Frank Meza 2:53:10 at LA Marathon (70 years old) unofficial time (just finished)

Agree wrote:

The Mooch wrote:

The reviewers are condemning a person for lying about marathon results while lying about their status as patients of the doctor.

Precisely. I can't believe they don't see the hypocrisy at using lying and dishonesty as a tool for their retribution.

Just glancing at the posts, I don't see where they mention being a patient of Frank. Just that people should consider his cheating before going to him.

I do agree that it is wrong though.

fisky wrote:

Francisco ran LAM in 2017 and 2018 in roughly 3:27 and 3:09 respectively so he could not have been an accomplice in those years. He registered for 2019 LAM but has no time shown.

Why do you say this. Couldn't the two or more participants have helped each other during the same race? Not claiming that ,but has it been eliminated as a possiblity?

asklfgkasdfklsdklf wrote:

Just glancing at the posts, I don't see where they mention being a patient of Frank. Just that people should consider his cheating before going to him.

I do agree that it is wrong though.

Under the terms that the reviewer must expressly agree to:

"By clicking a star above, I agree to the Terms of Use and verify that I have received treatment from this doctor."

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

Agree wrote:

Unrelated, I met Tony while running in college in MO, and he's socially awkward as hell.

So how does that invalidate what he says here?

Being awkward doesn’t invalidate anything. It’s just exactly how I imagine a lot of the posters here.

bored troller wrote:

Trigurureview wrote:

My guess that one is triguru and another is doubler.

I agree that one or both are the "guru." I believe Doubler/Derrick is above that.

I like Doublr and what he does, but he's been caught in these forums posting under different handles in the same thread. He's not above it.

That being said, I doubt it is either of them. Do you really think they are the only two people in the world that are outraged by cheaters that would go overboard with their responses?

Doublr's on vacation and triguru is getting his venom out here.

Semi-related wrote:

I found this interesting letter someone wrote after the Julie Miller scandal.

https://triathlonmagazine.ca/news/letter-to-the-editor-how-amateur-cheating-hurts-the-sport/

I'm just perplexed at these repeat serial cheaters. It's one thing to cut a course once, typically to qualify for Boston, but what kind of strange mental condition and addiction drives someone to do it over and over again like FM, Julie Miller, and Kip? And do they actually want to stop, but just can't?

That is an excellent article and sums up most of the various arguments in this thread. Frank, or friends of his, should read it to understand why so many people, not even remotely affected by his actions, are so enraged by them.

Here's an ethical question .... If you lived in the LA area and your friend said "I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow for a consult. His name is Frank Meza."

Would you suggest to the friend to google "Frank Meza" before the consult?

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

Agree wrote:

Unrelated, I met Tony while running in college in MO, and he's socially awkward as hell.

So how does that invalidate what he says here?

I'm awkward and well aware of it.

Tony is not only awkward but just somehow not right. His threat that if no action is taken "thAn I'll file an OFFICIAL complaint" to his employer and the medical board is ignorant.

Murphy has admitted on MI of being deceptive in order to get information whenever he thinks it’s ok.

HS stepped up? wrote:

Here's an ethical question .... If you lived in the LA area and your friend said "I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow for a consult. His name is Frank Meza."

Would you suggest to the friend to google "Frank Meza" before the consult?

That’s not a question of ethics.

One of Franks's sock puppets (or perhaps a troll) said many pages back that the guys who were cheated out of a $10 gift card for their AG award probably didn't care about a $10 gift card anyway. So what's the harm in it?

I guess if he really sees things this way, it explains how he can keep doing it for more than 10 years and not think there's anything wrong with it.

Most hurt are often the friends & family who believed in the cheaters, often sacrificed to help them, and were used.

The Little Search Engine that Could wrote:

"Just stop it,"

see:

https://www.google.com/search/howsearchworks/algorithms/

This will help you understand how search engines work.

The fact that "Frank Meza Marathon" appears before "Frank Meza" demonstrates the sheer volume of recent searches containing "Frank Meza" and "marathon" ... and therefore marathon cheating. That's the point here: the scandal is gaining traction.

Interesting that we don’t the same search results.

bored troller wrote:

Trigurureview wrote:

My guess that one is triguru and another is doubler.

I agree that one or both are the "guru." I believe Doubler/Derrick is above that.

I’ll concede that.

We’ve discussed this. You have to clear your memory. A “fresh” computer (no known searches on this topic) brings up the FM cheats stories left and right if you just search his name. It ain’t good for our boy Frank.

Ends justifies the means? wrote:

Murphy has admitted on MI of being deceptive in order to get information whenever he thinks it’s ok.

Not ethical.

RossiCheated wrote:

We’ve discussed this. You have to clear your memory. A “fresh” computer (no known searches on this topic) brings up the FM cheats stories left and right if you just search his name. It ain’t good for our boy Frank.

Not on mine.

I just searched him on LetsRun & Roderick’s previous thread on Phoenix appeared. Immediately populated with skeptics, I guess he tried again here! Roderick’s a rube.

Ethical? wrote:

HS stepped up? wrote:

Here's an ethical question .... If you lived in the LA area and your friend said "I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow for a consult. His name is Frank Meza."

Would you suggest to the friend to google "Frank Meza" before the consult?

That’s not a question of ethics.

Ok, so it's not a question of ethics. Then it must not be unethical.

If suggesting to one person that they google this person is not unethical, then making the same suggestion to many people must also not be unethical.