Now there is a "proper" technique to walking with poles in your hands?

Oh goodness.

Yes. Sticks in hands is one technique.

I don't find much benefit to using poles I have to carry in my hands all day, it is rather tiring compared to the techniques that don't require holding the sticks.

How you approach steps, pushing yourself up is more efficient than pulling yourself up.

Etc. Lots of technique with poles, much more than sticks.

Edited by redmonk on 02/08/2012 15:55:48 MST.

Douglas wrote: "Far too many of you are taking this stuff personally. Why? I disagree with people every day! I don't get mad, and neither do they. Why are all these relatively meaningless subjects so darned personally important to y'all? They ain't! Chill already, and stop taking things personally. Disagreement is okay."

Damn it Douglas, I paid for an argument!

Sorry I did not mean to offend the pollsters :)

I agree, if you like them great. I am glad you have a tool that you like. In some ways I wish I used them because they work so well with so many shelters but I have not found the advantage of them yet, for me.

Maybe someday I will see the light and I will love them. For right now, I don't see how they provide much more than balance and stability. That study seems to prove otherwise though. Interesting.

Probably a lot has to do with the various terrains we are all hiking on.

The one thing I will disagree with is if Andrew Skurka uses them, then it is correct. Andrew has done some cool treks but I don't believe what he does or uses is gospel.

This thread has been quite entertaining to follow. Like so many other threads where people get so passionate about thing that couldn't matter less in life...

But I'll toss in my $0.02

"Maybe someday I will see the light and I will love them. For right now, I don't see how they provide much more than balance and stability. That study seems to prove otherwise though. Interesting.

Probably a lot has to do with the various terrains we are all hiking on."

It's not about seeing the light, and it's not about the terrain we all hike on. It's about personal abilities. Maybe you and some of the other anti-pole folks are just more gifted than the rest of us. You have the balance and agility of a mountain goat. That's fantastic. Enjoy your strong knees while they last (and may they last your whole life) but many of have the balance and grace of cow, and knees that creak and moan every time we kneel and get get up again.

I've been sitting my my office chair the whole day working at my desk, with the exception of the occasional bathroom break and coffee refill. I can get up right now, squat down, and when I stand up my knees will sound like Velcro ripping open.

Be thankful you don't have that problem.

BM

"And I always thought having a big heavy pole was a good thing. But as they say... it is all in how you use it."

You're starting to sound like John Stewart commenting on Dennis Kucinich a few years back. ;=)

I think everyone means well in this (and other similar discussions). However, "discussing" things via an on-line surrogate can lead to misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and bad feelings if the writer doesn't make an effort to be super-polite in his/her typed conversations. I get this all the time when using e-mails at work...some people are better at written communication than others. I think we all understand the context of this type of discussion and no one should get too miffed...

Edited by todd1960 on 07/11/2012 13:10:32 MDT.

"Aristotle would have the logic and reason to see the advantages of four legs."

FERGAWDSAKE, Cameron, don't get Nick started on Aristotle!!! :0(

"Why are all these relatively meaningless subjects so darned personally important to y'all? They ain't! Chill already, and stop taking things personally. Disagreement is okay."

As ever, the sweet voice of reason. Thanks, Doug. Again....

"FERGAWDSAKE, Cameron, don't get Nick started on Aristotle!!! :0( "

Well, Aristotle says.... just kidding.

I like to see things that can be measured if possible. I think that a subject like this, or HH pressure, or EN Ratings can be helpful, especially to someone deciding to make a first time decision on a new piece of gear.

Things like "accurate" sleeping bag ratings need to be taken inconsideration for the individual. WM, is pretty accurate from what I have read. But some people find they are a little on the low side; I am one since I sleep very cold. But if we have as much information as possible, then we can hopefully make a good first time purchase, or decide not to purchase.

There is no doubt in my mind that poles are advantageous, or even necessary for some people.

I am keeping my poles, because I may need them in the future. I am already hard of hearing, my eyes are not as good as they once were, and my balance and agility may soon start to deteriorate. I just wish my ears would quit pulling my hair out of my head, and rerouting the growth out of said ears.

Andrew Skurka is considered by many to be a "hiking god." He uses poles so it MUST be the right way.

Scott Williamson is considered by many to be a "hiking god." He DOESN"T use poles so it MUST NOT be the right way.

Hmmmm..... Which "hiking god" to follow?

Maybe it's personal preference. Nope it can't be..... I use poles so it MUST be right! Don't tell Scott.

Edited by gg-man on 02/08/2012 17:59:52 MST.

Gregg,

Scott Williamson determined it was more important to shield himself from the sun. And, it looks like he sometimes uses poles.


More info here:
http://budgetpct.blogspot.com/search/label/trekking%20poles

Poles or no poles?
I have not decided yet whether I'm going to take trekking poles on the PCT. I've found that the umbrella trumps poles hands-down, and most of the time I don't use the poles anymore. Shielding myself from the sun is more important. The reason I might take them is to help my knees on downhill segments. However, I think my knees strengthen up after a while, and by just slowing my pace I can do fine. Plus, the PCT is gently graded, unlike trails in Crimea (Ukraine).

UPDATE 18 FEB: I've tentatively decided to leave the poles at home. If I find I need them, I can have them mailed to me.

Value of trekking poles
I recently happened across an article in the Jan/Feb 2009 edition of Men's Health magazine that talked about the fitness value of trekking poles. It cited research that said that people who used trekking poles had a 6% higher heart rate (e.g. 106 bpm vs. 100 bpm, or 141 bpm vs. 133 bpm) and a 10% higher oxygen consumption rate while walking at the same speed as people who did not use them, but they did not report a higher subjective level of exertion. I have done little mini-experiments on myself, just observing my sensations when hiking at a certain pace with and without poles, and came to similar conclusions. It takes a lot more energy to do with the arms what one can easily do with the legs (i.e. propel oneself forward). This research suggests that trekking poles increase cardiovascular fatigue; however they may reduce other kinds of fatigue.

Edited by dextersp1 on 02/08/2012 18:26:14 MST.

Allot. And want lighter ones too. If I was twenty, I probably wouldn't need them at all. But, I'm nearly fifty and I've found them to really help me allot. Not just with balance, but with my knees. I find that the use of TPs gives me much more comfort on a long hike. If the terrain is flat I leave them. But if there's allot of gain/loss, poles are my buddy. And I do digress -now I just need a third arm so I can use an umbrella too.

Corrected info:
----------------------------------------
The thread about LT4 Trekking Poles got me thinking.
http://gossamergear.com/trekking/trekking/black-straps.html

I have these Black Diamond Trail Back Trekking Pole
http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/en-us/shop/mountain/trekking-poles/trail-back-trekking-pole


There is a difference of 11 oz or 5.5 oz per pole.

But, you are not carrying the total weight of the poles when using them - one pole is always on the ground.

So, is the difference between the two in practical applications 5.5 oz?
------------------------------------------------

Here is why I asked - there are 3 factors - weight, durability and price.

Price - $175 Vs 80
Weight - 11 or 5.5 oz difference
Durability - Gossamer less durable than BD

A person might be willing to pay 2.2 times more for less durable poles to save 11 oz. They might choose to go with the additional 5.5 oz for more durable poles at less cost.

>But, you are not carrying the total weight of the poles when using them - one pole is always on the ground.

I don't think ti works that way. Sure, one pole is almost always on the ground, but then you need to pick it up, and ACCELERATE it faster than your walking velocity to get it out in front of you. I would have to say that it's at the very best, breaking even with just carrying them in you pack, but in actually reality (adding up all those micro accelerations, and depending on the weight of the pole at the tip, moments of inertia and all that jazz) they are equivalent to some amount more than static dead carried weight. The concept is similar to rotating mass vs. static mass on a bicycle. There are many debates arguing how much losing mass at the tire/rim compares to losing mass on the frame.


BM

Kovea Dynamic IV trekking poles. 180g/6.35oz

http://www.scribd.com/doc/56787140/KOVEA-Catalogue-I

Scroll down to page 45.

I saw some on eBay for $107.

Might want to check them out. Also that site has the full Kovea catalog.

Ultra Magnus,

You probably have an aspect I didn't include in the calculations.
I would have guessed there was a mechanical engineer here that would have the answer.

So, I guessing the formula would be something like.

BD weight - LT4S weight = A + motion micro adjustments?

I'm happy with my BD poles. I put a great deal of stress on them when I'm post holing in the snow. Also, they can handle talus skiing.

But if there is a mechanical engineer out there I would interest in their take.

I'm not an actual engineer but I do work in the mechanical engineering field. What I lack are the higher level math skills (went to the school of hard knocks rather than a proper university), so I won't be much help in calculating the moments of inertia and energy expenditure of swinging trekking poles.

BUT- one could do a fairly simple experiment to see for themselves the affects of mass distribution in the trekkiing pole. First, take your poles and add a significant amount of weight to the end of the pole. Duct tape a couple rolls of quarters or a bottle of water, even a potato, whatever, to the bottom of the pole, just above the basket and go for a walk across your yard. Then, move that weight as high as you can w/o interfering with your grip on the pole. In both cases the net weight of the poles are the same, but it will be quite obvious if "all weight is equal" or not.

After thinking about it some more- I think pole weight is very similar to shoe or boot weight. I've read articles in the past explaining how shoe weight is more significant than ounces in your pack.

BM

edit- I just realized that some of the earlier posters addressed this same point. I just got lost in the debate over the benefits or lack-thereof, of poles and missed it. Apologies for regurgitating what's already been said.

Edited by Ultra_Magnus on 02/10/2012 14:58:58 MST.

My last comment was posted a few minutes before I took off for my coastal walk.
I don't make it a habit of insulting people but after several posters pointed out that THEY benefit from using poles inspite of not being physically or mentally handicapped, the same person managed to put another comment that implied you need to be so to benefit from them; that to me was being deliberately provocative.

As a matter of fact I used , very successfully , my poles again .
One of my mates also had exactly the same poles but only used one when in snake territory (for some reason he does not like them) otherwise they were used just for his tent.
However on some walks , for example under heavy rain, he also uses them .
Franco