[quote]Just finished a 64 mile run wrote:
I haven't ever logged or looked at GPS pace data, so take this as you will...
The sections in the really mountainous areas have some really suspect spikes in pace to me, especially when the grade adjusted pace is used (I don't know how accurate that adjusted pace is).
Turn on the GAP in the following run, and there appears to be a pattern. The spikes corresponding to outrageous adjusted paces are all going up steep hills after a steep downhill. However, the The spike in the GAP is not at the valley of the hills though, it's a noticeable amount up the steep hill. That seems like how a vehicle could coast, not a runner in my experience. The runner loses all momentum going back up hills like these after a few steps, not meters up a hill. And the runner's real pace would just drop.
Look at the one below. There's examples everywhere, but most egregiously, the GAP drops to 2:35 per mile going up a 21% grade after going down an 18% grade near the end of the run. But that GAP is ~1/3 up the way of that hill which looks like it would be ~100 meters long. Also note that the actual pace going down the hill is 5:00 to 5:10 per mile and ~5:15 going up the hill. There's no way IMO those paces would be so close together for a runner. Could a world class sprinter could run that fast up such a hill?
Is there any possibility the seemingly erroneous GPS data in the mountains is because of loss of/low signal in the valleys which are then caught back up at higher elevation?
Perhaps someone who frequently runs in places like this could attest to whether or not this is potentially valid?
(I'm not defending RY, because I'm 99.44% certain he cheated frequently in this, and even if this explained part of the seeming anomalies, the total average pace is still inconsistent with what has been observed.)[/quote]
This definitely not valid. Sorry.