Train for your peak.

Why a generic plan misses on a real peak

A 16-week Mont Blanc plan is not a 16-week Mt Rainier plan, and neither is a Mera Peak plan. They share a polarised intensity backbone, but the demand profile underneath, vertical accumulation, summit-day duration, descent eccentric load, altitude exposure, multi-day fatigue tolerance, is different enough that the preparation should be different too. A 4810m (15,781 ft) classic alpine push that finishes in a single 12-hour day does not stress the body the same way a 6476m (21,247 ft) trekking peak does, where you sleep above 5000m (16,400 ft) for a week before you ever touch the summit cone. If your training does not reflect those differences, summit day will.

Every page in this hub follows the same eight-section structure: what the peak punishes underprepared climbers for, the five-card demand profile, the altitude reality check, the weekly distribution that works for it, how Train to Mountain tunes the plan to this specific mountain, the common mistakes, a sample week, and what to do next. Word count runs 1,100 to 1,400, citing primary research where the science decides the call. The peaks here range from accessible 3000m (9,840 ft) introductions to the classic 4000m (13,100 ft) and 5000m (16,400 ft) Alpine, Cascade, and Rockies objectives, through to the 6000m (19,685 ft) and 6500m (21,325 ft) trekking peaks of the Himalaya and the Andes.

If you are not sure which peak is the right one for your current fitness, run the Summit Simulator first. It compares your aerobic engine, descent capacity, and altitude history to the demand profile of each peak and shows which ones you are realistically ready for and which need more base. If you already know the peak and just want the plan, pick it from the map or the grid below. The training science behind every page is laid out in the guides library.