Women runs 520 miles on treadmill in 7 days but doesn't get WR as Guinness says her witness doesn't count

They did all that for 5k? How did they live off 3k for so long while she trained for this?

Amy and Dave are toast wrote:

[quote

What? They've got gps data for the 53? Why on earth wouldn't they let people see it. She could put it on Strava and everyone would shut up immediately.

Can someone ask on the fb page? I'm not a member or would do it myself.

The problem is they can't.

If you haven't run it, you have not the Strava or GPS data. It is simple as that.[/quote]

I joined the group and asked them.

Why should they give you their GPS data for free? If you are trying to harangue it from them, it m8ust be of some value to you, so supply/demand means that there should be a price point of interaction.

Does anybody else here not really care about the 53 thing? I couldn't care less about the GPS data of a something-of-nothing record that anyone with enough time on their hands could have a decent crack at breaking. She wasn't actually awarded a Guinness WR for that one either, so I really don't think it matters. Or maybe that's just me?

The reason that this latest one is more worth kicking up more of a fuss is for the ridiculous media circus created to try and get Guinness to overturn a perfectly reasonable decision, based purely on gullible public opinion. Also, this would be taking away the record from Sharon Gaytor, who got the record fair and square, following all the procedures and guidelines set by GWR.

If they'd not thrown such a tantrum and just accepted Guinness's decision gracefully, all this sleuthing that's making everything they've ever done look suspicious wouldn't be happening.

ethiopian wrote:

1 2 3 Green wrote:

Did I hear correctly in that video, "350 mpw a couple times in the last month" (at the time of the video), and alludes to consistently hitting 100mpw.

I have no ultra experience, but her BF% in the video is nowhere near where I would expect it to be if she had been putting in those kind of miles.

Don't bodyshame her!

Even if a 300Kg dude pops up and says he has broken the world record for 1500m on a treadmill at home, it is politically incorrect to say "you don't look like a 1500m runner, let alone a record braker". You have to say something like "I am sure you have done it, but next time, please record it so that haters don't doubt you"

KP Kelly agrees!

Sick of it wrote:

Dude, If you want to prove your Britishness do it on another thread.

It really bothers you that people don't think you are British. Hate to break it to you but there's nothing special about it.

I agree with you and I should not have got drawn into this silly game, apologies.

Confidentiality agreement wrote:

Why should they give you their GPS data for free? If you are trying to harangue it from them, it m8ust be of some value to you, so supply/demand means that there should be a price point of interaction.

It's not in our interest, as trolls and haters, for Amy and Dave to share the gps data. If they did, and it was genuine, we'd be out of work, and Amy's career as a stunt runner would continue. So why would we pay for it?

Amy - please don't share the data validating your status as an elite endurance athlete so that we can continue our careers as trolls and haters and you have to get a proper job.

GPS data wrote:

Does anybody else here not really care about the 53 thing?

They know they can't effectively attack Amy on the 521 mile new treadmill record in 7 days, so they turn to the 53m/53d record that was like 2 years ago, with the statute of limitations for data preservation already expired, and demand "answers" or something. Might as well investigate the JFK shooting so much after the fact.

Warren reporter wrote:

They know they can't effectively attack Amy on the 521 mile new treadmill record in 7 days, so they turn to the 53m/53d record that was like 2 years ago, with the statute of limitations for data preservation already expired, and demand "answers" or something. Might as well investigate the JFK shooting so much after the fact.

Dave Keighley claims they have the gps data but it hasn't been made public, so your statute of limitations for data preservation is not relevant (and BS anyway).

If I had gps evidence of me running 26.2 mpd for 53 days I would put it on Strava and regularly post links to it all over the internet.

'STUNT RUNNING':

Sort of running but you're not.

A bit like 'HOBBY JOGGING':

Sort of running but you're not.

Strava wrote:

If I had gps evidence of me running 26.2 mpd for 53 days I would put it on Strava and regularly post links to it all over the internet.

This is so easy to fake it's trivial. Just have 4 or 5 pppl run 5 or 6 miles each in a relay, putting the GPS on the baton.

So your "gold-standard" data retention is actually no proof at all.

Re the boyfriend Dave: The man doth protest too much, methinks.

Sort of running but you're not wrote:

'STUNT RUNNING':

Sort of running but you're not.

A bit like 'HOBBY JOGGING':

Sort of running but you're not.

At least most hobby joggers like to collect and store their data.

And share it all over social media to anyone and everyone (most of whom couldnt care less)

...stunt runners not so much.

Don't you lot know withholding evidence that proves you are not a scammer are the actions of an innocent person.

Maybe USA would drop it wrote:

Strava wrote:

If I had gps evidence of me running 26.2 mpd for 53 days I would put it on Strava and regularly post links to it all over the internet.

This is so easy to fake it's trivial. Just have 4 or 5 pppl run 5 or 6 miles each in a relay, putting the GPS on the baton.

So your "gold-standard" data retention is actually no proof at all.

It would be easier to run it yourself than arrange that.

Maybe USA would drop it wrote:

Strava wrote:

If I had gps evidence of me running 26.2 mpd for 53 days I would put it on Strava and regularly post links to it all over the internet.

This is so easy to fake it's trivial. Just have 4 or 5 pppl run 5 or 6 miles each in a relay, putting the GPS on the baton.

So your "gold-standard" data retention is actually no proof at all.

Yeah, real easy to get "4 or 5 pppl run 5 or 6 miles each in a relay, putting the GPS on the baton" to implicate themselves in a dishonest scam and become the laughing stock on social media, etc and outed as a crook. And then there's the actual logistics of doing it without people outside of the perpetrators getting involved for 53 days.

You're an idiot.

You're an idiot. wrote:

Yeah, real easy to get "4 or 5 pppl run 5 or 6 miles each in a relay, putting the GPS on the baton" to implicate themselves in a dishonest scam and become the laughing stock on social media, etc and outed as a crook.

How would you ever out them, if they produced real GPS data? Plus, there is no crime in misattributing GPS data, so they wouldn't be crooks. The word "scam" also doesn't hold because it wouldn't be fraud either.

And then there's the actual logistics of doing it without people outside of the perpetrators getting involved for 53 days.

Why didn't anyone "outside of the perpetrators" get involved in Amy's record in the first place? Oh, that's right, there was just constant media coverage of it during the last month. You think it would be *easier* to fake (as you allege) her 53/53 record with all that going on, than with a whole team (think Sky) helping to deceive?

Thanks, if you're the same person then you've just confirmed you're an idiot. If you're not the same person then you're an idiot too.

ethiopian wrote:

350 miles per week is 50 miles per day, roughly two marathons per day. Since her marathon best is around 4 hours, and obviously she is not running this at her marathon pace, I assume she must have been training at least 10 hours every day. Bullocks! I have no data but I don't think even guys like Scott Jurek and Anton Krupica could handle such a mileage.

She said slightly under 350 miles that week. Maybe she meant to say 35 miles.

I am not judging and I am not a hater.