Robert Young fakes run across America

Rob Young Interview - Questions on the Controversy - Fastest Crossing of America Attempt:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F

Walking is not a sin wrote:

There is nothing wrong with walking! Ultra running is all about covering very long distances on foot. Most, if not all, ultra runners employ some kind of a walk/run strategy.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with walking. But walking is not a requirement to completing most ultra distance races. If Racergirl doesn't want to walk or doesn't want to count walking, then she can run the whole way instead. She may find that she actually finishes faster by incorporating walks rather than running herself into the ground... or maybe not! There are plenty of people that are trained enough to be capable of running the entire way for up to 100mi (and a rare few that can do even 24 hours straight) and for whom walking would be a waste of time. The WR for 24hours is a ~7:45/mi pace on average for 24 straight hours. The WR for 100mi is a 6:55/mi pace.... There was little to no walking involved.

On the topic of this thread about completing a transcon? Lots of walking is certainly going to be better because doing nothing but running 68+ miles per day would trash your legs.

Big Al wrote:

Take a look at this thread from July 2015 from URC facebook in the UK.

RY makes a long post in it

https://www.facebook.com/groups/259647654139161/permalink/707124482724807/

Note in the same group that someone supporting and congratulating RY was called "autistic" for asking if it was a world record.

This is from the same group whose admin claimed that LR is full of people hurtling personal insults which doesn't happen on their site...

Doesn't really answer a thing !

DMulvee wrote:

Big Al wrote:

Take a look at this thread from July 2015 from URC facebook in the UK.

RY makes a long post in it

https://www.facebook.com/groups/259647654139161/permalink/707124482724807/

Note in the same group that someone supporting and congratulating RY was called "autistic" for asking if it was a world record.

This is from the same group whose admin claimed that LR is full of people hurtling personal insults which doesn't happen on their site...

Exactly. Endless double standards.

Another very interesting thread from URC. (I doubt james, gary, lindley, etc will be back. They need the security of their own group where everyone (pretends) to agree with them)

Q. Finally why hasn’t any cadence data been released? As this could potentially quash the cries of data editing.

A. Declined to answer.

greenchilli wrote:

Rob Young Interview - Questions on the Controversy - Fastest Crossing of America Attempt:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F

Thanks, very interesting. I wonder how that was conducted, it says 'spoke' but was it a phone interview or email I wonder? Particularly with respect to the unanswered question about cadence which doesn't help his case at all.

Gary Dalton wrote:

Ross Tucker won't drop anything, he's relentless when he thinks someone's been cheating. I have absolute faith in his integrity

I hope you're right. But i have little interest in what you consider absolute faith

Another locked thread from URC. We never did find out what this new evidence was from Coack.kev/kevin o'rourke. I presume he meant the doctored data!

"Q. Finally why hasn’t any cadence data been released? As this could potentially quash the cries of data editing.

A. Declined to answer."

- See more at:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F#sthash.uUHQckQU.dpuf

Of course he does. I'm sure he'll decline to let the SKINS investigators see it too. The only way he can argue for his innocence is to keep that hidden or deleted.

If he posted legit cadence data for even just *ONE* of the sub 3 hour marathons out west, I'd be shocked.

The thread must have been deleted on URC. Neil brie said he would.

A girl basically said look how sun burnt RY is now, after two days with Laz following him, when he was pale before.

Gary dalton (he uses the fake name gary kiernan on there) said dont be ridiculous. As if having a sun tan proved he cheated.

Well, obviously that alone isnt proof. But added to all the other evidence.........

greenchilli wrote:

Rob Young Interview - Questions on the Controversy - Fastest Crossing of America Attempt:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F

Here's the whole article in one question...

Q. Finally why hasn’t any cadence data been released? As this could potentially quash the cries of data editing.

A. Declined to answer.

printer wrote:

greenchilli wrote:

Rob Young Interview - Questions on the Controversy - Fastest Crossing of America Attempt:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F

Here's the whole article in one question...

Q. Finally why hasn’t any cadence data been released? As this could potentially quash the cries of data editing.

A. Declined to answer.

There is one other key aspect:

"GPS was plugged in as soon as we had signal and uploaded before being deleted from the watch to make room for the new data, as is the norm"

Which will be his new excuse. The data has been deleted and he can't show it to anyone now.

You guys have some valid points HOWEVER, you've obviously never run a 100 miler. Sort of impossible not to walk at some point. Heck most of the top 10 finishers walked at some point. Are they subpar? I hardly think so.

DMulvee wrote:

printer wrote:

Here's the whole article in one question...

Q. Finally why hasn’t any cadence data been released? As this could potentially quash the cries of data editing.

A. Declined to answer.

There is one other key aspect:

"GPS was plugged in as soon as we had signal and uploaded before being deleted from the watch to make room for the new data, as is the norm"

Which will be his new excuse. The data has been deleted and he can't show it to anyone now.

Also, his explanation for the sudden change in pace after the first 4 days, and the decline later.

Q. How did the start of the attempt go for you?

A. Really well. I was running really well and at the time we had CCTV America with us filming. I felt very nervous to start but a lot more confident after the first day was out of the way. I settled down into a plan but realised after a day or two that it was the wrong plan for me. The plan was for me to hit mileage in the 50's before increasing it to mileage in the 70's. I realised that I always hit races or runs hard for the first half and then the second half would be a cool down, ready for the next day, so I thought, why would I not stick to what I am used to? I swapped the plan around and started to work hard hitting the high mileage before the millage would naturally decrease.

Steve Way Phil Turner - I personally believe Rob is not "one of them". Having reviewed the evidence and data and also witnessed Rob's online behaviour in the last month I can't see him being anything other than a complete fraud. Just looking at his inability to defend accusations of false PBs and cycling achievements is bad enough but having looked at some of his uploaded runs I can't help but feel he is just taking the piss out of the sport I love. For reference, I personally have some very similar PB's to what Rob is claiming for his 10km and half marathon and not only could I tell you immediately what year and race I did them in, I could probably tell you what the weather was like, who I was racing, show you a Garmin link, show you a Power of 10 link and even describe how good my pre-race shit was...... I wouldn't need a month to think about it.

Unlike · Reply · 94 · 5 July at 15:32

Interesting that 94 people liked this post in URC. Which shows not ALL of us uk runners think RY is Jesus, but most have been too scared to say anything as the likes of james adams, neil brie, mark cockbain, gary dalton/kiernan defended him. They are slowly shifting opinion, and as anal as lindley chambers has been on here, he has always outed RY right from the start.

Also interesting that some guys that were defending RY to the point of obsession, like a guy called owain, also ticked like on steve way's post! So maybe some of his followers are finally seeing sense.

If someone asked me this question, and I had a PR of 2:41 as he claims. I think the first thing i'd say is, umm no I ran a 2:41 at XYZ marathon. As a reminder the elapsed time of the run he's talking about was 2:44.

Q. Prior to and since the Strava data has been released, people have queried the ‘elite’ level performances. For instance, how you’ve gone from a verified marathon PB of 3.12 to running what appears to be a 2.30 marathon time at 8000ft in the midst of the attempt?

A. The Elapsed Time is longer than the running time hence breaks during the run, something "Lazarus Lake" of the Barkley marathon saw for himself. This means my actual running (moving) time is different than my actual Elapsed Time (overall time), the link you also show is a 3000ft decent (downhill running) during that period.

- See more at:

http://www.runultra.co.uk/Articles/July-2016/Rob-Young-Interview-Questions-on-the-Controversy-F#sthash.2oRSysV0.dpuf

whorunslikegumpster? wrote:

You guys have some valid points HOWEVER, you've obviously never run a 100 miler. Sort of impossible not to walk at some point. Heck most of the top 10 finishers walked at some point. Are they subpar? I hardly think so.

Tell that to Zach Bitter. Or Jon Olsen. Or Yiannis Kouros, Oleg Kharitonov, Don Ritchie, Denis Jalybin, or any other number of runners to clock sub 13 hour 100milers.

Maybe it's impossible to not walk some of the trail 100s with steep mountain climbs, but 100mi itself is not the factor that determines whether one *HAS* to walk.

Some of the stuff in this is hilarious.

The CCTV footage was handed over by the Mayor of the town as he owned the garage and clearly you can see me running/walking past not long after the RV.

Regarding the Strava data:

The Elapsed Time is longer than the running time hence breaks during the run, something "Lazarus Lake" of the Barkley marathon saw for himself. This means my actual running (moving) time is different than my actual Elapsed Time (overall time), the link you also show is a 3000ft decent (downhill running) during that period.

Is this a new excuse? Can anyone with more knowledge of the Strava data critique this? My understanding was that while there are breaks recorded in the data, Strava also captures segments of continuous efforts.

Hiro wrote:

Is this a new excuse? Can anyone with more knowledge of the Strava data critique this? My understanding was that while there are breaks recorded in the data, Strava also captures segments of continuous efforts.

It's fluffer BS. I think that segment was like a 2:44 with 2:30 of run time and a 15 minute pause somewhere in there. He's grasping at vague straws to be able to tell half-truths to explain impossible times... technically there is a longer elapsed time than running time, but it is not so much longer as to make any of his splits believable.