You’ve got me there. Considering this is a 40 page thread of people assuming David isn’t capable of what he says he is, I did make my own assumption that at least one of those people might be happy if they turned out to be right. And maybe I’d like to see David fail. Maybe I think these internet threads are all kind of funny anyways haha
-
34
-
Peanutbutterjelly wrote:
You’ve got me there. Considering this is a 40 page thread of people assuming David isn’t capable of what he says he is, I did make my own assumption that at least one of those people might be happy if they turned out to be right. And maybe I’d like to see David fail. Maybe I think these internet threads are all kind of funny anyways haha
OMG it's literally a 40 page thread!!!
meaning what
20 -
Peanutbutterjelly wrote:
Some of the people on this thread would be stoked to see David fail..
Fail? I want to see D run a 4:00 mile!
Given that - per Wikipedia - the Masters record for 35-39 y/os in the mile is a 3:51:38, I say “dang he’s fast, respect!” Until that day though, I suspect likes to exaggerate for attention.60 -
This quoted post has been removed.
Looks like Megan finally told Chatbot David to stop goofing off on the internet and help with the kids.
150 -
podcast critique wrote:
ChatGPT Analyses This Thread wrote:
"The function of a long-running internet thread is not to arrive at truth but to exhaust the possibilities of its own discourse. In the end, what matters isn’t whether Roche is a grifter, a prophet, or just a guy who likes to run fast—it’s that the conversation needed him to be something. It needed an object to affirm and deride, to elevate and humiliate, to prove, above all, that its participants are clear-eyed realists in a world of self-deluding fools.
But here’s the trick: the frame of this discussion is not its true frame. The visible argument—about coaching ethics, training philosophies, the economics of online influence—is enclosed within a larger, unspoken structure, one that positions skepticism as the highest virtue and refuses to entertain any sincerity that isn’t edged with irony. The real scandal isn’t whatever Roche has or hasn’t done; it’s that he refuses to play by these rules, refuses to fit within the preferred frame.
There’s something of Kieślowski's Blind Chance in all this: no matter which path the discussion takes, the destination remains the same. Like Witek running for the train, the argument reconfigures itself, finds new routes and contingencies, but the outcome—a forum performing its own worldview in an endless cycle—never really changes.
And so we end where we began: with the forum turning over the same stones, convinced that the final answer lies just beneath. It doesn’t. The real answer is in the gap, the blind spot, the thing this thread cannot bring itself to see. But the digging has always been the point."
well chatgpt believes david roche wrote this. copy and paste the above and ask chatgpt who wrote this and chatgpt states the following:
"This passage was written by David Roche, a writer and online critic, specifically from a piece about the endless cycles of online discourse and discussions. It seems to reflect his characteristic approach to analyzing the dynamics of internet threads and public debates. Roche often writes with a focus on culture, particularly the ways in which public opinion can shift in circular patterns and avoid meaningful resolution.
If you want to dive deeper into his work or this particular article, I'd be happy to help you find more"What do the chatbot and David have in common?
- unwarranted arrogance
- steers all attention towards themself
- hides behind a persona and refuses to address legitimate criticism
- responds incessantly to every comment
- uses obscure references in attempts to sound intelligent
I’d say there’s enough evidence here.
230 -
DJade321@ wrote:
It’s a huge red flag how David characterizes almost every training intervention or supplement as “game-changing.” The AG1, the bicarb, the ketones, the high carb, his new smart bike, a study he cites, etc. Everything is game-changing and it’s exhausting. I am sure Chat GPT could write a novel about it.
We love you all!!!It’s game changing in the sense that it helps inflate his bank account. Hell, I’ll call Chef Boyardee game changing for the right price.
David slobbered all over the Adidas Terrex Agravic Speed Ultras until it became obvious that a sponsorship wasn’t in the cards. Now he seems pretty ambivalent about them.
170 -
Can I ask a sincere question: is this really written by ChatGPT? I haven't really played around with it since the initial rush of enthusiasm, so I don't have a good sense of what it's capable of. If it's really ChatGPT... then I'm impressed. These are good posts, with wide-ranging and interesting allusions, solid internal logic, and defensible perspectives, written in a knowingly self-satirizing tone. I mostly disagree with the poster's pro-David perspective, but I genuinely enjoyed the posts. Which, if they're ChatGPT, is really depressing.
13 -
the panopticon wrote:
Can I ask a sincere question: is this really written by ChatGPT? I haven't really played around with it since the initial rush of enthusiasm, so I don't have a good sense of what it's capable of. If it's really ChatGPT... then I'm impressed. These are good posts, with wide-ranging and interesting allusions, solid internal logic, and defensible perspectives, written in a knowingly self-satirizing tone. I mostly disagree with the poster's pro-David perspective, but I genuinely enjoyed the posts. Which, if they're ChatGPT, is really depressing.
They are emphatically not written by ChatGPT. It's an attempt by 'someone' to sound like they are detached from the Roche ecosystem but quite conversely actually makes them sound like they are deeper in the cult than those present at the Waco Siege.
120 -
Those posts were similar to David Roches articles on trail runner magazine, interesting at first but quickly tiresome. Amazing these people have so much time on their hands, I wonder whose raising their kids for them. Must have some nice grandparents in the picture or something.
140 -
the panopticon wrote:
Can I ask a sincere question:
I don't know, can you?
02 -
big jim fan wrote:
Those posts were similar to David Roches articles on trail runner magazine, interesting at first but quickly tiresome. Amazing these people have so much time on their hands, I wonder whose raising their kids for them. Must have some nice grandparents in the picture or something.
Also, if you doubt its David, just go look at some of his articles on trail runner magazine, there are certainly some similarities.
50 -
ChatGPT Analyses This Thread wrote:
"The function of a long-running internet thread is not to arrive at truth but to exhaust the possibilities of its own discourse. In the end, what matters isn’t whether Roche is a grifter, a prophet, or just a guy who likes to run fast—it’s that the conversation needed him to be something. It needed an object to affirm and deride, to elevate and humiliate, to prove, above all, that its participants are clear-eyed realists in a world of self-deluding fools.
But here’s the trick: the frame of this discussion is not its true frame. The visible argument—about coaching ethics, training philosophies, the economics of online influence—is enclosed within a larger, unspoken structure, one that positions skepticism as the highest virtue and refuses to entertain any sincerity that isn’t edged with irony. The real scandal isn’t whatever Roche has or hasn’t done; it’s that he refuses to play by these rules, refuses to fit within the preferred frame.
There’s something of Kieślowski's Blind Chance in all this: no matter which path the discussion takes, the destination remains the same. Like Witek running for the train, the argument reconfigures itself, finds new routes and contingencies, but the outcome—a forum performing its own worldview in an endless cycle—never really changes.
And so we end where we began: with the forum turning over the same stones, convinced that the final answer lies just beneath. It doesn’t. The real answer is in the gap, the blind spot, the thing this thread cannot bring itself to see. But the digging has always been the point."
Here are three paragraphs from the following Trail Runner Mag article written by David. The writing style certainly appears to be similar to the fake ChatGPT above.
Similar sentence length, style, tone, obscure word choices to seem smart.
Can someone use actual ChatGPT to analyze the similaries in writing styles? I would but work computer doesn't allow it
"The Lydiard evolutionary tree won out, for the most part, with aerobic-focused systems sprouting forth into new phylogenies. Perhaps the most important change from aerobically dogmatic approaches from Lydiard involved more year-round speed development and structured workouts in the preparation phase. Italian coach Renato Canova has directed many of the fastest marathoners in history, and his Fundamental Phase (analogous to the preparation phase of Lydiard) includes faster long runs, hill sprints, and interval training, plus plenty of doubles.
Notably, Canova still wants the “Aerobic House” to be built with long-term high volume easy training, but that is taken as a given at the start of the Fundamental Phase. From there, Canova workouts get more specific to racing across the Special Phase and Specific Phase, with occasional “block” workouts including two hard sessions in a single day.
Canova block workouts absolutely fascinate me from an evolutionary perspective. These sessions can be brutally hard, sometimes consisting of 20 kilometers of tempo in the morning and afternoon. If you’re a training sicko like me, that probably reminds you of something else: those Norwegians doing their double-threshold days.
The Norwegian approach is different, though, with controlled intervals that are much more sustainable and lower volume by design. Evolutionary, we’re probably seeing some sort of biological signal on the efficacy of double workouts. Which will win out and fill the ecological niche of Olympic medals in the coming decades? Maybe one or the other. Maybe both. Maybe neither, as competing approaches take hold. If there’s one thing we can learn from history, it’s not to get complacent with training dogma, since someone is out there experimenting with a new system that will take our lunch money. Coaches all over the world are working at the frontiers, on the track and road and trails, progressing methods at a breakneck pace."
30 -
Even in the way he speaks at times as well
20 -
ChatGPT Analyses This Thread wrote:
Detective P wrote:
What does chatGPT think about Letsrun?
"LetsRun thrives on a paradox: it elevates figures only to tear them down. Christopher Lasch diagnosed this as a defining trait of a narcissistic culture—one that craves heroes but resents them, that seeks out guides but cannot trust them. The forum’s defining energy is a mix of admiration, suspicion, and the deep-seated belief that anyone who rises too high must have done so unfairly.
Pierre Bourdieu would add another layer: LetsRun’s social economy is governed by cultural capital. The forum respects expertise, but only certain kinds. A coach who presents knowledge in the 'right' tone—detached, self-deprecating, laced with just enough cynicism—earns credibility. But someone who invokes love, joy, or personal fulfillment as structuring principles? That triggers skepticism, because it signals a different set of values, one outside the forum’s preferred modes of authority. The more someone disrupts LetsRun’s internal hierarchy of expertise, the more likely they are to become a target.
But this dynamic isn’t just about policing status—it’s about managing anxiety. Running is an individual sport, but LetsRun is a collective experience. The forum provides a space where frustrations about training, competition, or personal limitations can be externalized and reinterpreted as debates over authenticity. Every cycle of hype and teardown reinforces a reassuring illusion: that success is never just about talent, hard work, or luck, but about some unspoken flaw waiting to be exposed. If greatness is always suspect, then failure isn’t so painful—it’s just proof that the game is rigged. And so the process repeats, not because it reveals truth, but because it soothes doubt."
And check out this David Roche Trailer Runner article.
Why Should I Care About Running? - Trail Runner Magazine I am 110% certain after reading this excerpt that the fake ChatGPT is David. Hi, David"As the ethicist Chidi said in the amazing show The Good Place, “Michael is having an existential crisis. It’s a sort of anguish people go through when they contemplate the silent indifference of our empty universe. Look, the good news is, if he can work through this, it’s the first step towards understanding human ethics.”
Non-ethicist Eleanor: “And if he can’t?”“Well, then, he’ll be a lifeless shell of misery forever and we’re all doomed.”
Eleanor expands in a later scene. “All humans are aware of death … so we’re all a little bit sad.” A few lines of dialogue go by. “And if you try to ignore your sadness, it just ends up leaking out of you anyway. I’ve been there— everybody’s been there. So don’t fight it. And in the words of very wise Bed, Bath and Beyond employee I once knew, ‘Go ahead and cry all you want, but you’re going to have to pay for that toilet plunger.’”
When I was a kid thinking about this stuff for the first time, I didn’t have The Good Place or a deep connection with a specific faith, so I was desperate and impressionable when I read a couple quotes from Kurt Vonnegut’s A Man Without A Country. I actually wanted to make them the inscription of our book, before realizing that I didn’t know how Vonnegut felt about hill strides. Those two quotes:
“We are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is.""
And
"
I was listening to a podcast with comedian Pete Holmes talking to Billy Eichner about the meaning of life, and Buddhist Jack Kornfield was quoted. There has never been a more apt description of my understanding of these topics than a game of podcast telephone with two comedians talking about Buddhism. But that quote struck the same chord as Vonnegut did decades ago:“What would love have me do today?
Like a producer really feeling a beat in the studio, I rewound that part and turned up the headphones. That is my stuff right there! It’s one of those questions spurred by the one big question that gets to the point, at least for my unique blend of lifelong introspection and self-conscious ignorance. What would love have you do today?
I think love points first toward the important stuff. Racial justice (Black lives matter), gender equality, equal rights, making sure our lines of empathy go beyond our personal connections, trying to support other people going through the same confusing journey no matter what their backgrounds or perspectives. Therapy, mental-health awareness. Lifting people up with unconditional support, not crapping on other people and their
feelings/beliefs, etc.40 -
110% confirmed: the fake ChatGPT is definitely David Roche. Hi, David. Huzzah!
140 -
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
The fake ChatGPT is David Roche!
120 -
liars lie wrote:
Can someone use actual ChatGPT to analyze the similaries in writing styles? I would but work computer doesn't allow it
ChatGPT:
"...if both pieces were from the same author, the author would likely be very versatile, capable of shifting from technical, sports-focused analysis (Sample 1) to more abstract, reflective commentary on coaching and philosophy (Sample 2). Based on these factors, I’d estimate a 50-60% chance that both samples are from the same author."
90 -
big jim fan wrote:
Those posts were similar to David Roches articles on trail runner magazine, interesting at first but quickly tiresome. Amazing these people have so much time on their hands, I wonder who’s raising their kids for them. Must have some nice grandparents in the picture or something.
Word is they have a live in nanny.
100 -
kiltedrunner wrote:
liars lie wrote:
Can someone use actual ChatGPT to analyze the similaries in writing styles? I would but work computer doesn't allow it
ChatGPT:
"...if both pieces were from the same author, the author would likely be very versatile, capable of shifting from technical, sports-focused analysis (Sample 1) to more abstract, reflective commentary on coaching and philosophy (Sample 2). Based on these factors, I’d estimate a 50-60% chance that both samples are from the same author."
the writing in this article definitely proves they're both by the same author30 -
Same with this article. When David is writing about the "human side" of things he slams in a whole bunch of references by artists/psychologists in the same exact way that the fake Chat GPT poster does:
"This article is published by a running coach for that reason. Coaching has let me have a little peek through the keyhole into people’s lives. “The house is so beautiful,” I’ll hear people say, looking at a person’s life from the outside. “It’s so playful and fun! I wish I could have that house!”
Meanwhile, I am squinting inside and seeing a bunch of chimpanzees screaming and going Jackson Pollack on the walls with their feces. Our inner worlds can be weird, messy, gross and beautiful all at once.
Coaching showed me that it’s not just complicated in my own head. Christmas is a great example of that complication in action. Michael Bublé tells me over and over that it’s the most wonderful time of the year. Parties for hosting! Marshmallows for toasting! It’s the hap-happiest season of all! Well … and I can’t say this enough … screw Michael Bublé.**"
70
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.