Results: 2016 London Marathon Results
April 24, 2016
regretfully curious wrote:
Wait. Now I'm confused. Why are you pushing for him to be reinstated? Looks like those are impossible splits and stats to reconcile, except if he cut the course.
that split is calculated based on him starting 16:30 after the gun.
There's a photo of him at 1.2 miles next to a runner that hit the 5k mat at 27 minutes (gun time)
If Ryan started 16 minutes late, he would not have been even with this trimmer at mile 1.2. This proves that the chip start time is incorrect.
Belinda wrote:
Leave this poor kid alone. It's okay to go after adults like this, but leave children alone.
Can you not read, or are you just trolling?
Lots of trolling going on here. Keep up the good work, whether it's calling out cheaters or mistakes the marathon makes, I enjoy reading your comprehensive research.
The next step is for the haters to accuse me of being Doubler.
If the kid is able to run the 33:30 10K or 16:20 5K then London should reinstate him. Otherwise, it's obvious that he cheated. At least Brasher is giving him a chance to prove his time was legit.
doubler wrote:
regretfully curious wrote:What time splits did he run in London? What finishing time?
What's his time in other races?
Splits removed.
First ever marathon.
Officially he finished just under 4 hours - but in reality it would be about 4:15:00 if they correct the start time. After the first 10k, he ran about 30 minutes per 5k consistently according to the email below.
Got this email from their media department - but I initially sent photo proof to a different email address.
Hugh Brasher, Event Director of the Virgin Money London Marathon, said:
“We have a system in place that highlights results which need explanation – for example missing split times and unusual split time patterns. We contact runners identified through this system to ask them to provide an explanation.
“In Ryan’s case, there was no time shown in his results from the 5km timing mat and his time at the 10km mat was 34:10. All his split times from that point for each 5km were about 30 minutes (i.e. about an hour for each subsequent 10km).
“We have not accused Ryan of cheating. We have asked him for an explanation for the time differential and we have also asked him for evidence that he has previously run a 10km in about 33 minutes or a 5km (such as a parkrun) in about 16:20. To date, he has not provided that evidence. We have also sent him an entry form for a free place in a 10km run we organise at the end of this month so that he can demonstrate that he can run 10k in 33:30 minutes.
“Ryan has not been disqualified, nor has he been banned from future events organised by the London Marathon. His results have currently been removed from the database while the investigation is ongoing.â€
HowardDean wrote:
Lots of trolling going on here. Keep up the good work, whether it's calling out cheaters or mistakes the marathon makes, I enjoy reading your comprehensive research.
The next step is for the haters to accuse me of being Doubler.
Hi doubler...oh wait..
Doubler wrote:
regretfully curious wrote:Wait. Now I'm confused. Why are you pushing for him to be reinstated? Looks like those are impossible splits and stats to reconcile, except if he cut the course.
that split is calculated based on him starting 16:30 after the gun.
There's a photo of him at 1.2 miles next to a runner that hit the 5k mat at 27 minutes (gun time)
If Ryan started 16 minutes late, he would not have been even with this trimmer at mile 1.2. This proves that the chip start time is incorrect.
I don't see the kid in the picture you posted at 1.2 miles. He was wearing a yellow shirt right?
Sesamoiditis wrote:
Doubler wrote:that split is calculated based on him starting 16:30 after the gun.
There's a photo of him at 1.2 miles next to a runner that hit the 5k mat at 27 minutes (gun time)
If Ryan started 16 minutes late, he would not have been even with this trimmer at mile 1.2. This proves that the chip start time is incorrect.
I don't see the kid in the picture you posted at 1.2 miles. He was wearing a yellow shirt right?
He started in the blue sweatshirt..he's seen with that in pre-race photos.
Doubler wrote:
Belinda wrote:Leave this poor kid alone. It's okay to go after adults like this, but leave children alone.
Can you not read, or are you just trolling?
Honestly, your post on this subject was horribly written with few facts and you didn't layout anything... It was cryptic
.I suspect because you want people to go to your site to read the whole story.
So no, I don't buy your claims. You have a writing problem.
I'm not saying he cheated, but the OP does nothing to disprove that he did not cheat.
make that "disprove that he did cheat"
Observer of CHEATERS wrote:
I'm not saying he cheated, but the OP does nothing to disprove that he did not cheat.
He was removed from the results based on an impossible 10k split (and missing 5k time).
It was deemed by London as impossible (or extremely implausible) because of his chip time. I have proven that his chip start time of 16-1/2 minutes after the gun is inaccurate.
If you disagree, please explain how Ryan started 16:30 after the gun, and caught up to a runner by mile 1.2 that had a 5k split of 27:11 (clock).
Observer of CHEATERS wrote:
make that "disprove that he did cheat"
And really, London needs to prove that he DID cheat. The basis for questioning him was proven to be inaccurate.
Not used to being on this side of the argument.
doubler wrote:
If the DQd Runner started 16 1/2 minutes late (at 10:16:30), it would be impossible for them to have been pictured together at the 1.2 mile point at 10:27.
Try again?
Dodge Ball wrote:
doubler wrote:If the DQd Runner started 16 1/2 minutes late (at 10:16:30), it would be impossible for them to have been pictured together at the 1.2 mile point at 10:27.
Try again?
LOL. I am having a hell of a time verbalizing the evidence - or writing it, whatever. One more shot..This seemed to get the point across to some non-runners..
Ryan's official times showed that he crossed the start line 10:16:30. That is over 16 minutes after the race started. This data is inaccurate.
Ryan likely crossed the start line about 1 to 2 minutes after the gun sounded.
The 'fast' 10k time that the marathon wants Ryan to replicate to prove he ran the marathon is based on the calculation from his alleged 16:30 minute delay.
He hit the 10 kilometer point at 10:51 am. Accounting for the delayed start, the race thinks he ran the 10k in 34:10. This would be incredibly fast.
However the photo shows that Ryan had to have started the race much earlier. He is seen with a runner that started at 10:01. This runner hit the 5k mat at 10:27 am. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for Ryan to be near this runner if he started 15 1/2 minutes after him.
Ryan likely crossed the start line between 10:01 and 10:02 am. Crossing the 10k point at 10:51 am, gives him a reasonable 10k time of 50 to 51 minutes.
doubler wrote:
Hugh Brasher, Event Director of the Virgin Money London Marathon, said:
“We have a system in place that highlights results which need explanation – for example missing split times and unusual split time patterns. We contact runners identified through this system to ask them to provide an explanation.
“In Ryan’s case, there was no time shown in his results from the 5km timing mat and his time at the 10km mat was 34:10. All his split times from that point for each 5km were about 30 minutes (i.e. about an hour for each subsequent 10km).
“We have not accused Ryan of cheating. We have asked him for an explanation for the time differential and we have also asked him for evidence that he has previously run a 10km in about 33 minutes or a 5km (such as a parkrun) in about 16:20. To date, he has not provided that evidence. We have also sent him an entry form for a free place in a 10km run we organise at the end of this month so that he can demonstrate that he can run 10k in 33:30 minutes.
“Ryan has not been disqualified, nor has he been banned from future events organised by the London Marathon. His results have currently been removed from the database while the investigation is ongoing.â€
This is a perfectly reasonable response. He hasn't been labeled as a cheater nor was he DQ'd. His results were flagged as needing more information. This is a perfectly acceptable procedure that many races practice. Is Ryan unable to provide an adequate explanation to them?
Dodge Ball wrote:
doubler wrote:Hugh Brasher, Event Director of the Virgin Money London Marathon, said:
“We have a system in place that highlights results which need explanation – for example missing split times and unusual split time patterns. We contact runners identified through this system to ask them to provide an explanation.
“In Ryan’s case, there was no time shown in his results from the 5km timing mat and his time at the 10km mat was 34:10. All his split times from that point for each 5km were about 30 minutes (i.e. about an hour for each subsequent 10km).
“We have not accused Ryan of cheating. We have asked him for an explanation for the time differential and we have also asked him for evidence that he has previously run a 10km in about 33 minutes or a 5km (such as a parkrun) in about 16:20. To date, he has not provided that evidence. We have also sent him an entry form for a free place in a 10km run we organise at the end of this month so that he can demonstrate that he can run 10k in 33:30 minutes.
“Ryan has not been disqualified, nor has he been banned from future events organised by the London Marathon. His results have currently been removed from the database while the investigation is ongoing.â€
This is a perfectly reasonable response. He hasn't been labeled as a cheater nor was he DQ'd. His results were flagged as needing more information. This is a perfectly acceptable procedure that many races practice. Is Ryan unable to provide an adequate explanation to them?
I think they did overplay it in the first article that was written over there. But they went to the media hoping to get the proof via photos of him running the first 10k.
The last statement from the marathon was what you quoted. He will never be able to replicate that time - because the issue was with London's timing - as I think has been proven. They haven't heard back from the marathon regarding the photo evidence.
Yes, I get that he can't run a 34 min. 10K (if your chip malfunction theory is correct).
But I don't understand why he is not able to resolve this. If I am in his shoes and I know I didn't cheat and I know I didn't run a 34 min opening 10K, I would convey exactly that to the director. Furthermore, every runner is aware of the chip/gun time differential. If this is such an obvious discrepancy, this sounds like something that is very easy to clear up.
doubler wrote:
I am having a hell of a time verbalizing the evidence - or writing it, whatever.
No you're not. People aren't bothering to actually read or comprehend what you wrote before they respond.
an honest opinion here wrote:
Honestly, your post on this subject was horribly written with few facts and you didn't layout anything... It was cryptic
.I suspect because you want people to go to your site to read the whole story.
So no, I don't buy your claims. You have a writing problem.
^this
OP is a pathetic attention whore. That runner, whether he cheated or not, is worse off now thanks to the moronic OP.
Dodge Ball wrote:
Yes, I get that he can't run a 34 min. 10K (if your chip malfunction theory is correct).
But I don't understand why he is not able to resolve this. If I am in his shoes and I know I didn't cheat and I know I didn't run a 34 min opening 10K, I would convey exactly that to the director. Furthermore, every runner is aware of the chip/gun time differential. If this is such an obvious discrepancy, this sounds like something that is very easy to clear up.
You would think.
But just saying he didn't start that far back wouldn't be enough to resolve this
Regardless, the marathon has all the information now. I would think it would be enough.