Results of the BALTICUM 2011 in pdf

Head judge: Jaan Künnap (Estonia)
Judges: Kristjan-Erik Suurväli (Estonia), Saulius Barauskas, Saulius Saikauskas (Lithuania), Normunds Reinbergs, Pēteris Kūlis (Latvia).

Jury’s decisions for year 2011:

1. In climbing category Jury decided to determine winner’s taking account team’s climbs in total “as project”.  Mentioning their best climb underlined in the table.
2. In High mountain category Jury decided not to include commercial 8000+ meter climbs as they are in violation of Rule 4.3.1 and  4.3.2. Jury acknowledged achievement of Manaslu and Everest climbers and made special mention to their climbs.  Peak Han Tengri climb was included by majority of votes.
3. In Technical category and High mountain category Jury decision was made in so that each member of Jury gave its list of preference from places first to ninth and average points sum for each climb was calculated. Climb with lower average got higher place.
4. Decisions in Climbing category and Mountain trekking category were consensus decisions.
5. Jury decided not to allow into competition route report “Erydag” as it is was not in accordance with Rule 4.3.1 and “Pillaren Peak” as it was categorised as training rocks and not as route.

Jury’s decided for the next competition to change the rules or at least to revise the rules in following:

6. Rule “Team members must be citizens or permanent residents of the Baltic States” has to be revised in High Mountain category”.
6.1.  It is possible to revoke this rule at all, but then prioritise climbs and give priority for example as follows:
6.1.1.      Unsupported Baltic teams climbs (without common BC and logistical and recue support);
6.1.2.      Supported Baltic team climbs (for example Lenin, Han Tengri, Denali with common BC and prepared “ordinary” route etc.);
6.1.3.      Commercial expeditions (international 8000rs, former USSR 7000er-s etc
6.2.  Or it is possible to divide the category and create special “commercial group climbing category” for the climbs in international teams or commercial expeditions.
7. In the climbing category teams, if team has multiple route reports, team should submit report only in their best routes or as project.
7.1.  In climbing class reports should include description of hardest pitch or part of the route, its length and clear statement if pre-placed bolts or stations were used.
8. Reports should be submitted in Reports in English or in Russian and in due time before the Balticum so that judges have opportunity to read route report.
9. “COMPARATIVE TABLE OF THE ROUTE DIFFICULTY GRADES” should be revised or divided so that it would reflect accurately differences between climbing category, technical climbing category and high altitude category.
10.  Jury agreed that as the 54^th Balticum will be organized by the Lithuanian Alpinism Association, they will propose changes to rules, so that common agreement in the changes would be achieved in reasonable time before the 54^th Balticum.