Please read this explanation of your incorrect conclusion due to Rhys-Jones' error carefully. I posted it once already, but you evidently ignored it or forgot it:Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version.
Rhys-Jones book has recently been quoted as in
Alberto said: However, the final proof, that allowed Antonio to understand everything bottom-up even before having entirely the above material available, is the intentional "embellishment" (or "sugar-coating", or "cover-up") of the facts in the reports presented after the battle to get to the final official version.
As Graham Rhys-Jones wisely said in his "The loss of the Bismarck": "it was Tovey's version which went to the printers".
The suggestion that Tovey's version differed from some other version is based on the mistaken reference in Rhys-Jones book regarding Rodney's movements.
He writes "Tovey had described her blocking position as extremely well chosen. Pound, who had gone through the records with extraordinary diligence, thought it very ill-judged (36)"
In the citation (36) he says this is from a letter from Pound to Tovey and then gives the ADM 199/1188 p25. However as you can see from the document I posted at the beginning of this thread [1941 Criticism thread], it is actually nothing of the sort, but an internal memo signed by Tom Phillips to Pound. We know from the other draft response to Tovey that Pound disagreed with and overrode Phillips' opinion, he agreed with Tovey's opinion and on this matter alone, it was correct that Tovey's version went to the printers. There was no contradictory version because Pound and Tovey agreed.
How Rhys-Jones got things muddled up who knows. There is nothing in Rhys-Jones book to suggest he thought there was any cover-up or conspiracy.
In clear for you: Tovey said Rodney's blocking position was well chosen. Phillips said it was ill chosen. Tovey's version went to the printers, because Pound realised he was correct and told Phillips he was wrong. Rhys-Jones incorrectly ascribed Phillips' opinion "ill-judged" to Pound.
Rhys-Jones never fabricated evidence as Antonio has done, and never suggested there was any kind of cover-up. He never suggested there was another "version" of the overall chase which varied from Tovey's. He studied the action in detail, but was not interested in making up a Conspiracy Theory with imaginary evidence.
Please confirm you understand Rhys-Jones' error and its significance. Please do not make this same error again and repeat these words again.
Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version.
We know why you keep saying the same incorrect things over and over
Here the only fairy tale (that has been "imposed" by the "winners" for 75+ years) is Kennedy's novel, full of heroes, honorable decisions and consensus from British side.
The "cover up" conspiracy theory was always very illogical
Unless you deeply resent what you consider "triumphalist" accounts of the RN's defeat of Rheinübung and suspect you can make some money out of providing an alternative reality.
All the best