Did Mike Rossi (viral marathon dad) cheat his way into Boston?

Let me do a bit more digging--but it looks really suspicious to me. As far as I can tell it's her first marathon--the split she has makes no sense--and she doesn't look to be flying in the photos that I saw. I really don't want to throw a name out there and be wrong.

rosalina wrote:

Do you want to see the MRI?

Yes please!!

I think the DQ is a no brainer - as mentioned many, many times, the RD can DQ at their own discretion. The question is why bring in USATF? I'm guessing that they are going for a Boston DQ as well. It's clear he actually "ran" Boston, so it would be difficult to justify a DQ there.

Maybe Athlinks data can be used in the same way as a biological passport. That would provide ample reason to DQ him from any USATF sanctioned races and perhaps ban him from future races for a period of time as well.

????

I linked a gmail account to the last post--if any one is interested in doing a cursory investigation before I potentially out her on the forum, shoot me a message.

JayRuns4Food wrote:

It was a small race, and there was a pack of us that were all trying to use VIA to qualify. I chatted up a bunch of them along the way. There was a solid group of us (10+) for the first 8 or so miles keeping good pace. It got tough once on the narrow dirt path to keep in group as there was room for no more than 2 people across. Also passing was problematic on the trail too, but the race was small enough that the BQers separated pretty early, so there wasn't that much passing.

By the way unless you are elite, sub elite or have hobbit like feet, I'd stay away from running flats on this course. The roots and gravel part of VIA is absolutely brutal on the feet.

Reading that part of the course was on dirt and gravel, I had thought some of the runners' shoes might have some dust and grime on them by the end of the race. I looked at Rossi's shoes in that full body picture of him showing off his medal, and they don't look very dirty. I didn't really have anyone else's shoes to compare them with, so I just dismissed it.

Dirty South wrote:

The question is why bring in USATF? I'm guessing that they are going for a Boston DQ as well. It's clear he actually "ran" Boston, so it would be difficult to justify a DQ there.

????

My guess is because of the high profile of this guy - since his idiot letter and him in every conceivable piece of BAA gear has been plastered all over the news - they want to dot i's and cross t's and give the appearance of having given "Dad of the year" a fair shake. It's a big fat CYA. As an aside, I think Rossi needs to be DQ'd from "Dad of the Year" too. A 'gift with purchase' kind of thing.

Doubler wrote:

Reg Fields wrote:

Yes, lets look into this. We need something to keep us busy until the LVM makes their DQ decision for Rossi. Plus I'm against anyone who cheated to take a spot away from someone that qualified and earned it.

Let me do a bit more digging--but it looks really suspicious to me. As far as I can tell it's her first marathon--the split she has makes no sense--and she doesn't look to be flying in the photos that I saw. I really don't want to throw a name out there and be wrong.

I've heard of runners DNFing but passing close enough to the finish mat to register a finish. If something like that happened, she wouldn't necessarily check to make sure she wasn't in the results. So I would lean towards emailing the RD and not outing her as a cheater, since it's possible she wasn't trying to cheat but she still may need to be removed from the results. Unless you know she's bragging about her BQ and her plans to bring her kids.

Doubler wrote:

Reg Fields wrote:

Yes, lets look into this. We need something to keep us busy until the LVM makes their DQ decision for Rossi. Plus I'm against anyone who cheated to take a spot away from someone that qualified and earned it.

Let me do a bit more digging--but it looks really suspicious to me. As far as I can tell it's her first marathon--the split she has makes no sense--and she doesn't look to be flying in the photos that I saw. I really don't want to throw a name out there and be wrong.

Seems like we could keep several people occupied full time trying to track down cheaters.

Doubler Wubbler wrote:

Doubler wrote:

Let me do a bit more digging--but it looks really suspicious to me. As far as I can tell it's her first marathon--the split she has makes no sense--and she doesn't look to be flying in the photos that I saw. I really don't want to throw a name out there and be wrong.

Seems like we could keep several people occupied full time trying to track down cheaters.

You mean like this?

A question for MR:

Why would running Boston be a "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity for a guy who can run 3:11? The standard for his age group is 3:25 and will only get slower in the future.

He might have had a feeling he was never going to be "able" to "run" "3:11" ever again.

Unless I had a hell of a case, I would not be adding anyone else's name to this thread. 1) you could be way off base about her, 2) it might really make us look like witch-hunting cooks, which we are not.

Doubler wrote:

Thought I'd just randomly pull up a marathon to see if I could spot a cheat. Found an interesting one the first marathon I looked at where a woman BQ'd and got sixth in her age group. With no intermediate splits.

She had a 10k split and a finishing split and no intermediate times.

Her 10k time was 1:06 and finishing time 3:39. That 10k split is 20-25 minutes slower than it should have been and slower than all that finished around her?

So, do we care enough to investigate this in a public forum? After all, if she cheated, she is taking a spot away from someone if she registers for Boston

It seems to me you are seeking some controversy where there is none.

The information is public. Posts the facts in a new thread and don't make it personal. Will you get people willing to sort through photos to validate? Doubtful.

I'd be very interested to see how many suspected cheats one can find in each BQ marathon. My guess is the aggregate number is 1% or less of qualifiers. Only because a BQ is a niche inside a minor sport.

illiniowl wrote:

A question for MR:

Why would running Boston be a "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity for a guy who can run 3:11? The standard for his age group is 3:25 and will only get slower in the future.

He might have had a feeling he was never going to be "able" to "run" "3:11" ever again.

So glad you came along 3000 posts in to add such insightful questions for Mike. Insightful questions that NO ONE has ever thought to ask! :)

HeCheated wrote:

2) it might really make us look like witch-hunting cooks, which we are not.

Some of us are witch-hunting chefs.

Yes, she has pictures with the medal and Facebook posts.

CSU-1959 wrote:

HeCheated wrote:

2) it might really make us look like witch-hunting cooks, which we are not.

Some of us are witch-hunting chefs.

I'd like to go on the record as a vegetarian. Which could cause all kinds of semantical shenanigans.

Throwback Wednesday wrote:

There have been a lot of good things on this thread but the irony of people arguing over the definition of the word "semantics" might be top ten.

I was thinking about starting a thread about the greatest things about the Rossi thread. Unlike with Kip, there's no "one and only one Mike Rossi thread" rule!

But like all but about 5 people here, i'm too lazy

My bad... Meant kooks. I think I got autocorrected. Or I'm just an idiot. Either way!

If that MRI comes with a gps log of his run, give me two.