The official winner Verwey seems look a solid guy, but the article was really disappointing. I mean sure it was probably written by ChatGPT based on an Instagram post or something but the article doesn't even mention the name of the bloke who should have won. It also would have also been helpful to hear a word or two from race officials as to what happens. Why can't they officially make the guy who was led off course the official finisher, especially if the official finisher is in agreement? Was the race run under IAAF rules? It seems like the race director should have some discretion in this type of case.
The official winner Verwey seems look a solid guy, but the article was really disappointing. I mean sure it was probably written by ChatGPT based on an Instagram post or something but the article doesn't even mention the name of the bloke who should have won. It also would have also been helpful to hear a word or two from race officials as to what happens. Why can't they officially make the guy who was led off course the official finisher, especially if the official finisher is in agreement? Was the race run under IAAF rules? It seems like the race director should have some discretion in this type of case.
The only media I saw about it was from the cited 3AW radio source, probably explains why the article itself is so bare-bones.
The official winner Verwey seems look a solid guy, but the article was really disappointing. I mean sure it was probably written by ChatGPT based on an Instagram post or something but the article doesn't even mention the name of the bloke who should have won. It also would have also been helpful to hear a word or two from race officials as to what happens. Why can't they officially make the guy who was led off course the official finisher, especially if the official finisher is in agreement? Was the race run under IAAF rules? It seems like the race director should have some discretion in this type of case.
The only media I saw about it was from the cited 3AW radio source, probably explains why the article itself is so bare-bones.
Second place was Jordy Williamsz, who I thought had retired, but is evidently transitioning from the track to the roads.
For The Kudos podcast mentioned that the guy who went off course was Lachie Edwards. He had a sizeable lead on Verwey at the halfway point before being taken off course.
Jordy Williamsz has retired from professional running, but is back doing it recreationally. He's training for the Gold Coast Marathon in July.
The official winner Verwey seems look a solid guy, but the article was really disappointing. I mean sure it was probably written by ChatGPT based on an Instagram post or something but the article doesn't even mention the name of the bloke who should have won. It also would have also been helpful to hear a word or two from race officials as to what happens. Why can't they officially make the guy who was led off course the official finisher, especially if the official finisher is in agreement? Was the race run under IAAF rules? It seems like the race director should have some discretion in this type of case.
It's a great story but poorly documented and the wording is like someone who is not familiar with modern spoken English. Plus the completely unrelated video feed right in the middle of the article. I guess you get what you pay for with AI.
This is a great performance by Jordy Williamsz. He retired last year due to injury frustrations, he's now working full-time and doing marathon sessions at 5AM (check his Strava). Real blue-collar type stuff from him.
He mentioned on the 'For the Kudos' podcast that he spent nearly half a year off any running and put on a lot of weight, which makes the performance even more impressive.