comparing the performances

In the last 1-2 years we often hear: How many BIGs have you climbed ?

But I think it is never taken into consideration how serious the climbed BIGs are (200m heightdifference - 15 min cycling, or 1800m heightdifference, 2 and a half hour climbing)

I would be happy - beside the classical classification - if there were additional info by the results of the members:
1, the heightdiff or strength of the climb (not the same 50 BIGs with 400m heightdiff each or 40 BIGs with 1500m heightdiff for each)
2, or to reach a BIG level it should have been taken a number of steep, hard / serious climbs that should climbed to reach that level.
or other

With the 1st idea we could know how serious BIGs the member used to reach the number of his/her BIGs.
With the 2nd idea the classsification of the reaching of BIG levels would be more comparable.

Best regards,
Gabor Györgyi

Hi, good ideas already requested but true.
Well, a little true because it's true until 200 Bigs.
Afterwards (zone 2,3,4 and 10 in the pocket), main of the bigs are long, steep and high ones.
The problem to edit those additional notes is that few members already wrote their specific sides and years for their climbs. That means that the difference of level is difficult to calculate.
But I've a good surprise for the end of the year : I've used my time in spring to create a new calculation that will lead to what you want : let's wait just a few months still !
Best regards !
Dan.

OK, Daniel, I'm curious.

(Beside I mention - as you also know - by Tour de France they also add the difficulty of the climb: more points for climbing 1st on Galibier or a small hill)

Another reason:
By the promotional text on the website the legendary climbs are mentioned: the hardest ones:
Galbier, Stelvio, Kitzbüheler horn, Bonette, Pico Veleta, Mortirolo, Gr Speikkogel, ...

Now when it isn't mentioned how many long or how many BIGs which need few hours of cycling --> now people are not motivated to cycle long climbs or cycle few hours for a BIG, they are not motivated cycle Stelvio for example, there is another, bit short: Pra Campo.

The reason why I mentioned this, to motivate to cycle the long climbs, the BIGs which need 2-3-4 hours of cycling upwards.

And Daniel, Happy bithday to You !

Gabor

And a promotion for the coming cotations :
http://www.challenge-big.eu/help-descr.htm
Approximatively 1300 sides on 1750 are already measured and calculated.
I've still 450 climbs to measure with Google Earth altitudes and tracks.
I've still 670 files "description" to edit blank per default.
And afterwards, I'll begin to transfer the results of the measurements into the descriptions files. Only the icelandic number 1 has been transferred presently.
Bigs will soon be able to be compared and whatever the side choosen, the addition of the big points will answer to your question, Gabór.