This thread was originally titled, "Incredible development in the $612,000 Transcon Goodge run, currently ongoing" but the new title is more descriptive. The description of the run is here.
And yet they are still claiming they are about to break the British record on Instagram and according to Pete Kostelnick this fake record claim is all Will Cockerall's fault! 😄
One of the saddest things for me about this situation is finding out what the person who claims to be Pete Kostelnick is like. I still cling to the hope that it is a troll pretending to be him.
Have you checked these figures?Where have they come from? I had a quick look at Strava and they don’t seem to come from there as the calories on his strava for those days are completely different from this and in line with all the other days. Am I missing something?
These figures are from Whoop, that he flashed up. One has to be really paying attention as then it's gone. They're heavily sponsored by Whoop who have just dumped 4.5k in the GoFundMe, but they're hoist by their own petard, as Whoop data is clashing horribly with Strava data.
Will, I wouldn’t look too much into the calories thing. These are probably calculated from HR, so possibly just a reflection of the same anomaly. The question still remains, what is causing that?
I thought this re using HR, but had a google and from strava.com:
"To get calories calculations for runs, Strava requires that you enter your weight. Calories for runs are a function of speed (grade adjusted), weight, and moving time. Multiply these together with a scaling factor, and that's the estimate."
"I for real wrote my own softwarez and it provides rock-solid proof that Goodge isn't cheating. But I won't show it to you. But I really did it. For realz! I also wrote special softwarez to solve world hunger and cure cancer, but I'm not gonna show that to anyone either. It's too awesome to show to anyone. I have lots of other stuff I invented that I plan on not showing anyone. I'm real good at inventing stuff. But I mostly invent fiction."
Do you really think you have the intelligence to understand what I would write? The level of intelligence of Will Cockerell shills isn't exactly up to my standards with Cockerell and you all not even having enough thought to create your own theory of how to cheat at the transcon and just stole my proposal of watch muling from earlier in the thread. You can't even come up with your own ways to cheat.
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!! You have me in stitches because your unhinged, BS-laden rant reads EXACTLY like a super-villain monologue. I'm hearing it in the voice of Dr. Evil! Super funny stuff! Thanks for the laugh, doctor!
What would be interesting would be to see the strava fly-by information for the runs, but that's been turned off in the privacy settings, so it's not so easy to see where/where he's moving and where/when he's stopped. That could be cross-corelated with what the woop says for activity times. Is this data all in the GPX file you can download from Strava? I know you can look at the raw data from a Garmin .TCX or .FIT file but does Strava strip out some of this and just produce a breadcrumb type trail?
Surprise surprise whoop have their own special method of calculating calorie burn
How WHOOP calculates your calories burned
Step 1. We estimate your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) using customary formulas based on user height, weight, and gender (this information is set in your user profile information). xemptyzStep 2. As your HR (Heart Rate) rises, we add this uptick to your BMR estimate. xemptyzNOTE: For HR above a certain threshold the formula transitions to a WHOOP proprietary formula: Calories Burned = BMR + function (Heart Rate).
I had assumed Strava would use HR but no, they use GAP and weight and time on feet
Give me a credible reply to that and we can talk. And no more personal insults about homosexuality, sodomy, necrophilia, insanity and faeces from straight out of 1985 that you and RB solely deal in, perhaps because you're one and the same. Just try to answer the question in a calm, measured and responsible manner to forward our narrative.
When did I ever accuse you of necrophilia? Did I accuse you of that before or after you repeatedly called Goodge a fraud to his face?
"I NEVER said that! But if I DID say what I say I never said, this is WHY I said it!"
Way to deny and confirm at the same time, Sneakers!
Surprise surprise whoop have their own special method of calculating calorie burn
How WHOOP calculates your calories burned
Step 1. We estimate your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) using customary formulas based on user height, weight, and gender (this information is set in your user profile information). xemptyzStep 2. As your HR (Heart Rate) rises, we add this uptick to your BMR estimate. xemptyzNOTE: For HR above a certain threshold the formula transitions to a WHOOP proprietary formula: Calories Burned = BMR + function (Heart Rate).
I had assumed Strava would use HR but no, they use GAP and weight and time on feet
That’s very interesting. Which suggests his very low HRs shown on strava, and written off as ‘tech fails’ by defenders, are actually occurring, which is what’s throwing the WHOOP figures. Which brings it back round to the simple question of why this is happening, when it’s clear that his heart works normally at other times.
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!! You have me in stitches because your unhinged, BS-laden rant reads EXACTLY like a super-villain monologue. I'm hearing it in the voice of Dr. Evil! Super funny stuff! Thanks for the laugh, doctor!
He didn't spend 5 years in evil cheating school to be called Mr Sneakers thank you very much.
I have always been focused on "how they could be cheating". I can't help it.
Please poke holes in this theory:
At 7:00am Goodge starts his run and hits his watch. The tracker moves up the road 6 miles and does so for the next 25 miles. Robbie gets in the pick up Truck and heads to mile 25. He hits his watch and starts running. When Goodge hits mile 25 he gets into a pick up truck and heads to mile 50. At mile 50 they run together, get some photo shots, have beer miles for maybe another 10 miles. Maybe today they go to war and add 20 more miles!
They get back into the van and email their files to their data guy. He patches them together. Proofs and corrects them for any ugliness. Then they upload to Strava by next morning.
This would explain why they have experienced ultra guys crewing one another and not your typical food makers or laundry helpers. It would explain the noticable heart rate differences at one point that carry all the way to mile 50. It would also explain why this transcon is so damn easy. And would also explain why they are so defensive.
Here's an interesting thing sent through. How few calories he burnt on May's spectacular acceleration to a 5 day negative split:
So from such numbers as:
April 23: 10,000 cals
24: 9,700
25: 8,200
Then roughly around the 6700 mark for the next 10 days, but then:
6 May: 5,800
7 May: 4,900
8 May: 5,700
9 May: 5,000
10 May: 6,300
11 May: 6,400
12 May: 5,200
13 May: 5,100
14 May: 5,000
15 May: 5,100
On May 19 just 3000 calories burnt.
And it's suddenly hit me right between the eyes: the massive calorie intake of April 23-25 of 9,300 a day? All under my observation.
Looks like WC has estimated these numbers based on the Whoop screenshot on recent IG post. Not that it means much, but I'm going to cross reference these with the numbers pulled from strava:
(Numbers rounded to the nearest 500 cals, 1.0km and 0.5h)
1st May: 6k, 6k, 89km, 11.5h (Significant drop in cals for similar distance & time?)
2: 6k, 6k, 85km, 11h
3: 8k, 6k, 89km, 11h
4: 8k, 7k, 85km, 11.5h
5: 8k, 7k, 89km, 11.5h
6: 6k, 5k, 82km, 11h
7: 5k, 5.5k, 89km, 11.5h
8: 5.5k, 10.5k, 91km, 12.5h (Significant + in Strava cals for an otherwise fairly "normal" / slower day)
9: 5k, 7k, 105km, 13h (Significant + in daily km, with lower cals on both Whoop & Strava)
10: 6.5k, 8k, 100km, 12.5h (Same as 9th)
11: 6.5k, 6k, 100km, 13h (Same as 9th & 10th)
12: 5.5k, 5.5k, 92km, 11.5h
13: 5.5k, 7k, 98km, 12.5h
14: 5k, 7.5k, 89km, 12h
15: 5k, 7.5k, 83km, 12h
16: 7.5k, 8.5k, 97km, 12.5h
17: 8k, 8.5k, 92km, 12h
18: 7k, 8k, 97km, 12.5h
19: 3.5k, 7.5k, 87km, 11.5h (Big discrepancy in cals Whoops vs Strava)
20: 8.5k, 9k, 97km, 13h
21: 6k, 7k, 80km, 12h
22: 8k, 9k, 97km, 13h
Was hoping to see a bit more insight here, but other than the days I've added comments on I can't see much. I scraped the data though so thought it was worth sharing anyway. Maybe someone else can spot something here?
I have always been focused on "how they could be cheating". I can't help it.
Please poke holes in this theory:
At 7:00am Goodge starts his run and hits his watch. The tracker moves up the road 6 miles and does so for the next 25 miles. Robbie gets in the pick up Truck and heads to mile 25. He hits his watch and starts running. When Goodge hits mile 25 he gets into a pick up truck and heads to mile 50. At mile 50 they run together, get some photo shots, have beer miles for maybe another 10 miles. Maybe today they go to war and add 20 more miles!
They get back into the van and email their files to their data guy. He patches them together. Proofs and corrects them for any ugliness. Then they upload to Strava by next morning.
This would explain why they have experienced ultra guys crewing one another and not your typical food makers or laundry helpers. It would explain the noticable heart rate differences at one point that carry all the way to mile 50. It would also explain why this transcon is so damn easy. And would also explain why they are so defensive.
We could come up with dozens of theories of what might be going on, but the beauty for them is they only have to provide a single plausible explanation. They could even go with “tech fail” (which is what I was pretty sure was happening for the first 30 or so pages of this thread). But it’s really odd they haven’t even done that, and have chosen to remain silent and just ignore the issue completely. I get that it’s not a great look to say that a product you’re endorsing is giving bad data, but still.
I have always been focused on "how they could be cheating". I can't help it.
Please poke holes in this theory:
At 7:00am Goodge starts his run and hits his watch. The tracker moves up the road 6 miles and does so for the next 25 miles. Robbie gets in the pick up Truck and heads to mile 25. He hits his watch and starts running. When Goodge hits mile 25 he gets into a pick up truck and heads to mile 50. At mile 50 they run together, get some photo shots, have beer miles for maybe another 10 miles. Maybe today they go to war and add 20 more miles!
They get back into the van and email their files to their data guy. He patches them together. Proofs and corrects them for any ugliness. Then they upload to Strava by next morning.
This would explain why they have experienced ultra guys crewing one another and not your typical food makers or laundry helpers. It would explain the noticable heart rate differences at one point that carry all the way to mile 50. It would also explain why this transcon is so damn easy. And would also explain why they are so defensive.
We could come up with dozens of theories of what might be going on, but the beauty for them is they only have to provide a single plausible explanation. They could even go with “tech fail” (which is what I was pretty sure was happening for the first 30 or so pages of this thread). But it’s really odd they haven’t even done that, and have chosen to remain silent and just ignore the issue completely. I get that it’s not a great look to say that a product you’re endorsing is giving bad data, but still.
Well if you are cheating it is simple. Don't even dignify accusations by ignoring them. Their goal is grift and they have plenty of supporters that are demanding nothing from them along the line of proof.
I was thinking about their vehicle situation. If you were planing a transcon, what purpose would you have for so many vehicles? One or maybe two. But why do they need one or two extra pick up trucks? And for that matter, why such a big crew?
Unless they all had roles in pulling off this little scam.
We could come up with dozens of theories of what might be going on, but the beauty for them is they only have to provide a single plausible explanation. They could even go with “tech fail” (which is what I was pretty sure was happening for the first 30 or so pages of this thread). But it’s really odd they haven’t even done that, and have chosen to remain silent and just ignore the issue completely. I get that it’s not a great look to say that a product you’re endorsing is giving bad data, but still.
Well if you are cheating it is simple. Don't even dignify accusations by ignoring them. Their goal is grift and they have plenty of supporters that are demanding nothing from them along the line of proof.
I was thinking about their vehicle situation. If you were planing a transcon, what purpose would you have for so many vehicles? One or maybe two. But why do they need one or two extra pick up trucks? And for that matter, why such a big crew?
Unless they all had roles in pulling off this little scam.
One person who ran with him said it's all about the film-making and the running is almost an afterthought. Hence 40% of the main crew being videographers.
the strava files should always be lower - they record cal output of the run, the whoop is recording 24/7 so should have 12h or so of BMR on top of the run output (noting they use different methods in any event) - so certainly some red flags here, in particular from 1 May onwards
yeah yeah, try to deflect and justify. I'm not going to go through all your sordid insults over the past 2 months, and I've lumped you in with RB whose insults are nigh on identical to yours, but he can have the necrophilia, if that makes you feel better.
So do you admit you just falsely accused me of accusing you of necrophilia like you have falsely accused Goodge of fraud?
All the heart rate, cadence, GPS, and timestamp data are on Strava and can be retrieved and formatted into GPX if you know how to script it.
Since it's my own custom scripts and software used for the download and analysis, I won't be posting that for Cockerell to misuse and further make up fake numbers and falsify data.
But if you Cockerell shills behave and tell Cockerell to stop falsifying numbers, maybe I'll post all the data somewhere for download.
After having done quite a bit more research on this, I'm fairly confident this statement is BS and the data in-fact cannot be obtained.
Unless you are willing to publicly share said data, this is going to have to be filed under a massive "Trust me bro", and all your previous "analysis"null-and-void!
I gave you something that is very simple to do and you Cockerell shills couldn't even download the Strava data? I think that speaks volumes about how you and Cockerell should all be quiet because you all clearly lack any skills needed for data analysis. How do you think I made all those graphs on pages 12 and 22 of this thread, bro?