[Three Nine]

Its not hearsay.

[slackline]

Before folk get any more misty eyed, this is the guy who lied to his girlfriend, claiming he had testicular cancer, for god knows what twisted reason. That is the level of untruth the guy will stoop to. This too is hearsay (from a credible source) so I’ll have to delete it later.

Sounds like bollocks to me.

[tomtom]

That's plumbing new depths...

[Three Nine]

That's plumbing new depths...

I'll not go into detail, but the fibs about sporting achievements are just the tiny tip of the iceberg of mendacity. My mother always told me about how lying was wrong, and I never really understood why until I got to know Rich. 

[Monolith]

I bought all of Rich's holds off his home board a good few years back. Then some scumbag sold them from the wall co-op we started. I was worried about their future value at the time.

[monkoffunk]

OK, so on the night, he didn't stack up to the billing, but it's a great answer to all those saying he'd never been heard of in boxing.

With quiet confidence, Cambridge fans watched on as Rich Simpson took to the ring. Having over 60 bouts to his name, the Cambridge man was the sure favourite against the Oxford debutant. Although the Light Blue managed to knock his opponent down late in the first round, the gulf in experience was inapparent. As the final two rounds saw Simpson tire, he resorted to ‘dancing-on-ice’ style pirouettes to evade further punishment; meanwhile Oxford’s Light-Middleweight pushed forwards to clinch the bout by a majority decision and put the Dark Blues ahead for the first time.

[Three Nine]

Tab scum

[Whyatt]

What's he up to nowadays? Maybe a come back to kill the doubters?

[petejh]

OK, so on the night, he didn't stack up to the billing, but it's a great answer to all those saying he'd never been heard of in boxing.

With quiet confidence, Cambridge fans watched on as Rich Simpson took to the ring. Having over 60 bouts to his name, the Cambridge man was the sure favourite against the Oxford debutant. Although the Light Blue managed to knock his opponent down late in the first round, the gulf in experience was inapparent. As the final two rounds saw Simpson tire, he resorted to ‘dancing-on-ice’ style pirouettes to evade further punishment; meanwhile Oxford’s Light-Middleweight pushed forwards to clinch the bout by a majority decision and put the Dark Blues ahead for the first time.

The only certainty about Rich Simpson is he's a serial liar and a fraud. I had the pleasure of climbing with him in I think 2012 or 2013 when he was 'in training' for his supposed 'super-alpinism phase' to challenge Ueli Steck 
During that day he told me all sorts of lies, about Olympic boxing, dolies solos, alpinism, sport climbing. He was awful at dry-tooling and mixed climbing but the story he was weaving, in his mind and on sponsor's blogs, was that he was going to be challenging Ueli Steck's feats.

A total fraud - with his 4-min mileing, sub 3hr marathons, olympic boxing, 9a sends, Brandler-Hasse solos, super-alpinism, bollock cancer, hard grit flashes/GU's, who knows what else.

I've got an extensive collection of emails from reputable people detailing Simpon's various lies - I got involved with trying to clear up his Liquid Ambar claim while producing the NW guide and, as usual, felt like digging deeper once it was obvious he was a serial walter mitty. I've still got Simpson's emails asking me to abide by certain conditions before he'd name his LA belayer. And I've got the email Shark received from Dan Townley in which Dan confirms he belayed Simpson on ascents of LA and Hubble (both times 'early in the morning, no-one else at the crag'. Doesn't match the third-hand account of the people at Parisellas Cave the day Simpson appeared and claimed to have sent LA). Simpson's so dubious and troubled that even having a belayer confirm his ascents isn't credible enough!

The boxing footage is just embarrassing for him, and the Cambridge Uni newsletter (search for it if you're interested) says it all between the lines..

Doylo - saying 'how do you know he didn't?' isn't the question to ask a supposed elite-level climber claiming cutting edge feats. Recognition of elite level achievements requires credible proof in any walk of life - otherwise any strong indoor trainer should be believed when they claim Hubble, Action Directe, LA, etc. etc. You're at the point where I know you can send you 'dulas 8c(hard!) proj so why not just lie and say you did it, and then play cat and mouse for years with anyone who wants credible evidence of your non-ascent? How do I know you didn't send it?

Clearly a strong youth who trained to the point of being physically able to climb at the elite level. But a total liar.

[Three Nine]

Spot on.

[tomtom]

That's plumbing new depths...

I'll not go into detail, but the fibs about sporting achievements are just the tiny tip of the iceberg of mendacity. My mother always told me about how lying was wrong, and I never really understood why until I got to know Rich.

It was a gonad gag.... rather than a commentary on someone I've never met.. just to clarify. I also have video evidence of me not belaying at Hubble.

[shark]

Logpile?

[DAVETHOMAS90]

This is crazy shit.

Obviously appropriate to split the thread, but the title reads as a judgement in itself. Who's prejudice is it serving? Is this a forum or a mob?

Why the level of unchecked hatred against the man? Why not just stone him, and have done with it? There are new messiahs now.

I thought Andy Kirkpatrick's article was insightful:

http://andy-kirkpatrick.com/blog/view/death_of_a_lie

Thoughtful and balanced, and probably already somewhere else on this site.

I don't know what Rich did, and what he didn't, but I feel I have little reason to speculate, and no reason to wish him ill.

[dave]

Dave how is the thread title a judgement?

[SA Chris]

Why the level of unchecked hatred against the man? Why not just stone him, and have done with it? There are new messiahs now.

I see very little hatred, unchecked or otherwise? the common emotion seems to be bitter disappointment. As Andy K says, we all want to believe in the guy who can do great things if he tries hard enough, but then illusions are shattered when the truth is revealed. To some people this is an affront to their values / ethics / morals and they hate the guy because of the lies he's perpetuated, others are just saddened by them.

[Bonjoy]

This is crazy shit.

Obviously appropriate to split the thread, but the title reads as a judgement in itself. Who's prejudice is it serving? Is this a forum or a mob?

Why the level of unchecked hatred against the man? Why not just stone him, and have done with it? There are new messiahs now.

I thought Andy Kirkpatrick's article was insightful:

http://andy-kirkpatrick.com/blog/view/death_of_a_lie

Thoughtful and balanced, and probably already somewhere else on this site.

I don't know what Rich did, and what he didn't, but I feel I have little reason to speculate, and no reason to wish him ill.

Could you point to which posts you consider hateful?
I can only speak for myself. I did know Rich. I have contempt for many of his actions (some of which are not discussed here, including things which had negative consequences for friends), but I bear him no ill will and I certainly don’t hate him. I sincerely hope he’s moved on and is having a successful life based on earned merit.
The tone of my initial post is aimed at posters on here. There is no sensible reason to give the guy any benefit of the doubt when it comes to climbing. This is not personal, the same would apply to any climber in who did the same. I don’t see how this is has anything to do with hate or stoning. It’s akin to the suspension of a professional athlete for drugs offences – an unpleasant necessity for a greater good.
I’ve no idea who split and titled the thread BTW.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Dave how is the thread title a judgement?

To me, it reads as something that suggests value judgements, possibly skewed in one direction more than the other. That may just be me! "Rich Simpson - did he or didn't he?" would seem more open minded. I'm not suggesting that as a title.

As it is, it sounds as though someone is saying, "that's OK, look back through rose tinted specs, you just can't see the truth" - as though one side has more legitimate truth claims than the other.

Others might read it differently, but I'm not comfortable with it.

[dave]

To be honest Dave I think you're reading something into the thread title that isn't there, bar the customary forum sarcasm. "Rich Simpson - did he or didn't he?" sound like it's inviting more of a judgement if you ask me, and implies it's a cut-and-dried affair, which it isn't.

[tomtom]

Someone's dropped a bollock there...

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Hi Bonjoy.

Thanks.

My post wasn't particularly referencing your's, but there is a tendency to polarize with things like this. I'd rather not judge "the man", and in his absence, it's difficult to hear about more personal things.

There is also the difference in the level of speculation between those who knew him, and those who didn't, but still, the fanning of fire in any case.

[monkoffunk]

I don't know why its being discussed again, but I don't see any hated in any posts, more curiosity and disappointment. I guess a bit of drama, old or new, is exciting for people and Rich fanned that a bit at the time with his reactions to information requests. It's safe to assume he didn't do what he said he did, and if he cared about people thinking that I'm sure he'd have done more to defend himself. Probably should all just move on.

[petejh]

Come off it Dave. I'm talking about a guy who looked me in the eye  - when we climbed together one day during his 'training' for his mission to become a world-class super-alpinist - and over lunch convincingly regaled me with stories all about his Brandler-Hasse solo in record time, his sport climbing achievements, and about how he was a member of the GB Olympic boxing squad and only didn't make selection for London 2012 because he injured his shoulder shortly prior to the team selection bouts.

I remember he was completely convincing at the time.. Except I'd already heard all the rumours and so I just sat quietly and listened and let him talk,  knowing it's almost certainly all a complete fabrication of his imagination.

Have you watched the footage of his University bout? It's laughable. I boxed once or twice at company level in the Army (about as low a level as formal competitions exist) and I was about the same level - i.e. terrible.

 

There's nothing hateful about wanting to expose a liar and I don't harbour any ill feeling to Simpson.

[jwi]

I don't know why its being discussed again

It will be discussed every time some points out that “RS did also did a repeat in 2005” as a correction to a piece of news, as long as some of the stuff RS claimed are still newsworthy. There's nothing strange about that.

[Bonjoy]

Hi Bonjoy.

Thanks.

My post wasn't particularly referencing your's, but there is a tendency to polarize with things like this. I'd rather not judge "the man", and in his absence, it's difficult to hear about more personal things.

There is also the difference in the level of speculation between those who knew him, and those who didn't, but still, the fanning of fire in any case.

You could say 'polarise', or you could say 'make your mind up'. I think their is enough info out there for people to make their minds up. I don't think it's a mischaracterisation if anything posted implies that a consensus has been reach. I think it has. That's not the same as saying he definitively did or didn't do something. I honestly thought the issue was past the point of debate and hence past the point of being susceptible to further polarisation.

[Doylo]

My favourite one was when he had a one night stand with some climber girl and she had a poster of him on Liquid Ambar on her bedroom wall.  The story goes that before he sneaked out in the morning he signed it 'Rich was here xx'.