A defining moment in the history of the website: perhaps you, or we, have come of age.
Today is a sad day indeed
Wild Country have now issued the following statement to UKC:
"Earlier this year there was a forum thread on UKC which seemed to provide some evidence that disputed Rich Simpson's running claims - and alluded to problems with other claims Rich Simpson had made regarding his climbing. Wild Country, concerned about its reputation and also in consideration of concerns over the history of the sport, felt it prudent to ask Rich Simpson to provide evidence for some of his ascents in the shape of naming his belayers for several routes - routes which were reported and claims that were repeated on Wild Country's website as Rich Simpson was a Wild Country sponsored climber.
However, Rich Simpson refused to supply any information that could verify his ascents, even when repeatedly asked directly by Wild Country, thus Wild Country decided to terminate his sponsorship and remove any information regarding Rich Simpson from its website until such time as evidence is provided."
We have also received a statement from Scarpa:
"When we saw the threads on various web sites raising doubts about Rich Simpson's ascents, we asked him to make a statement on UKC in order to protect his reputation and that of Scarpa and the Mountain Boot Company. Rich Simpson refused to make a statement and then, under his own instigation, immediately tended his resignation as a sponsored athlete. We accepted this resignation."
When rich became aware of the UKC thread two weeks ago he wrote to his sponsors telling them he was giving up his sponsorship. He had no intention to reply to the thread.From Doylo on 9th Nov'
Today is a sad day indeed
What changed today ?
Taking advantage of your mate's desire to stick up for you is a low trick.
It is a different sequence of events, but unless you know exactly what Doylo was told and whether it was possible to misinterpret it, I don't think points like this help. The chinese whisper effect, even in the law where we're all paid to communicate accurately, is huge.
What about the boxing claims, they sounded pretty unlikely too?
Also, is he defiantly studying at Cambridge - people were casting doubt on that claim too.
Has anyone, of note, in the climbing world come forward to support Rich?
I think the real question is who would win a fight Rich Simpson or Si O'Connor?
(yes this is childish but I'm working on some tedious stuff and need a bit of light relief . . . fluffer!)
Ru, by 'history books' I mean it as a generalisation for all that is written on climbing ascents whether that be on the internet, in the history sections in guides, or in other publications. Of course it's up the guide writer but I personally don't think it's an irrelevency.
There's also his first ascents and the question of whether all of his ascents without evidence will be doubted now when written about.
I think the real question is who would win a fight Rich Simpson or Si O'Connor?
(yes this is childish but I'm working on some tedious stuff and need a bit of light relief . . . fluffer!)
The thing is though the written record is pretty unrelaible, anyone else remember OTE crediting Seb with the FA of Parthian Shot?
Today is a sad day indeed
What changed today ?
UKC wrote another non-news article.
The thing is though the written record is pretty unrelaible, anyone else remember OTE crediting Seb with the FA of Parthian Shot?
Wasn't that done on purpose by the writer of that article in very similar circumstances?
Exactly. I understand why people are getting upset by this, but I don't understand why UKC feel like they need to report this as a news item. I don't remember this happening with Si the Conner or Scott McSpanishspotter, so why they feel the need to single out Rich? UKC doesn't speak for all climbers so no need for the public service announcement.
UKC doesn't speak for all climbers so no need for the public service announcement.
...so why they feel the need to single out Rich?
Exactly. I understand why people are getting upset by this, but I don't understand why UKC feel like they need to report this as a news item. I don't remember this happening with Si the Conner or Scott McSpanishspotter, so why they feel the need to single out Rich? UKC doesn't speak for all climbers so no need for the public service announcement.
Id guess its an attempt to slow the inevitable tide of 'What ever happened to that Rich Simpson thread?' threads as much as anything.
I also think that it's a cynical ploy to avoid admitting that their journalistic standards are so low that they've published stuff in the past without any sort of evidence or checking of sources.
If Simpson wants to respond or other evidence comes to light we can unlock it.
This thread is kinda pointless.
I for one think UKC have handled this pretty well all things considered, including the aforementioned news piece which draws some sort of line under things, as well as summarising what is actually a fairly newsworthy happening in UK climbing to folks who don't want to trawl through long and rambling threads.I agree. Some people seem to have a knee-jerk reaction to pour scorn on everything that UKC do, rather than actually think about whether their criticism has any basis. Have a wad.
Until Rich comes out and confirms or deny what happened its pointless discussing it further.
I, and I'm sure I am not alone, find the whole thing quite sad (in a depressing way).Couldn't agree more, the whole saga has left me feeling shit.
Your sponsorship is in essence based upon you performing high profile work. Is being paid for work that isn't performed considered fraud?
To know what will count as the historical record, look at what represents the historical record of the past. As well as mags and guidebooks there are biographies, films, broader historical texts such as Welsh Rock and of course oral history. Nowadays it includes the forums and the news/articles on various websites.Ru, by 'history books' I mean it as a generalisation for all that is written on climbing ascents whether that be on the internet, in the history sections in guides, or in other publications. Of course it's up the guide writer but I personally don't think it's an irrelevency.
I meant that it was an irrelevancy for most guides as they don't have lists of ascentionists anyway. Clearly it's not an irrelevancy for the few that want to include this information, but then the writers will make a judgement call as they do already.QuoteThere's also his first ascents and the question of whether all of his ascents without evidence will be doubted now when written about.
My point is that there has been lots of fuss about the "historical record" when in actual fact the "record" is just a few trainspotter blokes like me who will do exactly the same thing when writing books and articles as we've always done. Which is to do a bit of googling, a bit of ringing round, then writing whatever we feel like afterwards.
nice ren & stimpy reference:agree: and its just reminded me I've got all Ren & Stimpy series on DVD (and yet to rip them to the PS3). I've also got two CDs of songs from the series.
When I read about Joe Brown, Colin Kirkus or whoever, I’d like to think the writing reflects the facts known and opinions help by climbers at the time, not some prettified version put about to keep the peace at the time.
by - Al Evans on - 10 Dec 2010
In reply to Monk: I used to be able to do three one arm pull-ups with either hand (it's actually not difficult if you train for them) but then along came Steve Bancroft who could do one arm pull ups on a single finger, as I remember , any finger!
by - steve webster on - 10 Dec 2010 In reply to Al Evans::lol:
although this has nothing to do with this thread.steve could not do one finger pull ups,he could barely manage a one armer.he was one of the climbers weakest stregth wise when he lived in leeds.
I do think that the discussion specific to RS has run its course. Though locking another topic on the subject seems pointless and counter productive to me. What is worth discussing is how to avoid the same shit happening again and again and….
shark is right, bullshit and climbing have always gone hand in hand and every generation has it's dodgy characters. However I also agree with Bonjoy that the above is worth discussing. Why does it seem to be so easy for bullshitters to prosper and what can be done about it? I have absolutely no idea what the answer is though.
It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.
Why does it seem to be so easy for bullshitters to prosper and what can be done about it? I have absolutely no idea what the answer is though.
I'm also a little skeptical of the second example you cite - that discussion of chockstones and Right Eliminate. It's my experience that Brown and his generation enjoyed teasing others and spinning tales - not in any kind of RS way, more around the edges and for the fun of it on the whole (their big achievements are not in doubt) - especially when asked about it by admirers or later generations.
In the world of HA mountaineering, unless you have photographic proof, you may as well not bother publicising your ascent.
It's way off topic now (or maybe the problem of historical accuracy is the new topic) but I'm not sure about your gold dust stuff Shark. I don't see the Al Evans and Webbo quotes as being contradictory, for two reasons: firstly, if I remember it right Bancroft did get a bit stronger in the fingers towards the end of halcyon days - see FAs of Castellan and Narcissus in 1976. Secondly, I think Al Evans was referring to one finger wrapped through a sling or a loop rather than draped on a campus rung or similar. The former is a lot easier.billy bancroft lived in leeds when he did the f.a. of narcissus and castellan so its not a case of him getting stronger after he left leeds.as i spent most of 1976 and 77 down the old leeds wall practicing one armers on the pocket above the door with steve and chris the flash i reckon i've more idea about this than mr evans plus given his history i wouldn't trust his memory.
I'm also a little skeptical of the second example you cite - that discussion of chockstones and Right Eliminate. It's my experience that Brown and his generation enjoyed teasing others and spinning tales - not in any kind of RS way, more around the edges and for the fun of it on the whole (their big achievements are not in doubt) - especially when asked about it by admirers or later generations.
Not sure of the relevance of Narcissus either; hardly a powerful route and definitely not requiring of much finger strength.
I suppose I just want that 'mush of stuff' to be as accurate as possible but I guess it can only say what is based on evidence of which there is none. So to conclude, the only conclusion you can draw is that all of his unproven ascents are to be recorded with a hefty element of doubt.
Another example was the chockstone on Right Eliminate. Everyone banged on about (it)
Interesting - thanks. The magazine and guidebook write-ups of the first ascent of Castellan (the moves through the overhang, or the way it was done at that point at any rate) suggested a bit of a breakthrough for Bancroft: press hype perhaps?
Interesting - thanks. The magazine and guidebook write-ups of the first ascent of Castellan (the moves through the overhang, or the way it was done at that point at any rate) suggested a bit of a breakthrough for Bancroft: press hype perhaps?
the way steve did castellan as i heard at the time was feet first i.e. more of a front lever type move to throw a foot into the pocket on the lip.which is possibly more suprising as if my memory is correct he was even shitter at these than one armers. ;D
Yes, I can confirm Rich done these routes as I belayed him.
Makes me laugh that people are doubting him. I tried to log on to U.K Climbing website when I read about the story but unfortunatly my schools sever wouldn't let me (I am in Thailand). Maybe people will stop doubting him now! Maybe he upset someone, I know he can be an arrogant little twat sometimes!!!
For my own piece of mind i contacted the guy who Rich told me belayed him on Liquid Ambar and Hubble. He replied this:Excellent newsQuoteYes, I can confirm Rich done these routes as I belayed him.
I have been hoping that this Simpson affair would get sorted but it seems he's happy to get erased from climbing history. He's content with his life and has no plans to get involved. A strange standpoint in my view but there you go, he's an odd fish. For my own piece of mind i contacted the guy who Rich told me belayed him on Liquid Ambar and Hubble. He replied this:QuoteYes, I can confirm Rich done these routes as I belayed him.
Makes me laugh that people are doubting him. I tried to log on to U.K Climbing website when I read about the story but unfortunatly my schools sever wouldn't let me (I am in Thailand). Maybe people will stop doubting him now! Maybe he upset someone, I know he can be an arrogant little twat sometimes!!!
But i guess its too little too late. Case closed.
I get what you're saying Chris, but if he's working in a school he must be quite capable of measuring his words. Whether he'll agree to is a different matter perhaps?
Cant believe ukc have done an article on this... bunch of chimps.
I've met the guy in question. I believe he is completely credible, i think if someone asked him to lie for them he would probably kick their head in. He knows his stuff re climbing (climbs 8b+). To be honest Shark he is a bit of a (how shall i put this) livewire. I was surprised to get such such a measured response and i think you've no chance of getting him to do a question and answer session.
Assuming the guy is a teacher I am more concerned with his grammar than anything else.
Sorry old things but I can't consider this as in anyway cedible evidence.
Either the guy is credible or he isn't. Thankfully there is a very easy way for him to prove if he is, absolutely and without a shred of doubt.
Assuming the guy is a teacher I am more concerned with his grammar than anything else.
Why what happened to her?
Assuming the guy is a teacher I am more concerned with his grammar than anything else.
:wave: Happy Xmas old bean.
This chap says he has the videos of Rich doing Careless and Liquid Ambar. I for one would take his word for it regards Hubble if I saw the video of LA. I think few would argue that this proved his credibility as a belayer/witness. Given that it is such a simple matter for him to do this I see no reason to take anything he says as credible until such time as the videos are shown. I believe the videos are in a non digital format, but there is no need for a complex re-formatting, a phone video of it playing on a screen will be fine.Either the guy is credible or he isn't. Thankfully there is a very easy way for him to prove if he is, absolutely and without a shred of doubt.
Brain exam? Mind meld?
i think your money is as safe as houses there jonThis chap says he has the videos of Rich doing Careless and Liquid Ambar. I for one would take his word for it regards Hubble if I saw the video of LA. I think few would argue that this proved his credibility. Given that it is such a simple matter for him to do this I see no reason to take anything he says as credible until such time as the videos are shown. I believe the videos are in a non digital format, but there is no need for a complex re-formatting, a phone video of it playing on a screen will be fine.Either the guy is credible or he isn't. Thankfully there is a very easy way for him to prove if he is, absolutely and without a shred of doubt.
Brain exam? Mind meld?
Now I’m not a betting man but I’m willing to put a £50 bet on with any RS true believer that these videos will for some reason never materialise. Any takers?
Either the guy is credible or he isn't. Thankfully there is a very easy way for him to prove if he is, absolutely and without a shred of doubt.
Brain exam? Mind meld?
This chap says he has the videos of Rich doing Careless and Liquid Ambar.
Sorry old things but I can't consider this as in anyway cedible evidence.
Maybe its something to do with the whole heason scandle.sorry, this is worded wrong, didn't mean I believed the stuff Ben did, i didn't, just good he got back into climbing.
Its good to see that ben is cranking fairly hard and putting a few vids up, would be great if rich did the same
Sorry old things but I can't consider this as in anyway cedible evidence.
You would say that
He was still strong as fuck anyway, that much I'm sure people aren't disputing
why?He was still strong as fuck anyway, that much I'm sure people aren't disputing
A few people (Damo, Mick) seemed rather put out on the other channel when I said much the same thing.
why?
Sorry old things but I can't consider this as in anyway cedible evidence.
You would say that
I would because unsubtantiated second hand 'hearsay' isn't credible evidence.
FFS the Bible has more credible 'hearsay' evidence.
Sorry old things but I can't consider this as in anyway cedible evidence.
You would say that
I would because unsubtantiated second hand 'hearsay' isn't credible evidence.
FFS the Bible has more credible 'hearsay' evidence.
This is probably why he doesn't get involved. People like you will never be satisfied.
If a credible witness gave direct evidence that they saw the ascents I would be satisfied.
to be honest i'm more disappointed with all this for people with unswerving loyalty like doylo and keith
If a credible witness gave direct evidence that they saw the ascents I would be satisfied.
Who is it you think is lying then, the Hubble LA witness or me?
there are loads of strong people who can't climb and loads of very good climbers who are not strong.
Ru can explain more about conditional admissibility but I'd say (given the edited videos that are in circulation compared to unedited one that are not) at best the statement is weak evidence that person y had seen a video and that's all.
also tbh i'm bored of all this lawyer speak on a bouldering site, do they have no lawyering sites for that kind of stuff?
www.cunts.com (http://www.cunts.com)
All we know is that you're saying that you were told by person x that they belayed RS.
I'm not sure how much of the UKC thread people over on this side of the fence have read (or I may have missed it here?) but this information was offered to petejh (assuming the names carry over) first to clarify the historical record (with conditions), which I gather was refused. This information didn't have to come through Doylo.
by - petejh on - 14 Dec 2010
In reply to friend1:
Seeing as this thread is going to be locked and I have the feeling that Alan won't be allowing anymore speculation to appear on UKC - I'd like this to be on some sort of public record before I forget the details:
Rich got in touch with me 4 days ago (on the 10th December) following my request for him to validate his ascent of Liquid Ambar for the forthcoming North Wales Limestone guidebook. He told me that he'd give me the name and contact details of his belayer for Liquid Ambar and Hubble provided I accept his 3 conditions, which were:
1) That his (the belayer's) details (name, email etc) are not placed on internet forums or in widespread media of any kind.
2) That only one person (yourself preferably) makes contact to verify my ascent.
3) That you request verification for the purposes of the historical record in your guidebook, and do not mention debates on ukc etc – he abhors this type of thing, and would probably be reluctant to get involved if he believed that your requests were in direct response to forum speculation.
I see these as smokescreens and attempts to control the situation - typical of his behavior whenever he's been questioned. His conditions are unacceptable to me for these reasons -
they isolate me into being partly responsible for supporting his reputation without his proof being open to public scrutiny,
it's totally unrealistic for Rich to try to keep his means of validation separated from the internet climbing community by which so much of the doubt has been raised about his claims,
Rich's behavior, by which I mean his long-term refusal to respect the wishes of any member of the climbing community by supplying proof when he's been respectfully asked to do so, has ensured he isn't in a position to demand 'conditions' from anyone,
and lastly there's no reason for there to be any great secrecy in this matter, it's a claim of an ascent up a little bit of a cliff near Llandudno - we're not talking about international espionage here, the only possible reason for wanting secrecy is if Rich has something to hide.
I emailed Rich back today to tell him either to verify his ascent of LA in an open and honest manner by giving me a straight answer, or consider his ascent struck from the record, he hasn't replied yet. I've spoken or been in contact with a lot of Rich's acquaintances over the last week to get a more complete picture, none of them supported Rich's claims and they actually raised even more doubts then they cleared up.
People have always been open and receptive to Rich proving the doubters wrong but he's never done so which is a shame, because he's a 'nice' guy and one of the strongest climbers around. As things stand I believe Rich has lied about all of his most impressive sporting achievements.
..Then one I day met someone called Dan Tounley he was older than me and had a very high motivation and was very talented he was climbing 8a+ at the time, he obviously saw that I was talented and very keen so he took me under his wing and taught me how to climb hard, how to train, that there's nothing to be scared of and that you must give 110 per cent if you want to achieve your goals and that you can do anything as long as you want it bad enough. He took me outside and even helped me with money on a few occasions by not letting me pay fuel money etc. We then went on a climbing trip abroad to northern Spain for 3 months, I was only 17 at the time and was very nervous but he was great he looked after me and I just had an incredible time and realised that all I wanted to do was to climb and travel and fortunately I'm still doing it now and enjoying it more than ever.
3. Who or what has influenced your climbing?
My great friend Dan Tounley, who got me into climbing and showed me the ropes. Although he does not climb anymore and has lived a life full of problems, he remains the person I most respect in climbing
All we know is that you're saying that you were told by person x that they belayed RS.
I'm not sure what you are saying (as usual) but it sounds like a criticism of petejh. Doylo knows who the belayer was, had his contact details and also knows him personally. petejh didn't.
And Climbing in Luxembourg (WTF?) interview (http://www.climbing.lu/index.php?page=simpson)
And Climbing in Luxembourg (WTF?) interview (http://www.climbing.lu/index.php?page=simpson)
Difficult to take this article too seriously when the interview opens with:
"1. When and how did you discover climbing?
At school, my science teacher took me climbing as I was being disruptive in her class. I really enjoyed it and continued to climb with her until it I discovered that she was in fact an alien. I found myself looking for a new climbing partner shortly after. "
I read no futher
not really interesting, and the author goes on about uncut footage way too much
I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking winTrouble is, he could of easily sorted this if what he said is true (ie got video of careless etc..).
Theres a reason the previous thread on this got closed..............its not going anywhere other than round in circles.
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 hadnt heard of Dan Tounley before. From what I have read on this thread he::thumbsdown:
c. is out of the country doing ...missionary work in bongo land or something
I'm actually starting to see why simmo hasn't bothered with all this, you can't fucking winLeave 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….
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 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.
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.
I'm through with trying to investigate any more, i'll give you a million pounds if you lock this thread!
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!