My suspicion is that he has, or believes he has, beaten the records, but hasn't done any of the tedious paperwork.
There's a logical inconsistency with Bruce's
apparent approach to validation and his approach to claiming [Guinness] records, even if leaving aside the trust issues around not having a live tracker, etc.
His
approach seems to be that he'll provide distance/power files (and perhaps witness logs and photographs). If we allow, for the sake of argument and as appears to be his view, that this is sufficient to claim a Guinness Record, then simply looking at Kurt/Steve's publicly available Strava data should show him that each of them has exceeded his own, self-asserted Guinness Month Record. In other words, it's inconsistent to simultaneously a) claim to hold the Guinness Month Record whilst apparently b) thinking that all that's needed for certification for the Guinness Year Record is distance/power on Strava: if (b) is true then (a) is not viable.
I do presume that he's doing the distance, but I also think the paradigm where asserting
"I have record X", often enough and publicly enough, leads to a de facto position where he is thought to really have record X is quite ..... unfortunate.
(The above points have all been made previously on the thread, but the key thing I wanted to express was the
internal inconsistency in his apparent approach to the various records he's claiming and may claim in future.)
