[Fingers of a Martyr]

yeah go on dave my minds been racing. dunning, john dunne, ben heason, si o'connor, oooooooh the possibilities :!: at the end of the day i don't really care if people are lying its just when innocent people get shit thats when i thinks its unfair.

[a dense loner]

only kiddin themselves? we're not 8 years old anymore. don't you know anybody that has said they've done somethin n you've immediately thought "don't talk bollocks". people seem to have this preoccupation with money/sponsorship, meanin if they don't make money out of it why should they lie. people lie, this is an undeniable fact.
a lot of people out there put a lot of their time n effort into trying to become a better climber. a lot of people feel strongly on this one way or the other.  :roll:

[unclesomebody]

having spoken to quite a few people about various people mentioned in thsi thread, I think that inbetween all the dick waving there is something more subtle.  Having heard the views from a certain person i started coming round to the fact that lying about your ascents isn't just good for you (in terms of money, sponsorship, idol status), but it can be dangerous for other people.  

All the people I climb with know how well (read; crap) I climb.  However, they have never had reason to doubt any of my calimb (nothing impressive).  Now, if I said I had gone out and onsighted some E7 (on the sea cliffs for example) and found it pretty easy then all the people I climb with will be able to gauge the difficulty of the route.  They will think, well, if he's done it it must not be that bad, and I am a better/bolder climber than him so I think I will go and onsight this route too.  That person may go and try to onsight this route only to find rusty pegs, loose rock, and a potentially fatal situation.  This really isn't on.  I know you probably shouldn't judge whether you can do a route by whether a mate's done it, but this happens all the time.  I have tried routes because a mate has said I can onsight it, and vice versa.  I would never lie about any ascent because of the consequences... I wouldn't ever want someone's injury hanging over my head because I lied.  There is definitely a moral responsiblity to be honest to stop that situation occuring (in my opinion).  

Also, notable ascents will go down in the history of climbing.  LIke Action Direct... a milestone in climbing.  How would it be if we found out Gullich's ascent was a lie... it's just not on.  

From everything I hear I feel i can rightly discredit some people's ascents, because their stories are so wishy washy AND there is no proof (photos, video).  It's a sad state of affairs, but as dave says, in any large group of people there will always be some liars.  Fuck em and just try to climb better than you did the previous day/week/month/year.  

goodnight.  and sorry for a rant.

[dave]

it's hardly nuclear physics to figure out who Dave's jibing.

hey, i woulnd't say i'm jibing, i'm just saying that i've been told some things by people i mostly believe (for various reasons) which causes serious doubt, thats all. Now i'm not the kind of person who believes everything i read or hear (did you know they've taken the word "gulible" out of the dictionary?), I'm just saying i've been told some things which if true, and i think theres a fair chance at least some of it is, its very sad.

Anyway it dismays me talking about this kinda thing. lets talk about summert a bit more lighthearted, like drive-by shootings or international terrorism.

[Fingers of a Martyr]

only kiddin themselves? we're not 8 years old anymore

true but thats the point i was tryin to make. if u know someones lyin and gettin nothing out of it let it go. let them delude themselves and encourage and praise the people who are pushin standards, they're own and world ones, and leave the bullshitters behind.

Believe me i don't want to belive it cos it sickens me, and i'd love to believe that this person is far and away the best climber in the UK

missed that bit. i'm presuming its o'connor as his 8a scorecard would probably justify that claim of best climber in uk.

[a dense loner]

am sorry owen but you are wrong in sayin that dave's n johnny's doubts r as bad as the anonymous postings on planetfear. why does evidence have to be proved from the doubters n not the source. has it occured to some people that names will be mentioned who will want to remain nameless etc. still there may be many more reasons for not mentionin things.
sayin we can settle things like this like adults. the simple fact is we can't, n all that will happen is we will all end up takin one side or another at some stage n slaggin each other off. just because someone believes doesn't mean someone else has to n vice versa.
n just cos pantontino has laid down the gauntlet doesn't mean that people are wrong if they don't give evidence to the contrary. it may just mean that they don't want to go over the folklore yet again.

[a dense loner]

you can put me in wi dave n jb, just for the record. so people know where i stand on the subject. out of all the names banded around so far, i only have respect for the big man himself. as for the others theres too much smoke not enough evidence. yes, you did read that correctly, stop rubbin your eyes. i work from the opposite side of the coin as owen. with some people i need to see before i believe.
i am not a coward, i will not mention sources etc cos that's not up to me. if any of you think that the doubters all sit round a table in sheffield wearing various states of disguise i'm afraid you're wrong. i don't know dave that well, however i do know johnny well n know that he doesn't come up with these doubts cos he's bored n wants a chat.
when i was on the subject of it endin up wi slaggin each other off, this has already begun wi pantontino havin a dig at johnny for havin a plantation circuit wired, the truth is he more or less has the peak wired.
however, johnny's ability or anyone else's, apart from the subject matter, should have nothin to do wi what we're talkin about

[Johnny Brown]

I bought this subject up because I am fed up of hearing doubts. I' m not here to throw shit about, I want to go to the crag and be impressed without people immediately raising doubts. I want things clearing up one way or another. If we can prove all these people have told the absolute truth I'll be the happiest person here.

I'm not too bothered about 'spilling the beans' because its mostly second-hand and I don't feel in a position to name the doubters. What I want is a real discussion on how to tackle the problem. Believe me, its getting out of hand.

JB tags him as a self publicist

I'm not singling him out Simon, its just the way the climbing media works and I want to point out its open to abuse. Of the names mentioned so far he's definitely the least guilty of shouting about it.

[Bubba]

If we can prove all these people have told the absolute truth I'll be the happiest person here.

But isn't this where the problems start? Nobody can *prove* any of this (either way), unless they were actually there.

Too often second hand evidence is vague, sketchy or just invented, you know, like "a mate of a mate said/saw this or that".  Not always granted, but often.

People can sit on either side of the fence - guilty until proved innocent, or innocent until proved guilty. Personally, I prefer the latter, probably because I'm a firm believer in that facet of our legal system.

We all know of one person who's dubious claims from last year were outed by people who were *actually there*, and since then those claims have been retracted.

[Johnny Brown]

We all know of one person who's dubious claims from last year were outed by people who were *actually there*, and since then those claims have been retracted.

That's the first I've heard actually. Would seem to be remarkably stupid.

Just for the record, I haven't made up my mind on any of the people mentioned. What's bothering me is that the unresolved doubts are spreading. Every hard ascent is now immediately questioned. This is not a healthy state of affairs and needs nipping in the bud.

What I'd really like is for this thread to inspire shy witnesses to come forward. For my own part I now carry binoculars all the time... seriously. If people feel there is even a tiny chance they may be being watched might make them think twice about making stuff up. More hopefully i'll get to see some shy heroes being awesome - and I'll be more than willing to big them up.

In quite the opposite direction, I watched and photographed Ross Cowie doing a ground-up ascent of Unfamiliar this winter. He sent Dan Honeyman over to ask me not so send them in to the mags. Fair enough, I thought, but why is he so distrustful of the media? He expressly asked to be excluded from Grimer's grit onsight article too. The we've got Tim Clifford, Matt Birch and Andy Brown who refused to be included in OTE's list of top UK boulderers. Why do they feel like that?

[dave]

i've got more respect for ross than most of the multi-E9 media hotshots right now!

[Johnny Brown]

you listenin, keenus?

[Bubba]

What's bothering me is that the unresolved doubts are spreading. Every hard ascent is now immediately questioned. This is not a healthy state of affairs and needs nipping in the bud.

I agree entireley - it's got to the stage where you need witnesses and video to be even half-believed.

For my own part I now carry binoculars all the time...

OMG :shock:  You stalker !!

The we've got Tim Clifford, Matt Birch and Andy Brown who refused to be included in OTE's list of top UK boulderers. Why do they feel like that?

They're probably climbing purely for their own satisfaction and not media glory.  I know that Tim doesn't fund his climbing via sponsorship (last time I met him, anyway) so maybe he can afford to sidestep the media machine and just get on with pulling down on his own terms.

[Johnny Brown]

Can any british boulderer fund their climbing entirely through sponsorship?

I agree they may be climbing for themselves, but refusing a mention in a mag? There's something deeper going on there - an active dislike of something the mags are doing?

[Bubba]

Can any british boulderer fund their climbing entirely through sponsorship?

Perhaps Malcolm Smith can (sure I read it somewhere, but not sure if that's true or not), but I doubt anybody else can exist on sponsorship alone. That said, there's plenty who are trying to make some money out of the sport.
Don't get me wrong, there's nowt wrong with that - if I was at that level then I'd jump at the chance to get paid for what I loved doing.

There's something deeper going on there - an active dislike of something the mags are doing?

You maybe right - but I don't know any of them well enough to have any idea of their motives.

[Dave Flanagan]

Some people lie. Climbers are people. Some climbers lie.
That has always happened before and there are a few well-known instances in the past (Gary Gibson in the Burren, some stuff in the 70s in Gogarth, some guy in who made up a crag worth of routes just by lookin etc.)

How there is a different breed of liar, there is more at stake now - fame, money - this is due to the climbing media.

Absolute proof is rare, a video of the full climb would be the best proof (even then no good for an onsight) so people have to go on trust. Maybe 10 years ago the idea of lying about climbing would of been laughable, an eccentric action, dismissed maybe with a shrug of the shoulders, this was probably due to the fact that there was so little to gain and that it was a rare event.

So people assumed that any ascent they hear of was true.

Now with the spread of rumours causing a lack of trust there is more disbelief. Some of it definitly has foundation, some doesn't. This serves to blur the boundaries even more.

So now people when hear about an ascent they might not automatically beleive it. Every person has to use their own judgement and set their bullshit filter to high and be considered about what they say. The problem is snowballing becuase people aren't uncovered as cheats, if people have a reason to doubt someone they should say that reason (people will scream for evidence but sometimes there is evidence to prove or disprove a claim). I understand that the climbing community is small and everyone knows everyone but these people are taking the piss out of all of us.

We shouldn't tolerate liars, they are making other honest people look bad, and destroying trust.

(thats just my gut reaction....)

[AndyR]

For my own part I now carry binoculars all the time...

I tend to go for a newspaper with two small holes cut out.

[Stu Littlefair]

Oh dear.

A word of caution, perhaps. I've heard a lot of rumours about why big JD's ascents couldn't have been done as claimed. I've just read the cocktalk thread and seen JB saying that one of the holds on Hubble was "supposed" to have a birds nest in it just after Steve's ascent.

I've also heard a lot of stuff about Fred Roughling - how he's a mutant tall freak who chips things to suit his ape-ish span. The thing is - it isn't true. The few people who bothered to check for themselves found Fred is reasonably small, and Akira looked perfectly natural.

Rumours start. People make things up. If these get repeated they become climbing folklore, and gain credibility. None of it is necessarily true.

I can use Steve Dunning as an example. Steve has come in for a ton of grief recently, and I suspect that it was started by a group of the UKs "top" climbers, who were suspicious of what Steve has claimed because, well let's face it - they couldn't climb the problems he's claimed and they think they are better climbers than him.  It's fair enough to have these thoughts, and only natural. But, if you've no evidence, for gods sake keep them to yourself.  Because if you don't,  someone will say "there's no smoke without fire".  That seems to be exactly what there is in this case.

I know one thing about the whole debacle - there's absolutely no substance behind the accusations. To debunk the "birds nest" theory above - Ru was trying hubble at exactly the same time, and wasn't having any problem with birds nests. Does Ru use different holds on Hubble to everyone else?

The same applies with other climbers. You might hear all sorts of rumours about them, but I'd recommend applying the same skepticsm to those rumours as some of you are doing to the claims of the climbers in question.

[Stu Littlefair]

Johnny Brown wrote:
The we've got Tim Clifford, Matt Birch and Andy Brown who refused to be included in OTE's list of top UK boulderers. Why do they feel like that?

Actually, that's not how it happened. Rich phoned them up, and asked them what boulder problems were 8a in Yorkshire. They felt a bit silly "bigging themselves up", so for a laugh they told them that there were no hard problems in yorkshire apart from Stu's Roof, and that I was the best boulderer in yorkshire :roll:

Awfully ni ce of the chaps, but they didn't refuse to be included, they were just arseing around.

[Stu Littlefair]

One more thing. You're all clever folk, so I make no apologies for dropping the SCIENCE.

You're never going to be able to prove that a climber has done all he claims, so the only logical way to proceed is to assume they have, unless you have a bloody good reason to suspect they haven't.

So, dense, that's why the doubters must always supply the evidence. Innocent until proven guilty is the way forward, yes sireee.

p.s "I've seen them climb an they were crap, so how could they have done Dreamtime" is a shit reason to doubt someones claims, in case you were wondering.

[Johnny Brown]

Actually, that's not how it happened. Rich phoned them up, and asked them what boulder problems were 8a in Yorkshire. They felt a bit silly "bigging themselves up", so for a laugh they told them that there were no hard problems in yorkshire

Not the story I heard at all. There was a definite 'don't you dare put me in your stupid list' element. That's pretty amazing that we have got such different impressions despite being both well-informed and involved in the yorks scene at the time!

[Stu Littlefair]

Actually, that's not how it happened. Rich phoned them up, and asked them what boulder problems were 8a in Yorkshire. They felt a bit silly "bigging themselves up", so for a laugh they told them that there were no hard problems in yorkshire

Not the story I heard at all. There was a definite 'don't you dare put me in your stupid list' element. That's pretty amazing that we have got such different impressions despite being both well-informed and involved in the yorks scene at the time!

Wierd huh?!! Maybe you're right. I know Matt sometimes lurks around here, so he might set us straight one day!

[Johnny Brown]

You're never going to be able to prove that a climber has done all he claims, so the only logical way to proceed is to assume they have, unless you have a bloody good reason to suspect they haven't

Disproving a hypothesis may be the only way in SCIENCE, but i don't agree in climbing.

I've seen, and photographed, loads of newsworthy events and could offer bombproof defence that they happened. In all the time I've climbed with newsworthy climbers, none of them has ever been doubted. Why? Cos there's always someone who saw to back them up. I think that's most people's experience, so its understandable they get confused when a climber has done absolutely loads without ever being seen. Perhaps we all need glasses - I know I've got mine :wink:

[Stu Littlefair]

So why's it so wierd that someone can climb lots of hard routes without being seen? Perhaps they climb alone a lot? Maybe they work odd hours, and climb on weekdays?

The same kind of accusations could be aimed at the Welford, but everyone believes him, right? Would it be the same if John had claimed as many cutting edge FAs as he has cutting edge repeats?

I'm sorry, but "Nobody sees him climb hard problems" is also a shit reason to cause someone else so much grief. Why not set your standards of doubt a bit higher? If they truly are bulshitting, they'll slip up eventually.

[dave]

I'm sorry, but "Nobody sees him climb hard problems" is also a shit reason to cause someone else so much grief. .

i think soemone made a good point about this kinda thing a while back on some other thread. I'll try and recall it, as its appropriate to all climbers:

Say your absolute maximum hardest grade done is 7c. now you may only climb that grade once or twice in your life or in a good year, and that ascent is only a fraction of a percentage of all climbing you've ever done. so you probably won;t have evidence of it. and thats ok. but if your best is 7c, then chances are that you've done a fair few 7b+s, and thus more chance there is evidence for them, i.e. moer chance people were there, took photos etc. you might even have 7b+s at your local crag you can lap. and again you've probably done quite a lot of 7bs, some probably flashed, and you'd have to be doing something pretty special not to have any witnesses. And again you'll have done countless 7a+s and below, probably done in trainers with a weightbelt.

but isay f you claimed to have done 7c and no-one, even people you climbed with had even seen you do the background work on easier stuff, then it seems a bit wierd. now of course theres always exception - people hit on thing that suit them, have good and bad days etc. but generally it holds true. if you think of all your mates that currently climb with you quite often, at or near their best, and think of the above paragraph, my guess it it'll hold true-ish.