Video Highlights 2015 Boston Marathon
April 20, 2015
But he wouldn't need to drive or take the bus. He could have his wife pick him up, or even call a cab or use Uber.
However, if he did drive himself to Relay Exchange #3, that means his car would have been parked there for a while, and he'd have to get back to it somehow.
A Kennedy vs Rossi smackdown at some date TBD? Rosie give him a head start...and Bob will never see the pass.
In short, Kennedy was doing way more than Rossi in terms of training. He also happens to be Bob freaking Kennedy. He ran 3:26 at NYC and was pretty damn happy to do it:
http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2014/11/02/olympian-turned-jogger-kennedy-finishes-marathon-this-time/18388589/
Underdabus wrote:
But he wouldn't need to drive or take the bus. He could have his wife pick him up, or even call a cab or use Uber.
However, if he did drive himself to Relay Exchange #3, that means his car would have been parked there for a while, and he'd have to get back to it somehow.
I'd speculate that his wife is not in on it, that he wants her to believe him too. He could easily park by the relay exchange and run back to it. It's not that far.
Has anyone confirmed how they shuttled the relay runners? if the relay bus for leg 3 ran after the start of the race, he could have crossed the line, then hopped on the relay bus and simply take the shuttle back to the start after the race.
Randy Oldman wrote:
KudzuRunner wrote:Higdon's use of the word "sociopath" is pretty pointed. Note that he doesn't actually name Mike Rossi in the column where he uses that word. But sociopath is a fighting word, classically understood. It's a potentially slanderous insult. Or at least I think it is. Since Higdon is nobody's fool, I have to believe he carefully considered whether to use it or not. Whew.
He doesn't suggest anyone is a sociopath. He says this type of behavior fits the pattern of a sociopath.
Anyway
Libel - written
Slander - verbal
I'm happy to be correct re: the libel/slander distinction.
You're making my point for me. Higdon chose his words very carefully, and left Rossi's name out of his post, to avoid anything like legal trouble:
"I suspect the Allentown Runner is as much a cheater as the Kokomo Runner. They both fit the pattern of cheating in marathons, not a crime, only something that a person with any kind of moral compass would not do. They also both fit the pattern of the classic sociopath...."
"correct" should be "corrected." Sorry about that. I must larn tuh profreedbe fur I hyat sned.
There is no relay bus. Relay teams provide their own transportation.
This is definitely some good info. See if he signed up for a ride, and if not ask him who drove him. He'll have to ask someone to fall on the sword for him and I doubt he'll find anyone.
BusClue wrote:
On this link
http://www.viamarathon.org/travel/race_day_transportation.phpit states: "Marathon & Half Marathon
New This Year at Runners Request!
Transportation will be provided BEFORE and AFTER the race. Runners have the option to park at the Start or Finish lines. Pre-Race shuttles will run in the morning from the Finish to the Start of the Marathon and Half Marathon. Post-Race Shuttles will be from the Finish Festival back to the Marathon and Half Marathon Starts."
I'm assuming that last year, buses ran pre-race from the finish to the start, and the "New This Year" part was a post-race ride from the finish to the start.
When registering for this year's race, they ask if you want to select the pre-race or post-race transportation option. I wonder if they asked last year if you wanted to take the bus pre-race. If MR did not select this option, and drove to the start, and then really ran the race, how did he get back to the start to get his car?
I think if MR did not select the bus to the start when he registered, it appears he planned to drive both ways.
any recent updates from his social media sites?
Those are hilarious and I'm in need of a Mighty Mike fix.
Warren commission wrote:
Cant find it wrote:Soooo where is the Letsrun post about Mike Rossi?? I thought Rojo was writing an article about it, but I haven't seen anything from him since Friday
"We're looking to put together a small panel and we're looking for someone with a high level of credibility and a good knowledge of the rules to lead it," said Gerry Yasso, vice president of resource development for race sponsor Via Lehigh Valley.
I wonder if someone from Letsrun is helping? The detailed spreadsheet of the race photos would sure be useful in an investigation.
I would not assume that somebody from LetsRun has taken the lead in coordinating & communicating ANYTHING with the folks at LVM. Even if somebody has (like Rojo, who was supposed to finish an article days ago, but hasn't)... they likely don't have a great grasp of the photo/video evidence, or where to even find it in this thread.
I would not assume that they are aware of the details of the overwhelming evidence accumulated here, in this thread. Especially the sequencial ordering of the photos to effectively create a video.
I would not assume that they are putting much time, effort, or resources into the "investigation". Hopefully they are, but I wouldn't assume so. It's very easy to say you are going to do something, quite another to do it. Quite another to do it, and do a good job at it. There is no way they have the resources to equal the many people here, with a lot of time & indignation on their hands, to put so much effort into the cause.
Can one of the main leads on this thread (sequential photo guy? SaraB?) volunteer to make contact with Gerry Yasso in a helpful way and make sure he is aware of the most damning evidence shared here in the hundreds of pages???? We don't want to bombard them with a bunch of people, but don't assume they know anything from this thread... even though some of us have read it all.
Don't assume Rojo is doing jack. He might be... but not even an article yet as of Sunday night.
HeCheated wrote:
The race directors are playing this smart:
Announce that it could take weeks to come to a decision. That shows there is no rush to judgment and that the review will be deliberate and thoughtful.
Announce there will be a panel. That shows that the decision will not be made by one guy, looking at pictures on a little laptop in his basement.
Announce that you have requested USATF review the case (or at least provide guidance on how to best review the case at the "race level.").
Announce that they will review "photo checkpoints." That tells you that to them the photos are not random or just for the purpose of sales to the participants, but rather are "checkpoints" at which you should see the athletes passing by and that they were designed (placement on the course, number of photos taken and so forth) with the intent of verifying complete participation. Just like timing mats, someone could miss one and be excused, but miss every "photo checkpoint" and you have a problem.
we can't expect that an announcement would occur so fast. They really just started the process in the middle of last week and this was Mothers' Day weekend.
Patience, my friends. Patience.
Unless you are in direct communication with somebody in that group, you are making a lot of assumptions here.
I agree that exclusive jurisdiction for any dispute with Via Events, Inc. (and/or its affiliates Via of the Lehigh Valley, Inc. or Via Foundation, Inc.) with respect to this event registration, waiver and release resides in the courts of the State of Pennsylvania and I further agree and expressly consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the courts of the State of Pennsylvania in connection with any such dispute If any provision of this event registration, waiver and release shall be unlawful, void, or for any reason unenforceable, then that provision shall be deemed severable from this event registration, waiver and release and shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any remaining provisions.
What assumption am I making? They announced every one of those things in interviews a few days ago.
Race Rule? wrote:
Regarding LVM, Mr Yasso stated something to the effect that the point to point course design would be difficult to cheat on. That means that the burden of proof for cheating is much higher than if Mr Yasso had not made that statement.
Come on, dude. Any thinking person, after learning about this case, would realize that Mr Yasso, not a cheater, simply gave way too much credit to MR by assuming that he ran a decent portion of the course, and cut some of it off (like a loop, or part of an out-and-back).
If you asked Mr. Yasso - "ok, it's a tough point to point design that's difficult to cheat on... but what about walking across the start mat, driving to the finish, and running the last 0.XX miles to the finish?" He'd probably laugh (because that approach is so pathetic from a true runner's perspective) and say - well, yeah, in that case it'd be an easy course to cheat on.
Dr. Kio Litton vs. Mike Rossi, one on one in a marathon. Let's make this happen. There will be chip mats at every mile marker along with full course video recording. I will donate $2,500 to the prize purse, winner take all. Anyone else want to see this race?
Oxford Webster wrote:
mileage_man wrote:I am confused by posts like this (i.e. "lack of photos isn't evidence that he cheated"). Here is the way that I understand evidence: if E is more likely to be true in a world where P is true than in a world where P is false, then E is evidence for P.
By this definition the lack of photos is evidence that Mike didn't run the race. This is because if Mike didn't run the race the lack of photos would be expected (like 50-90% chance?) whereas if Mike did run the race then the lack of photos would be very unlikely (like, well under 1%).
What definition of 'evidence' are people using whereby lack of photos on the course doesn't count as evidence that Mike didn't run?
(You want facts that can only be true if he cheated, such as photos of him on the freeway? But the lack of photos could only happen if he cheated, too. You want someone saying they saw him cheat? But if anything the chance of this happening assuming that he ran the race is higher than the chance of the photo evidence occurring assuming that he ran the race. Please help, I honestly want to understand this but I don't.)
There is plenty of evidence to suggest he cheated.
There is no absolute proof.
So the RD will have to decide whether or not the large body of evidence is enough to conclude (within a reasonable doubt) that Mr. Rossi cheated.
But we have no way of knowing what threshold the RD will be using to rule on a DQ, so everyone here is wasting time speculating.
Except for that dude a couple of days ago who re-wrote Allentown. Man, that was gold.
Thank you.
113....very interesting point re Bob Kennedy...probably best addition to the thread since SaraB's spreadsheet...although some of the memes are funny (even to someone over 18 years old)
read his FB post and the comments there. Most people get it, but some are officially clueless.
What's the deal with these people:
"I am officially out".
"Okay, its finally enough that I'm out."
FB, where everyone states their politically correct and cowardly opinion.
FB, where you usually get to read 100s of worthless "congrats" posts.
If they are "out", why are they still commenting?
Please be an ostrich, but don't tell us about it.
The problem with this story is it sets precedent.
If they give the guy a break, they should overlook any discrepancies in any results.
It sets a precedent. "So what if he did cheat. Who cares? Not a big deal." is a slippery slope.
TinWhistle wrote:
some of the memes are funny (even to someone over 18 years old)
I'm 63 and I thought a lot of them were funny.
Why are people here still arguing against Mike Rossi's supporters?
Nobody in the US of A is still saying this guy is innocent.
Quit putting up your fabulous arguments why his supporters are wrong.
He doesn't have any supporters. We all know he cheated.