Frank Meza 2:53:10 at LA Marathon (70 years old) unofficial time (just finished)

Running Programmer wrote:

I wanted to re-share this since it immediately got overrun by the new LA Times article. I'm considering making a new thread just for this because this thread is a hot mess.

Hi, sorry it took so long for me to respond. Just tried it and it works great thanks. Only limited to finisherpix though, so can't seem to access some marathon photos.

Great job and thank you nonetheless.

I didn't see anyone stepping up to defend Dr. Meza in the latest article.

run with an observer wrote:

I don't understand why LA Marathon is offering him to run with an observer again. You already know he can't run that kind of time for a marathon. He was offered an observer for 2016 for his cheating in 2015. Will history repeat itself? He'll make/find an excuse to not run LA Marathon in 2020, run in 2021 2022 2023 while setting cheating records and tell people that he thought the observer was only offered for 2020.

Reminds me of the saying, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

It seems he is completely unable to stop himself. It's some kind of addiction. I really hope he stops cheating, but I wonder if he dodges LAM and goes to a smaller marathon this year, where he isn't being closely watched. I hope he doesn't enter his 80s by skulking around on street corners, waiting to jump into races. That would be really sad.

The Washington Post has picked up the story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/07/02/year-old-shattered-an-age-group-record-los-angeles-marathon-says-he-cheated/?utm_term=.def928b7d250

Washington Post has picked it up wrote:

The Washington Post has picked up the story

I like the ambiguity of Meza's final say : "It's not fun any more"

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

[quote]Washington Post has picked it up wrote:

The Washington Post has picked up the story

The Washington Post story (by Matt Bonesteel) gives Meza a bit less of a pass than previous articles.

Going international?

https://m.europapress.es/deportes/noticia-descalifican-veterano-corredor-frank-meza-posibles-trampas-angeles-20190702113934.html

Send these directly to the LA Times.

Those pix of the backtracking (and the pacing irregularity) are amazing - they should be shared with LA Times and Wash Post immediately given FM's continued denial.

He should stop denying and go with the "Fake News" defense!

Story going national tonight/tomorrow.

Will share more when I can.

Coast To Coast Coverage wrote:

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

[quote]Washington Post has picked it up wrote:

The Washington Post has picked up the story

The Washington Post story (by Matt Bonesteel) gives Meza a bit less of a pass than previous articles.

I like the wording from the Washington Post. ‘Cheated’ instead of alleged cheated, ‘skip’ 2016 instead of finding some excuse like running with a phantom alumni in Oakland!

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

Washington Post has picked it up wrote:

The Washington Post has picked up the story

I like the ambiguity of Meza's final say : "It's not fun any more"

Let me help you with that.

‘It’s not fun anymore because I got caught cheating.’

doubler wrote:

Part of me wants to stop writing about him. I want him to admit that he cheated at every race. Then, what purpose would further investigation serve?

Now, it’s like he’s just begging for this additional evidence to be publicized.

His most unbelievable result was LA 2015, and now there’s photos of him running in the wrong direction along the side of the course.

Frankly, his delusion is overriding any sense of rationale judgement or he's just plain goading. Regardless, he keeps doubling down on this idea that he's going to prove everyone wrong now at LA 2020. Delusional or just plain stupid. And he got caught in another lie: last week was going to run chicago but cant now because of his heart condition and his running days are over till now he's running LA 2020 to prove everyone wrong. what an ass he is?

Wow!

Derek, please include deadesq in the Marathoninvestigation.com health and 401k plans immediately.

Last call for FM to capitulate ....

Dan Patrick is talking about it on his show now.

Washington Post has picked it up wrote:

The Washington Post has picked up the story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/07/02/year-old-shattered-an-age-group-record-los-angeles-marathon-says-he-cheated/?utm_term=.def928b7d250

Now that's a better headline (not great but better than the LA Times) Also don't blame the writer: most often, headlines are written by editors and, or others who may or may not know the details). Nevertheless, Washington Post is more important.

Think I'll buy some Gu on Amazon.com.

LA Times ran the first Wharton piece in Spanish.

https://www.latimes.com/espanol/deportes/la-es-es-este-corredor-de-maraton-de-70-anos-de-edad-de-east-l-a-un-creador-de-records-o-un-tramposo-20190622-story.html

I am trying to see if La Opinion ( Spanish language newspaper) is covering it.

The Spanish version frames it as a question.

Is he an extraordinary runner or a cheater(tramposo)? It's one or the other.

run with an observer wrote:

I don't understand why LA Marathon is offering him to run with an observer again. You already know he can't run that kind of time for a marathon. He was offered an observer for 2016 for his cheating in 2015. Will history repeat itself? He'll make/find an excuse to not run LA Marathon in 2020, run in 2021 2022 2023 while setting cheating records and tell people that he thought the observer was only offered for 2020.

Reminds me of the saying, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Agreed. The problem with the offer to run with an observer is that he already cheated, and LA Marathon officials already gathered enough evidence to disqualify him. It's not like they said, well, it looks like you PROBABLY cheated, so we'll DQ you just to be on the safe side. If there was any doubt, they wouldn't have DQ'd him. So nothing he could possibly accomplish in the future with an observer could negate the fact that he already cheated.

What they're doing would be like if a person was caught shoplifting and claimed he didn't do it. A trial was held, where it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (security footage, eyewitnesses, etc) that he indeed shoplifted. Then after all that, the authorities suggest he walk through a department store with an observer who would make sure that he didn't steal anything. What would that prove?

It's, like, a pretty solid rule regarding the direction of time and the nature of causality, that past events certainly affect the future, but future events can't change the past.