Excellent work Derek, as always! Can you determine what his hypothetical running time would be for him to have actually covered that 5K split (total split time minus the time he spent standing at the bus stop)? It shouldn’t matter, of course, but if it showed he hypothetically ran 5:45s for those 3 miles in the middle of a marathon it would just be another nail in the coffin.
RI red wrote:
doubler wrote:
The wheelchair almost took him out.
Derek, does this put the good doctor in the No. 1 all-time spot?
Him and Litton. If only we had access to this sort of evidence with Kip. I’ve Ling wanted to take a fresh look at The Litton story. But It was already looked at in so much detail I don’t know what new information could possibly come out.
Derek: Great work. Under the green all caps "THIS THE BEST SOLUTION FOR ALL" quote, the first sentence should read "Frank's time at LA is the FASTEST ever run..." not the "OLDEST" as you mistakenly say (simple error). Then under the "LA Marathon Rules on Course Cutting," title, I think the first sentence should have a colon after "Course Cutting." That way it reads "Course Cutting: Participants must stay on the race course..." As it stands now it looks like one category of "Course Cutting Participants." Simple errors in an otherwise excellent post. Thanks.
doubler wrote:
The wheelchair almost took him out.
RI red wrote:
OVERWHELMING! Let there be no question in anyone's mind now. Great work, Derek!
My offer still stands beyond the 2 first DQ's.
It is overwhelming. If for some reason they refuse to DQ Frank now, then their race deserves to be closed down. If they would allow such blatant cheating, there would be no point honest competitors running in it. It would make a complete mockery of having any rules at all.
Personally, I think the negative publicity will force them to give him the boot. With this video, it is now a big, easy to understand cheating story that any news network would be glad to pick up. Even if they disqualify him this story is likely to blow up, but if they don't then I guarantee that it will and the Race Director runs the risk of looking like he's in on it too.
Hard enough as it stands to excuse those five Marshalls who watched Frank enter and shuffle his way to the "win".
.
Most blatant cheater ever
Probably has his bib on side to avoid suspicion as he walks towards course
He better be DQ's wrote:
Hard enough as it stands to excuse those five Marshalls who watched Frank enter and shuffle his way to the "win".
Some of you guys act like the course marshalls are actually race officials. More than likely they are just a bunch of volunteers who didn't want to work a water stop....
They are probably literally given one command for their post:
"Just make sure the runners turn left here and don't go straight"
MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:
He better be DQ's wrote:
Hard enough as it stands to excuse those five Marshalls who watched Frank enter and shuffle his way to the "win".
Some of you guys act like the course marshalls are actually race officials. More than likely they are just a bunch of volunteers who didn't want to work a water stop....
They are probably literally given one command for their post:
"Just make sure the runners turn left here and don't go straight"
And why are they on the corner. Watch and you will see that they are directing the runners around the junction to ensure they don't diagonally cut that corner.
Quite reasonable with five of them there, to expect at least one of them to notice Frankie's course cutting.
.
Bob Seger, "turn the page". This chapter is over! Derek, easy to say now, but I knew that shadowy figure was Frank. BUT, you took that photo and ended this once and for all. Wow! Now some clean-up work. (RD's) I will support that effort.
It will be mind boggling if he still isn't disqualified after this new information. Maybe one of the local news media outlets needs to run a quick story about this to encourage the race to act and enforce the rules properly. It seems like they think this is just some random thing they can sweep under the rug.
BmoreRunner wrote:
It will be mind boggling if he still isn't disqualified after this new information. Maybe one of the local news media outlets needs to run a quick story about this to encourage the race to act and enforce the rules properly. It seems like they think this is just some random thing they can sweep under the rug.
I am pretty confident that if they don't act, they will be forced to act. That video is golden. The media outlets, local or otherwise, will eat that up. Frank is done.
.
In the past, the New Yorker picked up the story of Kip Litton, and the New York Times picked up the story of Julie Miller. This seems like at least as worthwhile of a story, if not better, given the doctor's reputation and coaching background.
There must be a lot of evidence, if even Roderick can figure it out.
I think that will be covered. wrote:
BmoreRunner wrote:
It will be mind boggling if he still isn't disqualified after this new information. Maybe one of the local news media outlets needs to run a quick story about this to encourage the race to act and enforce the rules properly. It seems like they think this is just some random thing they can sweep under the rug.
I am pretty confident that if they don't act, they will be forced to act. That video is golden. The media outlets, local or otherwise, will eat that up. Frank is done.
.
Interesting that letsrun still doesn’t have this thread even on their featured “on the boards” list.
Pik Nottil wrote:
In the past, the New Yorker picked up the story of Kip Litton, and the New York Times picked up the story of Julie Miller. This seems like at least as worthwhile of a story, if not better, given the doctor's reputation and coaching background.
The mystery has to be why the Brojos haven't written about it, very hard to claim that it is an inconsequential one - more noteworthy than someone we can't mention who had at least two main articles here.
Jayson13 wrote:
Update from Derek
https://www.marathoninvestigation.com/2019/06/frank-meza-additional-evidence-la-marathon-course-cutting.html
This is excellent work. And it does lead me to wonder if the LA marathon, in failing to enforce its own published rules on course-cutting, may now be breaching legal duties to participants, particularly if it committed to issuing awards to, among others,the fastest male finisher in the 70-74 age group.
Acccording to Derek's article, the marathon's own rules on course-cutting state, in pertinent part:
Participants who intentionally shorten the route of the race (“course-cutting”) will be disqualified. Any participant leaving the race course for any reason must re-enter the race course where he or she left it or be disqualified for course-cutting. Course-cutting may be determined by eye-witness reports, by surveillance equipment and video, or by the participant failing to register times at timing mats or appearing in race photography. Participants with missing or irregular mile split times at official timing checkpoints will be reviewed and may be disqualified.
Under well-known rules of textual construction, "will" is language of requirement or mandate, whereas "may" is language of permission or discretion. The marathon's rules of course-cutting appear to require ("will") disqualification of course-cutters, and then describe various permissible ("may") means of determining course-cutting. Moreover, the rules distinguish between cases in which course-cutting has been determined, which require ("will) disqualification, and cases in which there are merely "missing or irregular mile split times at official timing checkpoints," which merely permit ("may") disqualification.
Here, I haven't yet seen any indication that the LA marathon disputes that Frank has cut its course (and this latest evidence looks far more damning than some of the means that the LA marathon recognizes as acceptable for determining course-cutting ). Rather, the marathon simply states that "We’ve decided to take a different tact: Next time Frank runs one of our races there will be an official observer in place. This is a great opportunity for him to confirm his past performances and end the conversation. Pending any additional information, this is the best solution for all." But the marathon's own rules do not permit it to "take a different tact" in cases of course-cutting.
Of course, the marathon could simply say that it has not made, and need not make, a determination of course-cutting here. But where the evidence appears conclusive as to course-cutting, there is, I believe, a strong argument that the marathon cannot evade its obligation to disqualify a course-cutter simply by refusing to make a determination about whether the evidence establishes course-cutting. (Without getting too deep in the weeds, the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing inherent in contractual relationships constrains a party's ability to evade contractual obligations by refusing to take certain discretionary actions.)
I'm extremely mindful of the problems that could arise if the marathon were required to review and adjudicaate every hint or allegation of improper conduct. That burden, however, is lessened by the principle of standing, which requires that complainants have some cognizable legal interest at stake. Here, the obvious person with standing to complain is the guy who has allegedly been cheated out of first place in the 70-74 age group.
I set forth all of this not because I believe that the LA marathon should take action based solely or principally upon any legal obligation. I'd prefer that it do so because it cares about the integrity of its event, and because the circumstances and consequences in this particular case warrant its exercising its right to act.
This is Roderick on my cell phone. I suppose who ever bet his right nut was glad to see a “smoking gun”...no problem taking a few digs...peace!
Frank is toast. wrote:
Not only that there are five marshalls stood right there. Four behind where he enters the course and one just after whom he runs towards and then past. How in hell didn’t that raise a flag? He obviously entered the race right under their noses.
Maybe LAM is complicit in his cheating. If he 'retires' and never again runs with an official pacer, nobody else will be implicated.
It is interesting that letsrun doesnt even show this on the list of top threads.
It’s a minor annoyance of mine with what stories get the media attention. Bre-Tiesi-Manziel got tons of press. Jane Seo was a one time cheater and broke no records. I get why those stories got the attention, but I’ve written on many stories that I felt were much more worthy of attention.
Those were very minor stories compared to this, one-time lapses in judgement. This is a guy who has been doing this for more than 10 years and has a system in place to make him one of the best age group runners in the history of distance running. And he's a coach to boot. I think the only cheating story more grandiose than this is Kip. Even Rosie Ruiz only cheated twice.
Wow.
How much did you guys cry this weekend that this story isn't being highlighted more? :`(
Let me know how I can send you some tissues.