This thread was originally titled, "Incredible development in the $612,000 Transcon Goodge run, currently ongoing" but the new title is more descriptive. The description of the run is here.
27 days in and just past the halfway point. Looks like he is projected to complete his transcon run in 54 total days, which is 29% more time than PK's record.
@DataLoves1, would you consider jumping back in this discussion. Really felt your analysis was insightful and particularly in light of this new seemingly smoking gun, I'd be very curious to see what you think.
Do you buy this analysis of folks who have lineup video of PJ using trekking poles and recording a cadence of 120. Is this the smoking gun people think it is? Have you had the chance for any deeper dive on the data inspection? Thanks much.
According to instagram it looks like Paul was in the big group walking outside using poles at least from ~6pm to 7:30pm, he finished his run at ~7:50pm. This is corroborated by Rob's instagram story saying he was walking in the big group at 33 miles which is around 6:20pm.
From 6pm onwards his average HR was 75bpm (but we know this is wrong, it is invalid for the whole run, he put his watch over his jacket). His average cadence was 122.5. These rough values are very easy to see in the strava charts, but I calculated them with the exported data.
It is a shame with the HR. If we had that, we could establish a rough baseline of when he is using poles. We could then break down his other runs into %s of run vs. walking with poles vs. mystery zero cadence time.
We probably don't have enough data to do that reliably. But it would be very unreasonable to attribute his zero cadence periods seen in other runs to use of poles, because the data doesn't look like it does during this fairly long (1.5hr+) period when it appears he was using poles.
It seems very unlikely he was using poles during the zero cadence periods in other runs. I'd love to hear an explanation as to what other variables could be affecting his recorded cadence.
Voice of Narrator: There was no explanation. This is because Johnson --like Goodge and Young before him-- was cheating.
Paul is basically shooting a promo for Garmin in his last video while simultaneously arguing they are horrible at tracking cadence and steps as the defense for his wild cadence data.
Paul is basically shooting a promo for Garmin in his last video while simultaneously arguing they are horrible at tracking cadence and steps as the defense for his wild cadence data.
Classic.
He's been constantly running with people for 5 days straight and what do you know? His cadence data is near perfect. Funny that we don't see irregularities when there's nowhere to hide. We should expect clean runs from here on out.
If you want to ask for of Garmin data, ask for 1 specific date. What happened for the last 20 miles on March 22nd? What is going on with the second half of that run? How do you register a 0 average cadence over a 2 mile segment?
I'll be following on Strava for any other days, that could prove me wrong, but his March 22 run is the sketchiest cadence data I've ever seen.
StreetFerret proves all you haters wrong about the cadence, trekking poles and data. Even shows you how to download the data from Strava so I don't have to teach you, again. All you haters combined have done nothing remotely even close to what he has shown:
Nobody gives a flying feck about streetferret. It’s a an amateur implementation of a stolen idea run by morons who seem to barely understand running data.
Nobody gives a flying feck about streetferret. It’s a an amateur implementation of a stolen idea run by morons who seem to barely understand running data.
You do realize you and your side of haters took 10 months of me teaching you before you even grasped how to download the data. I don't think you should be disparaging others when most of you still don't get how to download the data even after I, and now StreetFerret, have taught you.
StreetFerret proves all you haters wrong about the cadence, trekking poles and data. Even shows you how to download the data from Strava so I don't have to teach you, again. All you haters combined have done nothing remotely even close to what he has shown:
StreetFerret proves all you haters wrong about the cadence, trekking poles and data. Even shows you how to download the data from Strava so I don't have to teach you, again. All you haters combined have done nothing remotely even close to what he has shown:
Funny, the run they picked is one of the ones I claimed is perfect on cadence right before you posted this. Why didn't they pick the one in question: March 22nd? (Hint: they can't because that data doesn't make sense)
Funny, the run they picked is one of the ones I claimed is perfect on cadence right before you posted this. Why didn't they pick the one in question: March 22nd? (Hint: they can't because that data doesn't make sense)
Because it's an insult to our intelligence that you keep creating new lies every day. A couple weeks ago, you all were accusing PJ of riding at high speeds in the van before I repeatedly proved you all wrong and you all got embarrassed.
StreetFerret proves all you haters wrong about the cadence, trekking poles and data. Even shows you how to download the data from Strava so I don't have to teach you, again. All you haters combined have done nothing remotely even close to what he has shown:
This run was never in question because people ran with him each step and no data was lost or needed for them to fudge.
All the days of almost perfect data is showing the loss of cadence and HR previously to be obvious cheating and not Garmin/pole issues.
That's the problem with you haters. Everything you don't understand you immediately resort to accusing someone of "cheating". I understand the data and taught you all what to look for and there is nothing in it that indicates "cheating". I've seen it all with the cadence and HR long before you even learned from me how to download the data.
StreetFerret proves all you haters wrong about the cadence, trekking poles and data. Even shows you how to download the data from Strava so I don't have to teach you, again. All you haters combined have done nothing remotely even close to what he has shown:
This run was never in question because people ran with him each step and no data was lost or needed for them to fudge.
All the days of almost perfect data is showing the loss of cadence and HR previously to be obvious cheating and not Garmin/pole issues.
This run was doomed from the start. If they had read the FKT site they would have seen that the start and end points are fixed at San Fran and NYC CITY HALL ()
This run was never in question because people ran with him each step and no data was lost or needed for them to fudge.
All the days of almost perfect data is showing the loss of cadence and HR previously to be obvious cheating and not Garmin/pole issues.
That's the problem with you haters. Everything you don't understand you immediately resort to accusing someone of "cheating". I understand the data and taught you all what to look for and there is nothing in it that indicates "cheating". I've seen it all with the cadence and HR long before you even learned from me how to download the data.
That's great, nerd. Maybe these handsome runners will let you suck them off a second time.
That's the problem with you haters. Everything you don't understand you immediately resort to accusing someone of "cheating". I understand the data and taught you all what to look for and there is nothing in it that indicates "cheating". I've seen it all with the cadence and HR long before you even learned from me how to download the data.
That's great, nerd. Maybe these handsome runners will let you suck them off a second time.
Is it any wonder the Reddit mods called your group toxic?