NYC Marathon cheaters

Lot of questionable assumptions in that list.

The very first one is very plausible. You've obviously never run NY,or any other large race for that matter. Take it from someone who has, it gets crowded up there and you do run slower.

Some of these folks may be missing splits due to chip placement, like carrying it in a pocket instead of on the shoe. I'd give anyone who runs a 4:22 benefit of the doubt on that score.

The French guy w/ the 4:01; you abmit his negative split was "subtle" but he missed some mats so you accuse him of cheating. For a "subtle" improvement?! I hope you have more to go on than that!! Give us his race history so we can be sure he's not capable of a 4 hour marathon.

I'm sure you weren't so reckless as to throw out a pretty serious accustion without researching the running bios of every one you accuse, so strengthen your argument by giving us this supporting info.

A few of these clearly look like cheaters, many may be valid runs. If you are accusing people without better information than what you show here, some might consider you an asshole.

By the way, I have no dog in this hunt. Didn't run the race & don't personally know anyone that did. But fasley accusing a runner of cheating is probably as bad as cheating.

Let's see how many NYRR disqualifies. As i said, when a similar thread last year, and all of them were DQ'ed. Since you sound like a grizzled veteran of NY, you're certainly aware that it's very easy to keep heading toward Central Park rather than up 1st Ave once you come across the QB Bridge. That would result in you missing the 30k, 35k and 40k mats, which is what occurred in almost all of these cases.

1) Paula

2) Lance.

nashville wrote:

i hope soemone on this list had a ligit reason for this adn ends up suing this board for defmation of charector

It certainly looks like the 25k mat wasn't functioning properly, it looked like it missed almost as many as it recorded, it didn't record Rogers Rop for example.

Cheering today wrote:

* Michael Schmiltz (Italy) 3:06 first half. 1:17 second half.

* Arianna Lazzaro (Italy) ditto

* Chiara Villa. (Italy) 3:04 for the first half. 1:24 for the second half.

Sicilian Greaseballs!

honestly who cares, none of these are mainline contenders, who have they cheated themselves and their immediate entourage

no-one else gives a sh*t.

There are people on this thread that have cheated on their wife, taxes, simple board games, kicked their dog and have stolen pens from the office. I'm not defending the cheaters but Jesus H, can you guys get any more sanctimonious?

You bet there are cheaters and it's also true that chips fail, and I totally agree with what Billy Simmons says.

Still, without the kind of evidence that Simmons cites, it's premature to call cheating when a chip doesn't register.

In my experience as a chip timer, the most common reason for what's called "chip failure" is "chip placement failure," namely doing something like putting it on a chain around your neck, putting it in your pocket, attaching it to your bib number, or putting it on your shoe next to your stainless steel runner ID.

Any timer can insert a finisher into the results via bib number, when necessary. So it's possible that finishers who weren't seen at the starts nor any of the splits, but are listed in the results, didn't use their chip properly and were added later.

Please note my use of "possible."

I saw, and nailed, cheaters in my years as a timer. I don't understand why people do it, really, but that they do it is beyond dispute.

Billy Simmons wrote:

Let's see how many NYRR disqualifies. As i said, when a similar thread last year, and all of them were DQ'ed. Since you sound like a grizzled veteran of NY, you're certainly aware that it's very easy to keep heading toward Central Park rather than up 1st Ave once you come across the QB Bridge. That would result in you missing the 30k, 35k and 40k mats, which is what occurred in almost all of these cases.

I hope NYRR does disqualify those that clearly cheated, and I hope they share the info with RDs at other major races so those losers get banned from all big races.

That said, my concern is accusing people of cheating w/o adequate evidence. Some of those looked like innocent circumstances, and even though the national mood seems to have changed in recent years, I still believe that people should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

Wouldn't you be pissed if someone falsely accused you of cheating in a race?

"There are people on this thread that have cheated on their wife, taxes, simple board games, kicked their dog and have stolen pens from the office. I'm not defending the cheaters but Jesus H, can you guys get any more sanctimonious?"

What? I said who cares anyway, what's sanctimonious about that?.

You know I've run sub 2.20 for the marathon, i just don't understand people who go out of there way to find out who's cheated to run 3hrs,I'm sure half my running friends don't believe me when I tell them what i used to run,then they come round to the house and see the certificates and cuttings on

the wall in the den.Some guy tells me he ran 3.04 at NYC ,

well that's great but I sure ain't going to check it out.

flashback wrote:

Wouldn't you be pissed if someone falsely accused you of cheating in a race?

You are correct. While i'm quite skeptical, I should not have used such an attention getting subject line. Instead, I should have called them "suspect" or "questionable".

Brightroom takes photos an multiple locations on the course and the previews will be posted in a couple days. It will certainly be useful evidence independent of chip splits. If the mats and cameras miss the runner at multiple consecutive locations, it doesn't look good.

I agree with others, some probably are cheating, and some aren't. Especially considering a slow start, and the probability that some runners weren't racing it, but still had a fast finish.

Billy Simmons wrote:

flyinghighrunner wrote:

Those are great, but I think this one is at least plausible:

Bernhard Krischer (Germany). 1:58 at half, missing from 25-40k, finished in 3:52. Funny how everyone gets faster when the mats malfunction. In Bernie's case, he was running consistent 27/5k and then sped up to 25/5k.

agreed. that one is iffy - 3 consecutive missing mats at a spot where it's easy to take a shortcut - but not nearly as damning as the others.

Iffy? He ran 1:58 for the first half and 1:54 for the second. That's not even remotely iffy. He paced himself nicely, ran a good negative split, and some mats didn't read correctly. Big deal.

Penguins have "bios"??????

flashback wrote:

I'm sure you weren't so reckless as to throw out a pretty serious accustion without researching the running bios of every one you accuse, so strengthen your argument by giving us this supporting info.

They make movies about them.

DontFeedTheTroll wrote:

Iffy? He ran 1:58 for the first half and 1:54 for the second. That's not even remotely iffy. He paced himself nicely, ran a good negative split, and some mats didn't read correctly. Big deal.

How many 4 hour marathoners ran negative splits? The guy you're defending was disqualified and isn't even in the results anymore. You really believe that a penguin ran negative splits and there were three defective mats in a row? At the spot where it's easiest to cut the course?

Cheering today wrote:

As I was cheering my teammates on pace for 2:45-2:55, I saw a middle-aged guy, about 30 pounds overweight, making strange noises. It was hard not to notice the guy among all the skinny runners. His stride was off, and he was wearing too much clothing. He was puffing and making faces as he was playing the role of the marathoner in pain.

He was on pace to break 2:50, or even better if he crossed Central Park to Tavern on the green.

He may have been part of the physically-disabled start... they start over an hour before the regular start, if I am correct, though I am too lazy to look it up right now. I saw one Achilles runner up in the mix with the sub-elites... he was trucking along, but his stride was a little loopy.

Jackass.