[dave]

I watch many people 'cheating' (eg, not starting from sitting, having an extra coupla' goes when nobody's looking, not matching the finishing hold, using 'extra' holds, and so on) and then remember to alter their scores when I tot up the results.

good stuff - glad to see fairness prevails. I know local fun comps are supposed to be lighthearted but it always annoys me when people take the piss in what are events ultimatley governed my trust. For example a few years back i used to do the local comps at a wall, but I stopped going after seeing the wall manager/problem-setter going around with their mates in the comp showing them the sequences to all the hard problems. Kinda spoilt it for me after that.

[a dense loner]

cheers for making that quite clear percy.

i wasn't stood between sam and another person who wishes to remain nameless, because he doesn't believe in internet banter, when you came in at night saying "you'll never guess what happened this afternoon" to which sam replied "what" and then you replied with "i had to ask ben heason to leave the comp for cheating", then having a 5 minute discussion with the 3 of us before wandering off to tell someone else. then a few minutes later someone off this forum wandered over to us saying have you heard and we all discussed it.

i posted my original point of him being disqualified on dec 7th. this is over 2 months ago. you could have posted instantaneously that this was nonsense. matt could also have posted. however time marches on and people forget...

i spoke to sam about this today at stanage and he remembers the incident. i said i wouldn't mention him to which he replied "i don't give a fuck. why would he say it and then deny it. it's ok to bitch in the pub or at the crag but not when it comes down to it? fuck it" or words to that effect.

so palomides my reasoning was not faulty at all. your logic was flawed at "whoever i discussed the incident with was lying, mistaken or a raving fantasist" since the person "we" discussed the incident with was percy.

i would agree ben has come out in a better light than people like rich and james, who have been noticable in their absence from further postings. to people who have no concept of such things i would wonder why this is? you could ponder that they have no proof, that they were totally mistaken, that they wanted some attention etc. you could also ponder that their sponsors have asked them not to say anything else, since in-fighting doesn't sell. you could also ponder that they don't care anymore, since their efforts have largely fallen on deaf ears. the climbing community doesn't want to know, it wants to believe what is fed to them.

i have kept the top half civil because this is what actually happened and the bottom paragraph is based on my own thoughts

[Palomides]

Nope, you're still not in a position to say you know what happened, as you still didn't witness it first hand.

You are in a position to say that you know what you were told. But that's a big difference. You are a secondary source of information (alright - a corroborated secondary source as your mates have the same memory).

The primary source is the guy who told you. And as he's now strongly disagreeing with your version of events, unless you have independant information from someone else who was there, then it's all fucked up.

Of course, there remain the vanishingly small possibilities that you and your mates all had a consensus hallucination, or that one or more people involved have had their memories tampered with by Manuchurian Candidate-style brainwashing, or that it wasn't Percy who told you, but Tom Cruise in a rubber face mask.
But not knowing the levels of drug use amongst anyone involved, or the level of cold-war deviousness/paranoia exhibited by the sponsors, then those frankly much more interesting possibilites have to be discounted. How disappointing.

[a dense loner]

we only know what we are told. i posted originally because it did not go down the line, it did not have time to reach chinese whispers since i heard first hand that he was asked to leave by the guy who asked him to leave. i can't be any clearer than that. changing of stories 2 months after the fact is exactly that, it's like traversing off at the break

for those of you who think that i have made this up for something to do just insert the word "allegedly" at various points

[Paz]

That was all pretty long for you dense ;-) but thanks for posting it.  

So help me out here, anyone who's an expert on solo aiding - how do you do pendulums?  You have to take gear right (a crab minimum), and pendulum off that with the rope tied doubly through it. Then while suitably established at the destination (ideally a ledge but e.g. using more gear which you've brought with you) you untie any knots and possibly unclip/ take yersen off belay, then pull the end through.  And presumably whilst there coil the rope and stash it on your back.  Then carry on.  Does Andy Kirkpatrick post on here?

[irish si]

any light shed on this?

[Paz]

any light shed on this?

I don't know I wasn't there ;-).  

also soloed Cryptic Crossword (E3 5c). However, Twenty-one and the free version of Ujarak are, almost certainly, the hardest, major, free rock-climbs in Greenland to date..... they repeated Cryptic Crossword, .... were able to make the ascent entirely without aid, free climbing the tension traverse/rappel at E3 5c,

see:
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:Uh-fOyo08TEJ:www.planetfear.net/climbing/highmountainmag/mountaininfo/october2004/mtninfooct2004.htm+cryptic+crossword+E3&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=4
Still, you'd be mad to set off on your own wouldn't you?  
Out of interest is there another way down from the top of this route for
those of us who don't like 60m abseils?  

Now, what were points 2 and 3 again?