Summiting Colorado's Peaks Above 13,000'

[Salient]

John Kirk? I didn't know DaBaby summited all of the 13ers.

[CheapCigarMan]

Ranked - prominence = 300' or higher.
Soft-ranked - 280' to 299'.
Unranked - below 280'

Named peaks - has an official USGS name. North Maroon Peak is an officially named peak.
Unnamed - does not have an official USGS name. The name of the peak conventionally appears in quotes if it has an unofficial name like "Southeast Longs". Another example is a peak with no name the centennial, pt13811, for example.

There is no correlation between ranked and named. Some examples:

Longs Peak = is a ranked and named peak
North Maroon Peak = unranked and named peak
Pt13811 = ranked and unnamed peak
"Southeast Longs" = unranked and unnamed peak, thus unworthy of anyone's time.

Ranked - prominence = 300' or higher.
Soft-ranked - 280' to 299'.
Unranked - below 280'

This, but only if the elevation for either (or both) the connecting saddle and/or peak is interpolated. Peaks where both elevations are given in a topo map aren't soft ranked even if they have 280' to 300' of prominence. Example:

https://listsofjohn.com/mobile/peak/6280

Soft ranked just means that a peak might have 300' of prominence, but the interpolated value is 280-299. Since it is possible such a peak has 300 feet of prominence, it is given a soft rank.

North Massive is a good example to use to show why the peak is soft ranked.

The topo maps don't give a spot elevation for either the peak or the connecting saddle.

The peak is between 14,320' and 14,360' and the saddle is 14,040 to 14,080' The prominence of the peak using interpolation is 280', but the possible prominence range is 240' to 320'.

There is a 75% chance that the peak is unranked and a 25% chance that the peak is ranked, so the peak is given a soft rank since it might be ranked.

Signal Butte (in the link) is not soft ranked, even though it has 299' of prominence since the summit elevation has a spot elevation of 6522' and the saddle also has a fixed elevation of 6223'. Assuming the topo map is correct (and lists always assume it is until proven otherwise), there is a 0% chance that the peak is ranked, thus no soft rank. Someone would have to go out there and prove that the topo map is in error for it to be ranked, but it will never be soft ranked since both the saddle and peak have spot elevations.

These were very helpful and clear explanations!

As I'm playing around the site with this new information I found a couple of observations and questions.

There are no 14'ers that are Ranked & Unnamed.
There are lots of 13'ers that are Ranked & Unnamed. Though, I've noticed that some of them do not have quotation marks signifying they are Unnamed. PT 13,811 for example. Why is it not annotated with quotation marks?

I've also noticed that the stats between the 14'er and 13'er checklists don't appear to be consistent.
Under 14ers it displays your total for Ranked+Named while under the 13er stats it displays Ranked+Unranked.
Wouldn't they both want to display Ranked+Named+Unnamed? Regardless, curious as to why they are not consistent?

[supranihilest]

There are lots of 13'ers that are Ranked & Unnamed. Though, I've noticed that some of them do not have quotation marks signifying they are Unnamed. PT 13,811 for example. Why is it not annotated with quotation marks?

Quotation marks only denote unofficially named peaks. These names are historical, local, colloquial, etc. but do not come from the USGS Board on Geographic Names, which is the federal body that names places within the US. A peak that does not have either an official or unofficial name is simply referred to by its summit elevation, as is the case for your Point 13,811 example. It wouldn't make much sense, personally, to also enclose it in quotation marks as we already know that it's not officially named simply by virtue of having a name that is only its summit elevation.

Or, to put it more simply, the quotes are only to separate peaks that have non-official, non-elevation, human-given names from their officially named counterparts. For example, Pole Creek Mountain and "East Pole Creek Mountain", which are officially and unofficially named, respectively.

I've also noticed that the stats between the 14'er and 13'er checklists don't appear to be consistent.
Under 14ers it displays your total for Ranked+Named while under the 13er stats it displays Ranked+Unranked.
Wouldn't they both want to display Ranked+Named+Unnamed? Regardless, curious as to why they are not consistent?

For the 14ers people traditionally go by the list of 53 ranked and named 14ers plus the 5 unranked and named 14ers, which is where the usual 58 list comes from. For 13ers that would be a question only Bill can answer. Everyone goes by the list of 584 ranked 13ers, but only a fraction of folks go by anything else. Given that there are a mere 5 unranked, named 14ers and 113 unranked, named 13ers (some of which have so few ascents you can count them on your hands) it makes more sense why people care more about the former and less about the latter. That and higher peaks always getting more attention. I would say the default view for 13ers should be just ranked 13ers, but that's me (and I say that as someone who's gunning for the entire 767 13er list). That would reduce confusion.

[CheapCigarMan]

There are lots of 13'ers that are Ranked & Unnamed. Though, I've noticed that some of them do not have quotation marks signifying they are Unnamed. PT 13,811 for example. Why is it not annotated with quotation marks?

Quotation marks only denote unofficially named peaks......

I've also noticed that the stats between the 14'er and 13'er checklists don't appear to be consistent.
Under 14ers it displays your total for Ranked+Named while under the 13er stats it displays Ranked+Unranked.
Wouldn't they both want to display Ranked+Named+Unnamed? Regardless, curious as to why they are not consistent?

For the 14ers people traditionally go by the list of 53 ranked and named 14ers plus the 5 unranked and named 14ers,.....

I've enjoyed your insights and learned quite a bit here.
Thanks for taking the time.

[rijaca]

For the 14ers people traditionally go by the list of 53 ranked and named 14ers plus the 5 unranked and named 14ers, which is where the usual 58 list comes from. For 13ers that would be a question only Bill can answer. Everyone goes by the list of 584 ranked 13ers, but only a fraction of folks go by anything else. Given that there are a mere 5 unranked, named 14ers and 113 unranked, named 13ers (some of which have so few ascents you can count them on your hands) it makes more sense why people care more about the former and less about the latter. That and higher peaks always getting more attention. I would say the default view for 13ers should be just ranked 13ers, but that's me (and I say that as someone who's gunning for the entire 767 13er list). That would reduce confusion.

Us 'old folks' traditionally go by the CMC list....

"The CMC officially recognizes 54 14ers as the number required to be considered a list completer. We will accept climbers who pursue a 14er list with a different total, such as 55 or 58, as long as they complete the minimum of 54. The list of 54 includes all 52 named peaks over 14,000 feet with more than 300 feet of prominence, plus North Maroon Peak and El Diente Peak for their history and aesthetics. The CMC does not currently include Challenger Point, which is historically considered a subsummit of Kit Carson Peak."

The 'usual 58 list' is a result of the popularity of 14ers.com.