[Fingers of a Martyr]

dunning thought 8b+ as well and a few wouldn' comment on the grade. i think it was core and sharma who never confirmed nor downgraded.  in fact has anyone actually came and said 'yes that problem is 8c'  i don't think they have.

[Bubba]

I reckon part of the problem is that 8c is still so cutting edge, and people have done so few of them, it must be hard for anyone to step forward and give a definitive grade.

And, the harder things get, surely the more morpho they become, so one man/womans 8c is another's 8b+ and another's 8c+ ?


morpho is probably the wrong term to use here, but you know what i mean.

[Fingers of a Martyr]

yeah totally, but not commenting is definitly the easy way. not offending the first ascensionist by downgrading but not confirming so not offending the doubters either. but yeah i agree a lot of hard problems simply don't get enough repeats but dreamtime is the exception to that one. its had 9 now i think.

[hongkongstuey]

i notice that 8a.nu have now removed all the blurb by Marcus Block and Gaskins reply

[dobbin]

I met the dude from 8a.nu whilst in swiss and read the unadulterated mails from both. Gaskins' response was a very un-egocentric mail explaining how disappointed he was that after putting the hours in over the years people doubt his achievements. And Marcus's sounded like someone with his nose out of joint.

[a dense loner]

did said dude tell you why he didn't put the uncensored letters in? it's not as if it's a mag n it's got to keep space to a minimum. if it were a perfect world i think that site would be proper bo, one for dave there.

[dobbin]

Dunno mate, he wanted to know if I had ever met his holiness (which I haven't) and whether I'd seen him climb (again, I haven't) and all I could offer was that I have looked at his problems, some of which lest we forget have been on videos (do i mean stick it?) and they have very small or no holds and the living end.

The body tension comment made me chuckle though. I bet you could use him as a work bench.

[dave]

just googled for Markus Bock and it came up with this photo:



 

[Björn]

Don't really get it ...  The dude, that'd be me, actually DID publish John's email, unaltered and all...

[Kim]

Don't really get it ...  The dude, that'd be me, actually DID publish John's email, unaltered and all...

yeah but someone on cocktalk posted up the full version of markus bock's email from some german site which had a extra stuff not on 8a.nu.
basically sayin "i spoke to ben and jerry and they say not everyone believes his ascent of hubble" or summat like that.

 :roll:  :?

[Björn]

Ah, OK, that actually was in the email I got from Markus, but as I haven't had time to talk to Ben or Jerry (being on vacation mind you), I thought it wouldn't be right to mention their names...

[tc]

Why not just mention this little lot instead?

Kaizen, Woodwell (V14)
Anaesthesia, Woodwell (V13)
Isla de Encanta, Woodwell O'ert Road (V13)
Il Pirata, Trowbarrow (V15)
At the Heart of it All, Woodwell, (V14)
Walk Away, Fairy Steps (V13)
Walk Away Sit Start, Fairy Steps (V15)
Violent New Breed, G-Spot (F9a+/V15)
2nd (?) ascent Little Women RH, Little Font (V13/14)

[dobbin]

chuffin hell! don't you love the internet.

Hi Bjorn! wish I was there!

[Pantontino]

Hi Bjorn, has it occurred to you that what you've actually done is make a very big mistake.

What on earth posessed you to give public platform to the paranoid, jealous rantings of Bock, without making an attempt to sort the disagreement out in private?

Such a cheap shot.

As it stands, Bock now has a nasty reputation, and your website has lost all credibility.

A total disgrace - you should be ashamed of yourself.

[tc]

I think any blame needs to be equally apportioned between 8a.nu and Martin Joisten's site, climbing.de, who were also very quick to jump on the defamatory bandwagon.
Fucking disgraceful behaviour. Time to go and stare at the Atlantic again and wonder whatthefuck has happened to the sport I used to love, methinks  

[Buoux 8C]

I disagree simon,

The matter could certainly have been handled in a bettter way, but at least this time unlike other similar matters, Markus was willing to put his name and reputation up on the line for something he obviously believed in. I also remember him saying to his opinion John hasnt climbed these problems, which is a rarety these days.
Also it gave John a chance to reply and give his side of the story, and hence the matter seemed to have been sorted out.

I also disagree that it has damaged Markus Bocks reputation and also made him look jealous, Maybe to British people it will have, but to most it seemed that Markus was truly worried that someone had claimed a substantial repeat to a problem of his home area which sounded doubtful. Hence he questioned Johns ascent.
I would have thought most Frankenjura climbers will respect Markus for what he did. Lets not forget that their is a huge climbing scene away from Britain that people also feel stongly about.


Lets also not forget that from a unbiased point of view Markus did have some valid points about his doubts of Johns ascents. But perhaps didnt express them in the best way.

I just hope this matter is sorted out and John will keep his reputation as been a world class climber, not only in Britain but throughout the rest of the world.

[a dense loner]

me

did said dude tell you why he didn't put the uncensored letters in?

bjorn

Don't really get it ... The dude, that'd be me, actually DID publish John's email, unaltered and all...

and your next post was

Ah, OK, that actually was in the email I got from Markus, but as I haven't had time to talk to Ben or Jerry (being on vacation mind you), I thought it wouldn't be right to mention their names...

why did you write the first line when it's not true, good intentions or not? you have just come on here telling it how it is n then changed your mind when someone has said they've seen something else. it is things like that that begin to form doubts. :? would you have come out with the second part if someone hadn't have pulled you up? i think not. it is beginning to seem like our european friends do not actually lie they just leave out important information!

[Björn]

Oh well, my mistake... not that I think it's such a significant one.

I must say I think some people are overreacting quite a bit. Maybe they should try to think a little bit further and stop being so bloody home blind (that goes for some Germans too). What I've tried to do is to give both parties an oportunity to tell their respective stories.
Are you aware of the fact that neither Markus nor John is complaining?
How'd you've handled this Mr. "Pantontino"? Please enlighten me!

PS. Here's the piece I chose not to publish, exclusively for ukbouldering:
"JERRY MOFFATT has seen him trying HUBBLE one week before JOHN said he climbed HUBBLE. JERRY doesn't believe him that he has done it, cause he has done the moves with ropepull" DS.

[ian h]

was j g not repeating hubble regularly when he was trying the brandenburg project?

 :?

jg writes on 8a.nu
"indeed I will very soon move on to concentrate on my work career."

now that would be a shame . surely not quit climbing.

anyway i have witnessed the guy climbing and there is 100% no doubt in my mind

[Nigel]

Yes Gaskins has repeated Hubble with ease during visits to try his Tor project. Quite a few people have seen him do this!

Bjorn, I think you made an error of judgement by publishing Markus' allegations. I understand that he's a bit put out that Gaskins did his problem in 3 days in a way that he regards as "impossible", but the thing to do would have been to consult Gaskins man to man. This would have been easy since he had John's phone number and obviously lives near the Frankenjura. In that way his more ridiculous "evidence" could have been cleared up and he might well be giving John the respect he fully deserves. By publishing his allegations you condone his cowardice and set a damaging precedent. Hopefully John's reputation won't be unfairly blotted.

Did you tell John that you were going to publish the allegations, and his reply?

[Bubba]

Lads, don't come down so hard on Björn - 8a.nu is one of the best sources for worldwide climbing information, and all he's done is publish contents of mails that have been sent in to his site - which isn't a huge crime...

Most of us on here believe the Gaskin's side of things because of his awesome  and flawless record of dispatching the hardest shit in the UK, but I can kinda sympathise with the Bockster, though in this case I reckon his doubts are misplaced.

[Björn]

Nigel,
yes, I told both John and Markus my decision to publish the story:
"The reason is that I believe it's better to make it public where you both can have a chance to respond and where everyone gets to see both sides. Otherwise the story would have leaked out anyway on various forums, message boards etc. and I think that would be worse as this would, no doubt, be heavily biased."
According to Markus, he tried to contact John to sort the thing out, but didn't get an answer.

[Johnny Brown]

I'd agree with that - I don't see he's done much wrong. Don't shoot the messenger :wink:

The way I see it, Gaskins has come out of this unscathed, whilst Bock looks bad. Now thats just a UK point of view, but what if Bjorn hadn't posted up the emails....

...all we'd know is that Gaskins had claimed some ascents, but that 'none of the locals believed him'...

Now personally I'd rather read both sides and make my own mind up. If allegations are to be made, its much better they are made in public where peeps have a chance to make a public reply. In some respects Bock deserves some respect for being prepared to do this... much better than the rumour mill I reckon. It looks like he was wrong and has paid the price... if he'd kept quiet it's unlikely any of us would have been well informed enough to form an objective opinion. The little side rumours that back things up are often easily sorted even if the main issue isn't - ie jerry the reliable witness or bird's nests in holds... giving us all a clearer view.

[Pantontino]

“Maybe it's wrong to make this public” – you're damn right!

http://www.8a.nu/site2/news.php?country=GLOBAL


Bjorn, you ask what I would have done – I've already stated the glaringly obvious option of dealing with this in private, before going public with a damaging (both to John, Bock and 8a.nu in the long run) splurge of tabloid nonsense. Pretty simple really. Why didn't you forward Markus' email directly to John, so that it could be sorted out? If Markus still wanted to go public after hearing John's defence, then I would have respected your decision to ‘hang the dirty washing up' a lot more.

These sort of accusations fly around the climbing scene all the time. I've lost count of the number of similar attacks that I've heard, yet I've never thought to myself, ‘I know, I'll stick this lot up on a website, create a load of bad feeling and burn as many bridges as I can, then worry about the consequences later.' I'm sick to death of this sort of bitchy back stabbing, jealous bullshit, and I certainly don't want to read any more of it on the internet. Maybe that's where we differ most.

Back to the case in hand:

I found your assertion that John was ‘happy' with the way things had been handled by 8a.nu. as a little suspicious, so I called him last night and he told me a rather different story.

It turns out that John is far from happy at the way he has been treated.

8a.nu implied that the first statement from John was a direct reply, at least that is how I read it – anyway, it wasn't. Bjorn merely informed John that Bock had doubted his ascents. John replied, stating roughly what had happened, but crucially unaware of the specific points that Bock had made. He had not seen the original email from Bock at this point.

It was only later when he saw it all published online that he was able to address the specific points and argument that Bock put forward. Thus his second reply is far more specific in it's critique of Bock's jumbled, inaccurate statement.

Clearly the way in which John's first reply was presented potentially undermined John's credibility (as it appears that he had not entirely addressed the detail of Bock's accusations) - whether this was done in an unwitting or calculated fashion is a moot point. Whatever the truth, you owe John an apology, both for publicly embarrassing him, and for compromising his position by not sending him Bock's e-mail.

All this bullshit clouds what has actually happened. John said he had a great time in FJ, met some great people and enjoyed the climbing. Interestingly he thought that Gossip would rate soft touch V14 – easier than ATHOIA, but in a completely different (i.e. much easier) league to Il Pirata.

PS: Richard, JB, I wonder how you would feel if you were on the receiving end of this sort of public attack? It's easy to say it's okay when you're not involved.

[Nigel]

Hear hear Simon. Agreed on every word.