Results wrote:
It's strange how her supporters are so determined to disrupt our conversation.
Well, think about what they are likely planning to claim the Guinness record. The data cannot be trusted because the trackers are wonky and not ready for prime time. LRC cannot be trusted because they are clueless about ultrarunning and what it takes to put on a proper show--they can be discounted 100%. The only truth is Mimi's word.
Reading LRC wrote:
Scam_Watcheroo wrote:So now we are I'm trying to get Mimi's team to actually answer my messages about getting non stop videos of some runs, which would give them a chance to prove their innocence. But her team never responds to any of my messages.
It is obvious that Mimi's team has read, and will continue to read, this thread. They have made corrections for some of the errors that have been pointed out to them.
The reason there is less suspicion with Sandy Vi--the amateur--is that her data is top-notch, and it has been real-time for the start. And Mimi--the highly experienced professional UK runner--still has not been able to match the same data level.
I'm also not suspicious about Sandra and her team because Trasie Phan and her coach Dave K. we're very transparent and honest when I first asked them questions about Sandra's running background from the beginning of this thread. This is in stark contrast to Mimi and her team where there is no transparency and an apparent refusal to answer my questions.
Asher Delmott wrote:
I went out this morning to check on Mimi. Found her and one other person running with headlamps and reflective gear. I also saw 1 support vehicle with Mimi's logo on the side.
I drove by first, then decided I needed to stop and get a picture to make sure it was actually Mimi and not someone else.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/lJIkdf2z4pAiVE0W2I can't speak to any other parts of the run, but everything I saw was as expected, and no indication of cheating. It is worth noting though, that when I told her my name, she recognized me as a "guy from Let's Run", so it's possible she expected to me to check on her while she was coming through the area.
Great stuff. This and Pete definitely giving them more credibility with me. More spot checks like this would help.
Agree with Scam though - they would know Asher busted RY around same area so would be very careful there. I also think replying to emails etc would do wonders (but when you're posh and "Marvellous" I guess you don't have to
Mimi's run data is all available at the Suunto Movescount site:
http://www.movescount.com/members/member1320158-Mimi1usa
This is much better quality data than what Strava provides, so I'd suggest anyone who wants to check up on her runs should use the Suunto data, not Strava. Strava has a very annoying "feature" of automatically removing sections of a run where the runner is moving very slowly or stopped. The Suunto data doesn't appear to do this, so you can see her true runs, including all the stops.
The periodic pit-stops that "Mimi's Relay" has been recording are clearly visible in the Suunto data. For example, take a look at this run:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move179338699
Check out the pace and HR graphs. Every 5km, pace drops to zero while HR drops from around 140 to 90-ish. These are clearly periodic rest breaks. I don't see anything suspicious about that.
If there's anything odd about the data, it's that the cadence numbers are very noisy. They are constantly bouncing around from 180+ down to the 110-120 range, which implies she's doing an alternating run-walk, but it changes dramatically every minute. Maybe she's alternating 1 minute running with 1 minute walking?
Unfortunately for Mimi that is comes after more than one-half of the adventure has been complete. Why wait until the second half?
Look at Movescount wrote:
Mimi's run data is all available at the Suunto Movescount site:
http://www.movescount.com/members/member1320158-Mimi1usaThis is much better quality data than what Strava provides, so I'd suggest anyone who wants to check up on her runs should use the Suunto data, not Strava. Strava has a very annoying "feature" of automatically removing sections of a run where the runner is moving very slowly or stopped. The Suunto data doesn't appear to do this, so you can see her true runs, including all the stops.
The periodic pit-stops that "Mimi's Relay" has been recording are clearly visible in the Suunto data. For example, take a look at this run:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move179338699Check out the pace and HR graphs. Every 5km, pace drops to zero while HR drops from around 140 to 90-ish. These are clearly periodic rest breaks. I don't see anything suspicious about that.
If there's anything odd about the data, it's that the cadence numbers are very noisy. They are constantly bouncing around from 180+ down to the 110-120 range, which implies she's doing an alternating run-walk, but it changes dramatically every minute. Maybe she's alternating 1 minute running with 1 minute walking?
Ultrarunning Judge wrote:
It's 145 pages. Some of us have things to do
Mimi's Relay wrote:
Mimi's Relay wrote:Mimi Anderson
Oct 2, 2017 - 8:04:00 AM
Speed: 0.00 mph Course: N/A
Elevation: 1,688.12 ft.
Lat: 38.371983 Lon: -97.604363
Mimi Anderson
Oct 2, 2017 - 8:06:00 AM
Speed: 0.00 mph Course: N/A
Elevation: 1,563.65 ft.
Lat: 38.372175 Lon: -97.604363
The sudden elevation loss of 1,024 feet is very interesting as well.
I'm not sure what you mean here, since from your own data (quoted above) the elevation loss was only 125 feet. Where did you get 1024 feet?
Here's the Suunto Movescount activity that includes the section where you mentioned seeing a big elevation drop:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move179690442Looking at the altitude graph, I don't see any discontinuities. GPS devices are pretty bad at measuring altitude, and much more accurate at measuring latitude/longitude. A sudden jump of 100 ft in the GPS altitude measurement would not surprise me.
In short, all these stops and starts in Mimi's data look completely innocent to me.
Try soaking your head wrote:
Ultrarunning Judge wrote:It's 145 pages. Some of us have things to do
He is a judge who wants other people to tell them what he missed so he can pass judgement.
Movescount wrote:
Unfortunately for Mimi that is comes after more than one-half of the adventure has been complete. Why wait until the second half?
Look at Movescount wrote:Mimi's run data is all available at the Suunto Movescount site:
http://www.movescount.com/members/member1320158-Mimi1usaThis is much better quality data than what Strava provides, so I'd suggest anyone who wants to check up on her runs should use the Suunto data, not Strava. Strava has a very annoying "feature" of automatically removing sections of a run where the runner is moving very slowly or stopped. The Suunto data doesn't appear to do this, so you can see her true runs, including all the stops.
The periodic pit-stops that "Mimi's Relay" has been recording are clearly visible in the Suunto data. For example, take a look at this run:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move179338699Check out the pace and HR graphs. Every 5km, pace drops to zero while HR drops from around 140 to 90-ish. These are clearly periodic rest breaks. I don't see anything suspicious about that.
If there's anything odd about the data, it's that the cadence numbers are very noisy. They are constantly bouncing around from 180+ down to the 110-120 range, which implies she's doing an alternating run-walk, but it changes dramatically every minute. Maybe she's alternating 1 minute running with 1 minute walking?
What do you mean? It’s all there from the very first day. I’m wondering whether scam watcheroo would be able to spoof all that data too?
Read the whole thread wrote:
give it up wrote:Why don't you post some damning EVIDENCE that she is cheating?
The only thing she's doing is cheating.
I'll I see in this thread is accusations and conjecture, but no argument or proof. Go on and convince us that there is cheating.
Movescount looks good wrote:
What do you mean? It’s all there from the very first day. I’m wondering whether scam watcheroo would be able to spoof all that data too?
There is nothing on Movescount I couldn't spoof in the same way I did on Strava. I would use the same algorithms I have now. The only real difference is changing the format of the data to one that Movescount accepts and using Open Ambit or one of those other apps to set up the uploads.
give it up wrote:
I'll I see in this thread is accusations and conjecture, but no argument or proof. Go on and convince us that there is cheating.
We don't need to convince the cheaters that you're cheating.
How about going on and not cheating in the first place, but too late for that now.
I just clicked on this one at random and it seems even more fuzzy with regard to cadence:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move176494328
She did around 14:40 miles per hour up an elevation of almost 4000 feet. She also did this in temperatures from 100-110 degrees F. Likely a lot of water stops in there, so the time is even more remarkable.
Look at Movescount wrote:
Mimi's Relay wrote:Mimi Anderson
Oct 2, 2017 - 8:04:00 AM
Elevation: 1,688.12 ft.
Oct 2, 2017 - 8:06:00 AM
Elevation: 1,563.65 ft.
The sudden elevation loss of 1,024 feet is very interesting as well.
I'm not sure what you mean here, since from your own data (quoted above) the elevation loss was only 125 feet. Where did you get 1024 feet?[/quote]
MATHS: 1688.12 - 1563.65 = 1024. 47
Scam_Watcheroo wrote:
Movescount looks good wrote:What do you mean? It’s all there from the very first day. I’m wondering whether scam watcheroo would be able to spoof all that data too?
There is nothing on Movescount I couldn't spoof in the same way I did on Strava. I would use the same algorithms I have now. The only real difference is changing the format of the data to one that Movescount accepts and using Open Ambit or one of those other apps to set up the uploads.
Plus the data was only posted today. Yet the claim is that it was posted from day one.
Results wrote:
I just clicked on this one at random and it seems even more fuzzy with regard to cadence:
http://www.movescount.com/moves/move176494328She did around 14:40 miles per hour up an elevation of almost 4000 feet. She also did this in temperatures from 100-110 degrees F. Likely a lot of water stops in there, so the time is even more remarkable.
The heart rate also climbs over 200 bpm many days on day one. That was a fairly flat day's run in Los Angeles County.
Late to Post wrote:
Scam_Watcheroo wrote:There is nothing on Movescount I couldn't spoof in the same way I did on Strava. I would use the same algorithms I have now. The only real difference is changing the format of the data to one that Movescount accepts and using Open Ambit or one of those other apps to set up the uploads.
Plus the data was only posted today. Yet the claim is that it was posted from day one.
I think Mimi had data uploads to Movescount since the start of the transcon, which then syncs it over to Strava. It doesn't make much difference overall since there is nothing fundamentally different above Strava versus Movescount. They are both services that deal in data that is not secured.
Big Heart wrote:
The heart rate also climbs over 200 bpm many days on day one. That was a fairly flat day's run in Los Angeles County.
I found it amusing that some of the URC members pointed to the cadence and heart rate data of Mimi's Strava as some sort of proof that the uploads are authentic and couldn't be spoofed when most of her heart rate data is missing or show ludicrous numbers.
Big Heart wrote:
The heart rate also climbs over 200 bpm many days on day one. That was a fairly flat day's run in Los Angeles County.
Maybe she was actually jogging some then, to keep up appearances.
Elevation wrote:
Look at Movescount wrote:from your own data (quoted above) the elevation loss was only 125 feet. Where did you get 1024 feet?
MATHS: 1688.12 - 1563.65 = 1024. 47
Um, try again? Maybe with a calculator this time?