I suppose if we go with this hypothesis we could conjecture that the Apollo 13 was the first real attempt to have a moon landing and that's why there were problems because there were still things to be nutted out in practical application that weren't discovered in the sumulations.

There weren't "so many" problems on Apollo 13. There was only one problem: the rupture of a cryogenic oxygen tank.

The problem with your hypothesis is that Apollo was already a program designed carefully to build on the success of each prior mission and to learn from what it taught.

Apollo 11 (landing) wasn't possible until Apollo 10 (powered descent and abort test) had succeeded, and Apollo 10 wasn't possible until Apollo 8 (translunar trajectory and lunar orbit insertion) had succeeded.

Apollo 12 (pinpoint landing, extended stay) wasn't possible until Apollo 11 had succeeded. Apollo 13 didn't succeed, so Apollo 14 was assigned its mission (hybrid trajectory, pinpoint landing in difficult terrain), which was not possible without Apollo 12.

It's actually less credible to believe that everything up to Apollo 13 or 14 was fake, and that Apollo 14 was real and fulfilled a very long and daunting list of mission objectives with no prior successes to build upon. That's like saying a football team up and won the Superbowl without playing any prior games and without practicing together as a team first.