UKC

It seems that Rich Simpson has recently been dropped by a few of his sponsors.

http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,16327.0.html

In reply to friend1:

John Simpson liberated Kabul... On his own.

In reply to friend1: and the queen mothers died too.

In reply to friend1:

I know it's not the most up to date news but does anyone know anything more about this? If it's true, are we likely to see an article on here or in the mags? I for one would like to know the truth once and for all.

In reply to friend1:

.. does anyone know anything more about this?

No. But thanks for reminding me why I prefer UKC! It does what it says ont tin, no avatars, etc, etc. Oh and fewer smug bastards!

In reply to Padraig: UKB is ironic. UKC is cheesy. Or is it the other way around...?

In reply to Padraig:

UKB is for critters and people who say "dude" in unconvincing Rotherham accents. .

I thought he packed it all in a few years ago.

In reply to tom.e:

No, that sounds about right. I like that.

In reply to friend1:

We're you expecting a reaction? Believe it or not, there are plenty of 'real' climbers on UKC. Having said that, you might get one in a bit

In reply to jonny2vests:

Seeing the film or Rich S training for/climbing Action Direct was for me, simply inspirational. Reading Steve McClure's articles on Rich's training and approach to this climb in my mind meant he transcended beyond just a media portrayal of a series of grades, he represented what one man could do with giants portion of determination.

Really I think what is at stake is the future of hard climbing. Are we now to believe that unless we have video footage, photo-shopped pics, an entourage of spotters/belayers at our beck and call, all of our efforts will dismissed an debated to the nth degree.

Really as responsible climbers, we have a duty to protect ourselves from ourselves or the beauty of the climbing experience will become a farce.

In reply to alx:

For major, significant ascents, I think you should at least be able to produce a belayer. Unless you solo'd it in which case a witness might be in order.

So what should we do with dishonest sponsored climbers claiming major ascents, let them crack on? (Not referring to anyone in particular here, just asking the question).

In reply to jonny2vests:

I would agree, not having at least a belayer to verify the ascent is unusual.

However as Steve McC has always stated Rich S is the quite little man that carries a big stick.

Not sure what to make of it all. Its a climbing case of Michael Jackson.

Is he a man that thinks hes a boy, in which case having sleepovers is acceptable. Or is he a child fiend.
~~
Is he a man that just doesn't give a toss about the media? Or is he a liar and a braggart.

Im inclined to believe that he doesn't care what we think, nor do his friends and associates. In which case this debate and our individual POV's are of little merit.

Just a little interesting side note is Percy B's remarks about A Muerte.
Why is it that people give up trying a route once a FA is taken? What motivates these climbers then? Claiming the FA and the media coverage that follows surely cannot be the sole reason and as such getting the second ascent is not an exercise worth partaking in. Surely if this is the case then why do we place them on such a pedestal to aspire to?

Right I am off to brush my teeth with my WildCountry tooth brush, put on my WildCountry leather bouldering pouch and sleep in my WildCountry matching duvet and pillow cases.

Night All

In reply to alx:

Lol, genius the way you managed to bring MJ into it.

In reply to friend1:

Is your assumption ('dropped')



the only thing underpinning your rhetorical assertion:

'Topic - Rich Simpson's claims...finally caught up with him?'


or do you have any actual evidence?


Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:

Hi Mick I followed this thread on UKB when It happened yes he has been dropped.

see Percy B's comment on the third page


thread started of with a few people confused why he disappeared from the sponsored climbers lists.
The thread is now locked out and will stay that whay unless Rich himself replys

In reply to Padraig:

But behind all the pseudonyms and avatars there are quite a few people on that site who know what they're talking about. For example:
carlisle slapper = Dan Varian
Percy B = Percy Bishton
Johnnie Brown = Adam Long
To name just a few.

These are seemingly intelligent, well-connected people who have been around in the (very small) climbing world for quite a while now and are firmly in the doubting camp. It's not just mindless speculation and rumour from armchair critics. Have you actually read it?

Of particular interest are the details of his recent solo of the Brandler-Hasse and the seemingly unrealistic time he claimed to have completed it in, compared with Alex Huber's solo ascent. And the fact that he then failed to provide any photo evidence or otherwise for his sponsors when they asked for it! Not to mention all the improbable running claims highlighted on the thread on here a while ago, and the unwitnessed/unbelayed hard routes.

Isn't it time that this was settled once and for all? At least so the history books can be put right. It seems like everyone knows the truth about it, but as long as Rich Simpson continues to ignore everyone's efforts to get a straight answer, then it just keeps flaring up and then smouldering for a bit before flaring up again like it has several times now. It seems to me that it's just a ridiculous version of the Emperor's new clothes story...

Surely it would be better for both him and the sport in general if this matter was settled one way or the other so a line could be drawn under it.

In reply to friend1: from Doylo on UKB...counters the being dropped claim.


Re: simpson vanishes...
« Reply #170 on: November 09, 2010, 08:10:28 pm »
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. Ultimately he doesn t care if people think he s a liar but he might write something in december when term finishes. And you can keep googling rich simpson boxing/running til the cows come home but i assure you you won t find anything.
Logged

In reply to grubes:

My apologies about the 'dropped'. I looked at the first page of UKB but couldn't really take any more. I'm never sure who half these dudes are but, assuming Percy was, well, Percy (thoroughly decent guy, etc) was more than a bit surprised.

Given Rich Simpson's questioning of the credibility of another climber, this really makes the mind boggle. Karma??

It seems that, these days, any noteworthy ascent attracts a stream of negativity (together with the praise).

On the other hand, the Cornish controversy and the Eroica one (and now this??) leave you reeling. Has the world suddently gone mad?

Mick

In reply to aw:

Hmmm. And you really believe that?

I think it's more a case of Doylo just being loyal and believing what his friend told him.

So either Wild Country lied to Percy Bishton about dropping Rich Simpson to save face (because they were upset that he no longer wanted to continue with his sponsorship deal)

OR

Rich Simpson lied to his friend Chris Doyle about being dropped to save face (he didn't want to admit that he was being dropped)

Under the current circumstances, and given everything that has come to light recently, which one seems more likely?

In reply to Mick Ward: Has the world suddently gone mad?


Come on Mick. I'm sure if you put your mind to it you can think of any number of analogous examples of chipping, hoaxes and disputations over claims over the last 40 years that you've been climbing.

In reply to friend1: Having read the thread on UKB weeks ago it seems clear that no-one knows the truth from the fiction. Until more evidence comes to light or RS himself makes some kind of statement then there won't be any change. There would be no point someone writing up a news story based on pure speculation. I believe the whole thing started on UKC with the 4 minute mile thread.

In reply to Mick Ward: only on the internet. 95% of climbers won't have heard anything about any of the incidents you mention.

In reply to Mick Ward:

Hi Mick,
No need to apologise its a long thread. To read through that will take a lot of time (and maybe a bit of your soul towards the end).
It eventually wound down and got locked out.

In reply to Juggler13: Juggler13:> (In reply to friend1) Having read the thread on UKB weeks ago it seems clear that no-one knows the truth from the fiction. Until more evidence comes to light or RS himself makes some kind of statement then there won't be any change.


Quite. As Varian says at the end of that thread before I closed it:

"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."
http://tinyurl.com/3yv5qop

I believe that Jack Geldard was investigating to write an article on the subject. I hope he does. There was an investigation into Fred Rouhling a few years back that ended up lending support to his claim of doing Akira http://www.climbing.com/exclusive/features/fredrouhling/

In reply to shark:


It still raises the question of how you could run the NY Marathon in 2.30 and put in a FMM at Alexander Stadium and NOT appear on any kind of running database. In a data driven world where timings are automated and obsessively recorded, those kinds of questions seem to answer themselves.

In reply to remus:

Which is why it's so important to finally get the truth out and put this matter to rest. So according to that figure 95% of climbers (obviously I know that a lot of these won't have even heard of RS but the principal still stands) are still under the impression that:-
Rich Simpson did the first british ascent of Action Directe
RS did the FA of A Muerte
RS has run a sub 2:30 marathon
RS has run a sub 4 min mile
RS has soloed the Brandler Hasse quicker than Alex Huber
as well as many other 2nd, 3rd, 4th ascents of world-famous 8c+ routes.

This is not the same as the Si O'Connor debacle. This is an internationally renowned climber with some incredible feats to his name, which have been reported in the international media and gone into the history books as fact.

And now, as the truth finally appears to be emerging, why are some people so quick to defend him and just say "he deserves to be given the benefit of doubt" and let history lie?
I'm all for giving him the benefit of doubt on one or two unwitnessed ascents, but all of them?! Come on!! Seriously? And all his running / boxing claims too?
And yet the supporter's only defense seems to be "but I've seen him do loads of one-armers on a video" or "he looks really strong on that pinky perky video". Noone is denying that he was incredibly strong in the schoolroom.
But everyone is struggling to find any evidence of him doing what he claims to have done.

In reply to shark:

Hi Simon,

Yes, of course there are skeletons rattling around in cupboards. But surely the difference today is the far more concentrated power of the climbing media.

Even as a callow youth, it occurred to me that McCallum should have cleaned his 1960s 'routes' before claiming them. He was bound to be nabbed, sooner or later.

In the 70s, if people had a bit of tension or a sneaky pull on a runner, then it was usually between them and their conscience/the second.

But surely nowadays, when even bona fide ascents are subjected to the most nitpicking scrutiny, it must be obvious to anyone that you're going to be found out.

Mick

In reply to friend1:

I took photos of him on Action Directe. Not on his actual ascent but he had no problem whatsoever doing any move or linking any sequence on Action Directe.

As Chris Doyle says on the UKB thread, the mind boggles that someone would devote so much of their life training for one route, get stronger than the route, and then not do it.

He wasn't only strong in the schoolroom.

I don't know anything about this guy and this is the first I've read about it, but just have to say.. as a former 'serious ish' long distance runner the sub 4 min mile/2:30 marathon (at NY too!!) just looks like BS.

I had to run 80 miles a week and train for years just to get near 2:45 (as does every other marathon runner). A sub 4 min mile by a UK athlete would be massive news, as would a sub 2:30 at NY, it would put him among the best runners in the country.

It was stated suggested in the uk bouldering thread he ran under someone else's name in new york.

I did this for the London marathon (naughty I know), I had to start with the fun runners, I had to walk/jog the first 5 minutes because of the sheer number of people/slow runners and the stats show I passed approx 15,000!!!! people by midway ! by the time I got to 22 miles I was 10 mins off my target time, then simply fell apart because of the effort of running around people and taking the longest route.

so in summary to run 2:30 at NY from mid pack is world class imo.

also lance armstrong only ran 2:55 with pacers after focusing on it for a year on his first attempt ! I believe he was 2:30-40 ish on his second attempt.

In reply to shark:


That's a good article - well worth a look.

In reply to alex:

Doing the moves is one thing. Linking the whole thing is another. Think of Andy Pollitt on Punks in the Gym or Mark Leech on The Screaming Dream.

In reply to Shani:

Of course. I was simply correcting Friend1.

On AD he looked very strong, had no problem linking any section and repeated the crux over and over for photos. Did he do the route? You'll have to ask him that. But to imply that he wasn't capable is wrong.

In reply to alex:


With all due respect Alex, this means absolutely nothing. As Dan Varian said on the UKB thread, he's belayed quite a few people on it and they've all done bigger links than a) RS did on Doyle's video and (b) Doyle witnessed himself. And they still haven't done it. Seeing people do moves easily in isolation or linking short sections together does not mean anything. I remember reading that Iker Pou fell from the very last move on Action Directe more than 20 times on redpoint (IIRC) before finally succeeding. How many times did anyone witness RS even get to that final move on redpoint before his success?

Indeed! I think that's why everyone is struggling so much to recognise the truth. And understandably so. But it seems to me that it's time people started to look beyond the smokescreen

In reply to alex:

I will have to take your word for that - but I agree with your sentiments.

For me, I view his climbing claims in light of his other boxing, running and rowing claims. The running claims are awesome. But the big question with the running claims is not to do with 'could he run sub 2.30 in a marathon and a FMM', it is rather 'could he run sub 2.30 in a marathon and a FMM and avoid appearing on any kind of running database in this day and age?'.

In reply to alex:

have you just added a photo of action direct to the site? or are ukc preparing for an article?

interesting

In reply to friend1:

Yep. But people reading the thread might have the impression that he was nowhere near the standard needed. But he was, and he appeared to devote his life to it for several years.

I don't know what would be more impressive tbh - doing it, or not doing it and convincing the world that he did.

Just uploaded old pic of him on it for old times sake. SOunds like Jack might use it sometime!

In reply to friend1: Hi,

Firstly, Friend1 - please post under your usual forum name on controversial topics in future, it is completely unfair to name someone, when you are unwilling to be named yourself.

Secondly, it has been suggested in the article that I have been researching in to this matter. This is true. I have been and I have been in contact with Rich and with some of his sponsors or former sponsors.

This is a very complicated matter. (How I laugh at the emails I have received stating "Surely its simple - you should write X or Y and that's it".)

It isn't simple at all, and in my 3 years experience of writing daily climbing news I will tell everyone here that it is nigh on impossible to disprove an ascent 100%.

Proving an ascent is another matter, it is considerably easier to prove an ascent than it is to disprove one.

Anyway - in regard to Rich Simpson.

Rich has politely refused to answer any question, to name any belayer or to comment at all on any matter. He has been friendly, courteous and polite. But he makes no comment.

The Fred Roughling article linked above relies heavily on the cooperation of Fred. Without the cooperation of Rich Simpson, an article investigating his climbing claims would be mainly based on speculation.

If someone would like to do a thorough investigation - I started one, and Ian Parnell started one, then we may publish it at UKC - get in touch with me to discuss.

As it stands now, I am not pursuing my own investigation further.

We did not report Rich's Brandler-Hasse ascent in the UKC news and we did not report his Pan Aroma ascent either. This is not to say we don't believe them, but there was no evidence to support them. This is our current policy on this matter.

As Alex says above he is a super strong and gifted climber and I hope to see many more great ascents from him.

I have met Rich on several occasions and he is a lovely guy.

If he does decide to comment on his ascents and answer questions, then I shall continue my article and produce an in depth piece - probably not dissimilar to the one linked above on Fred Rouhling.

Thanks,

Jack

In reply to all:

Can I ask two really simple questions

a) who belayed him on Action Direct

b) Presumably the sub 2.30 marathon is recorded (as in I know it will be, it's the NY marathon FFS), and if he ran under another name RS must be able to say who it was. (and is then verifiable)

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

Jack, (I can guess the answer, but to ask the question) - how did no one know who belayed him on AD - at the time I mean, when there was no 'investigation'?

Surely, standard reporting of a route (even just chatting down the gym) like that would state who was holding the rope.

In reply to ClimberEd:
Apparently it was someone Rich had met at the Nurenberg racing ring, where he'd been a few times to do some laps. But Rich had never previously mentioned this person to anyone who was out at the time, and they never met him.

Presumably if what Doylo said on UKB is true then Ivan Greene can confirm who it was that gave Rich their ticket. And then this name can be checked on the results page.

In reply to ClimberEd: Surely Alex can tell us whose hand that is in the bottom left of his image.
This whole thing reminds me of a situation in the juggling community. A guy called Albert Lucas claimed to juggle 14 rings (WR) and have a video of it. He decided to keep the video to himself and over 10 years later no-one knows for sure if he did it or not. I believe RS has a video of Careless Torque that he won't show.

In reply to alex:

Didn't you visit Rich in his Boxing gym to take some photos too? I know that on the UKB thread, that was one of the lines of enquiry that they were hoping to follow up at one point to see if anything he said was true.

In reply to alex:

>As Chris Doyle says on the UKB thread, the mind boggles that someone would devote so much of their life training for one route, get stronger than the route, and then not do it.

I don't find this terribly compelling. One might equally say that IF someone spends so much time training for one route and then concludes that actually they're not going to be able to do it, that's precisely the time you expect them to lie about it. Not that I'm saying that's what happened, just that the psychological context doesn't seem to lean one way or the other, to me.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
if he had failed on that trip he could always have gone back in the future to get it done, the route isnt going anywhere. He clearly had a huge desire to do AD, why wouldnt he have just gone home trained harder and gone back to crush it next trip instead of lying. I dont see why failing on that particular trip would have meant he no longer wanted to climb AD. I believe him.

In reply to krank:

Well, he might just have lost interest, but not cared simply to admit defeat. Or concluded that actually he wasn't ever going to be able to get strong enough. People react strangely to things sometimes. I'm not saying anything about what happened, just that I don't think one can draw much insight from psychological speculations one way or the other.

jcm

In reply to krank:
Errrm. Because it was easier just to say he'd done it than to go back home and train harder? Maybe?

Along your same line of thinking, why would you devote so much of your life training for one route, get stronger than the route, etc etc....then slip out one day without telling your mates who've been filming you on it and climb it with some random that you've never mentioned before? And not all go for a celebratory beer together?

In reply to Monk: I know that on the UKB thread, that was one of the lines of enquiry that they were hoping to follow up at one point to see if anything he said was true.


Alex couldnt recall the name of the gym or its location though it was in Sheffield. The ABAE had told me that the records are held at a local level. However,I don't know where the fights took place - he was Birmingham based IIRC. I gave up at this point.

Like Jack said an investigation without Simpson's co-operation is very difficult.

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:


So just to be clear on this, 'friend1' has an account they normally post under but has chosen to go anonymous to question someone else's integrity?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I would have thought that anyone who was willing/has the mental ability to put in that ammount of training (2 years?) wouldnt be put off by a failed trip and would happily give it another go, whats another couple of months. Does anyone know how many trips he made out to try AD?

In reply to ali k:

if your willing to put in that much effort then he doesnt seem to want to take the easy option.


maybe he didnt care about the film or if he friends saw him do it. However you would definately have gone for celebratory drinks, this is the most unbelievable part

In reply to krank: Maybe he was more interested in the training than the actual climbing. I know a few people who fit into this category.

In reply to krank:

I don't know enough about sport climbing to comment, but his running claims are simply not true. I am not sure why I bothered but following the last thread, checked that that every runner how ran sub 2:30 at NY in 2008 had actually run.

Remember these guys will be going for qualifying times for international competitions, they would get found out if they let someone run for them.

In reply to Tyler:


Just to set things straight - that 'anonymous' poster is me. I only intended to put the first post anonymously, then got involved in the discussion and didn't bother to change it. So now we are clear.

As Jack said, this topic is controversial and complicated. It's not black and white. And the main problem is that it's divisive. 'Believers' and 'non-believers' if you like. I have good friends on both sides of the fence, close to the heart of this debate, so initially I didn't want to stir things up...but as Jack points out I shouldn't post under a different name (despite most people's user name on here not being their real name, but anyway!)

I'm not sure where this debate will go from here. I suspect it will peter out, as usual, with both sides entrenched. As long as Simpson refuses to comment on his ascents and who his belayers were, or provides proof of any of his climbing, running or boxing claims, then there is little anyone can do. And he pretty much knows that, doesn't he?
The ascents will still go down in history as they stand, and people out of the loop or those who don't follow these online discussions will still hail him as a world-class sport climber. All I'm suggesting is that maybe people should just think carefully about these claims. I mean really think about them before you make your mind up whether to believe them or not. Does the evidence really stack up?

At the end of the day, what's the difference between Simpson's claims and those made by Si O'Connor?
One of these people will go down in history as just some joker with delusions of grandeur, who tried to fool the climbing media.
The other will go down as one of the best sport climbers the UK has ever produced.

In reply to ClimberEd:

I suppose he could always go back and do AD 'again', as Maestri did with Cerro Torre ...

In reply to alx:


That is the single most unbelievable statement I've ever read about Rich Simpson! LOL etc.



To answer a couple of questions from previous posts:
The trip on which Chris Doyle made that video was at least the second trip RS had made to try the route.
RS at one point did say he had a video of Careless Torque, infact he said he had videos of the majority of his significant ascents. Various people have asked if they may see at least one of these (I think it's safe to assume his sponsors would be included among this list), all have been refused (either outright, or promised repeatedly and then later refused) for various opaque reasons. I've not come across anyone who has seen any, inluding his long term partner of the time.
I'm not passing comment on either point BTW, it's up to folk to draw their own conclusions if they so wish.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Where did your post go? Well I started so I'll finish.

A good start, considering.

Am I?

I presume you mean me naming them? Dan Varian put his name to his posts. Percy B is hardly difficult to work out, and if anyone spends 5mins on UKB they'll realise who Johnnie Brown is.

That is my point in my latest post. There is nothing anyone can do now, while Simpson refuses to comment. I'm just suggesting people think carefully and make their own minds up.

In reply to friend1: I can sympathise with Rich Simpson, he's got nothing to prove when it comes to his climbing. I'm sure he could whip up AD on film if necessary but why should he just to keep the baying mob at bay

In reply to tatty112:

Partly because he always claimed that he should be able to make a living as a top climber. Making a living from requires a different type of behaviour.

In reply to tatty112:

NOrmally I'd agree with you, and I don't really care much for the 'fighting for little sponsorship money' arguement.

However some of his ascents will go down as part of (significant) British climbing history, and as such should be proven - or struck from the record.

In reply to ali k:

I really don't see why you have felt the need to stir this all up again.You have not added or brought any new information to the debate. You just seem to want to rehash it all again. Also seems very bizarre to post under one name and then comment under another.

It seems to me that this has all been done to death and just ends up in a really circular argument with no end in sight. Nobody has any proof either way, just a lot of conjecture.

Cheers Dave

In reply to Anonymous:

Which means you make quite sure you have at least one or two people organised to take pictures of the Brandler Hasse ascent ... or at least get hold of pictures that other people must inevitably have taken ...

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

And in this day and age MOST of us carry both a camera and video recorder with us at all times - on our phones. Proof in terms of film is easier now than ever before. We are not even limited to 24 or 36 exposures.

In reply to tatty112:


But surely he has after all that fuss over him questioning BH's solo ascents?

Live by the sword...etc etc

In reply to davo:

Agreed. And that's what frustrates me. But I was hoping that due to the fact that he's now been dropped by his sponsors, and also the rumours I'd heard of Climb and UKC writing articles about this, that we might find out something new and hear some comment from Rich himself.
Obviously now the articles won't be appearing due to his lack of involvement, but at least we've heard something from Rich, albeit not very helpful to the debate.
As I said, I suspect this will probably fizzle out for the final time now. But at least a few more people will be slightly better informed about the facts and can make their own decisions whether to believe or not.

It just seems a shame to me that the history books will remain unchanged.

Ali

In reply to friend1:

Just to give a sense of perspective on the running claims, can anyone help me get an idea of the magnitude of a claim to have done a sub-2.30 marathon and a sub-4 minute mile in the same year (is this right? I haven't kept track; anyway, fairly closely together).

Is this something most 4-minute milers could do? Very few? None, even? Has it ever been done before?

I have no idea myself, just asking.

jcm

In reply to Shani:


Furthermore, you would be wearing brightly coloured clothing precisely so that you would show up well in any photographs ... which would also mean that anyone in the Drei Zinnen hut, or walking past the Tre Cime would see you ...

In reply to tatty112:

I'd be in the same camp in you if he hadn't been slinging the muck himself with the whole BH debacle.

In fact, i'm still in the same camp and couldn't really care. It's up to his conscience what he chooses to claim as an ascent, but it would be ironic if he was making it all up.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Very unlikely, Nate Jenkins for example, who ran 2:25:37 in the NY Marathon that RS claims to have run sub 2:30 in, has a mile pb of 4:15. Jenkins is a sub 2:15 marathon runner at his best.

The only guy I know who personally who has run a sub 4 mile has never raced beyond ten miles.

In reply to The New NickB:

Presumably the likes of Gebraselassie have done both, at least in a career? (Or has he never raced over a distance as short as a mile, maybe?)

But doing it within a short period - is that not the feat of a world-class professional athlete rather than an amateur runner?

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

According to Wikipedia (which is always right), his best mile is 3:52.39 and best marathon 2:03:59, but these were 9 years apart. However when he took the 10,000m world record, the final mile was done in less than a second over 4 minutes!

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Andrew Lemoncello is probably the top British marathon runner at the moment, he switched from the 3k steeplechase in 2009 and ran 2:13:40. So he has a track speed, his mile PB is 4:03.

Gebrselassie has a mile PB of 3:52:39, but from three year before he ran his first Marathon (2:06:35). Haile is a very special athlete, one of the greatest of all time.

In reply to Toreador:

OK, so it's far to assume that great athletes could do it pretty easily. But anyone of, say, sub-international class?

Impressive about the 10k record. I always like that the 100-mile world record was set in the first section of a 24-hour race. Nothing like completing a world-class athletic performance and knowing you've got 12 hours still to go.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
No, it is fair to say that one of the greatest athletes that ever lived could probably have run both in the same year, but didn't. I doubt he could run sub 4 now on marathon training and He is just about the perfect runner.

In reply:

Unfortunately, regardless of what Rich really did or did not do, his behaviour, as it is related above, fits *exactly* a pattern shown by other climbers and adventurers who have proven to be frauds.

- The initial claim of something notable (but no evidence),
- the refusal to name witnesses (usually strangers, not locals),
- the offering of evidence (usually photos/video) but never delivering it,
- the eventual total clamming up in silence (while remaining otherwise normal and civilised).
I could match it point-for-point with other cases, but it's late and I'm tired. And I have to be careful what I write.

From what is reported above, Rich's behaviour fits the pattern exhibited by people like Christian Stangl, Peter Treseder, Tomo Cesen, that bloke on here a few years ago who claimed to have soloed the west face of Gasherbrum 4 and others. It's so consistent it beggars belief. They all did EXACTLY those four things above (and sometimes more).

And I personally know and have climbed with Chris Stangl, so the arguments of friends that "he's just not the type" are, I'm very sorry to say, irrelevant. Ambition, money, desire and fear do strange things to people. And good people make mistakes. You never really know what's going on deep in someone's head, what is driving them.

In addition, in nearly all these instances, it's never a case of total fabrication, it's more one of degrees. It leads observers to say "but he's genuinely good, he didn't NEED to do this ...". Tales of Rich doing sequences on AD are just such observations. They're not enough. There is no doubt Peter Treseder is a very fast walker, just not as fast as he said. Tomo Cesen had certainly climbed hard at high-altitude and is on video freesoloing 8a. Chris Stangl is probably the strongest mountaineer I've ever tried to keep up with, I have no doubt he COULD solo K2 in 72hours, as he claimed. But he didn't.

One thing people may want to take into consideration. Years ago I was working with an author on a story about a guy, very (very) similar to this saga of Rich, when we were advised by a psychologist (consulted just for this) that the person in question may honestly believe he has done these things. They begin to believe their own lies. I scoffed at this as complete bollocks, but since then yet more similar scenarios have shown I was very wrong, and this is often the case. Weird but true.

Being a non-bouldering, non-running, non-boxing Australian who wouldn't get off the ground on Action Direct, II couldn't give a rat's ass about the 'first British whatever' or sponsorship pools. I understand the significance of them to those involved, but such small-game fighting about those things is pathetic and anyone who does it has taken their eye off the ball. I know because I've done it myself. I love a bit of negativity, but beyond a point it just becomes poisonous and you need to stop, purely for your own sake.

D

In reply to Damo:
I love a bit of negativity, but beyond a point it just becomes poisonous and you need to stop, purely for your own sake.

That is a fine point if you don't care about climbing history. But some of us do. Some of us spend a lot of time and money on books and DVDs to do with climbing. It is bloody anal and geeky, but I love reading about the history of the sport. We love its rich history, wild tales and colourful climbing characters. I for one would be pissed off to have spent £20 on a book which later turns out to be largely bollocks. There's the rub. This goes beyond RS's ego.

This matter does need recording. Climbing history is not RS's to piss all over as he sees fit. If he climbed AD or any route and didn't seek sponsorship and recognition for it then fine. The fact is that he IS seeking publicity for his achievements. It is to be expected that he provide proof.

Someone said above "It just seems a shame to me that the history books will remain unchanged." But they will. The history books will record this controversy, and rightly so. Sure RS might not give a toss, and that is fine be most people. But extraordinary claims require extraordianry proof.

This isn't about RS's character it is about his claims. The former may well lead to 'poisonous' debate, but not the latter.

In reply to ali k:

I'm sorry to be so out of the loop, but when did the doubts start to arise and what exactly precipitated all this? I find it absolutely fascinating but had no idea that at least (some of?) his climbing claims are now believed to be frauds. How did people find out about his incredible running claims? Have I blinked and missed the whole opening volley of the story. Please, someone enlighten me.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Another claim that came up in the original thread was a 6:25 time for his first ever 2k on a rowing machine. The UK record is 6:07 for any age as a lightweight.

Any single one of the climbing, rowing, mile and marathon claims requires a huge investment of time and dedication, and it's hard to imagine one individual being able to do all of them, at such elite levels. Especially when the activities themselves are hardly complementary - they all have quite different requirements in terms of body shape and composition, and in CV fitness.

In reply to jon: Started with a 4 minute mile thread on here I believe. A lot of his claims can be found on his blog (still there surprisingly).

http://www.scarpa.co.uk/team/blogs.asp?TeamID=40

In reply to Removed Userdaveje:

The huge investment of time is a factor that interests me.

At my first place of work there was a guy who made loads of claims about what he'd done; the standing joke was that he'd have to have been about 105 to have fitted it all in.

In reply to jon:

I don't know the history of the disputed climbs, but the running claims were made by him on his blog - the one I saw was hosted by Wild Country, which may not be online anymore.

In reply to tony and juggler:

Thanks, I'll look back.

In reply to Shani:

You're lecturing the wrong guy about the importance of climbing history, mate. http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=3174

These 'history books' you speak of? Just how many books will be written focusing on the First British Ascent of Action Direct, or claimed solo of the BH? Over-egg the pudding much?

Exposing frauds is good as a general rule, but I think you're overstating the importance of RS's claims to the historical canon of British climbing literature. If he's now not climbing anything hard, no longer sponsored, keeping quiet about it all, not making any big new claims, then I think the whole thing will fade away fast enough and in a few years be nothing more than a chuckle and a shake of the head. A few years ago people were saying the same thing as you about the tool who claimed the G4 solo, now I can't even remember what year it was, let alone his name.

I know this is a bigger deal than that, but I don't agree it's as big as you're making it out to be.

In reply to Removed Userdaveje:

That, if he's a skinny lightweight (which I presume he is), is bollocks.

(from someone who breathed rowing for 10 years )

In reply to no-one in particular:

Just say that RS didn't climb A muerte first, who is currently credited with the second ascent?

In reply to Damo:


http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=211978&v=1#x3107616

Would this be the one?

In reply to ClimberEd:

He's short, verging on squat, very muscular and very low body fat. I can't see him being more than 10st. I used to see him at Bear Rock in Coventry.

In reply to Removed Userdaveje:

The more of these 'records' tangential to climbing come up, claimed by him, the more I feel sorry for him because each one fits more and more with the pattern I mentioned above. They just can't help themselves - fast is never fast enough, further never far enough. http://www.coolrunning.com.au/ultra/treseder1.shtml

My head is spinning with deja-vous. Fun stuff!

In reply to Damo:


So you think you've made climbing history? Maybe, but not any history that I am particularly interested in nor care about. Now I am interested in rock climbing history.

It wasn't meant to be a lecture just to make the case that RS has made/claimed historically significant climbing achievements. The history books that I have read are biographies and the historical sections at the back of most guides. I personally think they make great reading.

The fact is that climbing history does get broken down in to FA, first female ascent, first British/American [insert own nationality here] ascent etc...

RS's achievements have been recorded and his reputation further enhanced by his claims in running, boxing and latterly rowing and education. If this were true it would make a compelling case for an autobiography.

RS has been a 'face' on the climbing scene for what, a decade or so? He is 'ranked' as one of the UKs top climbers, if not one of the world's top climbers. I am not sure 'the tool who claimed the G4 solo' had such a high profile (but I really don't know).

It is NOT a big deal in that it is 'only' climbing - a trivial and niche indulgence. But exposing bullshit can only be a good thing in terms of climbing history.

In reply to Bill Davidson:

That's 'im, he done it - Clarke Kent!

Interesting comment from RS himself:

"I have no interest in climbing stuff with no history. I want to complete all the old hard classics which contain history. Kind of following in my hero Ben Moon's footsteps. I have no interest climbing overgraded routes like most of the new ones. I am just keen to climb the old school stuff which is properly graded."

http://www.freakclimbing.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid...

In reply to ClimberEd:

>In reply to daveje:

That claim was made by Jim Houghton, a friend of Rich's and a rower. I don't know if it was a repetition of claim made by Rich or from Jim's personal experience.

In reply to Shani:
>

Ha! No, I'm very sure that I haven't and never implied that I have. But you carry on ...

In reply to Shani:

You're definitely over-egging the pudding here. RS hasn't been the face of anything for a decade. He achieved brief fame with a few hard sport routes a few years ago. He gave up climbing not long afterwards. I've no idea who you think ranks him as one of the UK's top climbers.

In reply to Shani:



I have to admit that I had a look at Cambridge, and there is definitely a Richard Simpson who has started this year on a Natural Sciences course. Obviously, this is not that unusual a name, but I suspect that the education is one of the more easily verifiable claims he has made.

In reply to Monk:

I wonder if he's joined the athletics club. Or the rowing club. Or the mountaineering club.

In reply to tony:

True, he might not be cutting edge any more, but Wild Country have the following on their site (http://www.wildcountry.co.uk/RedChili/Sponsees1/):

"Red Chili has made a consistent effort to try and pick out and sponsor some of the best and strongest climbers around the world. So from Rich Simpson and Dave Birkett in the Uk to Stefan Glowacz in Germany and Aaron Shamy in the USA we've got a lot of top climbers helping us make some really cool shoes."

And the mighty UKC wrote "Rich Simpson is one of the World's top sport climbers..." (http://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/review.php?id=342)

There is more to being a 'top climber' than numbers. You cannot ignore the context of the achievement.

In reply to Damo:

Your four point pattern is an extremely interesting one. And your experience of cheating behaviour in related areas is no less interesting. You've certainly advanced the debate. Thank you.

Mick

In reply to Monk: He is definitely at Cambridge. I'm afraid I have no idea about the rest of his claims though.

In reply to Mick Ward:


Agreed Mick, and it's all the more fascinating if you know someone who fits the bill.

In reply to Bill Davidson:

Are any of his early ascents of hard routes in the UK and France now in doubt, or is this just a recent thing?

In reply to RupertD:

Jim posts on here occasionally, so it would probably be possible to answer that one.

6.25 is about half way between the quoted 6.07 of the best youth time ever or whatever the poster above said and a bog standard club rowing sort of time in the moderately sub 7 sort of range. I don't think saying "it's only 20 secs off the record" is that helpful unless you put into context that mere mortals can get down to 6.50 or something given a good build and some practice - admittedly first time it would be pretty unusual, but if someone showed you the technique and you practised other lengths first then who knows - all that's been quoted is "first 2k on a rowing machine", not "first time on a rowing machine" which is a gulf of difference...

I still know some people in the Cambridge Uni MC and I don't think he is involved with them.

In reply to jon:

Sorry Jon, Who do you mean?

In reply to The New NickB: Looking at Jonathan Wyatt, the mountain runner who's also a pretty handy track runner and marathoner. His PBs:

One Mile 4:01.51 Wanganui 16/01/1999
3000 Metres 7:57.33 Papakura 20/01/1999
5000 Metres 13:30.39 Helsinki 18/06/1997
10,000 Metres 27:56.80 Inglewood 15/02/2003
Half Marathon 1:02:37 Christchurch 02/06/2002
Marathon 2:13:00 Hamburg 27/04/2003

That's a pro career with intense time investment. Hard to imagine an amateur replicating some of those efforts in a calendar year.

In reply to Mowglee: Which is noteworthy in itself given that his place is likely to have resulted at least in part from his claimed non-academic achievments.

In reply to MG: Don't even go there... seriously.

In reply to Bill Davidson:

I'm sorry Bill, the question wasn't aimed at you - I aimlessly clicked on reply without thinking!

So, in reply to nobody in particular: What I meant was - are any of his ascents prior to his giving up climbing to pursue boxing now disputed? Or are these claims solely related to his re-emergence as a climber (and runner and rower etc... ). Action Directe, Brandler Hasse, 4MM, 2:30...

In reply to MG:

I doubt it, unless you mean by the fact that they add colour to his CV. The official interest in climbing isn't enough to get him a place because of it, the athletics has nowhere near the cachet of the rowing, and to be honest there's probably enough people with the practical rowing experience and good 2k times to mean they wouldn't be terribly interested in someone with good 2k times unless they had a pedigree in a boat too.

In reply to MG: I'm quite sure that Cambridge couldn't care less about his climbing achievements, and he won't have got in unless they thought he'd do well academically.

Maybe they'd be interested if he was going to row for them, but I suspect people have tried to bluff their way in with unverified rowing achievements before, so you'd think they'd check like...

In reply to jon:

AD was prior to him giving up climbing to pursue boxing, surely?

Anyway, to answer the question there are people who have doubts about his ground-up of Careless Torque and did at the time, and also of course the fabled solo of The Zone. (a search of ukb's archives will show the odd spat with RS participating). The thread linked to earlier on went on to ask for witnesses to Hubble and Liquid Ambar, without really seeming to find them.

So I'd say that yes, in view of the difficult-to-credit nature of some recent claims, people are indeed starting to ask questions about his earlier ascents.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Ah, yes!

In reply to AJM:

I met someone from CUMC in Langdale during the KMF weekend and they said that RS was involved with them in some way or another - didn't really get the full context as we were both belaying at the time...

In reply to RupertD:

Then maybe it is true, but if so, he has olympic medal levels of talent - and at the higher end of that. (unless, as some said, he trained for 6 months at different distances, before trying his 2k)

In reply to MG:

Doubtful.

In reply to MG:

Cambridge only gives out places on academic merit, if you watch the boat race build up interviews some of the guys were worried they might not get in because they thought cambridge would assume they just wanted to come there to row.
Rich Simpson basically taught himself his A-levels in a library and then got straight A's. Regardless of how rigorous you believe those exams to be it does tell you something about the person when they have that sort of tenacity.

In reply to mattmurphy:

There is more to the selection process than that. I don't the details but a "rounded" background is desirable.

In reply to mattmurphy:


did he tell you that

e

In reply to mattmurphy:

Look, no one doubts his tenacity, what is troubling a lot of us is his veracity.

And that really is troubling. It upsets me a lot more than it should do (by modern standards), but it does. In fact, to me, it matters more or less more than anything else I can think of.

In reply to Enty:

Yes, he must be a remarkable human being. A world class sports climber, a world class runner both at 1 mile and the marathon, a boxer and now we find he's a self educated genius.

Quite an incredible guy.

In reply to mattmurphy & others:
Can people please stop discussing / criticising his A levels and university entry. No-one knows what he put on his UCAS form to get into Cambridge, and it isn't really the issue. Whatever the truth is regarding his climbing / boxing / running related claims, it has no bearing on his A levels and his future academic career. And likewise, just because you get some A's at A level doesn't mean you can climb 9a. Good on him for educating himself and getting a place at Cambridge. But that is a completely separate issue.

The running and boxing claims seem to be so ridiculous as to be not even worth considering. As does the more recent solo of Brandler-Hasse and ascent(?) of Pan Aroma. But these do serve to indicate his ability to fabricate things.

So the real issue here is setting the record straight with regards to some key ascents that will go down in British/World climbing history. Most noteably:-
- Action Directe
- A Muerte
- Liquid Ambar
- Hubble
- Careless torque

In reply to ali k:

I'll have to say: there is something about the Brandler-Hasse claim that makes me feel almost physically sick. ((I was v. v. fortunate to be able to ask Alex Huber about it at Kendal c.3-5 years ago ... and when I asked him how on earth he had done it, he told me he'd laid on his bed at night for days on end, going through every single move in his mind, learning them by heart ... he even had diagrams on his ceiling. Because so many holds are dubious/loose. He had to know the route that well, move by move, before he could justify soloing it.))

In reply to ali k:

Surely it's worth knowing that we're not discussing the exploits of any old climber, this guy must be practically super human. Context is useful after all.

Did I leave out his rowing achievements as well?

In reply to MG:

It's fairly irrelevant, but there's enough applicants that they can choose the people with both, but realistically a rounded personality is not going to be enough. Whether the exact achievements are true or not, the guy has a fairly rounded personality anyway, having not only got the drive to educate himself (to a large degree, from what's been said), to be a very good climber who was (even if he only did the easier stuff that there's more evidence of) better than 99% of British climbers, boxes to some level, and probably runs and rows to some level too. Some of the achievements may be fantasy, but doing that many things to any level will tick a lot more boxes than several people I knew from there...

In reply to MG:

You're implying his uni place has been gained part-fraudulently on the back of supposed sporting prowess. Nonsense

In reply to mrjonathanr:

Well I look forward to some evidence of (even one!) of his achievments. Until then I think it quite possible his place was in part the result of fruadulent claims, which is pretty unpleasant given that another deserving candidate will have lost out.

In reply to ali k: You have a bit of a cheek trying to 'moderate' after starting this thread and under an assumed name. You have dug yer blade in so step back.

For what it is worth, I live close to Springhill boxing club in Shotts and know the coaches well. I enquirer about his outlandish boxing record months back, nobody in his area has heard tell of him. Unbeaten fighters are noticed and talked about. I have emailed Boxing News as they cover ABA boxing.

There was a post mentioning RS (either here on Ukb) boasting about his boxing earnings, as an amatuer!!! This has to be his most bizarre claim. Anyone even remotely connected to boxing would call him a liar for that one. Even Amir Khan struggled to get paid as an amatuer and many others have turned pro early due to lack of funding. Madness. Anything slipping from his mouth must be taken with copious salt.

In reply to MG:

The vast majority of the academics who are involved in the selection process at Cambridge would not know the difference between a 9a and a VDiff. Sure, having other interests is useful, but there isn't a box on the UCAS form for your lead grade...

In reply to MG:
I think it quite possible his place was in part the result of fruadulent claims, which is pretty unpleasant given that another deserving candidate will have lost out.

I think there's as much chance that he's studying at Cambridge as there is of him soloing the Brandler-Hasse.

In reply to friend1: My god I thought the northern mobsters were bad enough on UKB, they're just jealous that RS isn't from or resides in sheffield.. but to listen to you ponces on this forum bleating on about how he doesn't deserve to get into caimbridge is even more pathetic.. stop whinging and start climbing!

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Personally never heard of the boy, so no particular axe to grind. Out of curiosity I read his description of the Dolomites/Brandler-Hasse trip. Just on the basis of the text I immediately got the impression it was all made up - rather blatantly. (Just an impression, although reading things is my job, more or less).
It's amazing that sponsors hand out cash on the basis of "cultural" products on this level.
And it is very sad when young people get caught up in a pathetic fame game generated by our nauseating "celebrity driven" society.
If the accusations against him are true, then he is certainly the main victim, or more precisely, the one who will actually suffer as a consequence of his actions.

If anyone doubts that people are capable of lying all the time, directly, in public and insisting that people should accept their word for what is quite obviously not true, then tune into Italian TV and listen to Mr. Berlusconi.
Again, the only unbelievable thing is that ... some people believe he is sincere.

The Wild Country website has photos by Alex Messenger stating that they show RS on the FA of A Muerte
http://wld.brlive.co.uk/Community/Gallery/RichSimpsonSiurana1/

I know that supposed FA photos are sometimes staged post-FA, maybe this was/was not one of those?

In reply to Eric Herring:

It could be argued that 'first ascent' could include the working of the route prior to THE ascent. Those photos do have an effortless look about them which could indicate that it may not be THE ascent... or not, of course. Alex could say, I suppose.

In reply to Juggler13:

bit of a funny one that....if you had no idea about this thread it might seem like he's trying to big himself up as an "Alpinist" without having done any actual alpine routes. In the context of this controversy it raises lots of questions. It seems a bit weird to mention an "arduous drive" and "arduous descents" in the Dolomites....(are they really esp if you can run 2.30 marathons?) and almost nothing about the climb itself done in a style and time which would make it one of the sends of the year.

The way he lead solo'd it also raises questions.....did he have to know the exact length of each pitch so as to be sure to arrive at each belay or use a shunt or have a whole 30-40m of rope out all the way? was this his only pro-or was he also clipping the pegs as he went (otherwise it would be a possible factor 2 onto the belay?)

Also strange not to mention who he teamed up with for Panorama (random tall dude in photo?).

"Worthy of a final mention is the fact that I hope to be working with some of the country’s leading sports´ scientists, as well as the watchmaker, Suunto, in order to increase my lactic threshold and prepare myself physically for my alpine goals." - and as we all know if you're gonna climb hard you need the right watch!

And is Jon Griffith really infamous?

In reply to friend1: not ready the entire thread but as someone who has seen rich climb on a few occasions i dont doubt for one minute that he is good enough to do any of the routes he has claimed

In reply to beastofackworth: And Andy Murray is good enough to have won several grand slams.

Don't you think with all this interest if he had any videos or people who were prepared to say 'yeah I saw him do x' then he'd be splashing this all over the web?

In reply to beastofackworth:


I don't doubt he's good enough either - and until I saw this thread yesterday I never gave it a thought. However, having ploughed back through the linked threads and blogs, there are so many things that just don't add up - notably the running ones. I'd love for him to just come back at everyone with enough absolute proof to shut them up, but he doesn't seem to want to. If there wasn't that niggling little worm of doubt, he shouldn't really have to either, should he...?

In reply to friend1:

In light of these revelations it's interesting to read McClure's article on RS in CLIMB issue Oct 08.

In reply to shark: 'Alex couldnt recall the name of the gym or its location though it was in Sheffield'

Well the Steve Maclure article does name the gym - it was Woodseats Amateur Boxing Club, Sheffield. Does anyone have any contacts there to verify Simpson's achievements?

In reply to jon: Its not a little niggling doubt though. If he had made his claims about running he, like the villains in scooby doo, could have gotten away with it but the boxing claims are truly absurd! You do not fly under the radar with 18 wins and a potential place on Rob McCrakens Olympic squad. The boxing claims are the easiest to prove or disprove. All boxers have a card, which lists their weight class and record, with opponents names etc. This card is held by your coach, normally. If he has boxed he could simply produce the card. Of course he so far above reproach in his own mind that he feels he does not have to.

In reply to jon:
>I'd love for him to just come back at everyone with enough absolute proof to shut them up, but he doesn't seem to want to.

ive not got photographic evidence or witnesses to alot of boulder problems ive done and if someone doubted me it wouldnt bother me at all and at a guess thats probably why rich isnt commenting,because he knows what he's done and doesnt care if other believe him or not

In reply to beastofackworth:

Are you a sponsored climber who claims ground breaking ascents for publication in mags etc?

In reply to John2:

According to the ABA website, in January 2010 Woodseats ABC and Sharrow ABC merged and became Sheffield City Amateur Boxing Club.

In reply to Postmanpat:

nope and neither is he anymore

In reply to beastofackworth:


And neither am I which is why I don't feel the need to prove my solo ascent of the Eiger direct in 23 minutes. I'm so good I'm above all that.

In reply to friend1:

My, my, I didn't expect to lump him in with Medwards and Si Conman.

Wonders never cease.

In reply to beastofackworth: Your nothing more than an average climber, why would anyone ever ask you to verify your modest climbing exploits? What a strange post you make in the context of the thread.

In reply to beastofackworth:

No, nor have I. But then I'm not claiming to run a 2:30 marathon and a 4MM or anything out of the ordinary. If I was - and had done it - I'd expect to be asked (and certainly expect to be doubted) but I'd make sure I had the proof. In a way it doesn't matter if it's untrue. It doesn't change our lives. But it changes our sport. I hope you're right.

In reply to beastofackworth:

Well if he goes after sponsorship on the basis of what he's claimed to have done then he should expect that someone might ask him for some proof. After all he is asking for money on the basis of his claims. If his claims are false then technically he is guilty of fraud is he not?

Why doesn't he just say who belayed him on Action Directe? In fact why hasn't the belayer popped up on some forum or other to say that he did? I'm pretty sure I would have done if someone I'd climbed with had been accused of being a liar.

In reply to Tam Stone:


oh how scathing,im seriously hurt <big wide yawn>

In reply to beastofackworth:

But it is a fair point.A dispute over the scoring of a goal in a game with jumpers for goalposts is only of relevance to the people playing.A dispute over a goal in the FA cup final matters in the wider context of football.

In reply to Postmanpat: not to me it doesnt as i dont follow football.there are pictures of rich simpson on action direct and there is more video footage of him on it than Wolfgang Güllich but do you doubt him?how many photos are there of ben on hubble?theres only linked footage of sharma on jumbo love,do you doubt him?

In reply to beastofackworth:

Not relevant. Think about it.

there are pictures of rich simpson on action direct and there is more video footage of him on it than Wolfgang Güllich but do you doubt him?how many photos are there of ben on hubble?theres only linked footage of sharma on jumbo love,do you doubt him?

If Gullich or Sharma claimed to clearly nonsensical things in other spheres of life,yes I would wonder about the veracity of some of their climbing achievements.

In reply to beastofackworth: Hey, it's true. Get over yersel. This is about world class bluffing.

I do agree that RS is a talented climber and I only doubt him because of the boxing claims due to the fact that my nephews and pals box, I am a liflong boxing fan and have subscribed to boxing news for around 20 years. This is a weekly publication that covers pro and amateur boxing extensively and Ive never seen or heard tell of him. With the record he claims he would be ranked, which he is not nor ever has been. 18 wins is fantastic, I would have loved to be following his boxing and climbing and when I mentioned it to the boys, they came back to me saying that he was unheard of. That was in the summer. Now all this. Running, rowing, boxing all world class level stuff, I can't imagine anyone in his position nit simply verifying the claims.

In reply to friend1:

It strikes me the NYM results are trivial to verify. In 2009 (the year I presume RS ran) there are precisely 14 finishers with Times between 2:29* and 2:31. All of them started from the front of the field (gun time == chip time). So... which of them is RS's psudonym?

*It's not likely to be faster than 2:29 is it given he's reported 2:30

The search is easy if anyone is interested or if it was 2008 or 2010 http://web2.nyrrc.org/cgi-bin/htmlos.cgi/mar-programs/archive/archive_searc...

For the sake of an article I'd have thought you'd be able to verify all those 14 were who they said they were and actually ran with a couple of weeks of emailing. What would that prove... he ran without a chip maybe but it'd at least open up a new question to be answered

Also, there are other 4min plus a little bit times listed in the UKC article. Where did he run those? Ok, it's not the mythical 4mm but it'd be a lead, there can't be many 4:02 or 4:03 miles run a year by men called Simpson.

I don't really care whether he's a fantasist, delusional, flicking a big 'f*** you!' at the uk climbing media or simply private and disinterested but others will and when it comes to recording the history of the routes he's done it does matter. Is he a massively impressive, historically unparalleled sporting giant or a strong climber with a problem? I've no idea.

I hope it's not all one big house of cards and delusion for his sake and for that of his friends, partners and employers who've stood behind him. Imagining it were it me being discussed I can totally see the appeal in saying nothing but I think ultimately I'd rather have a reputation I could trade on rather than a trail of accusations following me wherever I went.

jk

In reply to Tam Stone:
get over myself?over what?im happy with my climbing so couldnt care what anyone else things and have doen enough competing to know where my abilities stand in relation to most others tyvm,i was giving an example that most people probably dont have photo/video/witness testimony to back up their hardest climbs,infact lots of the top climbers go back on routes for photo shoots days/weeks/months after climbing them.
i personally dont care about the running or boxing claims,im on ukclimbing,im here about the climbing and as a climber rich simpson to me is well capable and motivated to climb any of the things he has done without need to fabricate it.

In reply to Monk: According to this article, Edu Marin got the second (first) ascent of A muerte (see bottom of article).

http://www.freakclimbing.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid...

In reply to friend1:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xlZO95FljUUJ:www.scarp...

Only cached now - the original is taken down; looks like he's gone from Scarpa too.

And that piece reads like a kid's homework - just completely unconvincing.

Rich, if you're reading this, I hope you manage to put yourself back together....but the game's up.

In reply to beastofackworth:


Well lets put it this way. If I was about to lose my income because of a load of lies I could easily disprove, I think I would disprove them.

In reply to beastofackworth: Ok fair enough, I perhaps picked you up wrong. I hope to be proved uninformed and hasty as I did have a lot of respect for the guy, although it would seem the burden of proof is on him. I've nothing else constructive to add so am gone.

Any record of his ascents either first or repeats need clearing from climbing history unless he can prove otherwise.
A few years ago when he was doubted over some ascents he conviently said he'd taken up boxing and was studying to be a lawer.
Its a real shame all this has happened because he is undoubtly a very strong climber,probabily not as strong as he wanted.

In reply to mark s: Whenever I read about his claims he always says that he wants the doubters to go to him personally and ask to see the evidence. Since he has videos of some of his hard ascents.

So hasn't anyone actually done that? Or did his dog eat the evidence?

In reply to friend1:

I just read RS' on Scarpa. Interesting that he has bothered to include photos of himself climbing easy icefalls, but no self-pic or any other shot of him actually *climbing* on the BH. None at all? His description of the BH solo (and PanAroma) are notable for being quite wordy and containing all the stock phrases of climbing reporting, but conspicuously devoid of any actual first-hand specific detail of any actual move or sequence or pitch. No simple, original words to prove that he was actually there climbing it. Just general descriptions that could have been gleaned from elsewhere, and statements that he did each bit.

As I said right at the start of my first post on this thread, regardless of whether he did these things or not - *and I'd love to have it proven that he did* - the way he is behaving, in a 'professional' sense, is creating the appearance of deception and mimicking that of other fraudsters - regardless of whatever the truth may be.

And nice to see in his first post he describes himself as ".. a world class athlete ..". Having your sponsors' marketing department foist that on you in press releases and marketing material is one thing. Saying it yourself,about yourself, regardless of being unable to prove it, is just silly.

D

In reply to Dave Orsman: Not sure Wyatt is relevant...he's a mountain runner. Incredible trainer, awesome runner, but only occasionally hits the road hard. Probably the nicest guy in athletics.

I'm a bit uncomfortable with this subject in general. I have my view on this which is in line with many I guess, but I won't call the guy a liar until I see or hear otherwise.

TBH I see his claims as unsubstantiated...and will leave it at that.

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:
>

That's why I have doubts that it could all be bull. But he's clearly a hugely gifted athlete. Without his past history I'd be more inclined to call him out as a fraud, as it is I think we just have to call it unsubstantiated.

But he has done some great things so I don't think we can simply dismiss such claims...doubt for sure..

In reply to friend1:

From the Sportiva Blog: "I also felt quietly excited when I caught a glimpse of the Tre Cima on my way into Cortina."

Hmm. The Tre Cime really are a unique and unforgetable sight. From the north. From the south (and Cortina is in the SW of the Tre Cime) they are an indistinguishable pile of choss. In any case it is not possible to see them at all from Cortina or anywhere near there due to the intervening mountains.

As an aside, the town that you can see from the summit of the Cima Grande is Auronzo di Cadere with its long, picturesque lake.

In reply to scooott:

Jack Geldard posted earlier in the thread:

"Rich has politely refused to answer any question, to name any belayer or to comment at all on any matter. He has been friendly, courteous and polite. But he makes no comment."

In reply to friend1:

It does seem odd that an academic of all people would refuse to provide any evidence.

In reply to bouldery bits: I think there's a bit more to deserving that tag than being an undergrad.

In reply to mrjonathanr: Agreed, academic is pushing it a tad.

In reply to JJL:

that's a bit unfair






to school kids.

In reply to Morgan Woods:

lots of bile on this thread regardless...

In reply to SARS:

I wouldn't be surprised if some of RS's sponsers are looking to recoup some of the monies they have invested in him over the past couple of years. Presumably they would not have sponsored him without RS's statements in relation to his alleged achievements.

In reply to dustbuddy:


I would! I think most will be content to quietly cut and run. Anything else risks generating some seriously bad publicity.

In reply to jkarran: And do outdoor companies really give that much money to sponsored climbers anyway? I guess it's more than the occasional free pair of boots (elderly lakes afficionados will remember Billy's route "Asolo" on Dover...) but it's not millions of squids per year, is it?

In reply to andy:

Why exactly has he been dropped by his sponsors?

In reply to friend1: May have been covered earlier in the thread, I've been reading it over several days: What does Chris Doyle say about the ascent of A.D. the article on UK suggests he saw the full climb does it not? I'm more curious than concerned.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=49723

In reply to ticktockdublin:
Is that the article where he says something like "It's not his feats on rock that are impressive, but his feats of strength in the gym - like number of one-armers etc"?
I remember reading it at the time and thought it was an odd thing to say, considering McClure hasn't climbed Action Directe, A Muerte, Liquid Ambar, and at the time hadn't done Hubble. Or maybe he knew something about Rich back then?

As stated a few times above, he provided insufficient evidence to back up his recent claimed on-sights of Brandler-Hasse, The Fisch, and probably more importantly the solo of Brandler-Hasse, despite them asking for something repeatedly. Strangely enough, one happy snap taken with some random tall person on top of some unidentifiable peak presumably in the dolomites isn't proof enough...

In reply to puppythedog:
Chris wasn't there when Simpson claims to have done it.

In reply to mark s:


Nothing to do with the main thrust of this thread, but...


I've only ever seen him climb indoors at The Bear Rock, and watching him climb was quite awesome. And there would often be quite a few people sitting and watching him climb the hard routes up the competition wall. I say climb, but "breeze up" would be the better description.

Not many people would come in cold, to a wall, and sprint up a f7c as their warm up climb, and make it look completely effortless.

That does not, of course, prove his claims of hard outdoor routes.

But he is a very good, top grade sport climber, and I haven't personally seen anyone* climb the hard routes on the competition wall (Bear Rock) as effortlessly and elegantly as I've seen Rich Simpson skim up them.


Just like to add to this character assassination thread, as this is one hard climber I've been in the same room as, climbing**, and this is something that I do think needs saying...

||-)



* No offence alx, I've seen you climb the hard routes there, too, but RS made them look easier, sorry!


** I was possibly warming up on an F5+ and peaking at an F6b+ - RS warmed up on an F7c, and made it look easy...

In reply to ali k:


I read the Scarpa blog posts today - it seems in retrospect very odd writing "I" about all those ascents as if the second didn't exist. Even if your second only seconded the entire route I still couldn't think about doing such big routes except of as a "we". He also claims in the posts to have done a couple classic North Faces but is coy about which. Of course lots of people solo something like the Droites, but that is still a top effort especially for someone new to alpinism.

It's all very sad, I had never heard the doubts about him before this thread but it does all look very Walter Mitty-esque now. And if he did do everything he said, then just for the lack of being willing to answer peoples' questions he ends up with people like me who are totally neutral on the issue thinking he is a fantasist rather than one of the best climbers of his generation.

In reply to friend1: Give the guy a break nobody is getting anywhere with this, If Rich wants to stay quiet then thats that. Innocent until proven guilty. So as it stands he has done some very hard climbing and everyone knows this.

In reply to jim hughes: The thing is, why should he be 'innocent until proven guilty'?

If I claimed to have climbed AD, would I be 'innocent until proven guilty' without a single piece of proof? I doubt I'd be taken seriously.

Saying that though, I do want his claims to be true (the climbing ones anyway) as I think it is an inspiration to see somebody climb so hard after relatively short amount of time partaking in the sport and it really would show what you can do if you put your mind to it. However, the lack of proof really isn't doing his case any favours!

In reply to ali k: 'Is that the article where he says something like "It's not his feats on rock that are impressive, but his feats of strength in the gym - like number of one-armers etc"?'

He says, 'I’ve climbed with people who are stronger than me, some are better than me (but not by much – unless I’m abroad where it’s quite normal...) and I’m not often left in awe. Normally, when I’m really cranking, pulling down hard on those little holds, I feel like I’m doing enough to be as good as I can be. But am I? Are any of us putting so much effort in that we reach our true potential? One man who gets as close as any I’ve known is Richard Simpson'

In reply to John2:
Thanks for that. Definitely read that somewhere so I must be thinking of a different article by McClure.

In reply to dustbuddy:
I would personally hope they go after him for obtaining money under false pretences - i.e. Fraud.

I looked into him regarding the supposed sub-4 minute mile.
There was no such meeting even around when, or at the track he claimed it to be.
I know knowledgeable and influential people both at the alleged track and his home area - they had never heard of him.
He was supposed to have been pacing others (who beat him), and still ran sub-4.
His time would have made him fastest briton in the world that year, let alone his faster mates, and all would have been (conservatively) in the top 20.

Now how come NONE of them feature in the world's fastest lists, NONE of them have complained, and NONE of them have been going for the sponsorship available from companies in the running line - which would have been worth a hell of a lot more than climbing gear companies have given him.
The amount earned at Grand Prix's is quite something.

Reason - it's a complete load of b*ll*cks.

He has lied through his teeth regarding a sub-4 minute mile.

So, do I believe anything else he says - NO, not unless I see some evidence. His word is worth diddly squat.

In reply to friend1:

Let's face it, as it stands no-one believes him other than his mates and others who want to believe him as an article of faith. And it's going to stay that way until he produces some proof. It's not calling him a liar; it's the difference between atheism and agnosticism. I don't think there's much more one can say.

jcm

In reply to fred99:

As for a sub-4 minute mile and a marathon under 2:30 in one year - not necessarily such a difficult item.

I know someone (personally - I used to race against him) who won the Chicago marathon (in 2:11:25) in 1989, and then ran 3,56.5 for the mile later that year at Crystal Palace.

Name: Paul Davies-Hale.

He was on the TV for the mile (BBC or ITV, I forget which), and the marathon was fairly public as well.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I for one AM calling him a liar.
I'd like him to try and contest this claim.

He won't because he hasn't got a leg to stand on.

In reply to fred99:

Thanks; interesting.

A quick google throwa up this link, which suggests he was perhaps an unusually versatile runner.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/little-yips-that-make-the-charac...

Still, evidently by no means impossible even for someone who isn't Gebrselassie.

jcm

In reply to fred99:


An amazing running all rounder judging by the performance stats that you can find using:

http://www.thepowerof10.info/pothome.aspx

In reply to Alan_2468:

A nice bloke as well. Coaches youngsters now.

In reply to jim hughes:

No. He's clearly been given more breaks than he deserves, and apparently his sponsors now agree. If someone wants to quietly go about their business climbing for themselves and still climb Action Directe or solo the BH then good on them and it's none of our business what they do. But if someone proclaims themselves a 'world class athlete', as RS has done, rents our eyeballs in magazines and expects the rest of us to pay for his sponsorship through our gear purchases then the least he could do is deign to play the game he wants to be seen to be winning.

As for getting nowhere, I think it's been quite an illuminating discussion for some of the climbing community to have. It's a development of climbing as a whole that pretenders will try to game the media and we now need more hard proof of big claims if people want to gain from them. Sad but true. If RS has not climbed these things - and I repeat that I really hope he has - then he has exploited the trust and good faith of the climbing community, his sponsors and his friends. He has spat in the face of a community that traditionally took climbers at their word, who trusted him and acclaimed him and rewarded him. And he can't compromise his mighty ideals to produce just one bloody photo or piece of footage to irrefutably *prove* beyond any doubt that he actually did just ONE of these big things he's claiming?

There are much worse words for people like that than 'world class athlete'. :-/

In reply to friend1: Alex Huber on Brandler Hasse youtube.com/watch?v=96JIohKsQVY&

Very impressive! But maybe something taken away from it if it's a trade solo as the claims made are true.

Re: Richard's Blog:
Rich says it took him an hour to get down.. Good effort! My experience descending from Comici was that it was a total ball ache.
And i don't remember seeing Tre Cime in all its glory from Cortina. Had to pay a ridiculous toll and walk for an hour to the base.

The polint is Alex deserves the sponsorship - he has 'earned' it, i'm now going to buy a pair of Adidas trainers. I was gonna buy Scarpas but without the video - they're not getting my money.

In reply to Damo: I just think it a bit one sided. Here someone is having there life ripped to bits by the UKC hoards and they are not even here to defend themselves and probably dont even know that they are been called a liar and cheat on a Sunday evening.

Dont reply to me about media and proof because I dont care, It is a real person afterall so should be treated with some dignity no matter what they have or havent done.

In reply to Damo:

Thanks for the Peter Treseder links, I had never heard of him before.

A fascinating comparison of bullshit addiction.

In reply to friend1: I know some of you have been supporting Rich and this comment is not you. I think it is disgraceful how so many of you could be so nasty about someone you probably have never met. Just because we won't tell you who has belayed him on these climbs, it doesn't mean that he hasn't climbed the routes.

I happen to know for certain after a few years of pretty much no training, in 2009 Rich bashed out an F8c in a sesh having only played on it a little the year before. AND MY MATE BELAYED HIM SO THIS DID HAPPEN!!

The guy climbs for himself, not to prove anything to anyone. Why do we feel the need to crush all his achievements?
Dave

In reply to jim hughes:

Putting aside that he's most likely aware of the thread, i agree with you 100%

In reply to friend1:
I met Rich in Siurana, I think the week after he did A Muerte (assuming he did). Ive no idea now who he said belayed him, but I think he had been climbing a bit with Toni Arbones, and he had a mate with him called Rob (I think. No idea of his surname. All I can remember is he had longish hair and massive forearms).
Siurana is a pretty small place, there weren't that many people there, and as I say he stayed for a few days after he had done it. I can't understand how he would have kept that ruse up in a place like that, unless of course he had someone in on it completely as his alibi to say he'd belayed him. It was pretty big news when he did it and everyone would have been asking him about it. Very strange though that he apparently now doesn't name his belayer? I'm sure he must have done at the time.
I still believe him for the moment, but only on the basis that he seemed a really genuine guy and that he was incredibly strong. I'm also pretty sure my mate Jim believed him, who had known him since they were kids. Can't say any more than that.

In reply to jim hughes:

Because they don't have the internet in Cambridge, eh? RS has posted on UKC before, to question the veracity of another climber's ability, no less! He knows where it is. It's one-sided because he chooses to leave it that way.

Your concern for his wellbeing is genuinely admirable, but if he is truly in a bad way then all he needs to do to shut us up is produce one tiny bit of hard proof, or the testament of one of the secret belayers derico mentions above, and all will be fine. Surely it must be so easy to ease his pain at being treated so unfairly. On the other hand, if he did the things, doesn't have any proof and doesn't care about that, and truly does not care what people say about him, then none of this will trouble him at all and your concern for his emotional state is unnecessary ..


Good for you, but nearly 200 posts on this thread indicates it's not just about you, Jim. RS has been treated with respect for at least five years, but can't seem to find any himself for those sponsors who supported him.

In reply to derico:


He was climbing, and blogging, for his sponsors. That makes the situation rather different. Mr Simpson also publicly accused another well known climber of being a liar, so again - that makes it rather different.

In reply to derico:

"I happen to know for certain after a few years of pretty much no training, in 2009 Rich bashed out an F8c in a sesh having only played on it a little the year before."

Hmmm. Best ever redpoint 9a, then a few years of pretty much no training, and then an unfamiliar 8c in a single session. So after a FEW YEARS of pretty much NO TRAINING, he is still climbing at essentially the same grade?

It would of course be really interesting to hear directly from your mate about the details of the 2009 8c ascent on this forum, because up to now there really has not been anyone on here who has held his rope on a hard ascent.

Love your profile page btw.

Luca

When simple hobbies go wrong,yet another case of web induced crap whether true or not, bring back the 90´s. Im sick of all this who did what when and reading about the same old people climbing the same old routes. Whos with me, lets boycott this site and maybe climbing in the UK will return to what should be a fun activity. I hate to see people being character assasinated all the time on here.

In reply to jim hughes: I agree!

In reply to jim hughes: I'm with you Jim! Let's change the world!!

In reply to Rob15: cheers!

In reply to Tam Stone: It has to start somewhere. Theres going to be a revulution infact there has to be, If this is what the future of climbing holds then its looking bleak.

In reply to jim hughes: You need some of these http://www.shopcurious.com/common/zoom.aspx?productId=1124&brandUrlBase...

In reply to jim hughes:

Can we follow it on Twitter or will we have to bookmark the blog?

In reply to Damo: If I knew what you meant then maybe! By the way I meant revolution not revulution.

In reply to Damo:

The revolution will not be televised, not be televised, not be televised.

The revolution will be live.

In reply to Graeme Alderson: one can only hope.

In reply to Graeme Alderson:

But it could still be televised - right?

In reply to Removed User:
The revolution will be on a delayed broadcast!


Doesn't quite have the same ring...

In reply to jim hughes:


Agree.

Mick

In reply to Removed User:


I'm hoping for live streaming so I can watch on my computer.

Jim, I don't know how old you are but I started climbing before the internet had any impact and things struck me as just as gossipy then. In Scotland there were all sorts of rumours of who abbed routes in summer checking out crux tool placements etc. for instance.

In reply to friend1:

Down with this sort of thing!

In reply to TobyA:
>... before the internet had any impact and things struck me as just as gossipy then.

Absolutely. Go through the comments deep within the Himalayan Database and see how many ascents have been doubted or disputed by other parties. Maestri, Cesen, Mesili and dozens of others all lied and got called on it long before the internet.

In reply to friend1:

I don't understand why the UKC mods have allowed this thread to continue. It's not really fair on Mr Simpson and the last thread like this was closed down by the mods, so why let this one continue?

This is what Jack Geldard wrote at the end of the last thread:

"There have been some very serious accusations made, and also some speculation.

I have archived this thread for now, so that it will not accept further replies, until we (The UKC Team) have discussed it further."

What has changed that they now think that this thread is acceptable?

I don't know about the running or the climbing, but with regards to the rowing, in the previous thread Jim Houghton said that the rowing effort WAS witnessed.

In reply to Damo: The McCallum affair at Gogarth actually made a half page article in The Times
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=235364

In reply to Phil Payne:

Because they value freedom of speech and don't want to be accused of denying it?

In reply to Graeme Alderson:

The revolution will be a podcast

In reply to DaveHK:
classic.

In reply to Phil Payne:

It sounds like Jack was very fair and gave Rich an opportunity to provide evidence or even just restate his claims and deny the questions, but he choose not say anything.

I think after having publicly questioning another climber's record, and making his extraordinary claims, particularly through his (at the time) sponsors, then there is nothing unfair about people asking questions. If he wants to dispel doubts he could very easily just say who he did some of these amazing climbs with. I don't think anyone would doubt him at all if someone comes forward and say "I belayed him on his redpoint of Action Direct" for example.

In reply to TobyA:


I belayed him on his redpoint of Action Direct

There you go...all done and dusted!

In reply to MattDTC: Great. Thanks Matt. I'm sure in stepping forward you have saved Rich a lot of heartache. As Mr. Simpson himself seem a bit coy over the details about these things (besides going back onto the route to 'recreate' the redpoint to get photos for his sponsors obviously), you should write down your memories of that really important climb, as it's an important step in UK climbing history.

In reply to derico:
It's not a case of being nasty to anyone. This isn't some childish schoolyard bullying. No-one on this thread has made a single negative remark about his personality or character. In fact, several people have come on and said what a nice guy he is, and I'll second that. I have met him, and I thought he came across as a very decent friendly person.

This is about trying to find out the truth about some highly dubious claims that have been made, and ensuring that climbing history is accurate.

So who was that? If you want to help constructively towards this discussion then maybe you could ask your mate to give some details about this ascent. Otherwise, your information is pretty worthless.

Proclaiming yourself as a world-class athlete in several disciplines and listing your achievements all over the Internet doesn't really tie in with this modest 'climbing for yourself' attitude you talk about. If you want to see someone who really does climb for themselves and not prove anything to anyone then look to Ryan for that, or Bransby, or McHaffie, Pete Robins etc etc.

Rich is, I'm sure, fully aware of this thread, and certainly the investigations into his claims. He's been given the opportunity to respond and provide some evidence for these claims. In fact, he's been actively chased for it by his sponsors! And yet he chose not to comment or supply anything. So for anyone to say this is all going on behind his back and that he's unaware of it is laughable.

Rich has said in the past that he does have evidence for at least some of the things he's claimed. He's promised to show it to people and then not done, for various reasons. Most notably the footage of him doing Careless Torque. Why would you have this evidence and not show it to anyone? Including your sponsors? To me, this just doesn't add up.

And don't forget, he was very quick to publicly question someone else's claims and ask for evidence / belayers to come forward. So why is it now unfair for this to happen with his claims?

In reply to TobyA:

Thankyou toby. I was originally a bit coy about coming forward because i thought it might jeopardise my sponsorship with Pukka Pies if people were to question the legitimacy of my belaying over the years.

In reply to MattDTC:

Thoroughly understandable; from someone who for many years has been trying to attract sponsorship from Greggs the Bakers - in particular from their toffee filled donut range.

In reply to friend1:


I never lie about stuff I do, Rich must have some skeletons to want to do this.

In reply to ali k:

Ali - Such direct comments calling him a liar and the way they were put forward in my opinion are pretty nasty, especially the comments about his article.

I agree with you that Ryan and Pete are more reserved, I haven’t met James or Bransby yet so couldn’t comment.

I’m in work so don’t have the exact details, I know it has been in the Frankenjura guide for a while and put up by someone who has put up many 8c’s and above in Frankenjura. This is a bit vague I know, but you get the idea that if he can do this with limited training there is no reason why he couldn’t do a 9a (Which he trained for specifically). For this reason I do not believe my comments are worthless.. to the contrary I would say they were extremely important.

Luca - My friend is an exceptionally nice and honest chap who is a reputable civil engineer with no invested interest in Rich, so therefore no reason to lie. I have known him for years, so if he tells me that he belayed Rich doing an 8c then I fully believe him. I don’t really want to give his details, as this could lead to many people calling him a liar and it was my choice to put the post on here not his.

Thanks by the way.. I guess you like Abi’s part of the picture rather than mine!

Dave

In reply to derico:

His ability isn't in question. You only have to watch Doyle's Action Directe vid to see he clearly has the strength.

What is in question is whether he did the routes or not. There's a vast disparity between having the ability and using it to do routes.

In reply to MattDTC:

Hope your belaying's better than your proofreading

In reply to derico:

If it wasn't for the claims of a sub 4 minute mile, a marathon in 2 hrs 30 min and to have 16 unbeaten fights as an amateur boxer, then this thread probably wouldn't exist!

As far as I am aware, from reading this thread and others, none of these claims have been substantiated. Unsurprisingly, this has led to his climbing achievements being under the spotlight.

I personally find it rather strange that a world class climber would choose to use unfamiliar belayers for redpoint attempts at their climbing limit.

In reply to MattDTC:

Good enough for me. Now we just need the Careless torque video, the timekeeper for the mile and marathon and his boxing coach to step forward. Oh, and someone who saw his solos in the Dollies. And...

In reply to Alan_2468:

It’s probably not that strange - I've had the pleasure (or misfortune depending on how you look at it!) to be asked to belay in such a circumstance. I suspect trips abroad are not always undertaken with an entourage of belayers, and sometimes you have to rely on unknown climbers.

In reply to Alan_2468:

That's actually not impossible - I 'nearly' belayed Dave MacLeod on Rhapsody - I was helping the HotAches guys with the filming and Dave needed a belayer for his warm-up climb when he placed the gear, so I stepped in. After he'd climbed the crack and placed all the gear, he down-climbed and then said that he'd almost just gone for it there and then. At that time, I'd never belayed him before and he didn't know how experienced I was. So I don't have a problem with the issue of RS's belayed being unfamiliar.

It's the running I have a problem with. I do a few races, at a pretty low level, and of the 14 races I've done this year, the results of 13 are available on line, and a search on my name will produce my races, positions and times. The fact that people who are much better placed than I am have been unable to find any evidence that he's achieved either a sub-4 minute mile or a sub-2:30 marathon makes it very hard for me to believe those claims.

In reply to derico:

Thanks Dave, a few more details or even better some info direct from the horse's mouth would be good.

Best

Luca

In reply to derico:

Don't forget, RS had no problem publicly and directly accusing BH of being a liar four years ago. I'm not saying this is the right way to go about it, but it seems to me that there is now a damn sight more evidence (or lack of) for RS's claims to be false than there ever was for BH's. And following those accusations BH did in fact provide names of belayers and details for those ascents which were in question. It seems a bit rich for RS to declare himself beyond suspicion and now not do the same, don't you think?

I'll admit, some of the comments regarding the article being 'insulting to children' were a bit unneccesary. But you must admit that it was an incredibly strange article. Long and wordy, and yet lacking simple but important details like who he teamed up with to do these ascents. And including no photos of any actual climbing - despite obviously having a camera with him (evidenced by the single shot of him & his partner on top of some unidentifiable peak).

I find this single Brandler-Hasse solo claim incredibly hard to believe, never mind everything that's gone before. Alex Huber, not unknown for his amazing big wall climbing and hard soloing feats, soloed this route in 4 hours. After climbing it god knows how many times, and preparing for it for weeks - including putting chalk dots on the holds, analyzing every pitch, drawing diagrams, preparing mentally etc etc. Rich claims to have done it in 1hr 37 mins after climbing it just once before. That's LESS THAN HALF THE TIME, despite having some faffy rope technique to deal with on the crux pitches!!!! And this in his first 'alpine' season. That is some incredible achievement!

Is it not telling though that UKC and pretty much every other climbing media outlet in the world chose not to publish this as news?

I've never said there's a reason he couldn't climb 9a. But as people have said many many times before, being very strong and capable of doing something is not proof enough of having actually done it.
Having said that, I am still interested in the details of this 2009 8c ascent, so if you could ask your mate for more info or ask him to post on here that would be helpful.

In reply to Alan_2468:

Yeh, as others said, not uncommon at times. However what is uncommon is for every hard route you do to be with random belayers who never appear again. And which happen unwitnessed by people who just happened to be there at the crag. Particularly the ones in your own country like with Hubble and Liquid Ambar. And this has been the case with all of the ascents in question with RS.

In reply to ali k: I posted mainly due to his boxing claims but never really doubted his climbing prowess.

You say that all of his hard ascents are in question. I note that he has a very lengthy, impressive tick list. Are they all in question? It seems hard to imagine that after all these years of being in the media he has not done anything verifiable.

In reply to ali k:

Ali,

for a bit of perspective check out Hansjoerg Auer's 2007 solo of the Fisch. 920m up to 7b+ in 2h 55min up a route he had spent a total of only 15 hours on, 10 of them 3 years before the solo. An incredible achievement, but apparently witnessed & photographed.

BH by comparison is 550m up to 7a+.

Best

Luca

In reply to lmarenzi:

Yes, and you can guarantee that had he not had photos and witnesses nobody would have believed Auer. Particularly if he'd lobbed in a few worldclass running and boxing claims.

In reply to JJL:
>Oh, and someone who saw his solos in the Dollies. And...

And for the sub 4 min mile, someone who was at the ring during his boxing matches....

In reply to Tam Stone:
I was only referring to the UK ones and Action Directe, but good question.

Assuming we're talking about only F8c or higher, then the list includes

Frankenjura
Infinty 8c+, Showdown 8c Intercooler 8c 2nd ascent, Wallstreet 8c, Armstrong 8c, Raubritter 8c, Ronin 8c, Powerplay 8c, Action Directe 9a, Burn 4U 8c

UK
Hubble 8c Raven Tor, The Bastard 8c+ Rubicon, Liquid Ambar 8c/+

Spain
Ursus 8c Monstant
A Muerte 8c+/9a Siurana

France
Le Minimum 8c Buoux, Maginot Line 8c Volx, Agincourt 8c Buoux, Chiqquette Du Graal, 8c Buoux

I'm pretty sure that none of the UK ones have any forthcoming witnesses/belayers. On the UKB thread it was mentioned that there was some doubt about all the ones done in France, presumably done on the same trip?
Would be interesting to know who he was out with on the Frankenjura trips and out in Spain with.

To be honest I don't doubt all these claimed ascents. As you say, it's too hard to imagine that none of them are verifiable. But you would think with all the doubt that's been circulating for the last few years that someone would have come forward to say they'd belayed him on something.

In reply to lmarenzi:
I know. It's mind blowing isn't it! But as you say, witnessed and photographed so given credit for.

In reply to ticktockdublin:

I think a lot of the problem on here is that people don't know just how special a sub 4 min mile really is, even today 50 years after it was first done it is really really special. So people who want to bullshit think it is a reasonable thing to say that they have done, like , say a 2,30 marathon, it isn't, it is far more special.
I don't know about his climbing claims but his athletic ones stretch the imagination.

In reply to ali k:

>Hubble 8c Raven Tor

Errrr....

jcm

In reply to lmarenzi:Auers solo was reported here but seemed totally under appreciated.

Simpson may have become insecure with all these fantastic climbers (Huber, Auer, Ondra, Steck etc) that he had to bullshit in order to feel like 'a world class athlete'. Maybe he thought he was going to set the world on fire, had people bumming him up then failed to achieve his ultimate goal, Action Direct. Psychologically, it was probably downhill from there. (I'm guessing obviously)

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

ha. typo obviously!

In reply to Tam Stone:
Sadly, I think that may well be the case. If he'd had more patience then who knows what he could have actually gone on to achieve? He certainly had the strength in spades...

In reply to ali k:
That's just conjecture. All you know about the climbing is that along with Malc and Steve McClure Rich Simpson has been probably one of the 3 strongest sports climbers of the last decade, but refuses to give any evidence of his ascents. The psychologising is irrelevant, it's just sad that a cloud of uncertainty covers that tick-list.

In reply to ali k:

Luca's point was that Simpson's claimed time on the BH was credible/less amazing in the context of Auer's solo of the Fish given Auer's similar lack of prep and the length. I agree and don't know why so many are labouring this facet of his claim.

Also you can add 'Make it Funky' to the Raven tor list.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

>The psychologising is irrelevant

C'mon, it's hardly irrelevant that he's since made bizarrely unbelievable claims in about four other disciplines, is it? Unless you believe that he's gone in for some sort of giant troll in order to get back at the climbing world for not seeing the Ben H thing his way, it's hard not to carry a certain scepticism back into the earlier climbing.

jcm

In reply to mrjonathanr:

No, you don't *know* that at all. You think that because it was said so in the media and you'd like it to be true, as we all would. And you are assuming that there actually *is* any evidence of actual ascents. We don't actually know that any evidence exists, regardless of whether its supply is being refused.

Can you name one belayer on ANY of his harder routes? Just one?

>The psychologising is irrelevant, it's just sad that a cloud of uncertainty covers that tick-list.

It's an internet forum, that's what happens. He put himself out there seeking acclaim and money from us, but can offer not one piece of proof he has done anything he says he has.
Uncertainty? Clearly people involved with him consider it a bit more than that.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Cod psychology is just that m'lud. Gradgrind had it right.

Evidence!!!!!!!!!!!! for god sake its not a courtroom. just get on with your own life and forget about this. Yes, we dont know what he climbed but we do know that he was a strong climber due to strict training. Maybe if some of you took a leaf out of his book and got psyked and trained then there would be more notable acsents by a more diverse group of climbers, rather than people sitting at home every evening slating others.

In reply to jim hughes:

Training and using the internet aren't mutually exclusive afaik .

In reply to Damo:

The word *probably* might have been worth noting, while we're dabbling with the asterisk key.

Damo, how do you know what I think? Particularly since you don't appear to grasp it, and it wasn't complicated. I just can't see the line that comments on the existence or otherwise of evidence or have you jumped to a conclusion? The point is that there's a lot of conjecture, but an internet thread is hardly an exhaustive investigation.

Make your own mind up on the basis of the little you know (it's hardly difficult, is it?) - but drop the Q.E.D bull, it's undignified.

As someone sdays, it's not a court of law, and there's not much forensic rigour round here.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

I will see your Gradgrind and raise you a Sherlock Holmes.

jcm

In reply to mrjonathanr:
>
I think your opening line was ambiguous and implies a level of acceptance that I find unjustified. I assume you were trying to be generous and open-minded.


Evidence? You used the term 'know'. To truly know something in this sense you need some evidence, or it's just faith.

Upon re-reading I can see your comment could be taken a couple of different ways. I initially read it and inferred a certainty that you may not have intended. If I made this mistake and responded accordingly, then I apologise.

The point is that there's a lot of conjecture, but an internet thread is hardly an exhaustive investigation.
Who said it had to be? You're suggesting a comparison to something else. It is what it is, to whatever degree it evolves. That is for another debate. I think, despite the ugliness, the thread is a valid and useful discussion of the issues involved and to pretend otherwise is naive, and ultimately retrograde for climbing. As always with these threads, so many people come on and argue that we shouldn't be arguing. They dislike the tone of conversation so they pretend the subject of the conversation doesn't matter, or we shouldn't be talking about it. Bizarre.

I know others disagree. I understand their position.

And I did see your first post, before you changed it.

In reply to Damo: berk! grow up! Just leave it, your starting to look like a pedantic idiot chasing your own tail for a result that you wont get. Just face it there is no evidence to back either side of the debate until RS openly admits or submit evidence but until then we should live in faith. He was strong and very capable.

In reply to jim hughes:

Depends which debate you mean. There's plenty of evidence to indicate that the running claims are to say the least very improbable.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Yes, but this is a climbing site and I also think that a person is a person not a piece of meat to be ripped apart by the UKC vultures.

In reply to jim hughes:

Thanks for your concern Jim, but I knew there would never be a 'result' regarding RS' climbing. It fits the pattern to a tee. I'm in it for the discussion, the exchange of ideas and what the process reveals, for wider purposes.

As for my tail, I have to remove it from this comfy chair and go away for a few days, conveniently, as I agree this thread has run its course.

D

In reply to jim hughes:

Do you believe RS's claim that he ran a four minute mile?

In reply to jim hughes:

Ben Heason is a person as well. Rich Simpson was happy to question Ben's ascents when it suited him.

At the end of the day, it isn't important, except this is a climbing site and we care about the heritage and the integrity of the sport. Some of us are passionate about our running as well, his running claims made serious alarm bells ring.

In reply to lowersharpnose: I dont give a s#"t whether he has or not,Im not a runner and dont care. I am a person that cares about people that are being attacked on an open forum. I dont know if hes lied or not but all I am trying to say is he knows what he has or hasnt done, let him deal with it. I agree there are some tall tales but he was very motivated and if nothing else is true I believe that action direct did recieve an acsent from Rich.

In reply to jim hughes: as a brummy Ive seen him training, he was a bit of a monster.........

In reply to jim hughes:

On the contrary. There is evidence that THERE WAS NO SUCH ATHLETIC MEETING AT WHICH HE COULD HAVE RUN A MILE AT ALL, let alone under 4 minutes.

I have stated it, along with backup evidence, and I have access to the facts, which HAVE been passed on to certain authorities.

Or are you calling me a liar instead.

RS is a liar, and you are being his apologist, which does not reflect well upon you.

In reply to jim hughes: Jim. you are really missing the point. If you don't want to read about this then get on with your own life and stop hitting refresh.

This is an important debate regarding the history of British climbing. It's gonna happen whether you like it or not.

In reply to jim hughes:


What?

All of us?

You can use your faith to believe whatever you want to believe. Others may reach a different conclusion.

In reply to jim hughes:

You obviously know nothing about running.
Those who do have never heard of him - and these persons are from the entire surrounding area, and cover every area of expertise I can think of.

I'm sure I could drum up the full list if you want me to, but quite frankly I think that you're either;

A pal of his trying to hold up the investigation
or
Some t*ss*r having a wind up just for the sake of it.

I've called RS a liar regarding his sub 4 minute mile twice before at least, and I repeat it again.
If he wants to complain the all he's got to do is come out with the evidence - but he can't, because he's a b*llsh*tt*r who's finally got caught out.

Considering his comments regarding another climber, he should expect what he's getting. That's what really rankles.

In reply to fred99: I dont know the facts from a running point of view, maybe he is lying. Yes I understand that these are tough feats.

What I do care about as said before is the public flogging mentality of UKC regardless of negative or positive evidence.

His climbing claims are I`ll admit it very obscure and tough but............


He was and is very dedicated, maybe too much, butI believe we are dealing with a man that shot to fame very quickly and felt compelled to climb the pro ladder as quickly as he could.

maybe he was blinded by the lights and things went a bit obscure but I do beleive from a climbing point of view that he was capable of these said feats and until we know otherwise, just leave alone.

In reply to jim hughes:

I like your compassion - but sorry Jim, what you are saying is nonsense.

In reply to fred99: Im not a to33er or a pal of his and I actually do know quite a bit about running as just over ten years ago I was running for the county.

Im am not an Idiot or anything like that I just dont like floggings online with out the defendent being present.

In reply to jim hughes:

I think you can be pretty certain that the defendant is present....

In reply to blablabla: Why!

In reply to jim hughes: I don't think anyone is saying he is no capable of hard climbing but there are some pretty wild claims out there which people on here are trying to answer.

In reply to Morgan Woods:

I thought MattDCM above had already stated that he belayed him on AD or was that a joke...?

In reply to ali k:

Add Unplugged 9a 2nd ascent to that list

http://www.freakclimbing.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid...
http://www.freakclimbing.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid...

In reply to SARS:

Sadly, the latter

In reply to jim hughes:

Then you can understand people questioning. If you run a quick marathon nowadays it is almost inconcievable that such a time would not be recorded. If I say I ran 2:46, put my name and the time in google, and a link will appear.

It is an awkward one because the claims were believable to an extent, incredible, but possible, and he's clearly hugely talented.

In reply to JJL:
Really?? Didn't read that way to me. Are you privy to extra info not included in this thread?

I guess we need proof from belayers too, nowadays...?

In reply to friend1:

Does anyone else find something odd about the following paragraph? What comes across to you as his highlight of all highlights?

From the Wild Country website on Richard Simpson (copied just now, google Rich Simpson climber if you want the original):

"Stuff I have done -
Since starting climbing 4 years ago I have climbed many routes and boulders, my highlights been, Hubble 8c+ Liquid Amber 8c/8c+, Azincourt 8c, Evolution 8c, le Minimum 8c, Maginot Line 8c, Powerplay 8c, Chouca 8A+ Flash, Malcs Start font 8B, 8Ball Font 8B, Superman Font 8B, Pool of Bethesda Font 8a+ amongst other stuff. I also repeated the hardest problem in the infamous school room which as been unrepeated for 10 years, despite been tried by Britain strongest climbers which would be Font 8b+ outside.
This summer i repeated Hubble 8c+, which was a big tick for me. And i also sent a big bunch of routes in the Frankenjura, but the highlight was to make the 6th ascent and first British ascent of Action Direct 9A - Wolfgang Gullichs amazing and classic route."

In reply to Jon Read:

Exactly. MattDTM comes on here and states categorically he belayed RS on AD and then apparently it's some sort of joke for those 'in the know'.

didn't read like a joke to me either.

In reply to Jon Read:


Not the most serious sounding of comments. Fine, if he's not joking then that's great, in fact it's what passes for big news around here but it certainly looks like he's having a laugh.

jk

In reply to SARS:

Did the fact he'd cut and pasted the statement from the previous post not give you a clue?

In reply to andy:

I didnt read it which was my mistake I guess. bizarre joke

In reply to jkarran:

Hang on, no I AM SPARTACUS

In reply to lmarenzi:

To me, the repeat of Pinky Perky in the school room seems to be his personal highlight. He certainly puts more emphasis on that than anything else (followed by Action Directe). Was that your point Luca? I agree it is a bit strange.

In reply to ali k:

Did anyone see him do Pinky Perky?

In reply to Shani:
ha. this is one i can verify. there's a video somewhere.

In reply to ali k:

Just seen it's edited footage so not proof. Not sure if he repeated it that day with Chris or not, but unlikely otherwise he'd have put the total ascent up I would think. Either way, it's hardly the most important ascent to verify, considering all the others in question. It's just a four move problem on a woody.

In reply to ali k: Sorry to be pedantic but it's called Perky Pinky.

In reply to Damo:

I think there's enough evidence to assert RS position as one of the strongest sports climbers around for a while. I think it's adequately evidenced for me to accept fully. But if you want to be pedantic (and that's usually my job) you can pick up on whether you consider his strength to be knowable or merely reputed.

I'd be surprised if that were contested however. Even though the videos of Perky Pinky and A.D. show only sections, not complete links, the strength is there, what isn't is the certainty of the ascents. And FWIW the comments of Steve Mac, Doylo etc about his ability aren't something I'd doubt.


Then you'll have seen my reference to Cry Freedom and understood my point. Leachy was well capable but took forever, maybe Rich persevered and hasn't got evidence of the ascents, or perhaps rationalised he's good enough to do the routes so could claim them on that basis, or...any other conjecture, we just don't know do we?

As we aren't about to find out from Rich we have to draw our conclusions based on what information we have. Conjecture however isn't information, it's just conjecture. I think people are getting a bit carried away at times, and not thinking very carefully about what is, or isn't, known.

To be clear: I'm not leading the line for supporting Rich's version of things. I intend to keep my conclusions private.

I do think there's an ugliness to the thread which motivated my original comment. That could have been better phrased and clearer, I agree. I think there's an ugliness to conning people too, but we can only look after our behaviour, so there's no justification on the basis of someone else's supposed behaviour to be shabby ourselves.

As for calling you Torquemada, it's inaccurate: you're not leading the 'we wuz conned' camp either, but still, some circumspection is not uncalled for. Hence the comment - which was petty, hence the deletion.

In reply to Damo:

Difficult to convey tone on the 'net so not sure how to read this.
I'll assume you're not implying that the thread has upset me and so I'm dismissing the issue as invalid.
It hasn't; it isn't.

The thread has a place, and is particularly instructive when there are contributions from posters who really know the running or boxing world for example, or yourself, particularly your first post.

What isn't instructive is pretend psychology.
Measured posts are worth reading, silly ones aren't.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

Of course everyone likes to consider themselves as the arbiter of what constitutes 'measured' and what constitutes 'silly'.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKC:

Plenty have talked sense on this thread Mick, I don't disagree that Damo is one of them. Those of us involved in running (I know you do a bit of fell running), knew straight away that running claims were bogus.

In reply to mrjonathanr:
But obviously not enough for his (former) sponsors. And you would think they are in a better position than any of us on here to be fully informed of the facts. Or at least to question them.

I agree with you on this. But the information we do have at the moment pretty conclusively shows that the 4 minute mile didn't happen, along with the sub 2:30 marathon and his unbeaten boxing record (and now his claims that he will be in the Olympix boxing squad!). Would you at least agree on that?

For me personally, this shows an ability and willingness to fabricate achievements, and therefore I have naturally extrapolated this ability to include his climbing claims (both the recent alpine ones and the earlier sport climbs). This based on the fact that not one of these claims has been witnessed or had a known or verifiable belayer.

That is my personal position, and it will remain that way until anything is presented to convince me otherwise.

But I also think that there's something far more important at stake than my personal opinion or anyone else's on this thread. CLIMBING HISTORY AND INTEGRITY. Both British and Worldwide. For me that's the most important thing that I hope comes out of all this, and the reason why I started this thread.

In reply to all:

A couple of posts removed; apologies for messing up with the flow of the thread and for removing those quoted responses as well.

We are still looking into this whole issue and haven't yet decided what, or even if, we are going to publish anything in the long run.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - UKC:

Maybe worth reinstating the info about the Olympic stuff and Tam Stone's response?

In reply to ali k:
But I also think that there's something far more important at stake than my personal opinion or anyone else's on this thread. CLIMBING HISTORY AND INTEGRITY. Both British and Worldwide. For me that's the most important thing that I hope comes out of all this, and the reason why I started this thread.

This is probably the most important issue in this sorry mess.

I'm one of the people involved in authoring a new guidebook to North Wales Limestone ( http://news.v12outdoor.com/2010/11/16/new-limestone-guidebook-to-support-no... ). Jack's also producing a seperate Rockfax guide to the area.

I'm currently tidying up the LPT chapter and gathering information for the history and obviously the number of ascents Liquid Ambar has had is now in doubt. I've emailed Rich to ask him directly for something to validate his claimed ascent but to date he hasn't replied. I've said to Rich that if he doesn't provide something to validate his claimed ascent then the guidebook will record that Liquid Ambar has had two repeats - by Ben Moon and Pete Robbins, and that Rich Simpson claimed an ascent which is regarded as suspect.

I climbed with Rich this summer and it makes me sad to have to do this but, as I've told him, the historical record is a lot more important than Rich's opinion of who is and isn't worthy of receiving any proof he may have. At best he's being foolish in his actions, hopefully that's all it is.

In reply to Alan James - UKC:

Amazed to find this thread still alive, I looked again at RS's published bloggs. Below is an almost random quotation from these (I hope we are allowed to cite other web sites):

"... , I’ve also grown hugely as an Alpinist by climbing two North Faces in Alps. Although my ascents were not as quick as Ueli´s, I still consider them to be a positive step towards making attempts on his times in that they were pretty fast, climbed solo and pretty uneventful ... I think it would be unfair on myself to disclose much more information about my ascents at this point in time; they are merely a stepping stone towards my ultimate ambitions. Nor were they ever going to challenge Ueli´s records – that was never my intention."

I have heard some pretty spurious claims to fame in my time, but this is certainly the most pathetic.

In reply to petejh:


I got accused above of making this out to be a 'much bigger deal than it actually is', but the impact on climbing history is quite important to much of the outdoor community.

RS's tick list of climbing ascents cover several historically significant climbs. He is clearly aware of the historical significance of these climbs (and has said as much)- and as such he is embedding his name in to climbing history. He is not tickin 'any 8c+' he is ticking Hubble, nor 'any 9a', but AD.

In reply to Shani:

And the Brandler-Hasse solo, ffs, without any observers or photographs it seems. (Sorry to repeat myself.)

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Yeah - I am showing my ignorance of Alpine climbing. I was not aware of how amazing this claim was until reading your post about Huber's preparation. Incredible stuff.

In reply to Alan James - UKC: Fair enough, although I stand by my post. This is a bizarre situation indeed. I really wish he'd just come clean one way or the other.

In reply to Shani:

This photo of Huber soloing BH makes my palms sweat!

http://www.alpinist.com/doc/web08x/wfeature-solo-huber

In reply to Tam Stone:
Can you add your post again? - important info given the fact that he has now claimed to be on the 2012 Olympic boxing team (read the UKB thread), and you seem to know what you are talking about regarding this boxing squad.

In reply to Shani:

Another citation:

"Finally, I hope to head towards Chamonix in order to train on some big routes like the Walker, Freney Pillar, Tour Ronde etc. This, I hope, should allow me to increase my fitness, and prepare me mentally for climbing big routes, fast and un-roped."

I didn't know the Tour Ronde (north face, presumably) was a "big route" - I soloed that in less than an hour when I was twenty years old. I wonder if someone wants to sponsor me? (Yes - I have photos to prove it!)

In reply to Tam Stone:

>"This is a bizarre situation indeed. I really wish he'd just come clean one way or the other."

Like Schrödinger's cat, RS has simultaneously ticked and not ticked various hard routes - that's quite a feat in itself.

In reply to ali k: I've posted to much already so this is my last, I will end up getting pelters myself.

I am no boxer, have never boxed and don't claim to be an expert, merely a boxing fan who is fairly knowledgable. I have friends and family who do box however and have used my nephews and a pal to ask about Simpson. They claim he is unheard of and that with his claimed record that he would be fairly high profile. The England team is very high profile and Rob McCraken is a high profile trainer (Carl Froch) who has a huge talent pool to choose from. These talents are ranked and this is based on home and away performances and especially international competion results. Rich has 100% not competed internationally as a boxer and as such would not be elligable for inclusion into Robs team. If his home performances were so special that he was included, this would be in the press. Boxing ain't a niche sport like climbing is.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Looks like his Alpine ascents *might* include 'Pan Aroma' and an onsight of 'The Fish'. All in the same week or two of the BH solo.

http://www.8a.nu/forum/ViewForumThread.aspx?ObjectId=15781&ObjectClass=...