Robert Young fakes run across America

Stopped reading about 25 pages ago, but as it stands, here is my take-away:

No one can say that the RVers stories match up to the night of Asher and haven't changed to fit the narrative at any time. Too many inconsistencies. Too many inconsistencies with prior "races". Too much unbelievable data in the beginning of the run (not backed up with better data).

If I were running transcontinental, and I had a thread 200+ pages of people believing I cheated, AND I HAD ON TWO DIFFERENT TRACKING WATCHES, and it upset me so badly that my running suffered.... the first thing I would do would be release my watch data. Past data or even going forward. Didn't they say something along the lines of "we're trying to figure it out" and now its "well when we finish".

But then again if I were cheating, even a little bit, on a transcontinental run... I would do exactly what they're doing.

It's a bit stubborn to not release any watch data, even though you have two of them on, when I'd figure the vast majority of runners in the US do it DAILY.

They stopped for gas at Admiral Petroleum.

Can we get some boots on the ground? stat!

I put together some KML segments for the TomTom segments on the RV day (well, the relevant ones, anyway), along with all the check-ins, the RV route, and some possible RY routes for the infamous 21.9 mile segment that gets him into Laughlin. As before, there are key pieces that don't add up.

Link to KML:

http://pastebin.com/f8p2y2ei

113 wrote:

you're a failure wrote:

That's total crap. You're utterly clueless. Report the post and it's deleted quickly IF the mods think it's inappropriate. Exceptions are in the middle of the night. Mods are different and they don't delete exactly the same posts.

double ended dildo wrote:

http://hornywetteen.com/

Yep, the system works.

Ok, if that joke of a link ruined your day I agree you should transfer to the ultralist and talk about chia seeds and Ultra birthdays under your real name.

lardogbeck wrote:

It looks like the original hard evidence (the security camera video) has a plausible explanation since someone appears to be running by the camera a few minutes after the RV. Now it seems the only evidence is circumstantial - the crappy GPS tracking, his fabrication/exaggeration of his running history, etc.

Seriously you buy that the WALKER going past the camera during a section he was supposedly running at 9min miles is Robert Young?

For a start they were asked to give details of what he was wearing and declined to do so. This can only be so that they could claim any pedestrian within 15 minutes of the RV passing was him.

Secondly the "torch". Why does the light appear to be rectangular and why is it throwing no light on the ground? Answer... Because it is most likely a mobile phone.

I think I'm right in saying this is supposedly within 5 or so miles of the start of the section. Yet we are supposed to believe that the RV, travelling at a predetermined running pace managed to put 9 minutes into him in that short space of time. It's a nonsense.

When challenged that he wasn't running next to the RV this is the best they could come up with in a hurry. But it makes no sense.

If im getting the timeline right he supposedly borrowed a phone to call them, but not until later. If they had left him behind then why not borrow the phone from the dude vacuuming his car in the video? Why wait until the next town?

They supposedly returned to pick him up. Can anybody clearly confirm when they did this? Was it before Asher approached them or after? How far did they turn back?

Then most importantly you are missing the important evidence that Asher didn't see Robert on the road running near the van in 3 passes. Yet their story was that he jumped into the van scared. From where? Even if you think the video is inconclusive of his passes you have an independent eye witness who went to run with him and has zero motive to lie saying he did not see him running next to the RV, yet somehow he was supposedly next to it when Asher approached them. That's not circumstantial, that is an eye witness.

Not someone running by the gas station?

https://www.facebook.com/marathonmanuk/videos/1026629384087986/

As for the other data, I agree it is unlikely but not impossible.

AREALPERSSON wrote:

Haha! I'm a flouncer! You are probably right and I am back for another flounce, though just for a quick scan while my wife is not around!

"a quick scan while my wife is not around!"

Haha, says a lot about you Andy.

woof wrote:

Mr. Ron Obvious wrote:

Bro, didn't you read his early history? His dad put a rope around neck and hung him in the air. What kind of mental state do you think he would have?

I think that was his dog.

The Telegraph:

"“I don’t like saying this stuff about myself,” Young says with typical and genuine modesty, “but the scientists say it’s because I have a very high pain threshold. I’m very mentally strong. That’s the difference between me and most people – they have a point where they’ll give up, but I don’t have that.”

Young knows the source of this mental strength and the reason for his high pain threshold. Both were forged over his childhood, when he was subjected to daily beatings by his father; beatings for which he still carries the scars.

“Sometimes he’d hang me over the bannister by one leg,” Young remembers. “He said he’d drop me if I cried, so I learnt not to.”

In his early years, he was also forced to witness his mother and sister being attacked. The trio escaped when Young was around six years old, but not before his father had tied a rope round Young’s neck and tried to hang him off a door."

Seems like there is a lot of confirmation bias on this thread. Even if you discount the security camera video, this thread is just rehashing the same data over and over again. Yeah, it seems likely the guy is cheating but I agree with some other posters that the LRC community looks like a bunch of petty haters at this point. You've put our your evidence, just wait until the show ends and they put out their evidence, and we'll see who's right.

Ultraboy wrote:

When challenged that he wasn't running next to the RV this is the best they could come up with in a hurry. But it makes no sense. .

Actually, they came up with that after a few days, "in a hurry" right after the second video was posted.

Right after the first video was posted, Rob said maybe he was running on the other side of the road or something, that there were 50 other explanations, and he didn't know why he wasn't shown. Which is actually a decent answer.

Then after the second video was posted, his memory suddenly came back and he remembered falling way behind the RV and having to borrow a phone to call and wearing all black with nothing reflective, not even his shoes. Pretty memorable night but he forgot all about it until the second video came out.

lardogbeck wrote:

You've put our your evidence, just wait until the show ends and they put out their evidence, and we'll see who's right.

Have you still not understood that they're not going to put out their "evidence"?

[quote]Phil Knight wrote:

I'm disappointed in you Indy. No live updates from anyone downtown over your lunch break?!

A girl from Indy went out and ran with him today. She posted pictures and HER STRAVA LINK in /r/running on reddit.

too many retards in the thread wrote:

lardogbeck wrote:

You've put our your evidence, just wait until the show ends and they put out their evidence, and we'll see who's right.

Have you still not understood that they're not going to put out their "evidence"?

Still speculation. When the show is over and they don't put out anything, then they'll be discredited. Let the train crash first.

Public Lewdness wrote:

[quote]Phil Knight wrote:

I'm disappointed in you Indy. No live updates from anyone downtown over your lunch break?!

A girl from Indy went out and ran with him today. She posted pictures and HER STRAVA LINK in /r/running on reddit.

Rob is wearing COTTON socks in a trans con!!! What a newb.

So who is this POSKev?

The day the RV broke down wrote:

team1.kml wrote:

There are many inconsistencies, but a few here have focused on the May 18 day in which the RV got stuck in the sand. I'm not sure if you saw these graphics that summarize some of what we know about that day:(http://imgur.com/zjXpAoP) and this one (http://i.imgur.com/HdyOwyd.jpg). They need some more updates because we have deduced more since those were made.

Hi, not sure if anyone saw it earlier today, but I posted the photoshop file for my graphic. If anyone would like to edit it to be more in line with current thinking, feel free - I'm a bit too busy at the moment.

http://www.filedropper.com/rvday

Thanks. I tried and failed at improving it in gimp because I'm lousy at gimp. One of the main things I wanted to change is the base map (where did it come from?), which has points A and B... It would be great if Point A were at the end of the TomTom segment ending at 8:18 on the north-bearing stretch of Hwy 95. It's good to know where the RV was stuck, but I think Point A on Hwy 95 (8:19am) and Point B at the Riverside Casino (pool photo, 12:52). Then the focus becomes linking points A and B:

Elapsed time: 4:34

Distance claimed via FB Message: "about 36 miles"

Distance by Hwy*: 34.4 miles

Distance shown on truncated TomTom segment: 21.9 miles

Elapsed time shown on truncated TomTom segment: 3:42:16

Distance _NOT_ covered by TomTom segment: 12.5 miles

Elapsed time _NOT_ covered by TomTom segment: 1:02

Pace required to cover 12.5 miles in 1:02: 4:57 min/mile

Recognizing that 12:52 is the pool photo and that they played roulette beforehand ("The 3 of us went to the Casino and put $20 each on the roulette table before having a swim in the pool and taking a shower" from

), 12:52 is a conservative time. His arrival was probably closer to 12:30, taking 10-20 minutes off the elapsed time _NOT_ covered by the truncated TomTom segment. We are starting to get down into the ridiculous at this point, with respect to paces, and 4:57 pace is already very unbelievable.

* based on

!4m2!4m1!3e0

TomTom

CoachKev wrote:

Do the right thing and admit you are a numpty.

As decent Brits we will forgive you and put it down to the Yankee desperation for attention.

We all feel sorry for you and this is your last chance to be a decent bloke. We know you are in the deep stuff and think you have to keep up the BS but your sorry story is unraveling so do the right thing and admit it was all set up.

Our man continues to defy you and will be the winner!

BTW we don't post BS about Ashers family although I'm sure we could if we could be bothered but we are too busy being nice and drinking tea

Well, Mr. Fake Coach, we didn't publish made up stories about our childhood in a book and publicly give interviews about the lies to any magazine that will listen so we can make a profit from book sales and sponsorship from SKINS.

And why do you keep dodging questions about Rob's "pro cycling career"? I bet you helped create the lies but don't know the first thing about cycling.

I'm a friend of Rob Young's and I'd just like to tell you how disgusted I am at the way you are treating him! Get over yourselves, you criticise anyone who try's to push the boundaries of human endurance

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7388104#ixzz4Bm5yeJl7

EFG wrote:

I'm a friend of Rob Young's and I'd just like to tell you how disgusted I am at the way you are treating him!

I'm disgusted at the way you are treating us! And I'm more disgusted than you are!