mileage_man wrote:
I'm excited that LRC has finally published its Mike Rossi article.
careful you don't cream your panties sweetie
mileage_man wrote:
I'm excited that LRC has finally published its Mike Rossi article.
careful you don't cream your panties sweetie
Brojos made a mistake not putting any more tes on the 5k offer. How many 5ks have intermediate timing mats? He can cheat at a rinky dink 5k and post the results after the fact and stake claim to the 10 grand.
It's possible that his sub 20 might win and it would be awesome to see him busted cheating a 5k to get the money. That would be awesome.
careful sweetie wrote:
mileage_man wrote:I'm excited that LRC has finally published its Mike Rossi article.
careful you don't cream your panties sweetie
I've got a hard on and I'm only half way through reading it.
Straight from the article:
"Mike Rossi like all of is a human who makes mistakes..."
So true, so true. I got a kick out of that.
Overall, great article! Rossi is a fraud, as we already knew.
Insured Runner wrote:
RossiCheated wrote:They would have to pay him. This is essentially contractual. If he meets his end of the deal, they have to pay him (very much like a hole-in-one contest or half court basketball shot). It would be an open and shut lawsuit otherwise.
I would not have offered the money for any distance under ten miles, but it ain't my money, so game on!
Not to get this off-topic, but hole-in-one events are usually insured events. The company putting them on doesn't pay $1,000,000 or give away a new car if someone gets a hole-in-one. They purchase a one time insurance policy, if someone wins, the policy pays.
http://www.holeinoneinsurance.com/other-contests.html
I am guessing Brojos didn't do that.
It is a unilateral contract, and the terms are pretty clear.
Rossi can accept the offer by performing in time and the Brojos cannot rescind without paying him some money.
While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.
Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.
He'll probably figure out that he needs to use this to alter his data:
Actually, I've probably read all 10,000 posts. Don't turn this into a pissing match. Piss on Mike Rossi.
Mileage man, would you contact me?
erik@letsrun.comI'd be interested if you could share the data with me (and a short synopsis of your methods)? It might be fun to spend a couple spare hours to make some data visualizations using R/Shiny or even just some graphics to show how unlikely it is that he'd never be photographed, etc.
I tried to look through the thread but it's too overwhelming.
Thanks if you see this.
dddffffggg wrote:
While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.
Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.
Please enlighten us with how these few circumstantial points can be easily explained away!!! I hope he's innocent, but couldn't come up with how he possibly could be.
dddffffggg wrote:
Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.
You're right. The onus is on the accusers (the prosecution) and we have done our job. He cheated. We rest.
Now the defense gets a turn.
He can sue any number of people if he feels that he has so unjustly been called a cheat. The ball is in his court.
He is not the victim. He has not been wronged. He is a cheat.
RossiCheated wrote:
You're right. The onus is on the accusers (the prosecution) and we have done our job.
Kangaroo courts don't count.
Hi Mike!
Busy night for you?
Ya, a prize structure should have been made.
1k for sub 20
Another 2k if you can hold 3:11 marathon pace for 10k
5k for a 1/2 marathon at 3:11 pace
10k for a sub 3:15 marathon.
Of course there would need to be a documented witness. But it's not my money... BroJos have balls throwing that out there for a 5k. Good for them.
sanchobaile wrote:
I read the whole thing.. super interesting. nice job.
my only concern is the offer of $10k for breaking 20 in the 5k. I've run lots of races in the same neighborhood as Rossi's times (1:40 hm, 21xx 5ks), and if $10k was on the line, I'm pretty sure I could train specifically to break 20 in the 5k. The others would be more difficult. But I'm also very lazy with training and more naturally speedy (5:14 mile), which Rossi may not be, so I could be wrong.
You could probably break 20 minute s any day of the week.
1 mile 5:15. 2nd mile 8:00 (with some fast walking breaks) 3rd mile 6:00 (~19:15) crank out a sub 45 last 200 m and you are golden. And change your name to Mike Rossi.
bkrunner wrote:
http://www.letsrun.com/news/2015/05/the-evidence-is-overwhelming-mike-rossi-the-viral-marathon-dad-is-a-marathon-cheat-and-should-never-have-been-on-the-starting-line-in-boston/
Mods -- Can this thread be added to the 11K and counting Mike Rossi thread? It will help towards the goal of 20K.
I don't think Mike will try to attempt the 5k time as there's too much at risk if he doesn't make it. He has claimed that his previous 5ks were easy runs or jogging efforts, so if he tries to go all out but falls short and runs something like 20:15 - then the risk of humiliation is going to be too great.
Great article. Way to call out a cheat. If I was on the jury, the is no reasonable doubt in this case.
I do think if he really put the hammer down the next 12 months, a 3:25 marathon would be easy for him. I missed his age and weight, but he's got some to lose. $10K is a big incentive. However, if he loses weight, trains like a maniac and runs a 3:22, then he is basically showing that his 3:11 is bogus. Either way Letsrun wins. I'm pretty sure they can spare $10K, plus the publicity they get will actually net them a profit. Very clever LR.
The absence of any photos, combined with the presence of photos for everyone else in the race and his clearly inferior times at other races, really makes the case ably. But for this category of runner, it is entirely possible to make a huge and inexplicable drop in a marathon time, because none of them train very hard normally to run 3:40s and high 21s. It would take just one four month block of 80-100 mpw for one of these plodding 30-40 mpw runners to drop a ton of time, and they could easily do that without racing faster than goal MP during that time. However, there's no chance whatsoever that this guy did that.
Also, regarding the proof of a negative: you chose the wrong one:
George Washington died in 1799, while television wasn't invented until the 1920s. Therefore, George Washington could not possibly have watched television. Look: I just proved a negative.
fine article wrote:
It's a fine article, a bit long though. But my real question is: who effing cares? This dude probably cheated, what's it to you? I thought this was a sport about personal accomplishment. Was someone out of the money because of this? Did someone miss out on Boston because of this? Or could it be jealousy of the attention he got as a Boston runner?
^^^^ Hobby jogger ^^^^