Maybe Jos Hermens Was Right / Reporting At New York Times

Obviously, you have an ax to grind with the New York Times because of its politics meaning center left, and a bad/wishful prediction is not bad reporting, but I saw that headline beforehand and was thinking, what possible reason could there be for it? The Pats were doing fine and the Jets weren't dominating, before the game. Maybe the Jets were in the Zeitgeist with all the hype, but nothing more. They have a lot to prove following this disaster.

Good catch.

But Let's Run is no different.

The thread on David Pascal, the chiropractor who claimed to have won the 1983 World Games 1500m, but who didn't, was just deleted (thread #3813475).

There wasn't anything offensive on that thread, certainly not compared to others that are still up.

So someone who lies about their accomplishments and gets caught by Let's Run folks, now gets a free pass because ... why exactly?

I realize that the NY Times has higher standards than Let's Run. But if you're going to call them out, then it's fair to ask the same of you.

Right rojo.

Here's another one you wanted everyone to forget about.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3741314&page=0

"It was brutally hot"-Wejo

http://www.letsrun.com/wejorecap.html

"DeHaven only missed it by 90 seconds on a brutally hot day in Pittsburgh. If the Trials had been run on the flat Chicago course in decent temperatures, DeHaven would have run close to 2:11:00 and Clark would have broken 2:30.

So the solution is simple, hold the Trials on courses in 2004 where there is no chance for extremely hot weather. Admittedly global warming makes this a slightly more difficult task but it shouldn't be all that difficult as hardly any marathons are run in 80 degree weather."-Rojo

http://www.letsrun.com/rojospeaks.html

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KAGC/2000/5/7/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Pittsburgh&req_state=PA&req_statename=Pennsylvania

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KMDW/2010/10/10/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Chicago&req_state=IL&req_statename=Illinois

hypocrisy is easy to come by, no?

What's worse, what Rhoden did or not "growing a set" and ignore responding like you?

??????? wrote:

http://www.letsrun.com/wejorecap.html

"DeHaven only missed it by 90 seconds on a brutally hot day in Pittsburgh. If the Trials had been run on the flat Chicago course in decent temperatures, DeHaven would have run close to 2:11:00 and Clark would have broken 2:30.

So the solution is simple, hold the Trials on courses in 2004 where there is no chance for extremely hot weather. Admittedly global warming makes this a slightly more difficult task but it shouldn't be all that difficult as hardly any marathons are run in 80 degree weather."-Rojo

http://www.letsrun.com/rojospeaks.htmlhttp://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KAGC/2000/5/7/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Pittsburgh&req_state=PA&req_statename=Pennsylvaniahttp://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KMDW/2010/10/10/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Chicago&req_state=IL&req_statename=Illinois

hypocrisy is easy to come by, no?

I don't get it. What's your point?

Do you mean this Jos Hermens??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos_Hermens

What "terrible prediction" did he make? There was nothing in the original article that predicted the outcome of the game- the gist was that since spygate, the patriots haven't won a superbowl, and that perhaps the cheating gave them an edge. One blowout doesn't change the overall message. If the patriots win the superbowl, and the jets fizzle over the next few years, that will be a bad prediction. But that writers and papers update stories or edit them from paper to online versions or vice versa is hardly news.

NYT has always had shoddy reporting on sports-related things. I can't stand it when they periodically write an article on some new revolutionary discovery that will change training as we know it, which in reality is an interview with one nutjob exercise physiologist who has a half-brained idea contrary to most of the field, not to mention coaches in the sport. Remember the "cooldowns are unnessecary" article?

SomeActualData wrote:

Good catch.

But Let's Run is no different.

The thread on David Pascal, the chiropractor who claimed to have won the 1983 World Games 1500m, but who didn't, was just deleted (thread #3813475).

There wasn't anything offensive on that thread, certainly not compared to others that are still up.

So someone who lies about their accomplishments and gets caught by Let's Run folks, now gets a free pass because ... why exactly?

I realize that the NY Times has higher standards than Let's Run. But if you're going to call them out, then it's fair to ask the same of you.

You and ???????? hit the nail right on the head....but now rojo will be forced to delete this thread because he has been busted, which will only further validate your point.

SomeActualData wrote:

Good catch.

But Let's Run is no different.

The thread on David Pascal, the chiropractor who claimed to have won the 1983 World Games 1500m, but who didn't, was just deleted (thread #3813475).

There wasn't anything offensive on that thread, certainly not compared to others that are still up.

So someone who lies about their accomplishments and gets caught by Let's Run folks, now gets a free pass because ... why exactly?

I realize that the NY Times has higher standards than Let's Run. But if you're going to call them out, then it's fair to ask the same of you.

Same thing with Kimbia. Anytime any thread mentions the past of Uta and Deiter it is deleted.

A bump just to see if rojo has any serious replies to serious responses...

refering to the Haile retirement who said what and politics at home.

Fat and happy wrote:

Do you mean this Jos Hermens??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos_Hermens

dd wrote:

A bump just to see if rojo has any serious replies to serious responses...

Thanks. There could be a good reason for deleting that thread and, if so, I'd be happy to hear it. My question was an honest one, and I'm open to the possibility that there's a good answer.

Has there ever been any explanation on Let's Run for what, in general terms, gets a thread deleted? The NY Times at least has an editorial policy, though they seem to have not followed it in this case.

Another forum that I post on has a "Transparent Moderation Thread" where the mods explain their acts and give transparency to deletion, bannings, etc. It's a nice idea.

The Answer Is Here wrote:

Another forum that I post on has a "Transparent Moderation Thread" where the mods explain their acts and give transparency to deletion, bannings, etc. It's a nice idea.

That would be a cool thing to have on Let's Run. It wouldn't have to handle everything that gets deleted, but it would at least centralize the discussion and give participants some idea of what the ground rules are.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you Rojo. The NYTs mentions this website more than any other major national newspaper. Don't get them angry now....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/sports/03runner.html?scp=1&sq=letsrun.com&st=cse

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/get-fooled-again-april-fools-day-classics/?scp=2&sq=letsrun.com&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/health/nutrition/24Best.html?scp=3&sq=letsrun.com&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/05/sports/marathon-khannouchi-withdraws-from-the-olympic-trials.html?scp=5&sq=letsrun.com&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/health/nutrition/26best.html?scp=7&sq=letsrun.com&st=cse

Plus a column is different than a straight news piece or feature. Columnist are not considered journalists and are not allowed for the most part to write news articles. As such they have room to do things that would never past muster in the actual articles. I challenge you to find a comparable example that is not in an opinion piece. Sure you can find early versions of articles which are later edited but that is because new information is reported. You are using this example from an opinion piece to malign the sports reporting? That is not fair.

asdfghkv wrote:

NYT has always had shoddy reporting on sports-related things. I can't stand it when they periodically write an article on some new revolutionary discovery that will change training as we know it, which in reality is an interview with one nutjob exercise physiologist who has a half-brained idea contrary to most of the field, not to mention coaches in the sport. Remember the "cooldowns are unnessecary" article?

This is what I was thinking, from the start of reading Rojo's post.

Oh please. Do you mean this article?http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/15/health/nutrition/15best.html?scp=2&sq=cooldowns&st=cseI don't think it says what you think it does. Read it again. Very reasonable.

asdfghkv wrote:

NYT has always had shoddy reporting on sports-related things. I can't stand it when they periodically write an article on some new revolutionary discovery that will change training as we know it, which in reality is an interview with one nutjob exercise physiologist who has a half-brained idea contrary to most of the field, not to mention coaches in the sport. Remember the "cooldowns are unnessecary" article?

Animal Pharm wrote:

Don't bite the hand that feeds you Rojo. The NYTs mentions this website more than any other major national newspaper.

Any organization that would welcome me as a member is not an organization I want to be a part of!!!