Annapurna fatality rate has fallen quite a bit over the last decade due to being a more popular climb so that 32% isn't the correct number anymore, but of all 14 of the 8000'ers it still remains the most avalanche prone. K2 is definitely way more technically challenging and is still the holy grail of 8000er peaks for real mountaineers. The sport continues to evolve
Even though Annapurna has a higher fatality rate, K2 is definitely the toughest mountain for climbers on Earth. The reason for the high death rates on Annapurna is largely due to avalanches.
K2 presents to me as a greater challenge. The infrastructure around climbing in the region is less developed as it is in Nepal and its height makes it a more exhausting and enduring climb before weather is even considered. With unfavourable weather conditions (very common) K2 is just as prone to avalanches, which carry risks on all mountains. Consider both with equal weather conditions, K2 is harder, more technical, taller and more remote.
You can't argue against the fatality rate of 32%. Also a climbing segment from C2 to C3 is the most challenging part for mountaineering in probably about all of the 8000+ giants. It's just brutal and treacherous. K2 is a beast but Annapurna is Annapurna. Southern face is also on another level, so I personally agree with this rating and numbers are numbers.
@@phantom213numbers actually are saying a lot. If the fatally rate of Annapurna would be like 50% would you still arguing k2 is more challenging. K2 is indeed nothing for beginners. Annapurna is a relentless battle for even experienced climber that’s why the fatality rate is being so high on Annapurna bc it’s actually more deadly more dangerous, more difficult, more challenging usw. and at the end of the day way more climber loosing their lives on Annapurna vs K2.. Annapurna, located in Nepal, is considered the mountain with the highest risk of avalanches. It's known for its unpredictable and extreme weather conditions, with avalanches striking without warning. In fact, Annapurna has a fatality rate of 33% on its slopes, making : one of the deadliest mountains in the world
Sir that's a different thing, there are such peaks also which haven't been summited once, whoever goes he, dies, because only few went to climb, so the fatality rate is calculated for frequently climbed peaks
Annapurna fatality rate has fallen quite a bit over the last decade due to being a more popular climb so that 32% isn't the correct number anymore, but of all 14 of the 8000'ers it still remains the most avalanche prone. K2 is definitely way more technically challenging and is still the holy grail of 8000er peaks for real mountaineers. The sport continues to evolve
Even though Annapurna has a higher fatality rate, K2 is definitely the toughest mountain for climbers on Earth. The reason for the high death rates on Annapurna is largely due to avalanches.
K2 presents to me as a greater challenge. The infrastructure around climbing in the region is less developed as it is in Nepal and its height makes it a more exhausting and enduring climb before weather is even considered. With unfavourable weather conditions (very common) K2 is just as prone to avalanches, which carry risks on all mountains. Consider both with equal weather conditions, K2 is harder, more technical, taller and more remote.
You are right, i also believe that, k2 is way more difficult to climb then annapurna but more fatality rate is on annapurna.
You can't argue against the fatality rate of 32%. Also a climbing segment from C2 to C3 is the most challenging part for mountaineering in probably about all of the 8000+ giants. It's just brutal and treacherous. K2 is a beast but Annapurna is Annapurna. Southern face is also on another level, so I personally agree with this rating and numbers are numbers.
@@phantom213numbers actually are saying a lot. If the fatally rate of Annapurna would be like 50% would you still arguing k2 is more challenging. K2 is indeed nothing for beginners. Annapurna is a relentless battle for even experienced climber that’s why the fatality rate is being so high on Annapurna bc it’s actually more deadly more dangerous, more difficult, more challenging usw. and at the end of the day way more climber loosing their lives on Annapurna vs K2.. Annapurna, located in Nepal, is considered the mountain with the highest risk of avalanches. It's known for its unpredictable and extreme weather conditions, with avalanches striking without warning. In fact, Annapurna has a fatality rate of 33% on its slopes, making : one of the deadliest mountains in the world
Annapurna
AnnaPurna
K2
Annapurna is beautiful.
Nah k2 is more beautiful
Mount Gongga in China has a worse fatality to summit ratio than all of these….
Sir that's a different thing, there are such peaks also which haven't been summited once, whoever goes he, dies, because only few went to climb, so the fatality rate is calculated for frequently climbed peaks