New Gwr record confirmed

[palkanetoijala31]

Well i dont know if steven has seen it yet but there is a new record confirmed of 17h 12m 43s i now am in the catergory of only 3 others to lose a record and beat it.

[Soup Dragon]

i now am in the catergory of only 3 others to lose a record and beat it.

I still reckon myself, Phillip & Jamie were robbed of this honour by two Guinness decisions.
1. not to accept our perfectly legal time set on a Saturday when all stations were open.
2. allowing a time of slower than 18h10m to be officially confirmed as the record after ELL closure.

The target is now very tough, I reckon you can only afford one or two minor delays during the whole day to have a chance of beating the new record. Guinness are still being very non-commital over the new configuration and if they will accept as a new time.

[palkanetoijala31]

i now am in the catergory of only 3 others to lose a record and beat it.

I still reckon myself, Phillip & Jamie were robbed of this honour by two Guinness decisions.
1. not to accept our perfectly legal time set on a Saturday when all stations were open.
2. allowing a time of slower than 18h10m to be officially confirmed as the record after ELL closure.

The target is now very tough, I reckon you can only afford one or two minor delays during the whole day to have a chance of beating the new record. Guinness are still being very non-commital over the new configuration and if they will accept as a new time.

Hmm yes i forgot about number 2 if Karahan had a few drinks last night then u soon know the answer to 270 im sure he has Guinness World records on speed dial.

[joy54]

When I spoke to them last they said they wouldn't be opening a new category but would look at claims which were over the record to see how much Wood Lane opening affected them. So if you were maybe 5 minutes away from the record you still may have a chance depending on how long you stopped at Wood Lane for and did that wait then make you just miss a Piccadilly.

[palkanetoijala31]

Does that also count if pretend stopping at Wood Lane say it cost u 20 secs makes u miss a Ken o train by 10 secs which holds u up for 17m so u miss world record by 13m

[joy54]

Does that also count if pretend stopping at Wood Lane say it cost u 20 secs makes u miss a Ken o train by 10 secs which holds u up for 17m so u miss world record by 13m

Not from what the sounds of what I heard, they seemed to be talking about direct delays, not indirect.

I think you could take this to extremes. If you started at HT5 and then did Wood Lane early in the day which caused a succession of delays you otherwise would of missed and otherwise would of got the record. I reckon if you missed the record by 20 seconds and the train stopped at Wood Lane for 25 seconds that would seem like a strong case to me. But missing it by 30 minutes and claiming Wood Lane opening caused you to not break the record seems ridiculous to me (but then again I do have a vested interest )

[Starkey7]

This could be very silly. You could make a good case for running to Olympia from Hammersmith (H+C), and if you just miss a District out of Olympia then surely they'd have to take that into account.

[joy54]

This could be very silly. You could make a good case for running to Olympia from Hammersmith (H+C), and if you just miss a District out of Olympia then surely they'd have to take that into account.

I suppose the thing you have to prove is that you would of broken the record if you had of caught the train. But how are we meant to prove which trains run further down the line and if they got into a station at a particular time? I suppose you could make a Freedom of Information request for the information from TfL?

[palkanetoijala31]

From our timings sheet of September 26th attempt missing that ken o train held us up by 14 mins and we would have caught the earlier t4 train so seconds at the end would have decided it but im not going to pursue it too busy planning my drinking route.