GripBoard Rule #4

[Sybersnott]

I remember (not so long ago) when the DIFW record was.... five feet!!!!

YEAH, five feet. Wow, this was a great accomplishment.

Then we have someone who I've never heard of before post that the DIFW was "broken" by himself by a record of 72 feet. No pics or videos of the event. Oh, and BTW... he got injured at the end of it (which means it WON'T be duplicated anytime soon). Does something stink around here???

I don't know Joel Sward personally.... he's probably a great guy and strong as hell to do that - BUT A RULE IS A RULE. I know if I were to do something like that, I'd be sure to get the pics snapping and the video rolling. He didn't; no excuses - PROOF IS NEEDED.

I know if I did it and then posted that I did it WITHOUT the proof, they'd laugh me right off this forum. He shouldn't be treated any differently.

[Tom of Iowa2]

Errrrrr...ahhhh.Snott,I'm sure this is just a misunderstanding...

Sward beat his OWN record of 48 feet...which he has provided proof of.

The 48 feet was on tape and very conclusive.In fact in the tape it appeared that he could have kept going...there was what looked like a 700lb tire in the way.

Again,He broke his own record of 48 feet.

This guy is a beast and i don't for one moment think he is 'fibbing'.There were other witnesses also......of the 72 ft. walk.

Edited November 2, 2003 by Tom of Iowa2

[Rob Vigeant]

If he walked as fast as Jeff he would've gone 72ft in approximately 20 seconds his first RECORD is 48ft in approximately 16 seconds.

[CMunger]

I wholeheartedly agree that proof is needed for records. The first was pre-meditated, cameras on hand, then this Saturday was a "We just got done log pressing, let's try the inches before farmer's walk" No fanfare, no nothing. it was a "Joel's picking up the inches. let's move this yoke quick so he won't have to drop early." He did it, we measured, that's what he did. And then when we were doing Farmer's Walk he and Ostlund were going crazy weight, and he popped or tore somethign in his forearm, and didn't get to flip the tires. That's all there was to it. I'm sure he'll be back, and I'm sure he'll do it again. So, you can choose not to acknowledge the 70+ walk (frankly I think the turn screws up any semblence of precision anyways), but it still happened.

[Sybersnott]

Tom,

He broke his OWN record by 24 feet - and yet there were multiple witnesses around and NOBODY with a camera or video?? Am I missing something??

Yes the first record (48 feet) is documented, but the record-breaker (72 feet) isn't.... and that's what I'm calling into question.

[Tom of Iowa2]

I know if I did it and then posted that I did it WITHOUT the proof, they'd laugh me right off this forum. He shouldn't be treated any differently.

Well(and I'm not coming down on you)I was replying more to 'this' part of your post.

Yes You and i would get laughed off the forum.

Joel Sward,yes a complete unknown and an absolute 'newbie'broke his own record of 48feet....however what he did in the first place(the 48 ft.double Farmers walk)was so far off the scale-and so far above anything ANYBODY had ever done in HISTORY(EVER)that Joels second accomplishment of 72 feet..should not come as much of a suprise....in other words-yes-it needs proof to be a record (in the minds of some)but NO he won't get lauged off the forum.What he says and what you or I claim are not quite the same thing.....

Actually it's the casualness of his record breaking feat that IMPRESSES me....and perhaps ruffles some feathers???

[CMunger]

Tom,

He broke his OWN record by 24 feet - and yet there were multiple witnesses around and NOBODY with a camera or video??  Am I missing something??

Yes the first record (48 feet) is documented, but the record-breaker (72 feet) isn't.... and that's what I'm calling into question.

Yeah, nobody had a camera. We were just at strongman training. The saturday before BC & Makousky brought cameras cuz Bissonette was gonna try to break his prior record. This saturday (as I said in my prior post) had no such fanfare or premedititation. Should a person have a camera on them every time they touch a training implement? I look at it as a report, not a claim, but I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

Tom: I hear ya, I'm kinda jaded to it cuz I was there, so while it's certainly impressive, it seems like jsut another 'heavier than I can lift' object being lifted (too much of that goes on ).

Edited November 2, 2003 by CMunger

[Bill Piche]

So, you can choose not to acknowledge the 70+ walk (frankly I think the turn screws up any semblence of precision anyways), but it still happened.

Ok, I am tired of saying this. Proof is needed so all hell doesn't break lose. We instituted (now I remember!) this rule after someone would come on here and post and then bickering would result and arguing. Guess what resulted? The thread being deleted or closed.

In Joel's case, I have NO DOUBT myself he did it. However, to be consisent with the RULE, I had to lock it. At first, I did not. But, then realized I had to otherwise things would get fuzzy and you might as well not have the rule.

[Rick Browne]

It seems the smoke has cleared concerning Rule #4. It looms large and

governs the GripBoard as it should. Hopefully all members will have learned

from todays' thread. If that has happened, then all is good.

If an exciting grip event is witnessed and one happens to catch it on video or

pics and posts it here, then that is great and the rule #4 format is met.

If no video or pics can be presented, then one will just have to bite the bullet

and catch it the next time.

W-grip administers the GripBoard with fairness and the right pressure of

our rule enforcements. I have seen the "Chaos" created here before rules

were implemented and it was not a pretty sight.

Let's path forward and keep the GripBoard the best on the internet and let

good "Grip" roll.

Thanks to all

[CMunger]

Frankly, as this has gone on, I am becoming even more of a believer.

[supersqueeze]

The standard of proof is good, however sometimes people demand proof with overly harsh and attacking words. I totally understand why some poeple have been offended. Proof is neccessary, attacks are not. Just my opinion.

Mike M.

[Bill Piche]

The standard of proof is good, however sometimes people demand proof with overly harsh and attacking words. I totally understand why some poeple have been offended. Proof is neccessary, attacks are not. Just my opinion.

Mike M.

Since this board has all posts for probably 2 years, I would like to see such an example of overly harsh and attacking words. I am not sure it exists since the lock rule was enacted.

That was the point of the rule. To avoid such things.

[bseedot]

I'll never miss a workout again.

BC.

[JeffPeterson]

Snott, not uncommon to train with out a camera pointed at yourself. Not unbelievable a canera wasn't there. He has more important things to worry about, building strength, then appeasing you with a picture.

The rule is good., very good. But there are exceptions to every rule. Let's say Mark Henry is doing some PR for wrestling at the mall of america. I see him and hand him a gripper, I do often have one or two on me, and he gets down there on my SE or #4. Should I not share this world class feat with you guys just because I carry grippers not cameras around with me? Would people rather not know about this or know about it and not have a picture?

Not the best example maybe but a reasonable person sees what I mean. Remember I said a reasonable person.

[Rick Browne]

Don`t ya just love it!! Only in America will individuals persue the means

to "Beat the System"

Cracks me the fawk-up

[The Mac]

I thought the rule in question was rule #5 - oh dear, I've been misleading people with my posts throughout the years...

As for needing video proof, I think the idea is the way to go. Some years ago, there was a swimming meet in either China or Hungary (I believe it was Hungary) in which athletes posted times which got them qualified to compete in the major championships for that year. The records of the meet were properly signed off and verified by the correct judges etc - but apparently the whole meet NEVER HAPPENED. Make of that what you will and it's relevance to this thread. As video is now common (at least in developed countries) I think that an "official" record claim should be accompanied with video evidence.

As for discussing "claims" of feats without video proof (even including Joel Sward's new Inch distance), perhaps a new Sub-Forum (if there is space) would be the appropriate place; if not, then these things could be discussed on the Goerner forum.

[Tom Page]

Snott, not uncommon to train with out a camera pointed at yourself. Not unbelievable a canera wasn't there. He has more important things to worry about, building strength, then appeasing you with a picture.

The rule is good., very good. But there are exceptions to every rule. Let's say Mark Henry is doing some PR for wrestling at the mall of america. I see him and hand him a gripper, I do often have one or two on me, and he gets down there on my SE or #4. Should I not share this world class feat with you guys just because I carry grippers not cameras around with me? Would people rather not know about this or know about it and not have a picture?

Not the best example maybe but a reasonable person sees what I mean. Remember I said a reasonable person.

I agree with Jeff. Just do not call it a record though. This forum exsist's for discussion of feats of strength. It is to bad we can not talk about certain events just because there was no camera there. It is also to bad that we need a rule like that to prevent bickering.

[Bill Piche]

Snott, not uncommon to train with out a camera pointed at yourself. Not unbelievable a canera wasn't there. He has more important things to worry about, building strength, then appeasing you with a picture.

The rule is good., very good. But there are exceptions to every rule. Let's say Mark Henry is doing some PR for wrestling at the mall of america. I see him and hand him a gripper, I do often have one or two on me, and he gets down there on my SE or #4. Should I not share this world class feat with you guys just because I carry grippers not cameras around with me? Would people rather not know about this or know about it and not have a picture?

Not the best example maybe but a reasonable person sees what I mean. Remember I said a reasonable person.

I agree with Jeff. Just do not call it a record though. This forum exsist's for discussion of feats of strength. It is to bad we can not talk about certain events just because there was no camera there. It is also to bad that we need a rule like that to prevent bickering.

They do get discussed.

I can manage this with some good judgement on my part. That is, allowing some discussion to take place before locking. A "delay" so to speak. This will then allow some discussion and will also nip letting it drag out until I would be forced to lock it.

I've been doing it already actually.

[Rick Browne]

I like to add that the GripBoard is 99.9% Troll free!! ( a few in the past were

booted real quick).

All is good in the "House"

[ChrisJames]

What pissed me off Bearcat, wasn't the fact that it was locked but the "no proof" when i was standing 4 feet away from them and the nails were provided by me and Randy Strossen and in my eyes that insinuates that you don't believe me.

What have i to gain from the HOLLES bending a Red.

I agree with the video or pictures for anyone claiming a record but i was only sharing something with the board because i thought they would be interested thats all.Things do happen and exist even though its not on tape.

[Bearcat 74]

Yes Chris I am aware that things exist that are not on tape. Do I belive that Joel took the Inch's for the 70ft walk, shoot yeah. But, due to rule #4 it is supposed to be locked. Since they can do this stuff as easy as butter, get a video camera we would love to see it. This rule has been here for a long time I think, so this should've been no surprise.

I see what you are saying now about someone coming here and claiming and you posting. If I were to claim a #4 close with no proof, that should be locked, but if Pat or Steve posts that they have seen me do it then it shouldn't because they are sharing info. That works out well until someone says, awww, bullshit if he did it then he should've had pics or a video. Then the fight is back on between everyone, half saying they belive me on my word, the other half not because I have no proof.

[suterp]

Requiring proof to be listed on the records board makes sense.  Requiring proof just to talk about something you did or saw seems silly.

The other day my nephew claimed that a guy in his high school power cleaned 560 pounds.  I said that's not possible, but he insisted it happened, so I let it go.  It would have been kind of anal of me to say "I refuse to discuss world class feats unless their is proper proof such as video and a credible witness".

So it should be ok to express our doubts and disbeliefs without people being offended. This way is better, or it would quickly turn ugly as it has in the past. There are good reasons for having rules around here.

Now that the rule has been explained, I think I understand it and actually agree with it.

In the past, when a thread was locked I always saw it as a slap on the wrist of the person who posted. Now I see it more as a courtesy to the poster to prevent others from calling bullshit and starting an argument.

Thanks to all for the explanations.

[bseedot]

Mac- I thought it used to be Rule #5 too.

Let's remember that this rule does not only benefit us today, but all those future gripsters who will one day pick up a gripper or a Blob or an Inch replica. In fifty years, when Joel Sward is no longer doing Inch farmer's walks and the Holle's aren't closing #4's and bending Red nails we'll be a bunch of old farts telling the younger genrations of all the feats we witnessed. Why in the world would they believe us just because we say it is so? Just as we try to piece together bits of information of feats that happened fifty years ago to determine their truth or falsity, wouldn't it just be easier to tell the young bucks to lookat the pictures and video clips of the feats?

We have the capability to largely eliminate doubt on the feats being done today. Why not embrace that so we can move beyond bitching about whether something was done or not? I would rather give praise and discuss how others might be able to work toward accomplishing a given feat than argue about whether or not it was done in the first place.

Knowing what we now know about belief vs. documentation let's never let another Kinney situation arise. As Roark has said over and over belief does not constitute proof.

Here's why documentation is needed... when Joel set the DIFW record of 48.8 feet I had originally written 48'8". Somewhere on Jeff B.'s tape measure it switches from inches to decimals and it was in looking at the pictures after I'd returned home that I noticed this. Without a picture of the feat this oversight would have been lost forever. Maybe it's not a big deal but the point is that 48'8" is not the truth. Documentation allows us to demonstrate the truth as closely as possible. So is Joel's most recent DIFW 72'9" or is it 72.9 feet? Documentation would clear this up and that's the point of providing it- to approximate the truth as closely as possible.

BC.

[Guest chips]

VIDEO'S & PICTURES = RECORDS

20 WITNESSES ALL AGREEING,= CLAIM

[Clay Edgin]

I think having at least one credible witness (i.e., a member of the gripboard or other icon of iron like Brookfield) is sufficient, but that's just me. The pictures and video are icing on the cake.

But it's Wannagrip's party, so I'll eat whatever flavor cake is being served.

(don't mind the cake references - we had baby girl's first b-day party yesterday and you wouldn't imagine how much cake is left over)