UKC

Logbook veracity

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
In response to a significant ascent reported today I decided to look up that climb in the logbooks. I discover that it was recently ascended by an unknown prodigy in interesting style who - over the last few days - has logged some landmark climbs with some of the legends of climbing history. I stand to be corrected but I smell a rat - not a cragrat.
 Babika 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Without further details it's difficult to know what your point is?
Logbooks are a personal record. If someone wants to lie they are really only kidding themself.
1
In reply to Babika:
Look up Hubble and its recent ascent then follow the ascendent.

Post edited at 20:11
 ashtond6 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Regular sherlock Holmes
In reply to ashtond6:
Wow - thanks for the comparison to one of the great mythical forensic investigators, but my interest was curiosity rather than prosecutory. I wanted to know 'Who has climbed Hubble?' So how do I find out this information - clearly UKC is not the only source nor it seems is it reliable. Historians really care about the truth and it seems that in this case it is difficult to find. A digression here if you are not engaged by 'History'. There is a great quote whose source I can't identify but it goes 'History does not only exist to record the past, more importantly it informs the future' To look for new inspiration we can usefully refer to the past and it is important that we know just what happened.
So who holds the reliable cachet of information about Hubble - who climbed it & when?
I have no problem with someone who wants to fantasise about their climbing achievements or just have a bit of fun but how do we differentiate it from reality?
PS I have no ambitions for Hubble - it is about 10 grades above my level but I do value the facts.
Post edited at 21:11
2
 DerwentDiluted 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

> it was recently ascended by an unknown prodigy in interesting style

River a bit high is it?
 Rob Parsons 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

> ... So how do I find out this information - clearly UKC is not the only source nor it seems is it reliable ...

That's your bottom line, isn't it? This site can be useful, but it's also just A.N.Other site on the Internet.

How have we resolved questions like the one you've posed in the past? Who has *ever* held definitive records? And for which routes?

1
In reply to Rob Parsons:
That is part of my point - I just looked up 'Hubble climb' in Google and there were lots of references to it but I still haven't got a list of ascentionists. I recall that last year UKC ran a series of features about Indian Face which did list the successes so where they compile that list from? Perhaps I should just trust to climbing folklore.
 Jamie B 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

It happens - you do get fantasists on here as well as elsewhere claiming all sorts of things. In this instance however the entries are too puerile to be anything other than bored piss-taking. I suggest that the moderators simply delete all of this guy's logged climbs.
 Michael Hood 31 May 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
There was a similar ascent recently that was then deleted by Alan James. I think the usual scenario is someone leaves themselves logged on and their "mates" get onto the account and exaggerate their climbing achievements

Can't remember what the phrase is for this kind of behaviour.
Post edited at 21:46
 Brass Nipples 01 Jun 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Very badly photoshopped profile pic as well.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe: If you're going to be so vague then your post is kind of pointless. What climb, and which person?

2
 Chris Sansum 01 Jun 2016
In reply to Frank the Husky:

Pretty easy to work out from his second post on this thread!

Wonder whether we will see a string of 'for sale' ads appearing in the name of jackyshaw in the next few days?

Andy Gamisou 01 Jun 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
I'm a bit surprised Hubble isn't in wikipedia (as a climb - plenty of other stuff on unimportant trivia like Edwin Hubble and telescopes ). Plenty of other iconic routes have their own wikipedia page listing first ascensionists (Action Directe has, for example).
Post edited at 05:15
 GarethSL 01 Jun 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I remember a thread like this year's ago when someone was logging Rhapsody. Funny thing is that it's only in one logbook but there's 4 votes for the starts and I guess the same number of votes for the grading... Who could it be!
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
For Hubble ascentionists, watch one of ben's recent videos, he lists them in order during the interview. I think it's the one where he's interviewed in the new School Room.
I guess we have to review a wider range of media than just the printed word. I think in the video, Malcolm Smith is working one of the boards, so that's one on your list. 'Il Pirata', one of the 'Violent New Breed' is another, and I guess Alex Megos hasn't recorded his ascent on UKC.....
Post edited at 07:33
 AlanLittle 01 Jun 2016
In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

> Hubble ascentionists

Off the top of my head Moon, Smith, Gaskins, Dunning, McClure ... Megos

None of them afaik ukc logbook users.

Votes on the ukc logbook for the grade of Hubble: 26.

Hubble (9a)


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...