simpson vanishes...

[Nigel]

I couldn't decide whether to to get involved in this but in the end thought, fuck it, so....

This is a lot different to the Scotty situation as clearly Rich is/was strong enough to do the feats achieved of him. Also worth pointing out that a lot of these rumours get spread as hard facts by people who hear them second/third hand. For example, I recall that Si Moore saw RS do Hubble, no? Yet many people on this thread have included this as an 'unwitnessed' ascent. I think the responsibility for this lies firmly with the doubters (I.U.P.G and all that), so maybe someone who knows Si should check with him?

I don’t want to get involved in this either Stu, but I think I can stretch to clearing your query up. At the time myself, Doyle, and Si were working together on an access job in Leeds. I quite clearly recall Doyle getting a text from Rich just before we joined the motorway saying that he’d just done Hubble. Given that we always set off at half six then this must have been at about a quarter to seven-ish in the morning? Si was in the car so I’m certain he didn’t witness this.

 

[rocketman]

since when has it been acceptable to carry out character assassination without the contribution of the guy himself?

Well I believe he has been invited to this conversation,
where do we stand if he chooses not to join in...? :shrug:

On a nice soft bouldering mat? Or if you're old school a little bit of bathroom mat... flippant maybe, but does 'believing' he's been invited have real bearing on this conversation or its nature.

Edit as got work to crack on with: nothing more to contribute really, point made.

 

[slackline]

since when has it been acceptable to carry out character assassination without the contribution of the guy himself?

Well I believe he has been invited to this conversation,

Just because someone has explicitly said "post up evidence" doesn't mean that the intended recipient (Rich Simpson) will have been told about this thread and the request, or will have bothered to read it if he has been made aware of it.

 

[Johnny Brown]

Anyone who thinks this can be cleared up by simply by 'asking Rich himself' might do well to remember the farce we had when we tried this over one single ascent - his ground-up of Careless Torque. The layers of bullshit were remarkable - and yet he could have made us all look stupid just by posting his supposed video on youtube.

Ditto the supposed 'evidence' he had that Heason lied, to be revealed only to those who promised to back Rich up. Never appeared, despite Rich being made to look very foolish in its absence.

Rich's sponsors have already 'asked Rich himself'. His response prompted them all to drop him. Even Accapi. From what I've heard, this included contacting Koyamayada who was unable to corroborate Rich's story.

From the UKC thread, its clear his four-minute mile 'whilst pace-setting at the Alexander stadium' is a flat lie.

His Hasse-Brandler solo is so outrageous that it has been flatly ignored by the entire climbing world.

All very sad: clearly he was one of the strongest climbers Britain has produced in the last ten years, and with a remarkable talent for training. You have to ask - Why?

You have to wonder is this is giant 'fuck you' to the climbing community for refusing to listen to him on the subject five years ago. If you're not interested in the truth, lets see just what credulous fools you are then...

 

[lex]

my god what have I become!?

Think you already know the answer to that mate!

 

[Bubba]

since when has it been acceptable to carry out character assassination without the contribution of the guy himself?

It's the internet - it's perfectly acceptable to discuss anything under the sun so long as it's not going to land ukb in legal shit.

Simpson has an account here. Whether he chooses to join in or not (assuming he's bothered) is up to him.

 

[SA Chris]

Has anyone who knows him actually tried PM ing him? PMs might get flagged up in a hotmail account.

 

[Moo]

I think it's safe for us to assume he knows about this discussion

 

[slackline]

I think it's safe for us to assume he knows about this discussion

To 'assume' makes an ass out of [yo]u and me.

 

[Probes]

... from Wild Country's list of UK sponsored climbers. I wonder where he's gone? Perhaps he's given up climbing again.

He's not vanished he's become a camper.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=426350&v=1#x6040223

 

[ghisino]

I could tell you who belayed me on Resurection in 1994.

off the main topic...

@punter or even "wannabe" levels, what about people doing their top ascents on trips and exchanging belays with "unknowns"? Would you believe only if you're provided with an e-mail and the belayer (or spectator) confirms?

or again, other case. A few boulderers are "shy" and usually climb their hardest when they are alone : i guess they either suffer the presence of "competitors", or the presence of people in general (they get distracted or sth like that). Do you believe only if they flood youtube with still-camera cheap edit videos?

Finally. what about someone who only climbs hard with a few very close friends or with their partner? Does that invalidate the "belayer's proof"?

I mean, in all these cases (that happen) what are your criteria to consider the climber genuine vs liar?
(i stress, again : talking of levels that won't bring any major sponsorship)

 

[dave]

I could tell you who belayed me on Resurection in 1994.

off the main topic...

@punter or even "wannabe" levels, what about people doing their top ascents on trips and exchanging belays with "unknowns"? Would you believe only if you're provided with an e-mail and the belayer (or spectator) confirms?

or again, other case. A few boulderers are "shy" and usually climb their hardest when they are alone : i guess they either suffer the presence of "competitors", or the presence of people in general (they get distracted or sth like that). Do you believe only if they flood youtube with still-camera cheap edit videos?

Finally. what about someone who only climbs hard with a few very close friends or with their partner? Does that invalidate the "belayer's proof"?

I mean, in all these cases (that happen) what are your criteria to consider the climber genuine vs liar?
(i stress, again : talking of levels that won't bring any major sponsorship)

As I said, it all depends upon the person in question already having a demonstrable track record of being honest.

 

[nik at work]

And also it doesn't matter. Different people will think different things.

When people are taking sponsorship I guess there is a need for a general concensus of belief for a sponsor to continue providing support (why would a sponsor support a widely doubted climber?). The basis of this belief probably varies from person to person, I'd guess a sponsor would look for a young unknown hotshot to provide video etc established climbers probably have more ability to trade on reputation to an extent. I dunno.

If someone doesn't want sponsorship/publicity/whatever then they don't have any onus to prove anything and they probably don't care if A N Other person believes them or not. Whether you believe will be based on your personal assessment of what they tell you (and whether they have a trustworthy face).

 

[smoggie]

I could tell you who belayed me on Resurection in 1994.

off the main topic...

@punter or even "wannabe" levels, what about people doing their top ascents on trips and exchanging belays with "unknowns"? Would you believe only if you're provided with an e-mail and the belayer (or spectator) confirms?

or again, other case. A few boulderers are "shy" and usually climb their hardest when they are alone : i guess they either suffer the presence of "competitors", or the presence of people in general (they get distracted or sth like that). Do you believe only if they flood youtube with still-camera cheap edit videos?

Finally. what about someone who only climbs hard with a few very close friends or with their partner? Does that invalidate the "belayer's proof"?

I mean, in all these cases (that happen) what are your criteria to consider the climber genuine vs liar?
(i stress, again : talking of levels that won't bring any major sponsorship)

If said "punter or wannabe" is questioned about an ascent, I don't want proof because I don't give a monkeys. If someone who I respect and has inspired me in climbing and training has lied about significant ascents and achievements then I do care. I would prefer someone proven not to have lied, but I'd equally like to know if one of my climbing inspirations is a fool.

 

[chris]

Unfortunately sponsorships are provided by businesses; said businesses do not want any adverse publicity associated with their brand, athletes and products. Whether wild country and scarpa have pulled their deals due to some previous accusations, or RS not providing evidence, they'll probably thinking its a good job they did given this internet thread!

It would be a real shame if his efforts on the rock are false, RS was a nice fella and a very strong committed climber and provided many with inspiration. It does strike me as odd that no-one has a vid of hubble, as his goal was always to emulate moon/moffat and tick the real hard classics, especially being a sponsored climber to boot. I would have thought providing evidence and media showcasing your skills and your sponsor's gear would only increase your value to them? saying that no-one seems to question John Gaskins and his shunted ascent of VNB (or however he climbed it) which he did alone! Hopefully a belayer will come out of the woodwork and conclude this affair....well the climbing part anyway. Re: running and boxing, sounds a little too good to be true to be honest!

it would be interested to see for what exact reasons he was dropped by both teams.

 

[slackline]

it would be interested to see for what exact reasons he was dropped by both teams.

Scarpa

Wild Country

Knock yourself out, perhaps post details here to stem the speculation too.

 

[T_B]

People who climb a lot see other people and have belayers and take photographs, apart from bouldering sometimes. As The Sausage said, you just don't go around doing your hardest routes without someone snapping a photo, or happening to be there, or belaying or whatever. It don't need to be videoed (though that is increasingly the expectation), as if someone is clearly having it, there's usually a psyched bystander snapping away (result = convincing sequence of photos). My direct experience of sponsored b*llshitters makes me doubt anyone who hasn't got evidence for claims of significant ascents. There are soooooo many ppl climbing thesedays. I've been at the Tor on the mingingest day in March and watched Foundry Rob do Mecca on a day when he must have thought no-one else would have been there to witness it. We've seen it all before - sponsored yoof gets mum to sew logos onto shorts, then feels under pressure to come up with media-worthy results month-on-month. Have to say that those doing the sponsoring do like to put some of their younger 'athletes' on a pedestal sometimes, claiming they are the next big thing. So it's no wonder we end up with stuff getting made up. If they do terminate a high profile climber's contract it would make sense to put out a statement saying why, as it's not fair on the climber, nor the buying public and it does the brand no favours as it potentially makes them look underhand. All that said, I personally believe RS did some of the routes claimed, cos I can't believe he would have invested all the training/emotion to do Hubble/Action Directe etc and then lie about it. Let's see whether a belayer/photographer steps forward. Plus I've re-read what he wrote about BH on the other channel (his post was zapped at the time) and it's a pretty convincing diatribe about "wanting the truth" from someone clearly disillusioned with the whole climbing sponsorship game and how those who shout the loudest are generally the ones rewarded the most. As to the recent alpinism/running claims, they have been shown to be almost certainly unture, which is very sad to see. But we'll see it again no doubt. Perhaps the sponsors identifying the gifted climbers early on should have a quiet word and tell them that they're in the wrong sport! (I got the impression that RD had realised this, and bowed out. Maybe he found it more competitive on the track/in the ring and decided to come back to be a big fish in the small climbing pond? Who knows? If that was the case then life at Cambridge might come as a bit of a shock!

 

[Simon Lee]

Because it would be an utter waste of time. As Percy said he's not providing evidence to his sponsors on request why on earth would he provide it to me.

Perhaps it would. You'll never know if you don't try. And askings easy.

If this thread is anything to go by, the ongoing dialogue could prove tricky.

As he says:

Until people present themselves as doubters, I have no intention whatsoever in allowing them to save face by me putting up climbing videos on the net. It is the reason there is nothing up on the net at the moment and the reason nothing will ever go up. Like I said, until people outright question me, I will be doing nothing to prove them wrong. It would be unfair for me to present proof and never know the full extent of who these doubters are and exactly what they doubted.

I shall not be replying again. Unless you have anything constructive to say, then I suggest you don’t bother either.

Based on the above if I was to contact him I would need to present myself as a doubter of his ascent of AD, AM, CT, 4min mile, 2.30 marathon and the BH solo.

Any suggestions how one would go about doing that tactfully ?

 

[roddersm]

I think anyone deserves to be scrutinised if they publically claim to have done something way beyond their general standard of ability, regardless if they are a punter or a
sponsored pro. Climbing relies on trust and if people are going to bullshit it destroys the credibility of the sport. Anyone can put anything on their 8a scorecard, UKC logbook
or blogs and a lot of it is embellished or worse total bullshit. In my opinion the
internet is helping to foster a culture of deceipt/delusion with people trying to out do each other by embellishing their climbing credentials through their cyber profiles.
I'm sure there are a lot of honest people about of course.

In Simpsons case after reading all this I probably doubt his credibility more than I did before
especially when you hear some of the people who don't believe him. However from what I've heard about him or seen in videos etc. I don't think anything he's claimed is beyond the level of ability he has demonstrated. That doesn't mean he's not a liar just that there's no conclusive reason to believe that he is.

I hope this gets sorted one way or another because like others have said Rich has been a real inspiration to people and it would be shit if it turns out that he's a liar.

 

[SA Chris]

Any suggestions how one would go about doing that tactfully ?

Preferrably choose somewhere near a boxing ring.