100 Days or Less

[Dogwood]

I'll venture less than .005 %, that's 1/2 of 1 %, of first time "thru hikers" doing an unsupported thru hike of 2000+ miles will get it done in less than 100 days. What one can do and will do are two different things.

[4shot]

I'll venture less than .005 %, that's 1/2 of 1 %, of first time "thru hikers" doing an unsupported thru hike of 2000+ miles will get it done in less than 100 days. What one can do and will do are two different things.

You may be correct but the OP's question didn't ask for the % by experience level. Again, there are absolutely no hikers that I met (or even heard of) that had a specific target (in number of days) to complete the trail. Quite a few had a specific deadline to be off the trail (start of school, plane ticket. job start date, visa, etc.) but they simply worked backwards from that date and made some sort of calculation, with an ample margin of error built in. But I don't recall anyone saying they were striving to hit a goal of "X" days. In a way, it seems counter-intuitive to want to rush through what many on here refer to as a "long vacation".

As to rickb's point, it is indeed mathematically correct. Mapman's data is accurate based on the assumption that the probability that people who do the trail journal stuff (I didn't nor do I look at other's) is equally distributed among all the categories (ranges) in his histogram. I have no way of knowing if that assumption is correct or not.

[George]

You may be correct but the OP's question didn't ask for the % by experience level. Again, there are absolutely no hikers that I met (or even heard of) that had a specific target (in number of days) to complete the trail. Quite a few had a specific deadline to be off the trail (start of school, plane ticket. job start date, visa, etc.) but they simply worked backwards from that date and made some sort of calculation, with an ample margin of error built in. But I don't recall anyone saying they were striving to hit a goal of "X" days. In a way, it seems counter-intuitive to want to rush through what many on here refer to as a "long vacation".

As to rickb's point, it is indeed mathematically correct. Mapman's data is accurate based on the assumption that the probability that people who do the trail journal stuff (I didn't nor do I look at other's) is equally distributed among all the categories (ranges) in his histogram. I have no way of knowing if that assumption is correct or not.

met up with a guy in NJ who had a 100 goal and was on track - went by " 13 " given to him for his early base wt

he did not start with the goal - got it on the way

I did 13 with him on a rainy day and stopped - he went another 11