[carlisle slapper]

I'd just like to point out that i sent Rich a facebook message saying i doubted his running claims the day i posted on here about it. As i thought it was the least i could do. I also had in mind what he said about the argument being between him and his doubters in 2006,( very smart of him to hold onto that FA footage of the ground up on carless torque for 4 years, it'll almost be worth as much as the county footage when it comes out!)

Chris, Rich must have said to you or Keith who belayed him on Action? and where did the guy (or girl) go afterwards?, did you not all go for a celebratory beer or cake or something? also was the "ascent" day footage (with the decent conditions and the Unkle track) filmed after or before the ascent?

I better point out that that last question is loaded somewhat in that those links he does (assuming you cut when he falls off) are pretty small, and going from the pinch to the top is roughly about 8b (although i'll double check on the consensus for that) but everyone i've seen (in person with my very own eyes) seriously trying it has done this link and atleast 5 of them (Felix, Manuel, Ben, Ryan, Andre) haven't done the whole route yet (all of whom have climbed 8c+ or 9a). Infact the best bit of footage from the ground in the film seems to be from doing the jump to the 2nd pocket after clipping then you cut. Did you have any bigger sections which you left out the film or just weren't filming when he did them etc?

If you can't be arsed going through it then just send me a pm and i'll drop it as i don't want to wind you up. I appreciate if Rich is busy in his first term at cambridge and his exams are coming up too.

Comments that rich doesn't care if we think he's untrustworthy are a bit playground though. I dont care if he cares or not, but for the sake of future guidebooks (the only permanent influence this might have) and 100s of potentially mislead young climbers who have him up on their bedroom walls (they should choose a squeeky clean Robins (he's been bloody awesome this year on UK sport) or Mcclure in future). For the sake of the international reputation of English climbing.

I would quite happily volunteer for an ascent audit, whereby i produce witnesses, videos or statements or photo sequences from belayers and spotters of my 5 hardest ascents. As a show of solidarity and how much of not a big deal it is to get these things out in the open. I'm pretty sure i could ask some other high profile (sponsored) athletes to volunteer this too. UKB or C could run an article/ thread on it. After all its only fair tit for tat and all that, and if Rich has been fibbing it might help restore the faith of the average naive bumbly in british climbers.

[Doylo]

My memory is a bit hazy on the germany stuff as it was 5 years ago that i was out there and made the film.keith had gone by the time he d done action.i was out there with someone else (who simpson didn t get on with hence we didn t go to the same crag often.frustrating for me as i was hoping to get him doing it for the film). I don t even remember asking him who belayed him. This may seem strange but i was just psyched he d done it. I think he was there with a german friend. Can t remember which stage the footage used for the final edit was filmed. Pretty sure i don t have any footage of bigger links but will see if i can find the tapes. Some people may have done the same link and still not done it. Don t see why that means he can t of done it. It may be playground that he doesn t care what people think of him but thats what he said.

[Ru]

I think this thread has gone as far as it can.

I've spoken to Rich. You may think that everyone checks UKB twice a day whether they climb or not, but in fact he was unaware of this thread until today. He's currently busy at college and will not respond straight away, if he will at all. I hope he will.

Dan: this analysis of the AD footage is a bit pointless. We know it's not ascent footage - a move by move breakdown of how hard he makes it look (to you) compared with how hard some other people make it look (to you) when doing it by a different sequence is not going to achieve anything. The fact is that the belayer and/or witnesses are unknown. If a belayer or witness was available that could testify to the ascent then that should be enough. Finally Dan, I'd drop the inquisitor role. I'm sure you only have the greater good of climbing as your intention, but it didn't make Rich look good when he did it to Ben and it doesn't become you either. I don't think an article would be a good idea.

As Doyle says, no-one will find any running or boxing records by Googling or ringing Alexander stadium. Speculation about this will not achieve very much. Either Rich will respond and all will hopefully be clear, or he will not - with the consequence that inferences will inevitably be drawn. Again, I hope he will.

[ferret]

as ive said before i hate these threads

i just wadded ru for saying enough is enough. i can understand peoples concerns as to how false claims can effect our sport, but i think threads like these are in their own way equally damaging. in my opinion it would be better to stop further postinguntil rich comes forward and says his piece or somebody has some kind of meaningful communication with him thats worth passing on.

i will say that as these threads go this wasnt hasnt been too bad, people have put their opinions forward thoughtfully and any potential "accusers" if u like have been forthright not hiding behind internet nicknames etc. that said it hasnt achieved much either, hopefully the weather will be good this weekend and we can all go climbing and forget about this, for a while at least

[mark s]

This mass doubting of a respected climber seems a regular thing now.
How many times have the masses been proved wrong?

[slackline]

Any suggestions how one would go about doing that tactfully ?

You have a public website with 7 pages of posts accusing him of lying and you're worried about how to speak to him tactfully? You're probably well past that stage. In the circumstances I think at the very least he should be contacted to give him an opportunity to respond.

The thing is though that the postings of users do not reflect the opinions of the sites owners. As made clear in the About UKB

Moderation policy

We like freedom of expression and are proud of our light moderation policy so the overly-sensitive may wish to click away elsewhere. We think the overall tone of the site (friendly, humourous, irreverent) is a more important focus than fretting over specific content. However posters identified who troll, threaten, spam, promote hatred (sexism, racism, etc) or post illegal content will be banned and have their posts removed. As on all web forums, the views and opinions expressed by posters are their own and UKB has no responsibility for them.

...although clearly the tone of this thread isn't "friendly, humourous, irreferent", but it has remained fairly sensible as Ferret points out.

Perhaps it is because of the nature of the posts that Shark is seeking to clarify the situation in a tactful manner (I don't think such efforts are put into confirming other "news" of ascents or "significant repeats").


The alternative is to have deleted this thread and all subsequent postings which isn't really in keeping with past moderation of the site and would be more akin to UKC policy which this site isn't (thankfully).

[Ru]

The views weren't Shark's, but he was still proposing to do some digging and phoning round. The website is still his and Toby's.

Whilst it is lovely that Shark was concerned about how to approach Rich tactfully, it was, I think, a secondary concern to contacting him at all. Anyway, it doesn't matter, Doyle spoke to him yesterday and I did last night.

[shark]

slack--line, Your loyalty to the site is tremendous. I should point out that the 'Heason' thread was pulled here but retained on UKC something that I disagreed with at the time as an observer.

Ru - On reflection my reference to being diplomatic was too flippant. Sorry. The point I was trying to make was that Simpson positioned himself so that you could only legitimately ask him for evidence if you stated you doubted him. Either this is because he is difficult and prickly or it is a way of deflecting the need to supply it or both. You said it was easy to ask - the way he has positioned himself makes it very difficult to ask. Simpson has been asked and had the opportunity to respond with evidence in the past and more recently with his sponsors. He hasn't come up with the goods yet. As a UKB member he still can now.

I also think that you describing this thread as being 7 pages of posts accusing him of lying is overstatement. The lack of evidence so far to support specific claims has raised serious doubts which have been expressed and explored here. I don't describe that as 7 pages accusing him of lying. That is the type of polarisation that Simpson was forcing in that quote. The evidence I am talking about being the naming and testimony of  belayers/witnesses or video of actual ascents. Not even all of them - though I hope that if offered it would relate to AD as I personally think this is the most important claim. Notwithstanding witness or video evidence of any hard ascent would help support his other claims. He has claimed numerous ascents in the 8c and above category. If he has done what he has claimed then there will a belayer and therefore a witness for each one. Given the crags they are on in all probability there will have been bystanders too.

[slackline]

The views weren't Shark's, but he was still proposing to do some digging and phoning round. The website is still his and Toby's.

It doesn't matter who's site it is!

The fact that one of the owners appears to be making reasonable and rationale attempts to obtain FACTS is a good thing as it will hopefully stem the speculation by others (and being polite/tactful in going about that is good too as its civilised).

Whilst it is lovely that Shark was concerned about how to approach Rich tactfully, it was, I think, a secondary concern to contacting him at all.

Yes it was secondary as Shark's posts in this thread show he'd already started making efforts to corroborate information (in the absence of having Rich's phone number himself) before he posted the "tactfully" question (several posts prior to yesterdays).

Anyway, it doesn't matter, Doyle spoke to him yesterday and I did last night.

Yes I clocked that, not everyone has his contact number to be able to do this (as you had previously suggested Shark do).  Lets see if his attitude has changed.

[Snoops]

Man, this is depressing

If Rich does get to read all this i'm sure it will just re affirm his decision to leave climbing.

Adios gossip mongers.

I find statements like this ironic considering he instigated and contributed to the internet gossip hunt of Ben Heason. http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=157884&v=1

[slackline]

I find statements like this ironic considering he instigated and contributed to an internet gossip hunt of Ben Heason. http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=157884&v=1

Not read that before, but Rich's first post seems in-keeping with what has been suggested in this thread as sufficient evidence about his claims..

After all recent goings on with Ben heason,

i ask on a well read forum, would anyone who has witnessed Ben heason climb anthing of upper difficulty please contact me via email through this site or a post on this thread. It is important that a full name is given otherwise important information will not be taken seriously.

Please keep this post free of rants and uninformed information. It is important that anyone who has important information speaks out and help to bring out the truth.

[mark s]

Wonder if this thread will put an end to a UKC news headline like "simpson gains the lucasian chair at cambridge"

[SA Chris]

in my opinion it would be better to stop further postinguntil rich comes forward and says his piece or somebody has some kind of meaningful communication with him thats worth passing on.

What ferret and Ru said - Lock or Logpile time?

[carlisle slapper]

Well put Ru, i realised this when i first posted here, and this seems like a decent time to stop, it'd just be nice to hit something concrete rather than permanently pig swilling because every time a question is asked it produces nothing (which only leads to the desire to keep asking), however it looks like the only way that can possibly happen is for it to come from Rich, so i'll drop it.
Thanks for the reply chris.

[shark]

Seems fair and appropriate.

If Simpson wants to respond or other evidence comes to light we can unlock it.