Ebert's Unholy Crusade

New Areas. New routes. Retrobolting. Add-ons. Re-grading. etc.
Flex
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:31 am

Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Flex » Sun Mar 20, 2016 7:03 pm

Please be aware that Ebert has been rubbing out the IP's on closed projects and putting grades in their place. This gives the impression that the routes have been opened. Please check on the wiki whether the routes have actually been opened before getting on them. Also, please check before belaying Ebert on any new routes.

Stu
Posts: 590
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:13 pm

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Stu » Sun Mar 20, 2016 7:21 pm

That's f*cking nuts. He's gonna get a bloody nose if he's not careful.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:40 pm

O.o
Attachments
unnamed.jpg
unnamed.jpg (29.46 KiB) Viewed 5403 times

Flex
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:31 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Flex » Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:10 pm

The only challenge here, Ebert, is for you to realize that this latest course of action will be the final straw for many who have given you the benefit of the doubt on multiple occasions.

Logic
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 8:54 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Logic » Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:56 am

uhmmm yeah... Ebert, this is rather a lowpoint, even for yourself. What can your possible end-game be, surely you do not really have a clear goal(s) (n)or aim(s).
The ignominy caused by your delusions of grandeur laced with utter disrespect and self serving ego boosting chutzpah is remarkably embarrassing, I truly pity you.

oubaas
Posts: 192
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by oubaas » Mon Mar 21, 2016 6:53 pm

Ja I'd expect nothing less from him. Snot kop strikes again!

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:07 am

Open projects all round :pirat:

There is greater passion found in climbing routes when there is something to fight for.

End of story.

Ebert Nel
I'm coming for your projects.

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by micky » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:11 am

might make more sense if you paid for the bolts

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Tue Mar 22, 2016 6:29 am

Micky, that is the reason why we in this dilemma where people think they own a line. If you bolt it, you bolt it for the community. No man's mountain. The line has always been there, the bolter just makes it accessible for everyone, not just themselves. And then I even hear you have to ask for permission to try someone's trad project :puker:

Ebert Nel

McJagger
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:18 pm
Real Name: Arnold de Beer

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by McJagger » Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:22 am

I think you missing the point that routes might be tangible in nature but that the actual "line" is more like intellectual property. It takes vision to spot a good line, not everyone can do it. I agree that we should all be allowed to use the mountains freely and respectfully, but stealing peoples ideas is wrong!

Flex
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:31 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Flex » Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:41 am

Ebert seems to suggest that his actions would increase the passion of bolters to open their projects faster. Let me give my experience from this weekend:
I asked Ebert face to face whether he knew anything about Sarel's route. He lied. Sarel's, I apologize for getting on your route, the good news is I did not send it. I then confronted Ebert the next day and he did not explain any of his rationale to me. He just behaved like an arrogant twat.
None of this increased my psych to try hard on my new project which took two full days to bolt due to the three large horizontal roofs. In fact, Ebert's presence at the crag sucked all positive energy from the crag.
But enough about Ebert. I sadly believe until he seeks the help of a mental health professional he is a lost cause.
I want to challenge Ebert's sponsors (Mountain Mail Order, City Rock, 5.10 and Mammut) to drop their sponsorship of him. I cannot see how they would want to be associated with such behavior. If the local sponsors do not distance themselves from Ebert, I will write to Mammut and 5.10 overseas to get their take on the matter.

happy
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:00 pm

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by happy » Tue Mar 22, 2016 8:36 am

I unfortunately must agree with Flex. He is really an embarrassment to the South African climbers and especially those people who went out of their way to take him under their wing, regarding bolting etc. We all know who I am talking about, and considering he was/is also a major ambassador for Mountain Mail Order, Robert, I would seriously reconsider having Ebert as the poster boy for your business. Not to mention all the weed smoking and beer drinking at the crags, while climbing. Def not somebody to look up to.

rocklooney
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:22 am
Real Name: Patrick Fraser

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by rocklooney » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:20 am

How to utterly destroy your own reputation in the public sphere. Courses available up to Doctorate level.

Logic
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 8:54 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Logic » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:25 am

Ebert, hitherto, you are yet to present a congruent and logically sound argument on this forum and what you present in this thread is no exception. At least you are consistant, I will grant you that much.

You state altruism as your motive. However, your latest antics clearly is nothing more than simple attention seeking tactics. Your ambivalent relationship with the broader sportclimbing community is clearly a source of angst for you and it seems to cloud your judgement to a significant degree.

To reiterate, your aims and/or goals are unclear with the plan(s) how to achieve said goals even more convoluted. (Figure these things out for yourself, please do not bore anyone here with this process, perhaps then you might actually achieve something more than being noticed for really pitiful and naïve actions)
Last edited by Logic on Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

mokganjetsi
Posts: 1638
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:32 pm
Real Name: Willem Boshoff
Location: Cape Town

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by mokganjetsi » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:30 am

ebert's douchebaggery aside....... i think the debate has been up before:
nobody "owns" a rock face / line
hence bolting & naming routes should be done with respect for nature and other people
spotting a line is relatively easy; cleaning & bolting it is costly & takes effort
respect the bolter and give him / her a fair amount of time to open the route - one year?? unless they're benevolent and make it an open project.
nothing physically stops people from climbing a closed project; just shut up about it and let the bolter claim the FA? :?

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by micky » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:43 am

its a bit about respect oke. People find a line, get super stoked about it, spend time and money bolting and look forward to opening it and then handing over to the community. But you feel like you somehow have right to this more than everyone else who climbs, you're more special than every climber in SA? Its also not only about the time and money spent bolting a line. There is huge amount of work and sometimes cash by individuals and the MCSA in negotiating access to places we climb. They arent free for all areas, the land is owned and we are granted access to climb there. Be a doos and places will get shout down just so because you want to feed your ego.

A little respect for the people who make these places available to us and who do the hard work of finding, funding and bolting new lines.

by just wandering around and jumping on peoples projects you're just being an arrogant consumer with no creativity, imagination or effort, you contribute nothing.

Pierce
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 4:21 pm
Real Name: Pierce Joubert

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Pierce » Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:33 am

In my humble opinion I think that whoever went through the effort of bolting a route should be entitled to the FA and then the route is opened to the rest of the community, it's just a matter of respect for the person who went through that effort. If you are that adamant to get FA's on projects then find more lines and bolt them yourself, then everyone is happy. poaching someone else's project is pretty low especially if you have sponsorship that I'm sure will help you with the means to bolt your own projects, there's a load of rock out there I'm sure you will find something for yourself. :thumleft:

ColinCrab
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:10 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by ColinCrab » Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:50 am

I totally agree with the sentiments above in that any supplier or other still sponsoring ebert needs to withdraw ASAP. There are loads of deserving youngsters out there that actually do something for the climbing community that could do with funding, whereas ebert does nothing to further the spirit of the sport in this country and is in fact busy tarnishing the SA climbing scene with his adolescent behavior of drugs and Alcohol at he crags. What is the international climbing community to this total lack of bolting ethics?

Mike Behr and the MCSA, I further call on you to ban this individual from your properties in Waterval Boven. Ultimately it is you who own the ground and have the final say on what goes on and who goes on it. Please publicly let us have your standpoint.

I would like to add that those in his entourage that think its cool and still hang out with him at the crags will be labeled and also find themselves ostracized from the rest. To you I say move on and find passion in climbing in it's true form.

ebert I had always treated you well and as a friend in the climbing community but what you have done is the end of the line. You had the nerve to re-rub out the IP on my project the very afternoon on the day that I had corrected it and put a grade on it. Well you have really F**ked with the wrong person is all I am saying. We will never speak again and as you say "challenge accepted" little man.

User avatar
robertbreyer
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:54 pm
Real Name: CityROCK

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by robertbreyer » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:05 am

Hi everyone,
Yes we sponsor Ebert.
We have been reading this thread with interest, with the usual head shaking and smiling. :shock: :lol:

For the record:
Ebert and CityROCK/MMO have had a rather tumultuous business relationship.
But Ebert's usual "shock and awe" strategy does seem to have it's desired impact - we are all here reading and writing about him.
There's a saying in the PR world: "There is no such thing as bad publicity".
I remember similar discussions regarding Matt Bush and the whole Arrow Final bolting drama.

Ebert's sponsorship deal is up in June. Our brand ambassadors get an annual budget. Ebert has used up his budget for the year, so there's nothing left to cancel.

We are going to evaluate renewing his deal at that point in time. Based on how things have gone this past year, it's unlikely that we will renew his deal.

I do believe that publicly cancelling his contract won't change a thing - Ebert will be Ebert and I don't think he will change an iota, based on what rope of the day he tries to hang himself with. If anything I suspect it will probably embolden him even more.

- Robert & Trish
CityROCK & MMO
Last edited by robertbreyer on Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Logic
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 8:54 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Logic » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:53 am

Robert, "no such thing as bad publicity", really?

This platitudinous adage is belied by numerous high profile athletes losing sponsorship deals following improper conduct, Lance Amstrong, Maria Sharapova, Oscar Pistorius etc.

Admittedly, the examples are of athletes of the highest calibre competing at the highest possible level, this is obviously not the case with Ebert. Also, please, I am not suggesting that Ebert's actions are/were nearly as serious as with the examples stated above.

However, it is undeniable that situations where actions of sponsored athletes reflect poorly on the sponsors, resulting in bad publicity clearly exists.

Your downplaying of this fact comes across as smug and patronising. It further implicitly suggests you do not really care what your "sponsored athletes" do just as long as it generates some publicity for your business?

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:57 am

Follow my crusade on insTAGram
Attachments
Climbza.jpg
Climbza.jpg (95.66 KiB) Viewed 4894 times

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:20 pm

On a side note. Flex was climbing someone's (Sarels) closed project. I have never been on a closed project. Flex induced my motion to start going at closed projects after launching this forum topic. I claim innocence until provoked. And now you have to deal with it.

Peace
Ebert

Logic
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 8:54 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Logic » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:04 pm

Ah hah... so everything is actually Flexs' fault, Ebert?

JanWilKlim
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:07 am
Real Name: Jan se naam is eintlik lank genoeg

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by JanWilKlim » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:09 pm

Forket wrote:On a side note. Flex was climbing someone's (Sarels) closed project. I have never been on a closed project. Flex induced my motion to start going at closed projects after launching this forum topic. I claim innocence until provoked. And now you have to deal with it.

Peace
Ebert
I think you have perfectly captured your level of poepolness there ebert. Pragtig hoor.

ColinCrab
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:10 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by ColinCrab » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:45 pm

for the record

Forket wrote:On a side note. Flex was climbing someone's (Sarels) closed project. I have never been on a closed project. Flex induced my motion to start going at closed projects after launching this forum topic. I claim innocence until provoked. And now you have to deal with it.

Peace
Ebert
I was with flex this weekend when he asked me about the said route that had the grade "29" written at it's base. I mentioned to him that on the previous weekend it still had "IP" on it but seems it was now open. Flex went further to ask ebert to his face if he knew anything about the route being open etc. and ebert had said he knew nothing, a direct lie as ebert had changed the "IP" to a "29" as confirmed by others. So unbeknownst to Flex but with full knowledge by ebert Flex climbed a closed project.

So this is exactly the type of issue that is now arising from this childish behavior.

andrew p
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:38 pm

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by andrew p » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:49 pm

I don't know the details but I will add my cents worth as I have bolted a few lines, opened some, given others away, including to Ebert. The answer is pretty simple. PERSONAL CHOICE. And it changes, depending on the emotional attachment to a route and other factors. If someone wants to close it, if it makes them happy that is cool. Why do we need to challenge that? I might understand in a small way if Ebert had done all the routes and needed something new to climb at Boven but he hasn't and absolutely none of the hard ones. Come try Shear Force with me on the weekend, hopefully my draws still there. Andrew

Chris F
Posts: 770
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:45 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Chris F » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:04 pm

ColinCrab wrote:for the record
I was with flex this weekend when he asked me about the said route that had the grade "29" written at it's base. I mentioned to him that on the previous weekend it still had "IP" on it but seems it was now open. Flex went further to ask ebert to his face if he knew anything about the route being open etc. and ebert had said he knew nothing, a direct lie as ebert had changed the "IP" to a "29" as confirmed by others. So unbeknownst to Flex but with full knowledge by ebert Flex climbed a closed project.

So this is exactly the type of issue that is now arising from this childish behavior.
If this is what this is all about, it seems one of SA's top climbers is now resorting to things usually reserved for primary school playgrounds. A pity such talent is squandered on him.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Forket » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:19 pm

Andrew didn't you open Dewalds closed proj bolted by Colin ? Pritty sure you didn't have permission.

And yes I did convince him to get onto it, but never did I ever get onto a closed project like Flex insinuated.

In the end of the day, get use to my current religion. I'm coming for your projects in a months time. I'm first building a climbing gym before I can get out again. So you have time :D

eTroll

ColinCrab
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:10 am

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by ColinCrab » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:31 pm

Forket wrote:In the end of the day, get use to my current religion. I'm coming for your projects in a months time.

eTroll
Be very sure you build some big guns in that gym. Just saying

Old Smelly
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 1:21 pm

Re: Ebert's Unholy Crusade

Post by Old Smelly » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:42 pm

etroll?

I must say I am laughing my head off...

Ebert isn't an etroll almost as unecessary as an etoll? Somehow I think you are yanking everyone's chains...and upsetting them...just like etoll...

come guys we need to stop taking him seriously ...it just raises your blood pressure...
Really, its not that bad...I think it's my shoes...

Post Reply