Day 19 is up, erroneously titled 13. Although they continue to show a human [not bionic] pulse after my intervention a week ago, this day's data is hideously corrupt and risible. If anyone could explain what follows for me, I'd be delighted. Miles 2-16 all at 138-164bpm, and over 150 eight times and over 140 12/14 times.
Miles 17-52 he never goes over 150 again, and only goes over 140 twice with a 142 peak.
It was a day a very extreme climbing in the second half and fairly little slow down.
How do you explain comparing kms in the first half of the day, and their equivalent counterpart. ie 1 vs 27; 10 vs 36; 26 vs 52 etc. To becalm the people who say I don't consider the topography, I'll use GAP [grade adjusted pace]:
4: 6:52 at 146
30: 6:28 at 133. Does this not strike you odd that later in the day he is speeding up by 24 seconds, yet reducing his heart-rate by 13?
5: 6:33 at 145
31: 7:02 at 119 Yes, he's slowed down a little, but the 119 is incredibly low. Compare this to a 7:16 for International Charlie Grice at 138bpm.
6: 9:07 at 144
32: 6:57 at 127 You don't need me to say anything about that. A gargantuan difference, a performance from two different galaxies.
10: 6:16 at 153
36: 6:58 at 121. It's either tech fail or a totally and utterly different calibre of athlete. Light years apart in quality. And remember, this is them all on much better behaviour. And this has been going on, precisely in this manner, for 2,400k and 4 years.
11: 6:06 at 153.
37: 7:19 at 117. That's a 43 metre climb and he's got a heart-rate 36 lower than an 8 metre climb earlier. Who really climbs 43 metres for a 7:19k at 117 bpm on mile 37 of a multiday? No-one.
12: 8:07 at 156
38 6:38 at 113. a reduction in HR by 43 an a 1:29 reduction in pace.
19: 7:23 at 129
46: 6:44 at 133. He has come down by 39 seconds, on an almost negligible difference in heart-rate having done nothing but climb in that time.
Finally, let's look at the last two of the day - remember, the last two are supposed to be the "walking beer miles". Not a bit of it, he's caning it:
25: 8:03 at 132. He's weary now... he's done nearly a marathon. But of course I have no problem with what is a perfectly clean and credible split on a lovely 41 metre descent.
41: 7:40 at 124. But I have three MASSIVE problems with this. He's reduced in pace by 23, reduced in HR by 8, and is climbing for 49 metres, for a 90metre difference in slope.
And now the coup de grace. The last mile of the day. I quote WG from his youtube instructional video: "Last of day: beer mile! Grab a mate... grab a beer. Stride it out... And that's 52 miles in a day. See ya!"
Note, this final mile is the toughest climb of the day at 57 metres. A major ascent after 1,608 metres of climbing throughout the day.
26: 7:55 at 129. Looks spot on to me. How is his tech failing him? Tell me. Clean as a whistle.
52: 8:03 at 110. A 110HR on a 57 metre climb on the 52nd mile of the day. No words.
Note, I have specifically ensured to match the equivalent Ks so haven't gone out of my way to compare, say, a bad looking K with a good one.
He then crept into his bunker, and in a long piece to camera said it was his easiest and best day.
There is not a single K here where the comparison is for an athlete of even calibre. Usually he's absolutely massacred himself in the head-to-head.
These numbers are disgusting. A crime against the noble and historic sport of multidaying. Goodge and his cronies are laughing at us and have declared war against the sport of ultrarunning. Anyone who attempts to mitigate the above is defending the indefensible.
Who knows, this could all well end up in court. And if it does, this will be one of my leading exhibits.
Rgds, Will