's dad and the rest of the crew but we were at least able to tell them when a particular stop had the potential to cause problems down the line.

- A 3D tracking map. Not a lot of functionality but it looks cool.
3d_map.PNG

- Automatically embedding Facebook posts on the map based on timestamp. This one never got fully implemented, but we did a proof of concept where if Harvey did a video at 9 am, you would see a little icon on the map and be able to click it and watch the video.

And yes, the irony of spending hours of programming and technical skills on what fundamentally is a walk through the woods is not lost on me. I've spent hours inside to help others (who are also inside) be able to track the one guy who's moving all day long.

Very cool, I love interesting mapping technologies. thanks for the inside look at all the stuff you guys have been working on. I'm sure things like this will be useful for future attempts

[TravisRex]

Harvey spent last night at the Iron Works so he's down to 83.7 to go. 50 days will end up being Thursday morning at 5:33 am, so everyone on the team is curious to see if he ends up above or below that number.

Echoing TRG's question - what is the policy on entering Baxter State Park and/or climbing Katahdin at night? Is it suitable to be climbed in the dark?

The team missed out on getting a spot in the campground, but do have parking reservations for both Wednesday and Thursday.

(And before anyone asks, the team is being cautious about group size and no alcohol so we're fine on that)

[Angle]

According to his tracker he stopped at 2103.1 miles , which is short of Katahdin Ironworks road by 3.1 miles.

Harvey spent last night at the Iron Works so he's down to 83.7 to go. 50 days will end up being Thursday morning at 5:33 am, so everyone on the team is curious to see if he ends up above or below that number.

Echoing TRG's question - what is the policy on entering Baxter State Park and/or climbing Katahdin at night? Is it suitable to be climbed in the dark?

The team missed out on getting a spot in the campground, but do have parking reservations for both Wednesday and

(And before anyone asks, the team is being cautious about group size and no alcohol so we're fine on that)

[TravisRex]

According to his tracker he stopped at 2103.1 miles , which is short of Katahdin Ironworks road by 3.1 miles.

Hey Angle. Yeah the tracker is registering mileage off (see the previous commentary on the accuracy being off by 0.25%). Here's the screenshots that I grabbed last night showing both the "Harvey Head" and a cross reference with Google Maps.

harv_night.PNG

[Odd Man Out]

I don't quite get the Katahdin permit system. It says if permits are no longer available, AT hikers can still climb Katahdin using the normal permit system. But if you have a parking pass, isn't that the normal permit system for for non-AT hikers? If so, then why would you need an AT pass?

Let's put it this way. Suppose my friend and I were not a long distance AT hikers. We get a permit to park for a day at Katahdin Stream. My friend drops me off at Abol Bridge and I hike to Katahdin stream via the park trails as he drives the car to the parking spot. We meet at the car, climb up and down together, and drive out of the park. Is this how the normal permit system would work for non-AT hikers and if so, since it is basically what Harvey would be doing, why would he need an AT permit?

[Angle]

Thanks, glad he was able to make to the van.

Hey Angle. Yeah the tracker is registering mileage off (see the previous commentary on the accuracy being off by 0.25%). Here's the screenshots that I grabbed last night showing both the "Harvey Head" and a cross reference with Google Maps.

harv_night.PNG

[Zed]

A permit from the rangers at KSC isn't required to hike Katahdin. Fill out a self registration permit at the kiosk at Abol bridge. Climb Katahdin and then turn in that permit at the gatehouse when you leave. This is how the ridge runner (he may have been a Baxter employee? John, I think...anyway...) at Abol bridge last year said to do it as several hikers on a tight schedule were planning to night hike from Abol bridge to catch sunrise from the summit.

[Zed]

I don't quite get the Katahdin permit system. It says if permits are no longer available, AT hikers can still climb Katahdin using the normal permit system. But if you have a parking pass, isn't that the normal permit system for for non-AT hikers? If so, then why would you need an AT pass?

Let's put it this way. Suppose my friend and I were not a long distance AT hikers. We get a permit to park for a day at Katahdin Stream. My friend drops me off at Abol Bridge and I hike to Katahdin stream via the park trails as he drives the car to the parking spot. We meet at the car, climb up and down together, and drive out of the park. Is this how the normal permit system would work for non-AT hikers and if so, since it is basically what Harvey would be doing, why would he need an AT permit?

He wouldn't. The only thing the AT permit is really for is a spot at the Birches for a NOBO hiker and a census.

[TrailRunnerGuy]

Thanks Zed, good to know.

Best guess from the tracker is that he's stopped with the van at a road crossing at the southeast end of Nahmakanta Lake, around 2150. Hopefully he got in before the rain really hit. Pretty clear day tomorrow for the final ~41. It's possible he's still going and the tracker just isn't getting through the transmit because of the storm.

[TravisRex]

For anyone wanting to play the "What time will he finish" game, I went back and looked at the first log point - 5:56 am on 5/30. 50 days, 0 hours would be 5:56 am on Thursday 7/19.

We had originally heard that he was going to try to make it to Rainbow Lake tonight, but as TRG pointed out, he didn't make it that far.

So now to see how he decides to play the last 39.9 miles. Does he push through make the summit late in the evening and risk hiking down in the dark? Does he play things safe (and potentially more "media friendly" or "Dad friendly") and wait to summit in the daylight? How important is the 50 day barrier to him?

If I was a betting man...I'd keep my money in my pocket because I truly have no idea on how he'll choose to handle this. Either way he'll slot in after Campanelli (48d, 23h) and before Horton (52d, 9h) - pending verification.

It'll likely have to wait until after Badwater, but I'm curious to work with the rest of the team to break down the GPS track - how many points were uploaded, what is the longest gap in the upload (I know there's a section down in VA that Harvey ran without a pack and the GPS in his shorts where we got some terrible data) - that sort of thing. In this case, it's more for being able to have some fun statistics to throw out there, but i started reading the "Follow-up to Knotts Claim" thread today and...yeah that's rough.

I mean, we had comments on Facebook if the GPS didn't move for half an hour asking if Harvey was okay. The thread on Karel's attempt (and I love the symmetry of Karel starting as Harvey finishes...) already has some great commentary around Guinness (the world records, not the beer) and "proving" a FKT. The genie is already out of the bottle on FKT being a thing (see Ultimate Direction's "FKT grant program").

I'm not going to steer this into a discussion of what someone else did or didn't do, and seeing the number of -gate names floating around on other threads that I've skimmed (pizzagate is a great name), I'm somewhat relieved that Harvey is escaping with only a "MassageTableGate" blemish. If that's the biggest/worst question floating around out there - that feels like a win.

I'll be a little boastful and put the "Team Harvey" attempt at one end of the spectrum in terms of documentation/proof. Had this been an FKT (instead of what ended up being just a "Known Time"), I'm pretty confident that we could account for everything. But that's with a fully charged GPS every day. And a dude making multiple posts on Facebook. And videos from Harvey. And comments from numerous other people on or near the trail (we had one Facebook post from a woman who was upset that she had to wait an extra hour at a road crossing because the distance shown on the tracker was off)

But....it's all a bit much, isn't it? Even on the "stealth" self-supported attempts, you have people trying to piece together details from instagram posts. Or something like "battery-gate" and asking someone to go get you batteries to power your tracker, which doesn't serve any other purpose other than documenting and recording your location. This isn't "oh if I don't have food, I will starve." Batteries. And we made a point of communicating with Harvey the first few days about what was giving the most consistent upload from the tracker - so I totally get it.

Maybe it's just because this is drawing to a close and I'm feeling a bit of "what's next" melancholy-ness , but I do wonder at what point documenting a FKT - especially for a self-supported hiker becomes too much of a burden. Or at least enough of a burden that it's no longer worth it.

[TrailRunnerGuy]

4:26am start this morning, and the weather is clear. Looks like a great day to finish!

btw, I hear that the Road ID rep and the film crew are on hand, so they didn't abandon Harvey just because the record is gone.

[Just Bill]

TravisRex:
FWIW; I didn't personally follow Harvey's effort. By all indications though it appears that Harvey, you and the rest of the team have taken it seriously. There is a lot here for all of you to be proud of.
Having helped Joey Camps last year in a similar role as yourself, I can relate to your current feelings fairly well as this winds down. Unlike the participant... the support doesn't get the reward of the journey.

Prior to GPS documentation standards were pretty good, despite the lack of tech. Detailed notes, trip reports, daily spilts, campsites and hundreds of photos were often available.
To be fair, those few folks doing it were often friends who knew each other personally... and the personal integrity of each individual's ethics... so perhaps some of the intense scrutiny was eased by that simple fact.
At it's heart, you could read the words, hear the person speak, or understand peer to peer both things said and unsaid that told you loud and clear how valid the claim was.
Matt Kirk set his mark with a flip phone. The Davis Crew had less tech and it wasn't long ago that updates were sent via payphone. In many ways the increase in technology has diluted or even erased more traditional methods of documentation. A GPS track is pretty solid stuff, but that can be messed with easily enough. In some ways the tech has more opportunity for abuse as the stakes get higher. Karl's attempt was probably one of the first big money attempts... but across the board more 'professional' attempts are taking place even if they are not directly sponsored. I read an article or two recently on a growing trend you'd be more familiar with (on the running side) of some folks limiting the race schedule and doing more personal projects (like FKTs) to balance out thing within their sport. Sponsors are beginning to accept this form of sport (especially when backed by a large social media presence) as a valid way for an athlete to satisfy the obligations the sponsors may place on them.

Nothing wrong with that. I like it actually. Overall it's good for the woods to see more runners hit the trail, and more sponsors in any sport elevate the achievements of athletes who chose to challenge themselves outside organized events in our nations open spaces. Climbing has long enjoyed this type of project based accomplishment and folks like the late Ueli Steck and Killian Jornet come to mind as real pioneers in endurance sport. It also means that runners don't necessarily need to wait until later in their careers (like Jurek or Meltzer) to do inspirational trips like these which get more people interested in the outdoors and further push the limits as folks pursue these events for their own intrinsic value.

The flipside of that though is that there is pressure to make these things count. As you're seeing with Harvey... the odds of success are actually pretty low. So for those of us familiar with them... this rash of success is met with some skepticism as a result. Increased awareness broadens the field and adds unfamiliar faces.

On the AT in particular, every year there are several 'dreamers' to put it nicely. Unfortunately there has been a scammer or two as well. The trail community is also filled with a fairly rebellious undercurrent by nature. Thru-hiking breeds independence; and hike your own hike means that nobody has the right to tell you or judge you. Perfectly fine for a hike... not so good for a record. Knotts is a good example of a decent enough guy who relied solely on his 'tramily' for knowledge of the FKT. Prior to his effort, a few gals tried to flat out steal a FKT from Meltzer. Heather Anderson did little more than post on social media to claim her record... and plenty of folks saw that example and asked a fair question: "Why not me?"

If you read Peter's FKT site a bit you'll see how stunningly often folks fail to even read the thread about the FKT they are chasing. Let alone do the serious work, research, and planning traditionally required. There is a bit more to it than simply 'going fast' and spilling a string of instagram posts.
At it's simplest...
The main thing being asked is that you research the FKT you propose to claim.
You recognize that it exists because someone came before you, and if you wish to claim that person's FKT then you need to understand the guidelines they set forth.
Finally, that you document your effort (the RECORD part of record) in a manner consistent with the standards set by the FKT community at large and by the standards of that specific FKT.

The morals, stewardship of the trail, kindness, generosity, low impact... that's icing on the cake but not required. There is nothing preventing a jackhole everyone hates from claiming a FKT (sorta).

For those who are not simply fans of one person or another; The irony is that those who do review, defend, object or nitpick don't really care WHO holds the FKT. The goal is that the FKT itself maintains a high standard.

It's also worth pointing out that the only reason you were able to read of 'battery gate' or 'pizza gate' or even Karel's PCT issues is that the highest two standards held are honesty and transparency. Not judgement.
There are no judges, the community at large participates in review.
Specialized folks who are familiar with that particular route, including previous FKT holders are often asked to look closer as well.

In my case,
Ninja's hike was so clearly fraudulent on many levels; however one simple and clean case was shared publicly and left at that. In private the option was given to continue to pursue the claim but this was thankfully dropped.
Media attention and the nature of the person and those surrounding her made that hike a particularly difficult one for everyone on an emotional level as well.

What many don't know is that the 'finding' regarding Dan's effort was actually an attempt to put his hike together. Peter requested that all claims include a complete GPS track after a rash of poor claims arose. Dan simply was not able to produce that. Case closed. That's not to say that I didn't admire what he did, or even disagree that he did what he said... simply that it did not meet the high enough standard required of the actual record itself.

I had personal opinions regarding issues with 'style' as self-supported trips carry some extra burdens a supported trip does not. (battery gate if you like among others) Again, you could say (and I did publicly); case closed.


But it's not that cut and dry.
To Peter's vast credit; at the end of the day he documents and does not judge.
In that spirit; my findings as a community member familiar with the trail and the particular FKT are posted on his site.
So is Dan's claim.

While you might call that review judgement, it's not. My opinion and findings were shared. Some things were not. But his name was not stricken from the record in anyway because one loudmouth jackhole wrote a silly report.
The opportunity was left open to Dan to rebut, refute, or shore up his claim. This was also further extended out of respect for his attempt at a calendar year triple crown that was in progress.
At the end of the day; being out on trail is more important than paperwork.

As badass as Peter is... you can't hike em all. On higher profile FKT's he relies on others to assist who are familiar with a trail. That includes (if they want) the current and past holders of the FKT in question. There are folks behind the scenes you don't hear from publicly too... but that's more respect than any secrecy or back room politics.

Something hikers understand well (and trail runners too) is that regardless of memory in our daily lives; some portions of trail stand out vividly in our minds for the rest of our lives.
In the case of the big trails like the AT... on this forum there is literally at least one person who knows a section of trail like the back of their hand. Who maintains a section, volunteers, or has dozens of vivid memories of that section. There are folks who just hiked it yesterday, who saw so and so when they went by. Who may reach out privately to kindly point out a minor error... or reach out privately to a loudmouth jackhole if something dishonest has occurred. Collectively there is not a step on this trail you could take that someone here is not intimately familiar with.

In many case someone here literally cut that step in the trail so it could be taken.

For as seriously as some take FKT's... it is not anywhere near the level of seriousness folks take the trail itself.
You could sum up Jen's article in one simple statement; Don't **** with the trail.

A world class athlete attempting an FKT is no more or less welcome than a car riding tourist walking a hundred feet and touching that strange white mark on a tree for the first time.
You can't win an ultra unless you pay the race fee and enter as a valid participant. If you show up on the wrong day, run in the wrong direction, leave the course, or violate the race rules you don't get to plead your case.
If you come a week later and claim a faster time, nobody considers you the winner. They tell you to enter the right way next year. If you cheat and get caught- expect hell.

FKT's are not much different. They may be free, they may not have a scheduled day or even a fellow competitor lining up. But they still have rules, guidelines and standards to uphold. They have moved beyond a friendly 'gentleman's agreement' between a loose collection of a few hundred people.


There are folks in the hiking community who feel that a "record" has no place on the trail. That using the trail for your own gain is abusing the trail itself.
Don't come here and try to make a name for yourself. Don't bring sponsors, corporate money, or any of the things to the woods we go to the woods to get away from.
There are plenty who would answer your question regarding at what point a FKT becomes too much of a burden to attempt with 'Not soon enough.'


I came across 'let's run' during Ninja's attempt. Runners certainly have no less vitriol or scorn for cheaters, scammers, or posers than hikers if we are citing extreme views.
Nobody, in any discipline, tolerates those who abuse the community.
The only real difference is that when someone is dishonest in the running community... it only hurts the running community.

For many in the hiking community... it hurts the trail itself.
That is simply an inconceivable risk to a thin, fragile, ribbon of dirt lovingly cared for and protected by those thousands upon thousands who love it.

So the questions you've asked are one's the hikers ask about FKT's in general.

For all the inspiration, wonder, and power present in a well done FKT attempt... at what point is it worth tolerating a poorly done attempt?

I truly love what can come from this unique and powerful journey on our trails.
However it's just a hike, one among many. No more or less powerful on an individual level.

The reality now is you're simply 'next up'. Someone will be along shortly to best your time and bump you off the podium.

While the personal reward is high... ain't no beltbuckle or even a ribbon you get for your effort when it's over.
By allowing a FKT attempt to happen; at the end of the day you've only participated in your half of hike your own hike.
At the end of the day if that attempt violates another's right to hike their own hike; it simply won't be tolerated.

There are plenty of hikes that go un-publicized, unclaimed, unnoticed or unspoken.
Plenty of folks who quietly visit the trail that nobody cares about, some who go specifically for that reason.
There is no requirement to turn your personal best into something more formal.

Nothing that inherently makes your hike any more special than another.

If you come to the trail to publicize, claim, and gain notoriety...
expect to shoulder both the burden of proving your claim, and the burden of using the trail publicly.
Ideally your visit can be noted for it's inspiration and not simply go down as notorious.

The entry fee at an ultra does grant you one underrated and little discussed boon; permission. A ticket to ride the ride.
It's worth remembering that while nobody stands at the trailhead requesting your ticket, checking your bib or barring your entry; that doesn't mean you have permission.

Unlike other hikes, a FKT attempt is literally coming to the trail to take something of tangible value from it.

So the true question to pose; What are you willing to give in return?

And when you step out of the peaceful bubble the trail provides; Are you willing to pay that price?