It suggests that you were not against Andi's complaint to Guinness about Oyster cards being obligatory. Neither was anyone else, possibly aside from Clive who said he didn't think it unreasonable, although at least he had the choice of whether to use one if he attempted again. But that rule, and others that they have stupidly tightened in recent years, unfortunately were and are technically within our control, as much of an inconvenience as they might present. The minimum requirement rule is not within our control; the time we achieve relies on the running of the system, which we cannot influence.
I see what you mean a bit about the representative point, but I suspect that had I given more details of the many others who have attempted the record (and the forum), you would equally say, “Who made you forum spokesperson?” The most important thing was to make clear that I am not the only person to try this and that the minimum requirement will affect many more people who want to. Maybe the wording can be improved. I certainly don’t think I can be seen as a spokesperson as much as
whoever wrote to Guinness when Gawley was branded a liar here.
Because of how they operate, all communication with Guinness is generally made individually. The issue might be individual (lack of evidence for one’s own claim), or it might affect the activity as a whole (the former Oyster rule). Despite knowing about this forum for some time, Guinness staff have never registered and asked us directly what we think about how they handle the record. They might at least do that if they value it. They have had complaints from several more people than me. They have never attempted or adjudicated the record, and many here have suggested that they do not understand it anymore, if indeed they ever have.
Sub-16 hours was impossible in late 2021, when I made my attempt and that was the limit. T4 was closed and required to be visited by other means. This was an allowance that Guinness put in so that the record could still be attempted in the event of an indefinite closure of a terminal station. There was no point in them allowing this if it took the participant over their limit. Furthermore, the Battersea branch had a 12-minute frequency on average. When I found out about the limit afterwards, the claim became an exercise to counter Guinness's inconsistency and lack of knowledge about their own record.
Of course, since mid-2022, T4 has been open, the Battersea frequency improved, and the limit increased by a pathetic quarter-hour. Sub-16 hours and 15 minutes is definitely possible now. So is sub-16 hours. I did not say it was not possible, but unlikely. Because from 2008 to 2021, only two reported times out of at least 114 went under 16 hours and 15 minutes. If this target were more likely, then there would have been more such times, because I am certain that there must have been more such theoretical routes planned. I would say the Tube fails for this exercise more often than not, especially when the target is low.
There is no complaint from me about your formidability. Rather, it is an observation that your success might just have given you the air of "we went under 16 hours so everyone else can". In the absence of a verified record, why should there be a limit on what we cannot control and for what Guinness sees as an ideal time even though they have never done it? And as Richard has suggested, those who are less experienced might feel unable to attempt with Guinness rules now. That was the main point of the petition.
Perhaps you should remind me how all of your world record attempts prior to that date had gone?
4.jpg
Perhaps you should rethink that.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.