Sad News: Frank Meza Found Dead In LA River

The damage would have been minimal in terms of its depth and reach. He’s retired, so not much impact professionally. Non-runners (the VAST majority) neither understand nor care.

Most people are able to understand that we all have flaws and this was Frank’s. In contrast to some, really relatively minor, even if a rather odd compulsion and unfair to the likes of Mr. Whitlock.

It pains me that Frank couldn’t see past how easily he could put this behind him. He could have enjoyed another 2 decades probably.

Given that his work started in the 1970’s, yes, I am that naive to think things did not shake out the way you say.

The scrubbing makes sense as pressure mounted about the legitimacy of the claims. Of course the school would not want to promote potential lies on their website. I’m sure they got dragged into this as well.

Dropping the assistant coach altogether is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Not saying that is or is not what happened - but I am saying I wouldn’t leap to that conclusion. Plenty of people have made mistakes in their personal lives and still have their jobs.

I’m keeping an open mind here - the outcome was tragic, regardless.

Who here actually believe's that Dr Meza had a genuine heart condition?

Even as the controversy over his LA Marathon time was swirling, Frank Meza faced additional pressure from a newly developed health issue, his family disclosed.

It arose, they said, even as he was planning to debunk the skepticism over his sub-three hour marathons by inviting a chaperon and video camera to accompany him in his next race.

But during a training run in May in Debs park with his daughter-in-law, he began perspiring excessively, his heart racing, and he called to her, she said. He got off the trail with difficulty, and later was diagnosed with a ruptured chordae tending, a connective tissue in the heart.

He faced open-heart surgery, and the likelihood his athletic level of cardiovascular conditioning would never return, said Tina Meza. A sub-three hour marathon to disarm his detractors would be out of the question.

Or is it more likely that when faced with the option of "running with an observer" in 2020, he manufactured a health condition? Perhaps this story is actually what happens when Frank finds himself running with an observer, his daughter-in-law. They're running together and she notices how hard he's having to work to keep up with her, she thinks - "Dr Meza, world record marathon runner is perspiring excessively running with me"? Of course, being a part of a family of Doctors, this deception if true would have to be carried out fully with a fake Dr or hospital visit, but Dr Meza after all has manufactured a decade of running lies, what's another lie.

Of course, this is all pure speculation on my part, based on Dr. Meza's frequency of fabricating tall tales. Would the full autopsy report rule out the existence of "a ruptured chordae tending"? Seems like if they are trying to determine if Dr Meza jumped or was sitting on the bridge and his heart gave out, they would examine his heart health. Anyways, if there are any investigative reporter types reading this, it would provide quite an addition to the story if the autopsy report says Dr Meza's heart was completely healthy with no signs of a ruptured chordae tending.

But suppose it's true, he actually did have a ruptured chordae tending. Why was he allowed by his medical doctor wife to go out on a solo run? 70 year old facing open heart surgery is going out running on his own? Hmmm....

Thundergunner wrote:

I don’t disagree with any evidence, but not a whole lot celebrating the fact he was a talented runner. .

1) I haven't seen any evidence that he was a truly talented runner and by talented I mean national class.

2) But let's assume he was talented, what does that have to do with anything? Just because someone is a talented businessman, we don't praise them for that when they commit fraud.

Raysism wrote:

It's shocking how few people understand what the word "bullying" means. Even the worst of the LRC posts didn't constitute bullying.

Bingo. That was one of the points I made in an email to the author.

I spent about a half hour writing the author an email. Here is a CliffsNotes / edited version of what I wrote.

1) The whole article is written on a false premise that he might have actually run the times. He's not an accused cheat. He's a 3-time banned cheat. So starts with a false sympathetic emotion:

2) The article says that the bullying crossed the line but provide no proof of bullying.

Plus here is the definition of of bullying that I found to be bullying online:

The definition of bullying is when an individual or a group of people with more power, repeatedly and intentionally cause hurt or harm to another person or group of people who feel helpless to respond. Bullying can continue over time, is often hidden from adults, and will probably continue if no action is taken.

3) But let's just assume bullying existed and some combo of that and the publicity caused him to die - what percent of the blame (i'd say largely false blame) belongs to letsrun?

The reality is the thread about him existed for 4+ months and there was no suicide.

The article repeatedly focused on the role of letsrun but did not mention the major media outlets at all. It stated that letsrun had "done so much damage to Meza's reputation." For starters, I don't agree with that premise. I'd argue that Dr. Meza damaged his own reputation (When we talk about Trump's Access Hollywood, do people say, "The Washington Post damaged his reputation." No, they say Trump acted like a sexual predator and did it to himself).

But even if we accept the argument that the media damaged his reputation and in some way is responsible for his death, what percent of the blame belongs to LetsRun?

The reality is the suicide only occurred after the LA Times ran a piece which then resulted in people like Inside Edition knocking on his door and the Good Morning America hosts openly laughed at him. While huge in the running world, LetsRun is tiny in the real world. Having the hosts of Good Morning America laugh at you on the national morning show or showing up on the front page of Yahoo is much more damaging to your psyche than "bullying" on LRC

And yes, there are 6,000+ posts on him on letsrun but a single yahoo story on him got more than 2,500 in a matter of a few days. When you go viral, you go viral.

4) If Frank had confessed, this would have died down quickly. A few years ago Outside wrote a piece about Greg Price. He fessed up, and no one cared.

The reason why this story was so big is this guy not only didn't fess up, he kept doing it over and over and over. And did it to a world record.

Do I think the forum can be moderated better? Yes, of course.

Not when they commit fraud but usually when they die, there’s some looking back and positive things said.

Talented - I would think a sub-4 marathon in your 60s is something to be proud of. I would be surprised, based on what people said of him, if he couldn’t have been somewhere in the mid 3’s for a marathon and possibly a boston qualifier at some point. We’ll never know.

Nothing that deserved national attention, but something to be said for his dedication to the sport. I am no national-grade runner, but I hope running makes it into my eulogy... and I never founded a running club nor have coaching on my resume.

I’m focused more on the ‘sad news’ at this point and less on the ‘cheating scandal’. I thought that’s what this thread was about.

In other news, I do get part of the responses here are in defense of the cyberbullying accusation, which I agree - based on what I saw here, it was more discussion and confusion than anything. “Disgusting” is not a word I would have used if limited to just a description of the LRC thread.

This may be the first time (at least that I know of) someone involved in xc/track as a coach was DQ'ed for course cutting marathons

The "bullying" may have been the people going onto his doctor review sites and inserting negative comments and other things people may have done (i have no idea since i didn't start reading about this Frank guy until after his death)

While I do NOT blame MI and/or Derek Murphy for Meza's suicide; Murphy will have to decide how he is going to handle the reporting of cheating on his site. When does he just "rest his case?" After 10 stories? Until the cheater admits to cheating?

I know Derek found some more evidence, after this first stories, on here. So, for people on here, when will you "rest your case?"

After Derek posted pics of Meza on Echo Park Lake, I got curious as to how he might have cheated- as I know the area of the first 10 or so miles of the LA Marathon. Notice I said AREA, not the route. I looked at a map and figured out the fastest way for him to get to Echo Park Lake. Then on Hollywood Blvd. I didn't get around to posting it, then basically forgot about it, and then when I heard about his suicide, I just figured WTF is the point? But, I will admit ireading posts defending Meza used to get me upset, I mean the evidence is clear. But, it's not worth it to debate that anymore.

Again, I don't blame Murphy or this board, for Meza's suicide. Meza had many issues and he thought suicide was his only way out!

?upperdecker wrote:

The "bullying" may have been the people going onto his doctor review sites and inserting negative comments and other things people may have done (i have no idea since i didn't start reading about this Frank guy until after his death)

Someone on the thread said they left a negative review on a doctor review site, he was admonished not to do that by just about everyone else on the thread.

But even if we accept the argument that the media damaged his reputation and in some way is responsible for his death, what percent of the blame belongs to LetsRun?

I don't know, rojo. What is the acceptable answer here?

I still don't believe Meza confessing would have made any difference. Jane Seo admitted what she did but the story still ran its course. How does confessing to the obvious make any difference? If O.J had come clean after his acquittal, it wouldn't have changed anything.

greenliner wrote:

But even if we accept the argument that the media damaged his reputation and in some way is responsible for his death, what percent of the blame belongs to LetsRun?

I don't know, rojo. What is the acceptable answer here?

It wasn't LR who forced him to cheat. If he didn't cheat, what shame would there have been in the coverage to begin with? If his cheating was so small, how hard would it have been to explain to people? The media stories would have been his vindication since by his own statements, he didn't cheat at all. As noted, it was large, nonignorable and garnered media attention because of the depth of cheating and everyone really looking at the details were now convinced he wasn't deserving of the RW or Running times age group runner of the year and set many age-group records. He had cheated his way to it over and over again. So, if LR made him do all of that, then I guess they bear some culpability. If all they did was offer a forum for people to discuss/weigh the evidence of if he did or not, then they didn't.

As to thinking it wouldn't have gone away if he confessed. It might not have, however the story would have changed and maybe Dr. Meza's attitude about it would have as well. Rather than seeing it as something he had to still explain as legitimate, he could have simply noted it was a mistake and apologized. People have sympathy for Frank Meza now and would have even if he didn't pass away. I think that would have been the resounding theme.

As noted, anyone who goes back and read the entire thread (go and do it) is not going to see a list of posts shaming him. The majority is simply general inquiry and finding evidence in support and against potential cheating. People on here and in the media are still speculating about its veracity. Actually take the time to read it again then or otherwise you are simply creating a false narrative about what actually went on.

MikeMach1977 wrote:

As noted, anyone who goes back and read the entire thread (go and do it) is not going to see a list of posts shaming him.

Too much work for the ckickbait media to read the whole thread. Better to take someone else's (who also have not read the thread) word for it.

Elder abuse is also a possibility.

One of the family members said to the media something like you don’t understand, he’s fast. If you ran with him you’d understand.

My family thinks I’m fast too. I recently broke 3hrs for a marathon and I’m the “serious runner”/fastest by far in my family. So my family may think I can run sub2:30 on the basis of beating them all going on a run with them in the neighborhood, but I know there’s no way I can do that

I think we're getting to the "meta-analysis" stage in the stories coming out about Meza. These stories will try to explain "what it all means." The easiest, facile conclusion will be "cyber-bullying is bad."

In the case of this article, the author's truest statement is that he "generalized horribly" in his use of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty to essentially argue in favor of online censorship. Huber suggests that the only people hurt by a marathon cheat are those knocked out of a podium spot, glibly draws from a the two LA Times articles and a CNN story, quotes a couple of friends' tweets, and pulls a post from the last page of the Meza thread that "sums it all up." And there you have it: July 9 blog submission complete.

Hopefully, such "meta-commentators" in the future will actually read the thread -- and maybe, if they do read the thread, they might understand why even those people who weren't knocked from a podium spot might care about Meza's cheating. Personally, I think John Stewart Mill would approve of actually reading people's opinions before commentating on them.

That's story is the first I ever heard claiming that Meza said he was particularly distraught over the LR thread. Source?