Another run across America underway - is it legit? Boots currently on the ground

I’ve told Will in email, good for him for getting so much attention, more than I could ever get as an American going for a much bigger daily number, certainly an ounce of jealousy I suppose. At the end of the day, his numbers are not world class, so to call this a conspiracy, I highly doubt it.

oh yeah, that’s not Pete.

Yea I just watched the videos and at the end all I could think was maybe this was a way to get more people to watch. 50 miles a day isn't that far when you have a whole crew of people tending to your needs and you are just sleeping when you are not running...

Thank you for this tip. I started comparing the starting and stopping points on his Strava. Day 15 -> Day 16 has a discrepancy that I estimate to be approximately 3 miles.

Day 15 () ends a bit west of a pair of rivers according to the Strava MapBox map. Day 16 () starts just east of those two rivers. Using some crude estimations on Google Maps (which unfortunately doesn't show those rivers), I get about 3 miles between those two points ().

strava.com

Transcon Day 15 - 25% done - William G.'s 52.2 mi run

William G. ran 52.2 mi on Apr 16, 2023.

Link:www.strava.com/activities/8904587769

strava.com

Transcon Day 16 - William G.'s 53.6 mi run

William G. ran 53.6 mi on Apr 17, 2023.

Link:www.strava.com/activities/8912289974

goo.gl

Gallup-McKinley County Schools to Navajo Nation Off-Reservation Trust Land

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

Link:goo.gl/maps/YSpz56NtmS8Y4vFk7

There might be more days with discrepancies; I haven't checked prior to day 11 yet.

This could be easily written off as him forgetting to start his watch. Is there any other tracking proof he's providing? If Strava is the only proof, this is not good. Normal protocol is to leave a marker where you stopped and go back to it the next day. Preferably with a timestamped photo taken of the marker in its place both when you left it and retrieved it.

I will say that seems like a gap. I spent some time just now on Strava vs Google maps and it appears to be a 2-3 mile gap between day 15 end and day 16 start. That needs to be explained if there’s no live tracking to validate motion.

Will- I *really* doubt that's actually Pete K responding to you. More likely just some typical LR a**hole troll.
So ignore his input, and keep doing what you're doing.

Goodge is CLEARLY yet another scumbag fraudster. The fact that so many on this thread seem to have so much difficulty recognizing this is a testament only to the low average-IQ, and low ethical character (to the guys who are allies of his, or just a**hole trolls *pretending* not to get it) of most posters on this thread.

You're doing a good and admirable thing in exposing him --and you're also doing a damn fine job of it.
You're well on your way to proving it definitively (and, as you said, you've probably brought him right to the brink of dropping out now, and inventing some utter horse-sh*t excuse).

Hang in there a little longer. and don't let the idiots dissuade you from exposing the truth.
You're gonna win.

Hear, hear. At least there's *one* other guy on this thread who gets it.

I mean you could reach out to me on Instagram (dying for followers), but it is me. I’ve stated recently a concern about the run. I feel like I’m (unfortunately) the most objective person here. I’ve also expressed multiple times that I don’t really feel like this run is particularly special in regard to daily mileage.

Alright, I'll take a look, when I have a minute.
If you really are Pete, I have to say you've done a real disservice by mocking the OP (and sort-of back-handedly defending Goodge), and you're gonna look awfully silly when it's proven he's a fraud.
And the fact that his run is a lot less impressive than what Pete (you?) did is mostly irrelevant.

I'm comfortable in my own skin--I came on here because Will pushed something that I truly didn't believe was valid (going after someone for heart rate data--friendly disagreement); just because I know that people that cheat (like Robert Young) did so in a very different manner. I still don't think this guy is cheating when it comes to data. But I did notice a gap that someone else brought forward (not Will) that I looked into, that seems like it might warrant looking into, and bringing to their attention. I look forward to the conclusion of that. Go ahead and say anything I did was irrelevant, I don't care lol.

Goodge is a trust fund baby who will earn a nice little packet from this. A lot of us in the running community are smelling a dead rat!! Time will tell...

why do we have a Pete Kostelnick, a PeteKostelnick and a pete-kostelnick in this thread?

i've enjoyed and appreciated your posts and i'll give you an insta follow! we all think we're the most objective don't we? i'm honestly much more interested in this thread than others where there have been obvious cheats because this really seems like it could go either way. the points about his pace being unremarkable and the fact he has loads of fresh pairs of 2023 footwear and fancy recovery gear does make this seem plausible; the lance armstrong style "charm offensive" makes him look an utter fraud.

i'll be happy to accept he's done it if everything ends up pointing that way but I'll continue to be a hater because he seems like a plonker pushing crap products. and that is at least good for entertainment right? i was just as excited to tune in to watch gatlin lose as to see bolt win after all.

It's the pattern of the data that seems weird. Why are the irregularities only occurring during the three sponsored runs, across 4 years with various bits of kit, in exactly the same fashion, and never during events with a large number of witnesses?

He's frequently getting up for his afternoon runs and putting down the same (or better) speeds with a 25%+ reduction in heart rate. AND this has diminished, or stopped, when Will has put pressure on his camp.

I don't think this is a firm indicator of guilt, but something his camp are doing on a regular basis is leading to a consistent irregularity, and it needs to be explained.

Morning all! Herewith a paper to bring the whole thing together, which addresses Pete and other's dismissal of monitors being unreliable, and other concerns. There are so many strands to this story, but the beating heart of it is that for nearly 2,500kms at these challenges since 2019, Goodge has thrown up a physiologically impossible heart rate. Fortunately, none of my detractors has ever dared to challenge me on that, and if they do they admit they misunderstood the brief.

So without further ado, this brings the last 4 years of this caper under one roof:

15 QUESTIONS for William Goodge and Chief crew Robbie Balenger about their Jogle, 48/30 and Transcon.

1) On 20 August 2019, how do you explain running day 3 of Jogle at a heart rate of 103, when days 1 and 2 were at 150?

2) On 21 August 2019, how do you explain running day 4 of Jogle at a heart rate of 88?

3) How do you explain running the last 14 days at Jogle at an average heart rate of 110, and far from slowing down, accelerating, with a huge negative split. Going out in
8.4 days and coming back in 7.

4) For your 48 marathons-in-30-days challenge, how do you explain returning heart rate data that didn’t freeze, misfire, or get switched off, for just 10 of the 48 marathons?

5) How do you explain not returning a single day’s heart rate data between the 1st and 15th marathon - the actual Brighton marathon - when your monitor functioned again for a 3:44?

6) How do you explain your heart rate monitor then either being switched off [6 times] or malfunctioning for the next 18 marathons, before working again for your 5:34 in Merseyside?

7) How do you explain running nigh on identical times at your marathons in Cambridge and Bedford [4:59/5:00] on 29 Sept and 1 Oct, but at Cambridge you went over 150bpm 27 times, but at Bedford zero. And how did you go under 120bpm just 3 times
at Cambridge, but 35 times at Bedford?

8) Disregarding the London and Brighton marathons at the 48/30 which you raced; how do you explain averaging 4:41 per marathon when your monitor misfired or wasn’t switched on, but 5:06 when it was working?

9) How do you explain 11% of your kms on day 1 of Transcon being sub 120bpm, but 100% of your kms being sub 120bpm on day 5?

10) How do you explain going over 145bpm 19% on day 1 of Transcon but only 0.9% on days
2-12.

11) After I got in touch to raise this, how do you explain then going over 145bpm for 26%
of the following three days?

12) How do you explain an average of going sub-120bpm in a day of 22% on days 1 &
13-17 [after I’d got in touch]; but for days 2-12 you averaged sub-120bpm 81%
of the time?

13) Why do you average 134bpm on days 1 & 13-18 at Transcon, but only 110bpm for
days 2-12?

14) When you ran 9 miles with GB International Charlie Grice on day 11 of Transcon at
around 10 minute miling under a “baking sun”, why were his miles all between
133-159bpm, and why were yours all 106-121?

15) The likelihood of a heart-rate wrist monitor misfiring by giving an ultrarunner who
is doing 4-7 min Ks, an average bpm of 110 for the entirety of a long race, and
almost never going over 120, is incredibly rare. Thus far no record of such a thing has been
found; and certainly not in the other 750-odd runs of your career, when your
heart monitor is always clean and credible when you switch it on.

How then do you explain this unique phenomenon happening to you on a total of 35/46 possible occasions at the above events, for a total of 2,482kms between 20 August 2019 and 13 April 2023?

WVL Cockerell 20 April 2023

Well, if you put a tracker on a van it only makes sense to put a heart rate monitor on a van driver :)

I can answer Q1 to Q15

...because wrist based HR monitors are notoriously poor. Their data (on there own) would never hit threshold from proving beyond reasonable doubt that someone was cheating.

Ill admit at first I was sceptical of the run (gut said he was cheating initially) but looking it to it and into Will Goodge character I can't for the life of me see how any can say he's cheating beyond reasonable doubt.

This thread also angering me as a statistician the utter nonsense being used as 'evidence'. To be honest I'm as annoyed at this as I am if someone where cheating.

My gut actually says hes not cheating now (this isn't question though on balance of probabilities, to call someone out you've got be sure beyond reasonable doubt not just think they probably are) because he keeps sharing all the data metrics. There so easy to hide and lots of multi day runners and elites hide HR so it would be reasonable if he did too in light of accusations. Who would cheat, get called out on HR and continue to keep sharing it.

And as I've said to you FB, you can just change the HR data on upload file with relative ease using very basic coding skills. (So to look at the counter arguement, if data was clean I wouldn't beyond reasonable doubt believe a run in light of any other evidence, i.e I'm hammering that HR data is as reliable as saying he doesn't look tired in IG photos so he can't be doing it.

you haven't addressed a single point, you've just ranted. Dismissing the scientists and engineers at Garmin and Coros as idiots, is pretty tough trash talk.

You haven't said anything about the last 4 years is odd. Like speeding up when he goes down in heart rate for over 2,000ks. You're just saying that every single one of those 35-odd runs was a tech fail, when he never had them elsewhere. Just at huge charity fundraisers in unsanctioned competition.

Fortunately your trolling can be easily dismissed by the PR depts at Garmin, Coros and the American library of medicine, and you don't have the guts to say what percentage of Garmin and Coros misfire with physiologically impossible data on 50+k runs.

40% unreliable? 50? 30? I say, 1.1 to 1.3... but that is with big data spikes up too. This is only going low.

Can you find me a wrist-based misfire pattern akin to WG's 2400k on Strava? No, of course you can't. Your entire argument is that this reliable tech that spits out perfectly good, credible data 99% of the time, is "notoriously poor".

You can have your trolling. I'll stick to the science.

I agree that wrist (any optical really) HR monitors are very poor for high activity levels (but great at rest, pretty good at walking speeds). Also they are usually consistent in my experience (rather, the algorithms behind are). Sometimes they will get a "cadence lock" and provide impossibly HIGH numbers (for me, my max is around 180, I've seen spikes of 190 out of the blue on easy jog). But if the numbers are low and activity level is slow jog/walk (as is the case with "fastest Englishman") I would say they are pretty close to reality on average, probably within 1-3 beats of the HRM belt. That's just my experience and it obviously depends on individual characteristics like skin color etc.

One thing is sure for me: some people will cheat, no matter how trustworthy their public image. Remember Frank Mesa?

Also I personally find it strange to link any athletic activity to charity. Running for cancer research makes about as much sense to me as making silly faces for peace on earth. This whole thing is looking like a way to crowdfund a nice expensive vacation for several people with any leftover money going to charity later. Maybe. But I guess if people want to donate money to the guy and not directly to their charity of choice, it's their money. They might as well get scammed by NuCalm while they are at it.