Dude what are you talking about? For that mile cutdown workout he goes out of his way to post in the headlines splits that he definitely was not running. That is lying.
what do you think lying is?
STFU already, loser
Again, he posted his treadmill splits. Said publicly that treadmill might not be calibrated correctly. Whatever. Just because you keep saying the sky is purple doesn't make it purple.
You got me to go look at that Strava post again. Go read the comments. One was of someone saying it was OAC-level, and he responded that those guys (i.e., Klecker et al) would crush him on track or roads. Seems like the right response, because it's true, and not exactly lying his a$ off. Another funny one by a follower was that the workout would trigger the "haters on Letsrun". That was more dead on than he could have imagined. And Roche responded with: "at the end of the day, it's meaningless without race results." Which was the same point I made earlier. You guys are obsessed with nitpicking him. Rent-free, as I said.
And no, he goes out of his way to: post the splits on Strava and talk about how great and accurate his treadmill is on YouTube.
So where is he publicly stating that his treadmill is wildly innacurate
I have, and others have. But I agree, I'd like to see more firsthand accounts. There are plenty on Reddit. A lot of us also don't want to dox ourselves so there's that.
I went down an internet rabbit hole on the Roches (in response to this thread) a week or two ago and didn't find much on Reddit that struck me as terrible. All I remember are complaints about the lack-of-attention on the coaching front and losing the training data, the latter of which, if there isn't a decent reason, would be super irritating to me too.
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to hold up the Roches as all that is good and pure in the world, just haven't seen anything imo that justifies the vitriol. Page after page after page of it. But, like I said, I'd be interested if there really were bad practices. Not because I have any stake in it, but I'm curious like a lot of people (hence the 44-page thread).
I appreciate that you don't want to dox yourself, but you should also appreciate that people going nuts (not you) on minor celebrities in the dark corners of the internet like the LRC forum can and should be met with skepticism absent compelling evidence.
I've read several Reddit posts - and maybe a couple within this thread (I honestly can't keep track anymore) - where the Roche's have dismissed injuries and disordered eating concerns of lower level athletes (and maybe higher level?) on their roster. They've also encouraged aggressive return to running/mileage timelines after injury. This isn't good coaching. These are bad practices that shouldn't occur.
He absolutely has the results, no one is disputing that. Even aside from this 4-minute mile/treadmill workout discussion I want to point out that David is a liar and a fraud and a phony influencer for ALL THE OTHER THINGS HE DOES.
I would love other SWAP athletes, past or current, to come forward because one through line with us former SWAPers is that David is very much all of these things and we were burned hard by him.
The behind the scenes of their business practices, their brand deals, their coaching, all of it...very much proves that they are liars and frauds. People who have parasocial relationships with them through a podcast or social media don't want to believe this, but they have no experience with it.
David can appease everyone through an instagram comment, just last night "We love Jesus and his teachings" meanwhile in his private life will speak freely about being an atheist and thinking all of the Jesus stuff is BS. That's like, the most benign example.
But tl;dr - this isn't about his results or his workouts. I still question them because I don't trust he's being honest about the stats or more egregiously all of his interventions, but there's so much more.
This is so funny to me. Clearly you have a personal axe to grind and are pretty emotional about it. Almost as funny as how many times you are logging in to upvote yourself.
Again, he posted his treadmill splits. Said publicly that treadmill might not be calibrated correctly. Whatever. Just because you keep saying the sky is purple doesn't make it purple.
You got me to go look at that Strava post again. Go read the comments. One was of someone saying it was OAC-level, and he responded that those guys (i.e., Klecker et al) would crush him on track or roads. Seems like the right response, because it's true, and not exactly lying his a$ off. Another funny one by a follower was that the workout would trigger the "haters on Letsrun". That was more dead on than he could have imagined. And Roche responded with: "at the end of the day, it's meaningless without race results." Which was the same point I made earlier. You guys are obsessed with nitpicking him. Rent-free, as I said.
He literally says at [9:45] in this video that "The treadmill is NEW AND FULLY CALIBRATED CORRECTLY"...
then he says he "maybe could hit this on the track....certainly sea level!"
He's knowledgeable enough to know that's total BS. But he goes out of his way to go on and on and on about these 4:30/mile splits.
That's called being misleading (aka lying). Intentionally. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Ok, once again, someone got me to go watch/listen again. Your quoting was wildly and intentionally misleading (hmm, let's talk about "lying").
He says: "the paces you're going to see today. Are they real? My answer is: I don't care. It doesn't matter to me if they are real paces or would directly translate to outside because every treadmill is different and, yes, this treadmill is new and has been fully calibrated but I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level. But, with that in mind, it's about effort..."
I'm sorry, dude, but that's not "lying." He acknowledges the potential inaccuracy, and acknowledges that he couldn't run this outside. That's about as much as I think any reasonably person would expect.
Yeah, before you say it, I personally don't think he can hit those paces at sea level either, but whatever. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. But there are so many caveats that he put forward that the idea that he is lying or being intentionally misleading is just, well, wrong.
Ok, once again, someone got me to go watch/listen again. Your quoting was wildly and intentionally misleading (hmm, let's talk about "lying").
He says: "the paces you're going to see today. Are they real? My answer is: I don't care. It doesn't matter to me if they are real paces or would directly translate to outside because every treadmill is different and, yes, this treadmill is new and has been fully calibrated but I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level. But, with that in mind, it's about effort..."
I'm sorry, dude, but that's not "lying." He acknowledges the potential inaccuracy, and acknowledges that he couldn't run this outside. That's about as much as I think any reasonably person would expect.
Yeah, before you say it, I personally don't think he can hit those paces at sea level either, but whatever. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. But there are so many caveats that he put forward that the idea that he is lying or being intentionally misleading is just, well, wrong.
Good you got what he said exactly 100% correct. It also appears that your reading comprehension is quite bad. Probably also why you must be one of his mindless followers that defends him.
This little excerpt is a very good example of how Roche directly contradicts himself while being misleading.
Let me try to break it down for you in more simple terms:
1. He states that "he doesn't care" about the workout paces or what is real.
2. He acknowledges that treadmills are all different and can vary, but then he emphasizes that HIS TREADMILL is "fully calibrated and new" however.
3. Initially he backpedals and explains that *maybe* he could not actually hit these (maybe real or not real) paces outside as a direct one-to-one session....BUT he *CERTAINLY COULD* at sea level.
The whole video (including the thumbnail) has a heavy text emphasis on every workout split pace and average mile repeat time as well as his boasting on Strava. It's all intentionally misleading and text heavy.
That's just a minor example though. Between his shady coaching business practices and saying he is in "around sub 4-min mile AND sub 14min 5km fitness at altitude" as well as using "science" to mansplain that a "trans woman is a woman [with no physical advantages]" he's just full of BS on multiple fronts. Time and time again.
Congrats you fell for it. You must be a mindless follower in the SWAP cult.
Ok, once again, someone got me to go watch/listen again. Your quoting was wildly and intentionally misleading (hmm, let's talk about "lying").
He says: "the paces you're going to see today. Are they real? My answer is: I don't care. It doesn't matter to me if they are real paces or would directly translate to outside because every treadmill is different and, yes, this treadmill is new and has been fully calibrated but I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level. But, with that in mind, it's about effort..."
I'm sorry, dude, but that's not "lying." He acknowledges the potential inaccuracy, and acknowledges that he couldn't run this outside. That's about as much as I think any reasonably person would expect.
Yeah, before you say it, I personally don't think he can hit those paces at sea level either, but whatever. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. But there are so many caveats that he put forward that the idea that he is lying or being intentionally misleading is just, well, wrong.
Good you got what he said exactly 100% correct. It also appears that your reading comprehension is quite bad. Probably also why you must be one of his mindless followers that defends him.
This little excerpt is a very good example of how Roche directly contradicts himself while being misleading.
Let me try to break it down for you in more simple terms:
1. He states that "he doesn't care" about the workout paces or what is real.
2. He acknowledges that treadmills are all different and can vary, but then he emphasizes that HIS TREADMILL is "fully calibrated and new" however.
3. Initially he backpedals and explains that *maybe* he could not actually hit these (maybe real or not real) paces outside as a direct one-to-one session....BUT he *CERTAINLY COULD* at sea level.
The whole video (including the thumbnail) has a heavy text emphasis on every workout split pace and average mile repeat time as well as his boasting on Strava. It's all intentionally misleading and text heavy.
That's just a minor example though. Between his shady coaching business practices and saying he is in "around sub 4-min mile AND sub 14min 5km fitness at altitude" as well as using "science" to mansplain that a "trans woman is a woman [with no physical advantages]" he's just full of BS on multiple fronts. Time and time again.
Congrats you fell for it. You must be a mindless follower in the SWAP cult.
Dude, my reading comprehension is fine. I'm a lawyer as I've said, not that that means anything definitive given that there are plenty of idiot lawyers out there, maybe including me :).
But I mention that because, if anything, I'm the one being hyper-literal on this thread. Being a lawyer so to speak.
If there's a flaw in what I've been saying, it's that I'm reading literally what David said. He clearly left open the possibility that (a) maybe his treadmill is in fact accurate (it's "calibrated"), and (b) he thinks he could run the paces at sea level. I'll agree with you that he clearly wants to believe that these paces are probably legit. We don't have any evidence that he can't run those paces outside, but those of us who know running (including you) don't think he could come even close. Regardless, he posted a treadmill workout with enough qualifications that it's silly to call him a liar for it.
My point all along -- and maybe it's an anal lawyer point -- is that he is LITERALLY not lying despite what you all keep saying. He posted the workout, i.e., the splits from the treadmill. Those were the splits. He further acknowledged that the splits may not translate to what he could actually run outside (altitude). No court would convict in a hypothetical that there was a court case hinging on this.
My bigger point, as I also said, is that this is a nothing-burger. You guys are obsessed with this particular workout and some of his other comments. None of it makes him a "liar" and a "fraud." Just let him fall flat on his face, or not, at WSER. But enough with the mob mentality until you actually come up with something.
Oh, and keep up, Sparky. We've already addressed the sub-4 and sub-14 thing. Go back and find the quote. He said he wanted to be in shape to run sub-4, etc, when he gets to the start line. Meaning that it is a target and aspirational. He never said he could. Yeah, no way he'll ever get there imo, but you guys just keeping coming back to stuff that literally didn't happen.
Good you got what he said exactly 100% correct. It also appears that your reading comprehension is quite bad. Probably also why you must be one of his mindless followers that defends him.
This little excerpt is a very good example of how Roche directly contradicts himself while being misleading.
Let me try to break it down for you in more simple terms:
1. He states that "he doesn't care" about the workout paces or what is real.
2. He acknowledges that treadmills are all different and can vary, but then he emphasizes that HIS TREADMILL is "fully calibrated and new" however.
3. Initially he backpedals and explains that *maybe* he could not actually hit these (maybe real or not real) paces outside as a direct one-to-one session....BUT he *CERTAINLY COULD* at sea level.
The whole video (including the thumbnail) has a heavy text emphasis on every workout split pace and average mile repeat time as well as his boasting on Strava. It's all intentionally misleading and text heavy.
That's just a minor example though. Between his shady coaching business practices and saying he is in "around sub 4-min mile AND sub 14min 5km fitness at altitude" as well as using "science" to mansplain that a "trans woman is a woman [with no physical advantages]" he's just full of BS on multiple fronts. Time and time again.
Congrats you fell for it. You must be a mindless follower in the SWAP cult.
Dude, my reading comprehension is fine. I'm a lawyer as I've said, not that that means anything definitive given that there are plenty of idiot lawyers out there, maybe including me :).
But I mention that because, if anything, I'm the one being hyper-literal on this thread. Being a lawyer so to speak.
If there's a flaw in what I've been saying, it's that I'm reading literally what David said. He clearly left open the possibility that (a) maybe his treadmill is in fact accurate (it's "calibrated"), and (b) he thinks he could run the paces at sea level. I'll agree with you that he clearly wants to believe that these paces are probably legit. We don't have any evidence that he can't run those paces outside, but those of us who know running (including you) don't think he could come even close. Regardless, he posted a treadmill workout with enough qualifications that it's silly to call him a liar for it.
My point all along -- and maybe it's an anal lawyer point -- is that he is LITERALLY not lying despite what you all keep saying. He posted the workout, i.e., the splits from the treadmill. Those were the splits. He further acknowledged that the splits may not translate to what he could actually run outside (altitude). No court would convict in a hypothetical that there was a court case hinging on this.
My bigger point, as I also said, is that this is a nothing-burger. You guys are obsessed with this particular workout and some of his other comments. None of it makes him a "liar" and a "fraud." Just let him fall flat on his face, or not, at WSER. But enough with the mob mentality until you actually come up with something.
Oh, and keep up, Sparky. We've already addressed the sub-4 and sub-14 thing. Go back and find the quote. He said he wanted to be in shape to run sub-4, etc, when he gets to the start line. Meaning that it is a target and aspirational. He never said he could. Yeah, no way he'll ever get there imo, but you guys just keeping coming back to stuff that literally didn't happen.
Dude, my reading comprehension is fine. I'm a lawyer as I've said, not that that means anything definitive given that there are plenty of idiot lawyers out there, maybe including me :).
But I mention that because, if anything, I'm the one being hyper-literal on this thread. Being a lawyer so to speak.
If there's a flaw in what I've been saying, it's that I'm reading literally what David said. He clearly left open the possibility that (a) maybe his treadmill is in fact accurate (it's "calibrated"), and (b) he thinks he could run the paces at sea level. I'll agree with you that he clearly wants to believe that these paces are probably legit. We don't have any evidence that he can't run those paces outside, but those of us who know running (including you) don't think he could come even close. Regardless, he posted a treadmill workout with enough qualifications that it's silly to call him a liar for it.
My point all along -- and maybe it's an anal lawyer point -- is that he is LITERALLY not lying despite what you all keep saying. He posted the workout, i.e., the splits from the treadmill. Those were the splits. He further acknowledged that the splits may not translate to what he could actually run outside (altitude). No court would convict in a hypothetical that there was a court case hinging on this.
My bigger point, as I also said, is that this is a nothing-burger. You guys are obsessed with this particular workout and some of his other comments. None of it makes him a "liar" and a "fraud." Just let him fall flat on his face, or not, at WSER. But enough with the mob mentality until you actually come up with something.
Oh, and keep up, Sparky. We've already addressed the sub-4 and sub-14 thing. Go back and find the quote. He said he wanted to be in shape to run sub-4, etc, when he gets to the start line. Meaning that it is a target and aspirational. He never said he could. Yeah, no way he'll ever get there imo, but you guys just keeping coming back to stuff that literally didn't happen.
He’s lying and a liar. You’re the one who’s obsessed,
I really appreciate your matter of fact take on this without all of the emotional opinions that others are bringing in!
What facts?
The facts are that David goes out of his way to lie about his treadmill workouts and people like “um, no” go out of their way to gaslight (“hes not lying!”) and make personal attacks on other posters (“you’re an obsessed loser living in your mom’s basement!”
David said: "the paces you're going to see today. Are they real? My answer is: I don't care. It doesn't matter to me if they are real paces or would directly translate to outside because every treadmill is different and, yes, this treadmill is new and has been fully calibrated but I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level. But, with that in mind, it's about effort..."
This is not a statement from someone who is being upfront in any way. This is someone who can't keep track of which lies he can get away with and which ones he can't.
(1) "the paces you're going to see today. Are they real? My answer is: I don't care." Translation: no, these paces are not real
(2) "It doesn't matter to me if they are real paces or would directly translate to outside because every treadmill is different and, yes, this treadmill is new and has been fully calibrated"
Translation: I actually don't know what he's trying to do here. He repeats again that it doesn't matter to him whether the paces are real or not, but then he goes on to say that his treadmill is fully calibrated and accurate
(3) "I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level."
So he thinks he can do a mile cutdown of 436-4:27 at sea level. That is also a lie, he could not do this.
(4) "But, with that in mind, it's about effort..."
He doesn't care about his times and they don't matter, but the times he are running are 100% accurate but in the end it doesn't matter if they're accurate
Good you got what he said exactly 100% correct. It also appears that your reading comprehension is quite bad. Probably also why you must be one of his mindless followers that defends him.
This little excerpt is a very good example of how Roche directly contradicts himself while being misleading.
Let me try to break it down for you in more simple terms:
1. He states that "he doesn't care" about the workout paces or what is real.
2. He acknowledges that treadmills are all different and can vary, but then he emphasizes that HIS TREADMILL is "fully calibrated and new" however.
3. Initially he backpedals and explains that *maybe* he could not actually hit these (maybe real or not real) paces outside as a direct one-to-one session....BUT he *CERTAINLY COULD* at sea level.
The whole video (including the thumbnail) has a heavy text emphasis on every workout split pace and average mile repeat time as well as his boasting on Strava. It's all intentionally misleading and text heavy.
That's just a minor example though. Between his shady coaching business practices and saying he is in "around sub 4-min mile AND sub 14min 5km fitness at altitude" as well as using "science" to mansplain that a "trans woman is a woman [with no physical advantages]" he's just full of BS on multiple fronts. Time and time again.
Congrats you fell for it. You must be a mindless follower in the SWAP cult.
Dude, my reading comprehension is fine. I'm a lawyer as I've said, not that that means anything definitive given that there are plenty of idiot lawyers out there, maybe including me :).
But I mention that because, if anything, I'm the one being hyper-literal on this thread. Being a lawyer so to speak.
If there's a flaw in what I've been saying, it's that I'm reading literally what David said. He clearly left open the possibility that (a) maybe his treadmill is in fact accurate (it's "calibrated"), and (b) he thinks he could run the paces at sea level. I'll agree with you that he clearly wants to believe that these paces are probably legit. We don't have any evidence that he can't run those paces outside, but those of us who know running (including you) don't think he could come even close. Regardless, he posted a treadmill workout with enough qualifications that it's silly to call him a liar for it.
My point all along -- and maybe it's an anal lawyer point -- is that he is LITERALLY not lying despite what you all keep saying. He posted the workout, i.e., the splits from the treadmill. Those were the splits. He further acknowledged that the splits may not translate to what he could actually run outside (altitude). No court would convict in a hypothetical that there was a court case hinging on this.
My bigger point, as I also said, is that this is a nothing-burger. You guys are obsessed with this particular workout and some of his other comments. None of it makes him a "liar" and a "fraud." Just let him fall flat on his face, or not, at WSER. But enough with the mob mentality until you actually come up with something.
Oh, and keep up, Sparky. We've already addressed the sub-4 and sub-14 thing. Go back and find the quote. He said he wanted to be in shape to run sub-4, etc, when he gets to the start line. Meaning that it is a target and aspirational. He never said he could. Yeah, no way he'll ever get there imo, but you guys just keeping coming back to stuff that literally didn't happen.
It sounds like you are a bad "lawyer." With an obvious bias for David.
He didn't say he "thinks" he could run the paces at sea level outside on a track. He said he "certainly could". There is no evidence that he "certainly could" based on any given race or track workout he has ever done outside. It's a lie.
Dude, my reading comprehension is fine. I'm a lawyer as I've said, not that that means anything definitive given that there are plenty of idiot lawyers out there, maybe including me :).
But I mention that because, if anything, I'm the one being hyper-literal on this thread. Being a lawyer so to speak.
If there's a flaw in what I've been saying, it's that I'm reading literally what David said. He clearly left open the possibility that (a) maybe his treadmill is in fact accurate (it's "calibrated"), and (b) he thinks he could run the paces at sea level. I'll agree with you that he clearly wants to believe that these paces are probably legit. We don't have any evidence that he can't run those paces outside, but those of us who know running (including you) don't think he could come even close. Regardless, he posted a treadmill workout with enough qualifications that it's silly to call him a liar for it.
My point all along -- and maybe it's an anal lawyer point -- is that he is LITERALLY not lying despite what you all keep saying. He posted the workout, i.e., the splits from the treadmill. Those were the splits. He further acknowledged that the splits may not translate to what he could actually run outside (altitude). No court would convict in a hypothetical that there was a court case hinging on this.
My bigger point, as I also said, is that this is a nothing-burger. You guys are obsessed with this particular workout and some of his other comments. None of it makes him a "liar" and a "fraud." Just let him fall flat on his face, or not, at WSER. But enough with the mob mentality until you actually come up with something.
Oh, and keep up, Sparky. We've already addressed the sub-4 and sub-14 thing. Go back and find the quote. He said he wanted to be in shape to run sub-4, etc, when he gets to the start line. Meaning that it is a target and aspirational. He never said he could. Yeah, no way he'll ever get there imo, but you guys just keeping coming back to stuff that literally didn't happen.
It sounds like you are a bad "lawyer." With an obvious bias for David.
He didn't say he "thinks" he could run the paces at sea level outside on a track. He said he "certainly could". There is no evidence that he "certainly could" based on any given race or track workout he has ever done outside. It's a lie.
(3) "I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level."
So he thinks he can do a mile cutdown of 436-4:27 at sea level. That is also a lie, he could not do this.
George Costanza: It is not a lie if you believe it is true.
There is definitely a difference between being delusional and intentionally deceiving. It is possible he is just delusional.
(3) "I don't think necessarily that the workout I'm going to do today I could hit in a one-to-one session outside. Maybe I would on the track, certainly at sea level."
So he thinks he can do a mile cutdown of 436-4:27 at sea level. That is also a lie, he could not do this.
George Costanza: It is not a lie if you believe it is true.
There is definitely a difference between being delusional and intentionally deceiving. It is possible he is just delusional.
George Costanza: It is not a lie if you believe it is true.
There is definitely a difference between being delusional and intentionally deceiving. It is possible he is just delusional.
Okay, well I think he's intentionally deceiving.
Agreed. For the views! For the kudos! For the affirmation! For the attention! The guy can’t exist without someone telling him he’s awesome every 2 seconds.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.