I think 'in due time' could be a function of a still-ongoing NPS investigation of a stray sprinter van (or some kind of unauthorized vehicle). Probably witnesses are staying quiet publicly until the investigation is finished. That sounds ridiculous since we're talking about an ultra race, but it's probably true.
I agree! It’s immature, in my opinion. If someone has some real evidence, then share it. If someone involved thinks she cheated, but doesn’t have the evidence, then be mature enough to say so publically OR contact her or her team privately. I hope ultrarunning doesn’t turn into ultragossiping.
There has always been a few ways she theoretically could have cheated. Editing the gpx file or having someone else run for her. No evidence or witnesses have appeared … yet.
On a side note, Harvey did tag the National Team in the signature as he is one who has qualified. If Ashley wants to qualify, it’s not a matter of responding to the team, but signing up for a qualifying race at running top six women qualifiers (and > 130 miles). Who knows if a flatish 24 hour race interests her.
The race has a subjective entry process and nobody who wants to run it again is going to say anything publicly or name names. Harvey might be the one person who can get away with that. The rest of us are just watching him. But like he said, those who know, know.
You claim knowledge and insight you can't back-up.
You claim to speak for fellow doubters you can't name, aside from Harvey who could be talking about anything at all and has chosen not to speak up himself.
Then you claim your inability to back-up a thing you say is the fault of a corrupt RD who's destroying the magic of ultra-running by allowing cheats to prosper but is doing so through an event that's still somehow so desirable to the same ultra runners you claim are upset at Paulsen that none of them dare criticize him.
Sorry for the double response but I want to be crystal clear. You are claiming that you are a Badwater 135 finisher with insight into what it might take to run a time like Paulsen's on that course. Yet you are claiming that you personally can't say who you are because you want to run the race again?
Why on earth would you want to give more money to the RD of this race if there's a good chance your next competitive performance is going to be overshadowed by some upstart cheating triathlete? Why would anyone believe you unless you can explain that glaring logical flaw?
Especially given the pathetic immature way the RD (or whoever runs social media on their behalf) has responded to all this. This isn't the first time they've invited someone with a checkered past, then did nothing to monitor their race. He launched personal attacks on people that asked honest questions, calling them things like misogynists (even though there is no history of these people questioning record runs of other women). He liked posts of people that told others to go eat a bag of d*cks, deleted posts he didn't like, etc. In the week following he posted nearly daily passive aggressive posts picking at the main questions people had. He appears to be a very sensitive, brittle person. Personally, I'd avoid that race and their hysterical $1,595 registration fee. But if you're one of those people who does want to keep running, you need to communicate through a third party. Its clear the RD doesn't really care.
I never said I ran a time like Ashley's. I actually said she'd beat me in a clean race. For your second question, I don't think the RD is a bad guy. But entry is subjective and as for the entry fee money, the race is bigger than any one person. He spends all year putting the race together, I don't mind supporting that. It's a tight-knit community and a great event to be a part of, something you just wouldn't understand until you've been there.
I never said you said you ran a time like Ashley's. I said you have claimed many many times in this thread that you have insight into what's possible for her on this course. If you're a much slower runner, good for you. But in that case don't claim expertise and insight you don't have. That's like me saying an elite marathoner couldn't possibly run sub-14 minutes for the final 5km of a marathon because that feels unfathomably fast to me based on my experience of many many 2:30-2:40 marathons - pure arrogance.
I can't help but wonder if, whether you are trolling or not, you fail to see how this post makes you look like a complete idiot.
She posted her narrative about how the race went. She responded to the call for her to release her data by releasing her data. She explained how the race went for her and how that would correspond to what was in the data. She and her crew responded to Derek and provided him with more information, including things like text messages and receipts.
The burden is on those who would want to prove (with actual evidence) that she cheated.
She owes you nothing more. She is more than entitled to move on. She has already responded, so "where is she" is a question that has already been answered. Asking it more just makes you look sad.
I can't touch her in the marathon. But it's pretty easy to see what she is as a 100 runner with the progression of her PRs. I know there's speculation that she backed off late in her 17:26 but a good 100 isn't run at a hard pace like a marathon or something shorter and if you're cruising with an easy-ish run at 9 p.m. and are possibly going to be done at 10 or 11, you're not just gonna say "hey, I think I'll just make this easy run even easier and stay out here until midnight". I feel pretty strongly that she was not capable of faster than 17, and that's being generous.
If you look at how her times trend from shorter to longer distances, look at all the times on her Ultrasignup, you know who she is as an ultra runner. She's good, but the quality of her times drop off with longer distances. Marathon is her distance. She could probably turn in a similar performance to Sally, I think they could both have a good day and break 30. The difference from 24 to 30 on that course is like 2:10 to 2:45 in the marathon. It's a huge gap that takes the leap from very good to elite and there's zero to indicate that she's that good. Also just to be clear I will never be capable of a 2:45 in the marathon or a sub-30 at Badwater. So disqualify my opinion if you want.
Given her track record, knowing she never showed any signs of being elite at 100+ (she's not gonna get there from 17 and change in half a year) and knowing that she made two unfathomable bursts on extremely difficult climbs when she'd be very fatigued. Sure, it's possible, I guess, but extremely unlikely. She's a good athlete, but it's not like she's a world-class Olympian. Also seems odd that she establishes herself as one of the best ultra runners ever and she says her immediate next focus is returning to the marathon.
Part of what she has is her daily training. She trains in heat and incline, just due to area she lives and what she thrives on. Triathlon training is gong to giver her high aerobic fitness level that those that focus solely on runnign may not have. Her daily job has been an iFit trainer focusing on teaching people to train to run distance races as well as master the higher inclines (iFit products go to 40%) for hours per day in live classes 5 days a week. When that is your daily grind, it makes a bit of sense that she has the upper hand there. Now add in that extreme heat and the timing of when they hit and you have to see what happens. But the core of it and what she can do from training is there. It is how well she can apply it in those conditions.
I have some of your same reservations. But she started working with Ryan Hall in December of last year. It's very possible that the plan he put her on set her up to knock it out of the park at Badwater. It's clear she's been focusing on the longer distances in a way she perhaps hasn't in the past, and having Hall involved in that could make a big difference.
All we've got is some slightly wonky but mostly normal-looking data. None of the 15 other runners I looked at on Strava had the weird, way off the right side of the road GPS that she did on Whitney Portal. But the rest of her route looks normal (save for the 17-minute gap). What's being suggested (I guess?) by people who won't speak up is that there was some sort of systematic cheating at multiple points in the race. I just don't see that in the data, and it would have taken a ton of extra work to make false data (or multiple people's data combined) look normal. If we go down that path, then we are to believe that all the texts (or screen recordings) and explanation from her team are fake. It's within the realm of possibility but it also renders us all crazy conspiracy theorists while we wait for any actual proof.
I think the twins were actually triplets. They were hiding one in the Sprinter van, so while Ashley rested in the van they could still have a second body out on the course. The second twin probably looked more similar to Ashley, including the hair color.
Well, as far as conspiracy theories, I think it’s more plausible than them fabricating a gpx file. If they were running the Badwater 135 Shuttle Van Service, when did it start its service? Was it shuttling Ashley around the course throughout the first 122 miles in daylight hours. Was it doing it during the first 72 miles when Ashley would have been easily visible to Harvey’s crew and race officials?