I'm apologise if I'm asking an odd question: but if the record is reaching a threshold, is that a problem in the first place? I only ask because, personally I don't see it as such, and just presumed that other forum members didn't either. However I'm fully aware that I've not yet attempted the full record, and thus am not as qualified as many to speak on this issue.
But if you don't mind, I'd just like to explain my thoughts on this by doing what I quite often do and relating this example to sport, as it is something that I feel I know a little more about. Thus it could be said that there are many sporting world records that have stood for far greater expanses of time than Andi's current tube challenge GWR, yet this has not stopped other sportsmen and women still trying to break the world record for their discipline in the mean time. Perhaps the classic example is the Men's Outdoor Long Jump World Record in Athletics, that was set in 1935 by Jesse Owens and was not beaten again until 1960 by Ralph Boston, who snipped 8cm off Owen's record. This was seen as staggering in itself as it was thought that Owen's world record would never be beaten, yet this was far superseded by how Boston's original record was beaten no less than 7 times in the next 7 years! The record grew by a further 14cm in this time after Igor Ter-Ovanesyan's record which was the last mark in this 7 year succession. But a year later in the 1968 Bob Beamom took a staggering 55cm off Ter-Ovanesyan's record: a world record that stood until 1991 when Mike Powell jumped just 5cm further. Powell's 1991 world record still stands today in 2009, while Beaman's 1968 jump is still the 2nd furthest of all time.
At any of these times where the record could have been described as "reaching a plateau" thanks to how it had not been broken for a great period of time, the IAAF (Athletics' World Governing Body) could have cancelled the competition entirely on the grounds of it becoming a stagnant sport. Yet it didn't (and doesn't want to now, despite the record having stood for 18 years and counting) as competition is rife between those in the sport today, even if those individuals haven't currently matched the world record. While this attitude could be adapted for more of the Alternative Tube Challenges until the main record is broken, conversely if all attention is put on say John's long standing Bottle record, it will take longer for the main record to be broken as fewer attempts will be made on it as most are attempts are instead focused on John's record.
Thus, I see nothing wrong with any challenger aborting world record attempts, whether they be the most seasoned of current or former world record holders, or simply a rookie, who has run out of energy! I'm sure that "on the day difficulties"
are still to blame for most abortions, but even if more aborted missions are thanks to the attempt not being fruitful in producing a near world record time than was, I see no deterioration of the activity as hinted by tubeguru. In fact I personally see it as a positive attribute to tube challenging as it shows to all that sporting element are coming to the fore as us as an activity, where some challengers only wish to complete a full attempt if it is close to world record time. This may also better their all time statistics, which in turn shows that the fighting spirit (otherwise known as win at all costs) of challengers is coming to the fore, highlighting that competitiveness and hunger for the world record is on the increase rather than the decrease.
This leads onto my final point that tries to look at the following quote from the aforementioned tubeguru.
tubeguru wrote:The reason I ask if we've reached a plateau is because a full network challenge is being undertaken much more frequently than in my day, and yet so many of them are being aborted or come in under the record. That's why I suspected we may be getting close to the most realistically-achievable time.
While the previous content of my post was directed towards all forum members, I feel that this has to be singularly at our site administrator. (Who is a fantastic one at that, don't get me wrong.)
Simply Neil, is it not to be expected that when more people participate in an activity, the elite standard of said activity will become harder to reach? (This being thanks to how more people have attempted the activity and the laws of averages dictate that the sum of people very good at this activity ought to also increase with the total number of participants.)
As normal, I look forward to all responses written about the subject of my post.
(He says, stepping off his soap box.)
