283 people eat free sausage roll at the same time

This topic contains 5 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Dan Dan 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3952 Score: 0
    Profile photo of News Robot
    News Robot
    Participant
    • New Topics: 158
    • Total Replies: 1
    • Contributions: 159

    Suffolk Food Hall sets new record of 283 sausage rolls eaten simultaneously

    There were squeals of excitement at Suffolk Food Hall today as hundreds of hungry customers rolled up to set a new world record.

    Bosses managed to muster 283 people in their pig-turesque courtyard overlooking the River Orwell to eat a free sausage roll simultaneously.

    The event was arranged as part of the 10th anniversary celebration of the Suffolk Food Hall, which is located in Wherstead, just outside of Ipswich.

    Although their efforts do not qualify for the Guinness World Records, marketing and design coordinator Nick Punter believes it was the first mass sausage roll eating challenge of its kind to take place.

    “It went really well,” Mr Punter added. “There was a lot of laughter and a lot of children having a good time.

    Feel free to comment on IPSWI.

    #3953 Score: 0
    Profile photo of Dan
    Dan
    Keymaster
    • New Topics: 64
    • Total Replies: 478
    • Contributions: 542

    I found this a funny piece of unnecessary pro-obesity PR pushed by Ipswich Star.

    First and foremost, those coming for a “free sausage roll” are not “customers”.

    Secondly, it wasn’t even arranged through Guinness World Records, which makes today’s marketing stunt not actually a new world record.

    The number of people who came probably assuming with the publicity that this will be a Guinness World Record with an official adjudicator, only to arrive at the expense of fuel worth more than the sausage roll to be fooled into a cheap shot publicity stunt, I wonder if anyone left upset? Reading further into the article they even made vegetarian “sausage” rolls… which seems a bit counter-productive as the vegetarian rolls won’t be eligible to be counted.

    #3954 Score: 0
    Profile photo of Mart
    Mart
    Participant
    • New Topics: 9
    • Total Replies: 274
    • Contributions: 283

    we had sausage rolls from there last weekend, verY nice to, altough those in the world record looked somewhat smaller. Had we onlY known we could have gone back again this weekend for a free one, I don’t think..!

    I would also suggest that at some large buffet somewhere in the world I could imagine a larger group of people than that all simultaneously eating a sausage roll, so not a record official or unofficial..

    very angry now, don't like inappropriate censorship,

    #3955 Score: 0
    Profile photo of Dan
    Dan
    Keymaster
    • New Topics: 64
    • Total Replies: 478
    • Contributions: 542

    That is amongst the difficulties with such a record:-

    • What is the standard size of a “sausage roll” internationally (which isn’t “large”, “small”, “mini”, “party” etc. )
    • Non-pork eaters are excluded – vegetarians etc. cannot simply eat something with non-pork content
    • Someone would need to check all participants are eating at the same time – everyone having the first bite at exactly the same time etc.

    There doesn’t appear to be a record for it. So, they could have achieved it with a very modest 30 people. It is really important to have “world records” recognised, otherwise they are rather pointless. I could set the world record for the most people to eat a sausage roll at the same time with 3 people

    I am sure more significant records such as land speed records etc. have always been broken before time unofficially outside scope of rules or adjudication, such as through testing.

    #3968 Score: 0
    Profile photo of Mart
    Mart
    Participant
    • New Topics: 9
    • Total Replies: 274
    • Contributions: 283

    I was part of a group of several hundred doing a world record attempt a few years ago. We had opted to do all the verification ourselves as i think getting guinness directly involved on the ground is expensive, but their requirements for verification were really onerous, that is once you agree a record that they are happy to go with in the first place, you can’t just pick them out of the air!  It was videoed, counted, you name it, to confirm the numbers, and with strict rules on every aspect. All the details went off to them and a few months later they confirmed it as a world record but it was never a given, they could have found a flaw easily, in fact i think we may have got knocked a few number off due to a few people not being quite where they should have been.  However such was the difficulty of complying with the rules on the day and the massive amount of work to verify it that all said, never again!  Not least of all because taking part was actually a really tedious process and no fun at all…

    very angry now, don't like inappropriate censorship,

    #3969 Score: 0
    Profile photo of Dan
    Dan
    Keymaster
    • New Topics: 64
    • Total Replies: 478
    • Contributions: 542

    There is two routes – getting an official adjudicator as a witness (which as it sounds really expensive and is a “package deal” so it isn’t an set amount) or to do it yourself. Timelines are 3 months to apply and similar to hear back regarding the submitted evidence. For around £1200 you can “fast track” both applying and evidence, but not sure how much time you can save through that route… I guess it varies. I am sure the only real way to do it is option A, such as for TV and events where you will be instantly awarded the framed certificate after they do a few checks. I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t revoke some further-down-the-line. They must reject 99% of all record applications and probably 90% of evidence as insufficient.

    Mass-participation is a real big no-no… in addition to finding two witnesses that cannot be remotely connected to anyone at the event and must be along-the-same-lines as those that can witness passport applications; you need stewards for every so many people taking part with similar rules as to witnesses.  All need to write a comprehensive statement, in addition to “water-tight” evidence. It must be more tough now considering how many people will try to cheat with editing video and image evidence.

    I find it bizarre for them to confirm the world record attempt before deciding not to give it. You sum it up well, it needs to be fun, and with all those rules it just isn’t. I think this was the point behind those “flash mobs” where it was about how many people they could get to gather without really caring about any real world record. It is sad Ipswich Central hasn’t thought about staging a couple of world record attempts just to stick the town on the map.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Upper Orwell Crossings (Public Consultation Comments) | Ipswich Planning Applications | Sitemap | Orwell Bridge | Northern Bypass | Popular Ipswich Topics A-Z






Original Theme (modified) by nehalist.io