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.
BoogerJohnson wrote:
Will C: Have you connected with Laz?
This transcon came up on the ultralist around the same time WC started this thread, and Laz weighed in. His take was that WG is claiming to go after a "record" that's so meaningless as to be not worth even investigating (RY is Rob Young)
"he is shooting for a meaningless record
(altho it is a shame, tulloh was legitimate)
but it is just a publicity stunt.
he is wiser than RY.
do something not worth the trouble to debunk."
Will C needs help crystallizing the major development from and center.
The major development is:
The extremely low heart rates Goodge is showing in the 2nd half of each days running are causing suspicion, as no other runner has displayed these unnatural values….until the following development. Will C. has now found the only other runner in Strava’s database that has shown the same suspicious pattern in their own previous transcon (same route). That runner? …Robbie Balenger, an ultra runner THAT IS PART OF WILL G’S CREW AND IS WITH HIM ON THIS TRANSCON RIGHT NOW.
The conclusion is, something is wrong when the only two people in Strava history with these strange, unnatural HR patterns are Will Goodge and his current crew member (Robbie Balenger).
Seems to me this whole thing is getting dismissed because this isn't a WR attempt merely a British record attempt (and they don't even seem to be shooting for the correct record?). To the likes of PK what WG is apparently doing is distinctly average - to regular humans (even pretty damn decent runners) it's really not. Looking at Strava, WG has zero credible form that can be backed up by solid data and somehow he is seemingly romping across America faster than most reasonably competent and experienced ultra runners with no signs of fatigue, foot trouble or stress and huge chunks of time with an inexplicably low heart rate. When he actually gets observed he pretty much walks all day?? Anyone who uses wrist based HR monitoring will know that when it fails it usually defaults to tracking cadence, yet WG chucking out heartrates lower than 100bpm for sub 10 min miles for several periods a day, particularly in the afternoon, this deep into the challenge when he should be fairly fatigued is not a cause for concern?? (can anyone provide data that has those kind of stats for that pace after that distance?).
The whole message coming across here is that it's ok to cheat as long as you're not going for world records and you're doing it for charity. The biggest red flag here is that WG and crew are entirely refusing to engage in trying to put the record straight by releasing raw data (which given he is wearing both a whoop band and a watch means there should be two sets), or giving any kind of explanation for the repeated pattern which only appears on big challenges.
Without direct evidence it can't categorically be stated that WG isn't doing what he says he is but there is certainly enough evidence that on balance he might not be, to warrant a much closer look. Unless you simply don't care at all about integrity and honesty in running?
Facts Only wrote:
Seems to me this whole thing is getting dismissed because this isn't a WR attempt merely a British record attempt (and they don't even seem to be shooting for the correct record?). To the likes of PK what WG is apparently doing is distinctly average - to regular humans (even pretty damn decent runners) it's really not. Looking at Strava, WG has zero credible form that can be backed up by solid data and somehow he is seemingly romping across America faster than most reasonably competent and experienced ultra runners with no signs of fatigue, foot trouble or stress and huge chunks of time with an inexplicably low heart rate. When he actually gets observed he pretty much walks all day?? Anyone who uses wrist based HR monitoring will know that when it fails it usually defaults to tracking cadence, yet WG chucking out heartrates lower than 100bpm for sub 10 min miles for several periods a day, particularly in the afternoon, this deep into the challenge when he should be fairly fatigued is not a cause for concern?? (can anyone provide data that has those kind of stats for that pace after that distance?).
The whole message coming across here is that it's ok to cheat as long as you're not going for world records and you're doing it for charity. The biggest red flag here is that WG and crew are entirely refusing to engage in trying to put the record straight by releasing raw data (which given he is wearing both a whoop band and a watch means there should be two sets), or giving any kind of explanation for the repeated pattern which only appears on big challenges.
Without direct evidence it can't categorically be stated that WG isn't doing what he says he is but there is certainly enough evidence that on balance he might not be, to warrant a much closer look. Unless you simply don't care at all about integrity and honesty in running?
It’s the time, effort and resources to prove he is a cheat/not a cheat that isn’t worth it for people if he isn’t going for a record. Will C has spent a lot of money and time and hasn’t really proved anything either way. By most accounts he is aiming for a record that has already been beaten by 11 days and isn’t on pace to beat the new record so it’s a non-issue really
Thanks for writing. I had indeed given up on trying to persuade people that this is about the honour's code, and 7,000k over 4 years, by two runners of very little pedigree, using precisely the same heart rate pattern of high HR and then crashing, and only ever blowing up very early in their challenges, and exceptional performance in the second half of the days; was a cause for concern, especially with a half a million pound fund raise for their Gofundme.
The last three days of this have been terrible data and yesterday was identical to anything going back to RB in March of 2019. WG ran at 150s for the first 10 miles then averaged way under 110s for the rest of the day. The irregularities are relentless and only stop when I write to them or show up, when it was "all but" a sea of green, and 5 out of 6 days being clean.
But I have done all I can.
To point out the obvious - a 7 min/km+ walk across the US - is this the right website? Being LetsRUN.
Very good response here by a Rob Pope (who appears to have done a transcon himself) on the facebook group:
Anyway, I agree, the main issue is massive self promotion over an impressive feat, but the real impressive feat is setting off on a transcontinental run of any sort and unless you're going for an ACTUAL record, or you're doing it in a cool way - I.e. stopping to smell the roses, experience real America etc - having a mega crew makes it just less hard core and a bit of a yawn tbh. Will is clearly a decent runner, but I'd much rather see him guts it out on his own across the States for his brave mam than be in this circus. That would show the real grit which he probably HAS got. Even if we saw real suffering in the videos...that would be nice.
What is it? Is it easy? RUN FASTER AND FURTHER THEN - YOU'VE GOT A CREW. Is it hard? Well don't take the p*** out of runners better than you by making out like you're p***ing it (that means doing it easy, people of the USA) because of NuCalm - which is a crock of s***. It's just having a kip. That's it. That's why there's no data showing it's a thing or why no-one has heard of it until now.
Anyone who's done this (and we have Pete, Chris Finill, James Adams and Jerry L. Palmer in this post as well as myself) will tell you that despite all the suffering, we were probably out of breath about twice on our runs and for me, that was when I won the Oregon State Championship 10k and did a sub 3 Boston during mine, whilst drinking a beer in the latter (sorry for the self big-up there, but it's just to make this next point clearer)...BUT you'd never have caught any of us saying to camera it was easy - because it's really bloody hard, regardless of ability or pace. That's why a lot of the running community is rebelling against a guy who tells everyone he's wearing the Emperors new clothes when we can see he is bol**** naked, as we all have been. I just watched the recent YouTube video and it was just nasty, not the comedy epic the crew thought. Did they think it was cool? Watch it first, guys. Tell your edit crew that they've misrepresented you, because is that the face you want to put out? Well it's a horrible one. Be nice humans. Be the better humans. Even if Will Cockerell is in the wrong and was mean to you (I'm not saying he is or was, isn't or wasn't, as I don't have all the facts) don't act like douchebags - especially when people like me - who've had discussions with Will about my thinking you were for real, are looking to see your reaction. It looks p*** poor, lads. It really does - and I was on your side for a huge chunk. Now? Ah, I don't give a s****. You could have gone two ways with the data questioning. Ignore Will and "Prince William" it out or just answer questions, move the tracker to the runner and not a van etc. Instead, you chose another way. Not the cool way. Not the runners way and that, for me is why...ah sod it. I can't be arsed with it. Good luck to you, just do it right if you can and don't be a**holes again...because you were this week, whether you agree with me or not. Apart from the lad doing the cooking and Will's dad. They came across well.
If Will G wants to provide an explanation for his low HR, then yesterdays data offers the perfect opportunity. Just after 11 miles, his HR drops dramatically from 140-150 to 100-110.
It looks clear that something happened to impact his HR or watches ability to correctly measure his HR.
So what happened at this point on yesterday’s run? Did he loosen his watch? Put on/take off his jacket? Apply sun cream? Jump in the back of the van and pass his watch to RB? Grab his hoverboard and jerk his arm to maintain consistent cadence?
willvlc wrote:
Yes but why does it only misfire for him once every two years at these very specific events, and never on day 1 or when racing during an event? And why the identical pattern for Balenger? And why no spikes? Only low. Usually around one third to a half way through the day?
You just put it out there that the monitors are unreliable but if we took 100 completely random Strava runs, 98+ would come out perfectly alright.
I think this is the main gripe that people are struggling with.
As an impartial observer who admits to knowing next to nothing about Ultra running or Transcons it seems pretty clear Will Goodge is a lemon and is probably cheating. However, framing him on dubious HR readings is a really feeble case.
I could go through the first 100 runs on my Strava feed and know instantly if something is using a HR strap or wrist readings. There is absolutely no way that 98% of those runs will be even remotely accurate. This reeks of someone who has never use a HR chest strap... until you have used that everyone always claims that wrist-readings are accurate (it suits our ego) but they're clearly not. I know you will come back with your study claiming this 98% figure but it's nonsense. Wrist readings may work well at rest but any change in intensity causes all sorts of issues, especially over a long period of time. Even wrist shapes can effect it... some people's wrists are just the wrong shape for the watch to pickup properly.
Stalemate wrote:
If Will G wants to provide an explanation for his low HR, then yesterdays data offers the perfect opportunity. Just after 11 miles, his HR drops dramatically from 140-150 to 100-110.
It looks clear that something happened to impact his HR or watches ability to correctly measure his HR.
So what happened at this point on yesterday’s run? Did he loosen his watch? Put on/take off his jacket? Apply sun cream? Jump in the back of the van and pass his watch to RB? Grab his hoverboard and jerk his arm to maintain consistent cadence?
Perhaps we are getting set up for a big reveal. IN coming days, Will will display exactly how he gets his hear rate to plummet in 2nd half of 11 hour runs. We will see him lather himself with nucalm cream in his nether regions. This will be followed by a one time offer of $10 off your monthly subscription bringing the price to only $39.99 per month!
After all, this is FOR CHARITY. To raise awareness of Cancer. And this campaign has been very wildly successful. How many of you even knew about Cancer before this Transon?
All I'm saying is that 98%+ of runs I have checked on Strava are absolutely clean, and nothing remotely like this exists. The odd anomaly during a run is fine. I'm talking about the run as a whole. But for these guys 10% of their runs are clean [at very specific times, over the course of 4 years].
To call this evidence feeble simply beggars belief, and is absolutely condoning people returning data that stinks to high heaven and raising hundreds and hundreds of thousands off the back of it, and attracting up to a dozen eager and hungry sponsors. - And making a living as pro runners and adventuring around the world, with no real talent.
You are just saying that all 7,000kms of dodgy HR is because the engineers and technicians at Coros and Garmin are hopeless fools. When they speak on this, and mark my words they will, this whole thing will collapse.
But until then all of WG and RB's supporters will just hang on to their life raft of "tech fail".
The thing with Strava is you can't tell what the HR for the run was recorded with.
It will only list a watch even if you run with chest HRM.
We all agree that HR data from Will G is bs. Why it happens during his "money" runs is a mistery that could be explained by too many things. The fact is that it also happened under your observation. This leads to several possibilities:
- totally innocent reason, from "tech fail" to some unknown factor like the watch being worn incorrectly
- watch swap to another person that you failed to notice (would be a brilliant idea for a cheater, but quite risky if caught)
- FIT file tampering. easy to do for a guy like me, but takes time and effort and if they are capable of that then they are equally capable to generate believable HR in the first place, so I don't think that's the case
What is the method?
A low HR at a fast pace is only a potential indicator of cheating - how is he actually doing it? That's the smoking gun.
I think we can all safely assume WG and Team are not going to break their silence on the HR fron
I don't have time to do it but I'd really like to see a side by side comparison of the data from Ballengers Transcon next to the data from Goodge over the same miles - are there any direct correlations that indicate TCX files have been stitched together. Also I'm incredibly suspicious of the data from Ballenger during this trip - only manual miles and pace updates, no HR and no map or cadence - is that because there is watch muling/relaying going on??
willvlc wrote:
Yes! Huge operation, costing around 100k, and looking to raise half a million GBP, so $612k. Funds directed at Gofundme and not the charities.
Just to note - the GoFundMe is currently 30k... if the trip and crew are really costing anything approaching 100k then this whole thing is a huge fail
This thread and the Ashley Paulson thread last summer really highlight the drawbacks of attempting to use a participant's data uploads against them.
Will, your report states that these HR anomalies only occur when WGs does a big multiday fundraiser and is fine otherwise. Rather than take this at face value i've had a look at some random weeks in WGs strava history and I don't believe this is an accurate statement. His HR data is regularly flawed and doesn't make much sense on a number of his day to day training runs where he records HR data
As example:
8th May 2022: HR good for 1 mile. then plummets for 2miles, then picks back up for the remainder of the run.
25th May 2022: WG does a track session of what looks like 9x200m sprints with 200 jog recovery. His HR 'pattern' is ok, but the numbers are way off. His HR maxes out at 120-130bpm when doing his 200m sprints (at 4:27/mile pace!), then plummets to 90-100bpm on his 200m jog recoveries.
4th June 2022: A very hilly run. HR data all over the place. It has a pattern of significantly dropping when hes going UPHILL! - down as low as the mid 90s.
...And I could go on.
Can you review the above examples and offer your view on whether you see these as normal or not, vs what he is currently doing now. As your whole theory relies upon a pattern of Multiday events=bad data. Anything in between=good data.
For the record, i'm indifferent as to whether cheating is or isn't going on. I appreciate the work and effort you have put into this and raising its attention for scrutiny. My only issue is the principle focus is bad HR data and associated patterns, which i don't think is as clear cut as its been made out to be.
Thank you
You fail to consider pace. 8th May he does an opening mile at 9, then, yes he drops a bit, possibly as his body has settled into the run, for only a mile, because the next mile is extremely slow, so maybe he started slowing in the previous K - 10:30 miling for a very short run is fine with me to drop down to 115. This little jog is all good, and if there's a blemish it is absolutely minute.
And the 4th June run is clean as a whistle. The HR data is perfect. Yes, his heart drops on a climb, but he does a 19:35 mile!! Clearly a vvv slow walk. I am more than happy for him to be recording 110bpm for 19:35 pace. The next mile he speeds up to the rarified heights of 12 minute miliing and his HR rises to 116. Fine with me. Then he dares to go sub 10 for a mile and his HR becomes 123. I couldn't have written more perfect data myself.
I am really looking at the bigger runs with sequences of 20/30/40/50 K in a row.
The run for the 25 May I have is 3.63k on the track in 22 minutes at 114. Fine by me.
And this argument is about long ultraruns, I can't start getting caught up in tiny little 200 reps.
Can anyone share light on if it is very suspect that the tracker is on the van and not the runner. That seems very 1o1 basic attmept to have the tracker on the runner and not the van???
jt1998 wrote:
Can anyone share light on if it is very suspect that the tracker is on the van and not the runner. That seems very 1o1 basic attmept to have the tracker on the runner and not the van???
What is the tracker? Is it a cumbersome device that would be undesirable to wear for long distance running? Is it small and something that could easily fall off on the side of the road when adding/removing layers? Would it matter that the runner is not wearing it if it's easily transferrable to someone else?