Another run across America underway - is it legit? Boots currently on the ground

welcome back will!

Would upload it to google drive or something but i can't be bothered tbh.

His reading of the data is looking questionable. His chief complaint re. 'dodgy data' was that Will was running fast times with data showing a low heart rate. He's somehow missed that this happened under his very watch (linked above).

Between that and this revelation only occurring now, can we really put any weight into his interpretation of data?

So now, as per Will C's report, he's saying that Day 26 wasn't clean. His notes are: "the day is largely fine, but for 20 miles in the middle he is joined by Balenger and his HR goes super low, it's a mystery, but when RB leaves rebounds to normal levels"

Presumably then, he witnessed Will running at that point with Balenger, showing he was indeed running at the pace Strava states, but with lower HR than expected. He calls this a 'mystery' and doesn't seem to mention it elsewhere in his report.

We need a clown for this circus.

I asked Google Bard (Google's LLM AI) to summarize the document into 10 bullet points. Here is what it spit out. I didn't read the entire source document to cross check.
****From Google Bard ****
Sure, here are the 10 key points of the analysis:
William Goodge and Robbie Balenger have been involved in multiple multiday fundraising events together in the past four years.
Goodge's heart rate data during these events is highly irregular, with periods of very high heart rate followed by periods of very low heart rate.
Balenger's heart rate data during these events is also highly irregular, and is very similar to Goodge's data.
There is no evidence of other runners experiencing similar heart rate irregularities during multiday fundraising events.
Goodge's and Balenger's irregular heart rate data is consistent with the use of a heart rate monitor that has been tampered with to artificially lower the heart rate.
There is evidence that Goodge and Balenger have access to heart rate monitors that have been tampered with.
Goodge and Balenger have a history of making false claims about their running achievements.
Goodge and Balenger have been accused of cheating in the past.
There is a strong suspicion that Goodge and Balenger are cheating in their multiday fundraising events.
Further investigation is needed to confirm whether or not Goodge and Balenger are cheating.
It is important to note that these are just 10 key points of the analysis, and that there is much more evidence that could be presented. The analysis is based on a comprehensive review of Goodge's and Balenger's running data, as well as their social media posts and other public statements. The analysis also draws on the author's expertise as a distance runner, statistician, historian, and author.
The author believes that the evidence presented in the analysis is strong enough to raise serious questions about Goodge's and Balenger's integrity. The author calls on the running community to investigate these allegations further and to take appropriate action if necessary.

Even more flimsy than I expected.

It's a pretty good summary. This is the central argument:

"Goodge's heart rate data during these events is highly irregular, with periods of very high heart rate followed by periods of very low heart rate."

And it becomes FAR weaker (almost to the point of being redundant) if he's indeed witnessed him running at the stated speed during those periods (which his report suggests he has).

He's also made no mention of the other times it happened on his watch, albeit for shorter periods of time, which may even invalidate his Balenger point).

In fact, this really supports Goodge's team saying "we don't know what that's about but he's definitely running the thing".

the fixation on "proving" this with heart rate is crazy. will c seems an intelligent enough man and i really can't see why he's taking this approach. it's just not a smoking gun, however hard the data is scrutinized.

mind you, why on earth doesn't will g just switch off his heart rate monitor at this point? perhaps we are really just dealing with some quite stupid people here.

having such a tough time and running positive splits while will c was out there certainly points one way, but again it's not conclusive. weather, terrain, mild illness are all plausible reasons to have a few days that look more of a struggle.

being so hostile to will c seems indicative of skullduggery (cf lance a) but then again maybe they're just not very nice people.

I’m out.
If Goodge wants to exploit the death of his own mother to fleece money from the gullible then good luck to him.
He may be a bottom feeder but there’s nothing to prove he isn’t doing the miles.

flimsy but pretty funny!

he's probably right and i'd presume that most ultra endurance athletes are hardy spirits but then again it proves nothing and is just a gratuitous dig at the toughness of a man he doesn't like.

lots of kenyan athletes don't train in the rain ftr. who cares?

disappointed there's nothing more juicy in the report but the balenger/goodge v cockerell feud is wonderful stuff.

why rig an hr meter to give low hr?

if you rig it for low hr, can you rig it for cadence too?

AHA!!!

There is your answer.

CHEAT!!!

It was a smoking gun when the assertion that these irregularities only happened at specific times checked out.

Now it doesn't: Will himself has witnessed one such period (well, as many as 4, realistically - it happened for brief periods on other days he supervised him), but rather than back off he's doubled down.

It's absurd behaviour.

As for the hostility. I can somewhat understand it, albeit don't condone it. James Pregaskis, a member of Goodge's team, wrote this on facebook:

"Let this be my first and last public comment on this matter.
Will, we tolerated your presence whilst you were here with an open mind, when you publicly said you were finished investigating this case the previous day because of your ‘new development’ we knew you had found another way to drag Will’s and the rest of our names through the mud. Then after you’d said you would stop investigating, you continued to tailgate us for the rest of the following day, resulting in our frustration.
This frustration comes from the fact that we are 6 honest, integral, hard working people trying to do a good thing. And you came out, saw nothing to show for any cheating because there was nothing whilst you were here, nor since we set off in LA, and have still managed to spin something into a story, when you told me to my face you wouldn’t do exactly that.
I look forward to reading you’ve made up tomorrow, and I urge you to send a professional out to observe who won’t unethically interfere with the subject and see what happens to the data then.
If anyone wants to discuss this matter any further, I’ll be happy to speak to anyone with an open mind in my PM."

What he says is true. Will C went out to supervise. He found nothing except for some vague pivot to "Balinger ran with Will during the low HR data". So what? He ran with him.

And, frustratingly, Will C has started a 775+ post thread on this website, which has since raised significant issues with his claims, and yet he's reserving himself to a facebook group that he's an admin of.

They don't say "it's raining, I'll go for a slow 50 mile walk today" either.

"So now, as per Will C's report, he's saying that Day 26 wasn't clean. His notes are: "the day is largely fine, but for 20 miles in the middle he is joined by Balenger and his HR goes super low, it's a mystery, but when RB leaves rebounds to normal levels"

But concluding paragraph says he returned clean data every day. I rather suspect Will C wrote that before reading this thread then realised he had a major problem.

Okay...16 down arrows for giving kudos for someone doing an amazing feat...just because I asked a question about how he'd feel if confronted. Y'all can't even give an up arrow for kudos 😲😲😂😂😂

I've been following this for a while now - from my perspective the assertion on WC side is:

1. the transcon is presenting a large volume of HR data which doesn't line up with (a) WG's performance history and (b) HR data within the same run - namely there are periods where the HR and paces do not generally correlate with historic WG data, or data within the same run - this is what WC is calling the "dirty data"

2. the phrase "generally" is used with regard to WG data, because the exceptions are various multiday events over the last 3/4 which share the features of being "unobserved"

3. the "major development" is that Balenger, who has accompanied WC on the exceptions mentioned at (2), displays very similar HR data on his own transcon. Having had a very brief look at some other Balenger runs on strava, he otherwise produces what looks to be normal HR data. So the MO looks the same

This leaves 2 possible outcomes:

1. tech fail - but the question remains why do both RB and WG have bad data only in these circumstances? This also ignores the fact that HR wrist data is generally accurate - a few links have been posted earlier on this thread. This hasn't been adequately answered by anyone on the WC side

2. some form of manipulation to the run - equally WC hasn't offered up an explanation here, but there are some suggestions that there is watch muling going on

There seems to be a point that when observed on day 26 there is a 20 mile period where the data looks "dirty" where WG ran with RB - we probably need to know more about the manner in which this period was observed by WC

all said and done - too many "coincidences" here to suggest something below board is going on, and WG (and now RB) don't seem to have tried - for example, let's see RB data on the 20m segment on day 26 please - he is uploading files but with no HR data

what he says is another bit of waffling self justification. they "tolerated" his presence - what happened to welcoming observers? - but then there was some "frustration" because he observed a bit more than they wanted/he'd indicated. the man had flown across an ocean to observe! let him watch for a bit longer, what harm is he doing?

yes, the heart rate patterns seem like red herrings, but then why not stop publishing heart rate data?

can't see this having the clear denouement of the rob young adventure. some tense times ahead in battersea park later in the year maybe.

The reason they mocked him running up and down the road is they were surprised that someone would enjoy running for running’s sake. It’s a foreign concept to them.

What a letdown. Congrats to Goodge and Paulson on historically amazing accomplishments.