[hairich]

i may have missed the point of this chris as i am a bit drunk but if you have spoken to rich0s belayer then why dont you name him and then the true internet detectives on here can track him down and ask him. i am sorry if this has been dealt with already

[Doylo]

The 'point' is i contacted the belayer for LA and Hubble and he confirmed it. Quite simple. If the 'true internet detectives' want to contact him all they have to do is read this thread. Obviously my word isn't good enough

[Sloper]

As I have said and this is getting tiresome so off to bed, all you can say is that this bloke told you he had belayed Rich.

This is no more evidence of Rich climbing the routes than Rich telling you how Ivan Greene had blagged him a dodgy entry to the NYC marathon is evidence that that is what Ivan Greene did.

As I have said before I would like nothing more than solid credible evidence to come out to back up Rich's climbing achievements, but that doesn't mean I have to suspend my critical assessment of the claims and the arguments both pro and agin.

[Doylo]

I wasn't talking to you  . Simpson telling me something about the marathon is not the same thing as me contacting an independent witness and asking if he belayed him. You want video and more proof and thats fair enough but your not going to get any. At the end of the day for this to get resolved lots of belayers and witnesses would have to be contacted. You either trust what these people say or you don't. Basically the same thing i've done but on a bigger scale. There's nothing new to add to this, i wish i could resist replying to stupid posts 

[grimer]

I genuinely feel for you here Doylo.

For fuck's sake. Sloper, I hope the affirmation you are getting from all this is somewhere near the level of frustration it creates.

[Doylo]

I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking win

[hairich]

sorry chris.like i said i missed the point.in no way did i mean your word was not good enough

[Jim]

I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking win

Trouble is, he could of easily sorted this if what he said is true (ie got video of careless etc..).
Anyway, best let this thread die, if only for Doyles sanity....

[slackline]

Three pages later....

Theres a reason the previous thread on this got closed..............its not going anywhere other than round in circles.

[shark]

As I have said and this is getting tiresome so off to bed, all you can say is that this bloke told you he had belayed Rich.

This is no more evidence of Rich climbing the routes than Rich telling you how Ivan Greene had blagged him a dodgy entry to the NYC marathon is evidence that that is what Ivan Greene did.

I disagree. We are dealing with likelihoods here rather than incontravertible proof. A key difference is that Tounley told Doyle independently.

I hadnt heard of Dan Tounley before. From what I have read on this thread he:

a. exists
b. was a capable sport climber (Ru saw him climb an 8 in Spain) so is credible (would know the difference between dogging and redpointing)
c. is out of the country doing TEFL or missionary work in bongo land or something
d. has personally confirmed he belayed/witnessed Simpson doing LA and Hubble

Of itself that would normally be more than good enough proof - were it not for the other unresolved issues around the other claims.  It is possible that Tounley is lying to support Simpson - but it seems unlikely.

Speaking personally for these two ascents I am open to it being possible (rather than thinking it unlikely) that Simpson did them. It wouldnt take much more in terms of witness testimony (Tounley being the only one so far so we are clutching at straws) to make me think it was probable he did them.

[mrjonathanr]

I hadnt heard of Dan Tounley before. From what I have read on this thread he:

c. is out of the country doing ...missionary work in bongo land or something

Anyway. RS's problem is that once doubts surface and go unaddressed the standard of proof required to refute them tends to rise as scepticism gets more entrenched. And that some more recent claims seem very shaky for quite a few reasons, casting a retrospective shadow over ascents he may well have had the ability to do.
In short, too little too late means we'll never know, unless he takes Jim's advice and finds his video camera. Somehow I don't think that will be happening.

[Bonjoy]

I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking win

Leave it alone Chris, for your own sake. Remarks like that just invite people to start picking at the wound again. ‘You can’t fucking win’ is hardly true for a man who says he has everything on video….

[SA Chris]

harde to believe that such a flourishing economy began with a humble soft drink and a catchy advertising campaign.

[Doylo]

I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking win

‘You can’t fucking win’ is hardly true for a man who says he has everything on video….

I don't think he's ever said that. Anyway unless something else comes up there's nothing else to say on here.

[Bonjoy]

I can’t be bothered to trawl through old threads and PMs but he did say he had at least a very significant number of his ascents on video. I was exaggerating by saying all. At the end of the day he could still pretty much “fucking win” if ANYONE saw ANY of these, but we both know that’s never going to happen and we both have our own interpretations as to why that will be and like you say that’s the end of it, so unless things change I’m fully in agreement that we should all drop it.

[grimer]

Yeah, didn't everybody know exactly where everybody stood on this about ten pages ago.

I like repeating myself endlessly as much as the next man, but shouldn't this horse be thrown on the shit pile.

[grimer]

Oh, I see it already is 

[Doylo]

I can’t be bothered to trawl through old threads and PMs but he did say he had at least a very significant number of his ascents on video. I was exaggerating by saying all. At the end of the day he could still pretty much “fucking win” if ANYONE saw ANY of these, but we both know that’s never going to happen and we both have our own interpretations as to why that will be and like you say that’s the end of it, so unless things change I’m fully in agreement that we should all drop it.

Ye but i'm not in control of what simpson has in his attic. I've never said he should be completely vindicated on the basis of the LA belayer. Not at all. I just don't think that these two ascents should be ignored when someone's confirmed them.

[DaveC]

Somehow this subject/thread now has me thinking of Bill Hicks talking about how some subjects are like bad toothache, you just can't leave it alone....ooowwww................................................oooowwwww.......must stop prodding it.............ooooowwwwwwww!!!






I'm sure Slackers or somebody will dig out the relevant youtube vid.......

[shark]

At the end of the day for this to get resolved lots of belayers and witnesses would have to be contacted. You either trust what these people say or you don't.

Sorry can I just pick up on this. Going on his interviews, belayers/witnesses will be limited (not being funny) as he says he tends to climb with select trusted people and is a loner (can be read two ways).

Its knowing who they are too. You got an encouragingly decent response off Tounley. If you don't fancy it would you mind if I sent him an email to pick his brains on what other hard ascents he belayed/witnessed and who else (if anyone) was around for them. Also who else he knows of who was there/belaying on other ascents where he wasn't present might elicit some new leads. It might be better coming from you but I can sense you are done with this ! Two or three independent accounts would count for an awful lot.

[Doylo]

I haven't got his email, i contacted him via facebook. I think if he'd witnessed anything else significant Simpson would have mentioned it. He might know who was there for some other stuff. I think he was more of an early climbing partner. Sounds like they met up a few times when simpson was going well. To be honest Shark i don't think you'll get much more out of him. Barring Simpsons intervention i think this issue has ran its course. I'm through with trying to investigate any more, i'll give you a million pounds if you lock this thread!

[shark]

I'm through with trying to investigate any more, i'll give you a million pounds if you lock this thread!

 

This is a revenue stream worth investigating

[grimer]

Yes Shark, why don't you lock this. Look at this page. It is nothing but a parade of people nagging Chris because he's said a few supportive things about someone he udes to be friends with. What's anyone getting out of it.

I know I don't have to look, but I do, and it's always the same.

[Johnny Brown]

There is absolutely no point in locking this as another will simply start in its place. Probably on UKC first, then here, either way its better to let things trickle on here than stop for a month and then explode elsewhere.

[shark]

Oddly enough I have just replied to a PM asking that it get moved off the ShitHeap to a main forum.

This thread got logpiled because firstly it was posted in 'News' and wasnt News and secondly because it related to the UKC statement and anything that revolves around UKC tends to get logpiled to keep the Borg off our backs. It has now morphed to not being about the UKC statement any more.

I can't guess what anyone is getting out of it. Personally I'm glad it has elicited the first witness. Personally I'm hoping for more leads and info starting with is 'Tounley' spelt correctly as it doesn't come up on Facebook ? I'm sure someone other than Chris can answer that.