from the lister, who is not a member of this forum
Greetings from David Metzler, the author of the list under discussion,
and one of the co-creators of spire measure.
I thought I would respond to some of the points raised, all of which were quite cogent.
To Raymond's post re trees and views: A good question. Spire measure is _defined_ purely in terms of the topography, so it does not measure any actual view. Of course for tree-covered peaks the actual view from the top is terrible. It is in thinking about the _intuitive_ understanding of spire measure that it is useful to imagine the impressiveness of the view from the top. For that purpose, simply imagine the trees aren't there. Some NE tree-covered summits would in fact acquire pretty good views if you did that. (I am not advocating actually cutting the trees, however!)
Another way to get intuition about what spire measure is about is to think of the view _of_ the peak from all directions (the "tourists' viewpoint"). Roughly, a peak that looks more impressive (in terms of local relief and steepness) from all directions will get a higher spire measure. For this viewpoint, there is no need to imagine removing the trees.
-----
To mcorsar: indeed I think a good way to think of this list is simply "if you like that peak, maybe you'll also like these." That's how I tend to use these lists personally. And re: the Gunks, I didn't mean to disrespect them (I loved the one trip I managed to do out there), but, as you say, I'm not sure if they would manage good spire numbers, because of the lack of total relief and their non-pointiness. (They have the steepness, of course.) Right now I am more engaged in calculating peaks in the Himalayas; the Cats and Gunks may have to wait.
-----
Regarding Mt. Blue vs. Tumbledown Mtn. (both near Weld): Thanks for the tip. I should check Tumbledown specifically; I am not sure right off whether it should be on the list or not. As Roy points out, this is not a thorougly checked list. In particular, peaks like Tumbledown where the local HP is not near the cliff tend to get missed by my particular scanning technique. I can go back and calculate the spire measure for the points on Tumbledown nearer the cliff face; they might pick up enough to get on the list. However it's not a sure thing, since, as Roy also points out, Tumbledown is not particularly pointy (spire-like); in some directions, the drops are not dramatic.
-----
Any further questions, comments etc. are most welcome, to metzler (at) aa (dot) edu.
David Metzler
