[Tommy]

Scott's track record: (probably some small inaccuracies in this)

3 months climbing - seconded his mate on London Wall, but broke his finger thrashing his way up it.
9 months climbing - I met him and he was climbing about V6
1 yr - had passed me and did pretty much any V8 or so that I ever set indoors
1 yr and a bit - went down to Rubicon and thought he'd done The Press. Turns out he'd got the wrong problem and it was the sit-start!

1.8 yrs - Spends far to much time climbing inside and is eventually persuaded by me to tick a few things outside. Does the Terrace in about 5 or 6 goes and a load of 7bs and 7b+s I think in Mello.
2.5 yrs - Gets strong down the Works and spends another holiday in Mello. Ticks a load of 7b+ to 8a's in good times.
2.7 yrs - Finally gets his ass in gear to try a boulder comp abroad in a psyched atmosphere. Qualifies in 1st place at that Dutch Beach Boulder Comp (and yes, there were other wads competing)
2.9yrs - Again, persuaded that he needs to do something outside finally on the grit. You know the rest.

Training:

I can assure you he doesn't really do any. It pisses me off no end as I can never understand how he's got so much better than me without seeemingly doing the work! (Yes, you may laugh Scott!) I can still burn him off on the cracks though, so that's ok......... He's just very psyched and very good on simple power pulling problems.

Sorry Scott if you didn't want this stuff said - but I thought I'd do my final bit of defending. You'll all not get anything out him that you want really as he's very modest and not self-promotional. Why else do you think he avoids posting on here? Mostly I'd say if you every wanted proof then you'll probably not get it as he doesn't pander to other peoples' needs like that. As for it all seeming too good to be true, then I understand that as well, as us old codgers think it's impossible.

[Johnny Brown]

Frankly this guy is the biggest thing happening in british bouldering right now, you don't just fluke your way up 8b, its massive massive massive news

Dave's right. Flashing Brad Pit may be becoming routine, but doing the same on Deliverance and The Joker is unprecedented. And doing The Ace in a session is even more remarkable - he's burnt DG and Tyler off right there. Amazing.

ncidentally from my uninformed perspective, Paul B seemed to come out of nowhere when he climbed something pretty damn hard.

How naive, fiend. Paul came out of The School, which as we know from a previous discussion, has produced every world class climber britain has. Scotty didn't, therefore his achievements are in doubt. Could this be a whole new era for british climbing, with The Edge at its centre?

[andy popp]

Dave, adopting a position of trust does not mean you can never ask questions. It means simply that trust is the position from which you start. That has clearly not been the case with some people here who have started from a position of distrust. Clarity, historical accuracy etc. all still matter but the direction from which these issues are approached is significantly different.

Anyway, I'd rather be a dupe than a cynic.

[irish si]

Dave's right. Flashing Brad Pit may be becoming routine, but doing the same on Deliverance and The Joker is unprecedented. And doing The Ace in a session is even more remarkable - he's burnt DG and Tyler off right there. Amazing.

It is well done but that's a pretty ridiculous thing to say considering everything.

[nik at work]

Which bit is ridiculous? And why?
Just curious...

[Johnny Brown]

Presumably, because they both have done a lot more. But the point stands, and its a hell of a way to start.

[Doylo]

I have sympathy with both sides. On one hand i do believe that the benefit of the doubt should be extended to people in Scotts position (i.e. no one's heard of him). He is on course to becoming a very world class boulderer on these performances. Going from doing a couple of 8a's to flashing the joker and then doing the Ace next session is incredible and this hasn't been bettered by many people in our sport anywhere! Thus i can understand why some folk would like to see some proof of these ascents (they are that impressive!). Whatever unless Scott gives up rock climbing today the truth will out and hopefully we'll all be proud of our new British beast.

[Karl]

Scott's track record: (probably some small inaccuracies in this)

3 months climbing - seconded his mate on London Wall, but broke his finger thrashing his way up it.
9 months climbing - I met him and he was climbing about V6
1 yr - had passed me and did pretty much any V8 or so that I ever set indoors
1 yr and a bit - went down to Rubicon and thought he'd done The Press. Turns out he'd got the wrong problem and it was the sit-start!

1.8 yrs - Spends far to much time climbing inside and is eventually persuaded by me to tick a few things outside. Does the Terrace in about 5 or 6 goes and a load of 7bs and 7b+s I think in Mello.
2.5 yrs - Gets strong down the Works and spends another holiday in Mello. Ticks a load of 7b+ to 8a's in good times.
2.7 yrs - Finally gets his ass in gear to try a boulder comp abroad in a psyched atmosphere. Qualifies in 1st place at that Dutch Beach Boulder Comp (and yes, there were other wads competing)
2.9yrs - Again, persuaded that he needs to do something outside finally on the grit. You know the rest.

Training:

I can assure you he doesn't really do any. It pisses me off no end as I can never understand how he's got so much better than me without seeemingly doing the work! (Yes, you may laugh Scott!) I can still burn him off on the cracks though, so that's ok......... He's just very psyched and very good on simple power pulling problems.

Sorry Scott if you didn't want this stuff said - but I thought I'd do my final bit of defending. You'll all not get anything out him that you want really as he's very modest and not self-promotional. Why else do you think he avoids posting on here? Mostly I'd say if you every wanted proof then you'll probably not get it as he doesn't pander to other peoples' needs like that. As for it all seeming too good to be true, then I understand that as well, as us old codgers think it's impossible.

Awesome Tom. Summed up pretty well, you missed the part about him eating Soreen to crush these boulders.
Waddage to you Scott! 

[abarro81]

Well done Scott - big tings.
To add my 2ps worth to the debate about proof - I think Dave said it well, coming from relatively nowhere to this in a short time is likely to get people interested in proof. Would be ace (sorry) to see the pics. In the interests of disclosure, who was spotting? Anyone who doesn't like me asking can feel free to punter me for that.

[Jim]

Unfortunately its the liars of yesteryear that have created this enviroment.
Most of us our very passionate about climbing and want the history book to be correct.

Anyway, bon effort beast, whats next on the winter tick list? Voyager no doubt

[chappers]

1.8 yrs - Spends far to much time climbing inside and is eventually persuaded by me to tick a few things outside.

2.5 yrs - Gets strong down the Works.

Training:
I can assure you he doesn't really do any.

 

great effort ticking the ace. well done.

[Moo]

Well done Scott.

Ignore the naysayers they are just green with envy.

[dave]

what naysayers?

[Sloper]

I think that the presumption should be to take climbers on trust and that one should only move from that presumption when there are grounds to do so, suddent and substantial increases in performance are not grounds, a lack of knowledge about the performer is not grounds, a lack of belief is not grounds.

If I claimed to have dispatched a font 7c in a session people would be right to ask for some evidence since at the moment I'm a fat weak punter (in other words my claim would be inconsistent with the other available evidence).

If I claimed to have climbed a font 6c when it was hosing it down and after a session in the Grouse people would be right to ask for evidence, not because I'm incapable of flashing font 6c problems (well at least at the works, in Font it's just a little different ) but because of the weather, the beer, the fact it was dark etc.

If I claimed a font 7a in font and a random student from london asked for evidence because he doesn't know me, that's in effect calling someone a liar with no good reason.

So in short, unless anyone has good grounds for doubting the validity of the claims I think the only mature response is f----k me good effort or if you're not up for that, well of course I could do that too but for my sore elbow etc

[a dense loner]

You saying he's a beast is just the same as Drew a few posts back who said Scott was a beast and you just totally discounted him

he didn't say scott was a beast, he said his mate who knows scott is a beast and he believes him

it's strange how at 2.5 yrs scott gets strong at the works, this doesn't tally with anything i've heard from people who frequent the works, by that i mean people who actually know strength when they see it

thanks for taking the time to reply scott, all that was asked for was the name of your spotter

If I claimed a font 7a in font and a random student from london asked for evidence because he doesn't know me, that's in effect calling someone a liar with no good reason.

maybe, however asking him to validate his ascent of an 8b in a session when there is no precedant for this is somewhat different
 

[carlisle slapper]

Hey Scott effort on crimping out the finest card in the pack, sounds like it wasn't too bad for you which is cool. i don't usually post here but these guys have smelt blood and you need to stop the rot.

firstly: "  I'm not really down with the whole promoting myself thing"  yes you are, but your about as tactful as Boris Johnson. Anyone who opens up a RANKED 8a.nu scorecard is pretty certain to get noticed, by doing this you effectively made the hole you now find yourself in with these people barking PROOF at you. I like your style of taking a sledge hammer to people in Englands preconceptions of what is supposed to be hard. you are proof that standards are moving on and that hard training can pay off. All these people are asking is to see a glimpse of the muscle that dealt this mighty hammer blow to such a revered font 8b.

You have pictures & you also have a UKC picture account with loads of pictures on already? 1+1 = ? that should shut them up for a bit (avoid photoshop).
you also used to post frequently on this forum so even just tell them a bit about your send, who was there? how did your session pan out? what sequence you used etc (a mate of mine recently went RH top).

if you can't be arsed with doing this then i'd sack your scorecard off and join the boulderers out there just doing it for the hell of it. but whilst you have both you are effectively  entering a card game without showing your hand (no puns). i'm sure your just keen to show off your new found beastly power to mates and didn't think it'd spiral out of control, unfortunately you climb in the peak and everytime anyone does anything the queen and all her corgis must be informed else you will be scalded.

The speed of your ascent is awesome, and by your mate Liam's blog doing it from 4-9ish in the morning (after cycling in?)with just you there (?) is a level of psyche that i can only hope to achieve. whether you intended it or not you're in the spotlight, somewhere i'll never be.  I look forward to bumping into you out and about on the boulders and stealing some of that psyche, there's shit all chance of me getting up at 4 in the morning though.
in bocca a lupo

[Sloper]

So the hearsay that he's a beast doesn't support him but the hearsay that you conisder allows you to properly doubt his claim?

For me the grade isn't really an issue, you either have grounds for casting doubt or you don't.  In my view no one has posited anything that would give grounds to doubt the claim, it's a bit like saying Usaine Bolt is on drugs because of his rapid improvement in the 100m.

if some one were to do an 8b in a session I'd say that the Ace was a prime candidate.  

If anyone has gronds to doubt the claim ket them say so

[sasscotty]

OK sorry guys. Been at work where there seems to be a lack of internet. Once again thanks to all those giving me positive comments, really appreciate it.
I put a post on UKC a while ago asking for a lift out to the peak and got an email from a spanish guy (Marcos) and I have been climbing almost every day with him recently. he has been in england since august i think, just climbing! you may have met him and his friends if you go down to raven tor a lot. Also he has been doing a lot of sleeping at crags and in car parks   I just wish all the doubt would just stop

[sasscotty]

  forgot to say, it was him and and his crew that shifted pads around and spotted and stuff.

[nik at work]

At the risk of repeating myself Dense. Exactly.

Scott(beast) --- known by Drews mate who says he's a beast --- known by Drew who believes his mate (3 steps)

Paul (beast) --- known by Dense who says he's a beast --- known by Fiend who believes Dense (3 steps)

Drew is a fool for believing his mate about someone Drew doesn't know yet Fiend should believe Dense about someone Fiend doesn't know? Can you see it yet?

And in your last post you call in anonymous friends who "actually know strength when they see it" (whatever that even means?) to back up your doubts, despite pouring scorn on Drews unknown friend. Double standard? This is stupid shit stirring rumour mongering I'm afraid.

Back to the main point:
Once again an amazing performance Scott I (amongst with everyone else) would love to see some photos.

[The Sausage]

Hi all, didn't want to wade into this but it's getting a bit sour...
...if, as Dobbin (and others) say, the 'truth will out', then let's give it a bit more time, rather than asking for instant gratification of our (obviously cynical) questions. As it stands, this young man who has had an amazing week, is probably wishing he'd never bothered. It just seems such a shame to jump to doubts so quickly, and piss on the fire.

Scott, try not to take it too personally (not easy I'm sure). It's a reflection on your amazing achievements that it's created such a stir.

[a dense loner]

no nik you are reading it all wrong i'm afraid.
what was said by drew, as i pointed out above, was that his friend was a beast. this friend, the beast, knows scott. this friend, the beast, said he believes scott. at no point does it say that scott is a beast. sorry for being pedantic but if you're going to try and point out any inaccuracies in what i say at least do it when i'm being inaccurate and not on something you have misread. can you see it yet?

i didn't want to bring climbers down the wall into it since that is also a pathetic argument, but we have had a couple of pages talking about how strong he is, however not everyone thinks he's strong. like i said i have never seen him climb

i have nothing against scott at all, and anyone who thinks i have is mistaken.
all i, and others, wanted was a bit of proof. i don't think this is much to ask or expect.
the sausage is exactly right in his last line.

sloper are you really a lawyer? i hope i never get into trouble

[Fiend]

i'm sorry fiend but your post on paul b coming from out of nowhere is not true. maybe you didn't know of him

Well I'd hoped I'd made it clear...

Incidentally from my uninformed perspective, Paul B seemed to come out of nowhere when he climbed something pretty damn hard. How things seem from the outside and all...

Further to that nik is saying what I would have said.

However there was another point that I could have been making with this: That of inspiration and SYKE. I think it can be possible for someone to come out of relative or perceived or even actual nowhere and suddenly climb something a lot harder because they are totally inspired to go from putting 90% effort in to 120% effort in. Like however strong Paul was to those in the know he wasn't exactly a household name until he got SYKED enough to do Voyager.

In my experience the inspiration counts for a lot in terms of how well you're going to climb.

[nik at work]

God this is fucking stupid but hey ho.
Here's the quote:
For what it's worth, a friend of mine knows Scotty, and he says he will be telling the truth, and he's a fucking beast, so I am convinced.

It could be read either as:
For what it's worth, a friend of mine knows Scotty, and he says "he will be telling the truth", and he's a fucking beast, so I am convinced.

Or as:
For what it's worth, a friend of mine knows Scotty, and he says "he will be telling the truth, and he's a fucking beast", so I am convinced.

It's not clear, a limitation of the medium I'm afraid. I'd tend to think the second option makes more sense as how does the beastliness of this middle-man friend affect his quality as a source? You obviously think the first option is the intended meaning. What me mis-read something? Well I do apologise, ho-hum...

It actually makes no difference to my point. When I label Scott and Paul as beasts that is simply to highlight that they are the same link in the chain. I'd assume anyone who can get up the Ace/Voyager would satisfy anybodys definition of a beast?

You don't know him and have never seen him climb yet you think flinging second hand accusations of weakness will encourage him to satisfy your desire for evidence. Wierd. If I call you semi-literate will you become my pen-friend?

[andy popp]

Thank you Nik, for being a voice of reason. Its obvious which meaning Drew intended. Dense, stop being so bloody obtuse.