NH4

 

North Hants

Hash House Harriers

 

NH4 HOME

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tony 'Fruit'n Nut' Case

 

1939 - 2019

 

 

 

NEXT HASH

 

Hashes start at 11am when it gets too dark for evening runs (mid-September) and 6pm during summer unless otherwise indicated in red

 

Summer starts when the clocks change at the end of March and ends about mid-September.

 

Number Date Time Venue Grid ref Hares On-inn Notes
2108 Jul 21 6:00 pm

Crossways car park, Hook

725544

Old Thumper

Fuggles

To be arranged but almost certainly the White Hart opposite.

 

 

Many thanks to Charmaine Chardonnay, Old Thumper, Damp Patch and the hares, Silvier Fox, Petal, OT & CC for organising a superb weekend.

The weather was brilliant and hats off to whoever carved HHH on the south side of Nine Barrow Down.

 

 

 

Old news lies below the Run List

 

 
 

 

Hash List  2019

 

Highlighted hash numbers have photographs and a selection of comments

 

Highlighted runs NEED HARES

 

Deviations from the start time or changes to previously published information are marked in RED

Coordinate Finder

 

It is the hare's responsibility to check that the times, dates and coordinates are correct.

The website linked above is very useful.

 

Number

Date

Time

Venue

Grid Ref

SU unless noted

Hares

On-Inn

Notes

               
2106 Jul 07 6:00 pm

The Alma, Alma Lane, Heath End, Farnham   

GU9 0LJ

844494

Shrinky Dink

Dodo

The Alma

No food. If pub CP is full, please park in church CP opposite

2107 Jul 14 6:00 pm

Shrinky and Dodo's Gaff

GU14 8AF

876564

Shrinky Dink

Shrinky and Dodo's Gaff

Park in front until full, then along street

Will supply limited amount of food (pizzas?) & drink

2108 Jul 21 6:00 pm

Crossways car park, Hook

725544

Old Thumper

Fuggles

To be arranged but almost certainly the White Hart opposite.

 

2109 Jul 28 6:00 pm

Four Marks Rec. Ground, GU34 5AF

(park alongside football pitch)

663342

Nettles

Dickhead

Probably Wetherspoons in Alton

 

2110

Aug 4

6:00 pm

Zebon Copse Community Centre/Sports Ground

799516

Yorkie

Fairy Snow

 

 

2111

Aug 11

6:00 pm

Selborne Arms

742335

Seis Matters

Selborne Arms

 

2112

Aug 18

6:00 pm

 

 

 

 

 

2113

Aug 25

6:00 pm

 

 

Yorkie

 

 

  Aug 31 2:00 pm

BBQ at Sanyu and Roland's Gaff

 

 

 

Not a hash

Food provided; bring own alcohol

2114

Sep 01

6:00 pm

 

 

 

 

 

2115 Sep 08 6:00 pm          
2116 Sep 15            
2117 Sep 22 11:00 am          
2118 Sep 29 11:00 am          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

 

When is a Roman VIII not a Roman IIX?

 

 

 

 

 

FYI for you smartasses that thought that there was a misspelling on the 2000th T-shirt:

Jane Austin (1831 - 1894) was a prolific American authoress who lived in Massachusetts and travelled to New Hampshire.

 

Many thanks to the committee and hares who made NH4's 2000th Hash such an enjoyable event

 

 

The new committee has been elected. Click on the picture to see them in full detail - if you dare

 

 

BOURLEY ROAD CAR PARK CLOSURE: Message from Mountain Rescue

Updates on Bourley Road  (13th July)

 

Update regarding

 

Bourley Road

 

Tweseldown

 

There's a Government initiative to get the old folks doing some sort of sport

Shame it didn't work.


 

 

NEWSLETTER #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17

FALSE TRAIL EDITION #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7

Shiggy Scribbles Nov 2013

More photos from Uganda

No Entry's Page of Runs

 Photos from Lisbon HHH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Several observant hashers have been ruminating about the Roman eight where the format of XIIX has been used to represent the number 18. They maintain that the correct format should be XVIII. We had a similar query in 2008 or MMIIX or even MMVIII. Their argument is that IIX is not correct Roman for 8.

 

First of all, on the hash there are no rules.

 

Secondly, the Romans would have used VIII for 8, but they would not have used IX for 9 since subtractive notation was only introduced centuries later; they would have used VIIII. Subtractive notation only became common when clocks were invented in the XIVth century to save space on the clock dial. So, IIX obeys no Roman rules, but it is not prohibited. It is simply an uncommonly used form. However, it has the merits of being symmetrical, XVIII would not fit in the space available and I LIKE IT.