just saw the blog. Really great! Looks like the desert day entry is missing the little maths that indicate 45mph for the truncated segment on Hwy 95.
just saw the blog. Really great! Looks like the desert day entry is missing the little maths that indicate 45mph for the truncated segment on Hwy 95.
1 2 3 green wrote:
probably right, but so hard to tell with gps data. Not enough detail and not accurate enough.
the 21% grade is more like 6% looking at the location in google earth.
Just finished a 64 mile run wrote:I haven't ever logged or looked at GPS pace data, so take this as you will...
The sections in the really mountainous areas have some really suspect spikes in pace to me, especially when the grade adjusted pace is used (I don't know how accurate that adjusted pace is).
Turn on the GAP in the following run, and there appears to be a pattern. The spikes corresponding to outrageous adjusted paces are all going up steep hills after a steep downhill. However, the The spike in the GAP is not at the valley of the hills though, it's a noticeable amount up the steep hill. That seems like how a vehicle could coast, not a runner in my experience. The runner loses all momentum going back up hills like these after a few steps, not meters up a hill. And the runner's real pace would just drop.
Look at the one below. There's examples everywhere, but most egregiously, the GAP drops to 2:35 per mile going up a 21% grade after going down an 18% grade near the end of the run. But that GAP is ~1/3 up the way of that hill which looks like it would be ~100 meters long. Also note that the actual pace going down the hill is 5:00 to 5:10 per mile and ~5:15 going up the hill. There's no way IMO those paces would be so close together for a runner. Could a world class sprinter could run that fast up such a hill?
https://www.strava.com/activities/617303325
That little segment looks like a typical Strava oops. Zoom in on the area of interest and switch over to satellite view. It appears that the discrepancy in the GAP and the actual pace occur along a stretch of road that is either on a bridge or a built up section of road that is a bit higher than surrounding grade.
99.9% of my Strava'ing is for cycling and there appears to be a lot more function for rides vs runs. But, on a ride, you can have the elevation profile match either the GPS data or the mapped data. More often than not, the mapped data does not reflect bridges or other road improvements and you'll see odd topography flux that isn't realistic.
With that said ... I still think the dude is guilty as F***.
executive summary wrote:
1 2 3 green wrote:It should not be necessary for us to "present" the evidence. We gathered the evidence, cataloged it in a easy to use document, and handed it over. The "independent analyzers" should be able to take that and... analyze it. If they still come to the conclusion you predict, then they were either not independent, or not competent.
A simplified presentation like you are talking about is what's needed to convince Mrs. HalfMary Hobbyjogger on facebook, not a panel of experts.
"Panel of experts"? You're dreaming. The guys set to look at this will neither be independent nor competent. And very far from experts. Welcome to the real world.
Who do you want to convince? What's the goal of all this? Isn't it to convince the world that RY is a cheater? And who is a better representative of this world than who you condescendingly refer to as Mrs. HalfMary Hobbyjogger?
Skins's CEO is way more in tune with the global running community than a bunch of running data nerds. What he thinks can convince Mrs. HalfMary Hobbyjogger (or more correctly: what will convince Mrs. HalfMary to buy more SKINS products) will be the outcome of this.
People should understand that there's no independent panel of experts. There will at most be a couple of people who will tell Mr Fuller what's best for his business. And they will take into consideration Mr Fuller's own point of view. You can maximize your chances of convincing Mr Fuller and these guys, or you can hope that a messy pile of hundreds of web pages will convince them. Don't whine if it doesn't.
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey Guys-
Don't listen to this pompous A-hole; keep doing just what you're doing.
Keep compiling the best evidence you can (which is already pretty Goddamn good), and keep looking for more.
This Fuller dude sounds like he's probably a slime-bag himself, and was very possibly in on it from the beginning.
In any case, he clearly doesn't sound terribly interested in hearing the truth.
If he was, he would've been all over this story early on, and would've been aggressively seeking any and all info, analysis, and help from you people --instead of ignoring you, and tossing out casually dismissive insults, which is mostly what he has been doing.
If he's NOT interested in knowing the truth, as appears to very possibly be the case, then it's not gonna make much difference how you present the evidence to him,... so stop worrying so much about him.
Build the case, as you have been doing, and present it to the world through LRC, FB, the running media, etc. Eventually, it'll get picked up by mainstream media, and Robby-Boy will go down in flames.
If that takes a little longer than it should,... so what.
If the sleazy Skins CEO wants to try and prop up Robby's Ridiculous Charade, then you'll just take him down along with Robby.
You don't have to worry about convincing him (especially as he may refuse to be convinced, or may already know), you just have to keep doing what you're doing, and eventually you'll convince everyone.
You guys are doing great. You're the heroes here.
Ignore all the liars, frauds, and A-holes here and elsewhere, and for God's sake keep it up a while longer.
Great work.
team1.kml wrote:
just saw the blog. Really great! Looks like the desert day entry is missing the little maths that indicate 45mph for the truncated segment on Hwy 95.
I gave Hiro author permission on the blog, I'm the author of desert day posts - what is missing exactly? I made a second post about the deleted evidence.
I agree. You guys are doing great work. The truth usually prevails. May take some time -- Lance Armystrong for instance -- but it's usually worth it in the end!
http://ryinvestigation.blogspot.com/2016/06/bannocklaughlin-incident-follow-up.html#moreInvestigator wrote:
team1.kml wrote:just saw the blog. Really great! Looks like the desert day entry is missing the little maths that indicate 45mph for the truncated segment on Hwy 95.
I gave Hiro author permission on the blog, I'm the author of desert day posts - what is missing exactly? I made a second post about the deleted evidence.
I am an idiot. I thought "Elapsed vs. Moving time" was a separate blog entry and didn't read all the way down.
Perhaps LetsRun should go on the offensive and give the data over to our own impartial "Expert". I nominate DC Rainmaker. Have him analyze the data, present his findings and share it with Skins.
Seikosha wrote:
Perhaps LetsRun should go on the offensive and give the data over to our own impartial "Expert". I nominate DC Rainmaker. Have him analyze the data, present his findings and share it with Skins.
I told SKINS about Rainmaker, and was told, "thanks for the suggestion, we are aware of Mr Baker.".
sp2 wrote:
Hey Guys-
Don\'t listen to this pompous A-hole
Nah, don\'t listen to him, be like Rob\'s myopic sycophantic disciples and don\'t take on board other opinions, advise, experience, evidence, etc, etc.
Idiot.
executive summary wrote:
\"Panel of experts\"? You\'re dreaming. The guys set to look at this will neither be independent nor competent. And very far from experts. Welcome to the real world.
Lo not low wrote:
Dude, "low and behold" makes no fvcking sense, now does it?
Did it to you?, it would/does to most people if they know what 'lo and behold' means, just because theirs a 'w' where their shouldn't be (see what I did there) doesn't stop it making sense, but perhaps you're an idiot and it didn't make sense to you.
Regarding Fuller, of course he isn't going to spend time himself looking at the data, or anything else sent from here. What he is going to spend time analyzing is: Will it be better for his business to take a part in exposing RY, and cutting ties with him (analyzing how much following RY has, and how they will react to that -- the exposing and the cutting), or will it be better for his business to claim 'no definitive proof' (and lose business and support from those here (and anywhere else, if that's the case) that know the truth about RY and will hold this against him (Fuller) and his company.... While I thinking going to Fuller with this stuff has been the right thing to do, I suspect the right way to actually 'get' to Fuller would be to see that RY's cheating is clearly documented and proven so that the media will pick it up (beyond what they've done so far of just reporting that many folks think he cheated, etc.)
Good lord y'all are some dweebs.
Threads like this personify the typical LRer so hard that I actually just sit back and laugh in bewilderment at the fact that this is how you fools choose to spend your time.
occasionalUltra wrote:
cheating is clearly documented and proven
And that's what 'executive summary' was trying to point out, proving it is the problem.
8500 replies, including mine:
Good lord I'm a dweeb.
Threads like this personify the typical LRer so hard that I actually just sit back and laugh in bewilderment at the fact that this is how I choose to spend my time.
DJ Phat wrote:
Jehosephat wrote:Or maybe she's getting harassed by a bunch of (letsrun-inspired?) pitchfork and torch bearers even though she personally has done jack shit.
Hey yall, be careful with the side of righteousness and all that. Focus on the two dudes in the show.
Thanks for the advice, gandpa, but we've done this before. We know what is off limits and what is on the table.
Now why don't you slog back to the ultra list with all the other turtle geezers.
Hey f***face, maybe "gandpa" is on to something. Namely: don't be a c***. Instead, focus on solving the identified problems. f***ing Bozo the clown you are.
PS: I'm 100% on board with exposing RY's mis-exploits, but going after his fiancé? How about his children; are they fair game for you? What a bozo you are.
Prove it. wrote:
occasionalUltra wrote:cheating is clearly documented and proven
And that's what 'executive summary' was trying to point out, proving it is the problem.
You can come up with the most detailed, expert and convincing prosecution but a simple thing like the glove not fitting and it's all caput.
Dick Puke wrote:
Seikosha wrote:Perhaps LetsRun should go on the offensive and give the data over to our own impartial "Expert". I nominate DC Rainmaker. Have him analyze the data, present his findings and share it with Skins.
I told SKINS about Rainmaker, and was told, "thanks for the suggestion, we are aware of Mr Baker.".
Baker, haha... I told them too. I think he'd be great. At least a guy who we know has half a brain screwed on right who is capable of understanding GPS data and running ability.
Sorry wrote:
skyrefuge wrote:my impression has been that there was no grand scheme to cheat.
I don't know how else to put this, but you're an idiot.
Solid summary!
1 2 3 green wrote:
executive summary wrote:There is no evidence presented in a readable format. No, I'm sorry, 8000+ posts on letsrun are not evidence. Neither are a huge google doc or a complex web site.
Present evidence as 3-4 obviously faked "runs" and explain why they're fake. Compare the paces to world records or similar. Unless a short list of clear evidence is presented, expect the "independent" analyzers to conclude there's no evidence for him cheating. For example they may say:
...........
It should not be necessary for us to "present" the evidence. We gathered the evidence, cataloged it in a easy to use document, and handed it over. The "independent analyzers" should be able to take that and... analyze it. If they still come to the conclusion you predict, then they were either not independent, or not competent.
A simplified presentation like you are talking about is what's needed to convince Mrs. HalfMary Hobbyjogger on facebook, not a panel of experts.
The analysis they will conduct will not be funded at the level of, say, the Space Shuttle disasters. An apparel company is not going to uncork unlimited funds and resources to get to the bottom of of a negative finding that may be associated with their brand.
The proposed summary style will allow them to focus on a few, sufficient, points. These can also be shared with other media. Sooner or later more enterprising reporters will jump on it.
I think you all are doing an amazing job of putting things together; it's unfortunate that people believe what they want to believe, and people acknowledge only what's in their best interest to acknowledge. Considering this, though, I would like to think that it's in running-type magazine's best interest to at least state that what looks like the truth does look like the truth. So I'd hope that glove or not, someone out there in publishing-land, will want to see to it that things are seen as they are.