I, for one, can wait for the full story when it is finally ready to be published. That being said the story has already been told on the 100 pages of this thread and SOKLR blog. Hats off to the dogged determination of certain individuals to document what seems to be a complex web of cheating.
I also appreciate Wejo and Rojo for hosting this thread.
All I really want to know is this: Was scotth's posting as "Clarkston Kent" throughout much this thread an example of intentional irony or just regular irony? A guy incessantly jabbering on about formally exposing a cheater for some reason won't post under his usual handle? Yeah, these are different brands and levels of deception, but the similarities are undeniable and amusing.
Thanks to the Brojos.
Everybody hold on. A writer for a major publication just contacted me to finish writing an article he was going to write that some other guy was going to write that someone else started.
Be patient. It won't be long until I'm finished.
Old Mother Clarkston wrote:
Was scotth's posting as "Clarkston Kent" throughout much this thread an example of intentional irony or just regular irony? A guy incessantly jabbering on about formally exposing a cheater for some reason won't post under his usual handle? Yeah, these are different brands and levels of deception, but the similarities are undeniable and amusing.
This is what's so wierd about the direction of this thread. The "writer" guy is just another Kipper, wanting attention. Now we're watching the stories of two kooks fall apart.
I'm just waiting for the article to appear in a fake magazine.
Anyone see the latest copy of the West Wyoming Weekly?
Everybody hold on. A writer for a major publication just contacted me to finish writing an article he was going to write that some other guy was going to write that someone else started.
Be patient. It won't be long until I'm finished.[/quote]
Bravo! Your post deserves to be quoted in case it's purged.
No, I'm writing the article wrote:
I'm just waiting for the article to appear in a fake magazine.
Anyone see the latest copy of the West Wyoming Weekly?
Okay, this farce has gone on long enough. Friend, I am light-miles ahead of you. I've been chasing down this story ever since Kip launched his treacherous running career in 1980 by dressing himself up as a plain-looking woman and running as someone I'll only call "R.R." in what was definitely a MAJOR marathon (details to follow in the article). What is NOT needed here, by those of us who REALLY ARE writing about this for a HUGE publication, is snickering from the sidelines. Why anyone is skeptical at this point is beyond me, but it's your loss in the making.
what he said wrote:
Everybody hold on. A writer for a major publication just contacted me to finish writing an article he was going to write that some other guy was going to write that someone else started.
Be patient. It won't be long until I'm finished.
Bravo! Your post deserves to be quoted in case it's purged.[/quote]
They only purge posts that contain the phrase Dane Rauschenberg. By the way, he is a douche.
I still don't get where everyone's sense of entitlement comes from. Like many I've followed this thread since January, I don't see that an article is really going to add to what we know, it would be nice if it did come out but it wouldn't amaze me given the legal action that could follow if it didn't. Everything that has been discovered in this huge thread still exists.
I'd also like to add my thanks to the site owners for allowing this thread to stay.
the guy is obviously a Hitchcock film. I wouldn't want his fingers down my throat ... Marathon man indeed.
I still don't get where everyone's sense of entitlement comes from. Like many I've followed this thread since January, I don't see that an article is really going to add to what we know, it would be nice if it did come out but it wouldn't amaze me given the legal action that could follow if it didn't. Everything that has been discovered in this huge thread still exists.
[quote]Fell Runner wrote:
The "article" has already added so much to this saga. As someone earlier mentioned, we now have two quite strange birds here. Or is it three? Or one?
Well, in a nutshell, you have someone with a clear psychiatric disturbance who's compelled to keep cheating even as the whole running world watches him, and on his trail you have a "journalist" with a different spectrum of mental problems. It's like watching a version of "The Fugitive" with Richard Kimble being played by a geeked-up crackhead and Sam Gerard being a U.S. Marshal with Down syndrome.
I've read Kip's e-mails explaining his "race" in the Marshall Marathon, and I've read his account in his own words of his invention of the West Wyoming Marathon. The RD at Delaware sent me Kip's "explanation" of his performance there as well. All of it is amazing, and you'll all get to read about it in due time. If you found some of the stuff on this thread to be as fascinating as I have, I'm guessing you'll enjoy the article, whenever it comes out.
I have to admit that I am having a hard time being patient as well, but being a pathetic KL-saga-addicted loser, I suppose I will just have to continue to wait like the rest of you. I really mean that about being pathetic. I wish I could spend half the amount of time I spend addicted to this thread attending to my own running... But I'll be back tomorrow to see where the discussion goes.
I've been away from this site for awhile but spent the last while catching up. I miss the old days when a few of us spent hours going over race photo's and results trying to catch Kip. Proud I was apart of it but now this thread has gone down hill with all the personal attacks.
Most of the news on Kip is all set. the rest is just entertainment until we get that article. and that article WILL COME.....whether you guys want to believe it or not is up to you.
Fell runner-
Perhaps you're confusing "entitlement" with interested concern. I've read the whole thread, I assume I won't learn too much new from the article, so I really don't care that it comes out tomorrow vs. in a year- as long as it gets out. Although I would ask that if it's not out in 6-12 months, you admit that we skeptics weren't such entitled, unable-to-read whiners. I'll be happy to admit I was wrong if it comes out tomorrow, or in some reasonable time.
As to why it's important that it is written, despite this thread existing:
-Permanence. This thread has been yanked many times, if it finally stays down, then it only exists as far as someone backed it up, and who knows if it will remain public. Would be great for it to exist in print.
-Reach. This is a popular site, but a major publication would get far more eyeballs than a thread on this board.
-Coherence. People will read a 3-5,000 word story that's well told; only a few geeks (including myself) will bother reading this entire thread (no offence to those that did all the digging- it truly is/was good work, but it's not exactly formatted for a compelling road).
Post #2000 is mine! Let this thread rest now.
Post 2001- "A Kip Odyssey" is mine, ha!
RL wrote:
d2xccoach Couple questions and points
ive done vcm in 10 and 11 - after the final? mat at mile 20, near the end of the small inner 'hood loop, seems 30+ min would be plenty to get in a car or even bike on that main route the loop exits onto, trek back to the finish line about 3 miles south while the runners continue north for another 1+ miles before heading back.
diff ? for my info - i was several of runners missing a halfway split. always wonder why often see top runners missing mid-race splits - would think more likely to see the mid packers missing splits when several dozen runners crossing mat at once - not when its a small pack of lead runners.
none of this anwsers how kip manages to hit the mats on schedule. especially boston last year when, i believe, his 5k splits were very consistent EXCEPT for the ONE split from 20k to half where the pace went from 6:3x to 8:x - I believe - the only mats soo close there no way to advance himself off course - makes no sense.
finally on the topic of DQ .. at this years meeting the usual race rules overview seemed to touch upoun cheating without mentioning a specific incident or person. my recollection from that talk was someone really needed a bib# of that runner you felt broke a rule.
Hi RL-
First off, thanks for coming up to Burlington for VCM the past few years. I think I understand what you wrote but not 100% positive, so if I misinterpret anything below my apologies.
You noted that it would not be difficult to get from the final mat at mile 20 back to the finish in a reasonable time via car or bike. That is true, however some years we have put an unannounced mat or video or audio recorder out near 21.5. (In 2010 we had an audio recorder at mile 12.5, we move it around.) From Kip's splits, I'm not that concerned about how he got from 20 to the finish in 2010, I'm more concerned with how he got from 13.1 to 20. If you saw how traffic gets tied up near Oakledge Park and on Park St during the time he would have been trying to get from 13.1 to 20 you would know how tough it is to move between those points.
As far as missing splits for top runners vs mid-pack runners, additional density of runners crossing those mats at mid-pack times would not cause higher incidence of missed splits. A properly set up chip system can easily read a much higher density of runners crossing it at max times than any race can create. As it has been explained to me by professional timers, a couple things come into play. For one, at times they are setting up the chip system immediately prior to the lead runners arriving. In our case, we move the start line mats to 13.1, the spot where we missed you in 2010 (found you in our results!). The system may not be tuned 100% properly when the leaders come by. If their technician starts hearing chips not beeping when runners cross, he can adjust the settings. All this is outside my realm so I'm probably getting some details wrong.
Also, 2010 was our first year with B-Tags. We had a very high incidence of no-reads that year. I think I had to research finish times for about 55-60 runners who didn't show up with finish line times but contacted us outraged because they weren't in the results. We also had a ton of missing midway splits. Huge numbers. In 2011, year 2 for us with B-Tags, we were down to about 15-18 finish line issues, and on midway split no-reads decreased by something close to 70%. It's a combo of runners becoming more familiar with how to make the B-Tags work best (i.e. don't put them under a FuelBelt), the B-Tags getting beefier, and our timing company learning more about how to make it work better. We're confident that we'll see a similar curve as we saw with Champion Chips a decade ago.
As for the info we communicated at the meeting you were at regarding DQ's (Invited Runner meeting I believe, not the general course info and rules meetings), it wasn't specifically done due to Kip. In fact a few years ago we received a complaint about a coach on a bike giving water bottles to a top level competitor, so that's more what we were targeting. I believe we said that a bib number or solid description would be most helpful for the race officials. For a report along these lines a bib number would not be necessary, but we're not able to act on a non-specific report the better the description the more confident we can be in our decision. I know it's super difficult to remember stuff like that in the heat of a race (no pun intended after this year's race), but with money on the line we wanted to be on the record that if infractions were witnessed and reported that race officials wanted to know to take appropriate steps.