Boston Dad may have some explaining to do to his son

[turd ferguson]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

[ian]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

They certainly did. The only thing that will likely keep them from being sued is that they're probably right. It will be interesting to see what kind of fallout will result from the inevitable future scenario where an internet witchhunt snags an honest runner.

One problem I have with their article could also put their $10,000 at risk: comparing various race times statistically with the assumption that they were all run at maximum effort and with identical fitness. Most runners, particularly those who are trying to qualify for Boston for the first time, improve dramatically over the course of a training cycle, therefore there's only so much that a 5K in April can tell me about how fast someone can run a marathon in September. As a result, assuming that this guy was only a 3:45 marathoner at the end of last year and is not currently injured, it would be quite possible to improve to the 3:25 level with an extended cycle of solid training.

[La]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

They certainly did. The only thing that will likely keep them from being sued is that they're probably right. It will be interesting to see what kind of fallout will result from the inevitable future scenario where an internet witchhunt snags an honest runner.

One problem I have with their article could also put their $10,000 at risk: comparing various race times statistically with the assumption that they were all run at maximum effort and with identical fitness. Most runners, particularly those who are trying to qualify for Boston for the first time, improve dramatically over the course of a training cycle, therefore there's only so much that a 5K in April can tell me about how fast someone can run a marathon in September. As a result, assuming that this guy was only a 3:45 marathoner at the end of last year and is not currently injured, it would be quite possible to improve to the 3:25 level with an extended cycle of solid training.

Well, at least he would have then proven worthy of his place in Boston, even though he would have run his qualifying race after his Boston Marathon.

[Dstew]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

That is about the only good thing I can say about them and the article dripping with self righteous sanctimony.

I found the reaction of the original race founder to be interesting and informative:

Bart Yasso, who founded the race and then gave it to Via, for comment on the Rossi situation, he summed up the situation very well, “I have the same statement for everybody when they ask me. ‘The people at Via, their job is to work with the disabled citizens of the Lehigh Valley. I don’t want them wasting time on Mike Rossi.'”

They defend, rationalization and justify this continued crusade by saying that they are the only true defenders of the integrity of the sport. This is almost laughable because on their dimension, the semi official line between running and jogging is a 7:00 mile or roughly a 3 hour marathon and had Rossi gone onto the site and bragged about his 3:11 time, I am sure more then a few would have dismissed this as the merger accomplishment of a field filler.

The guy has been publicly shamed, driven off the social media and his "accomplishment" and reputation in tatters and yet like a dog with a bone, they cannot let it go. I suppose they are really no different then any other set of religious fanatics on a holy crusade.

[jonovision_man]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

That is about the only good thing I can say about them and the article dripping with self righteous sanctimony.

I found the reaction of the original race founder to be interesting and informative:

Bart Yasso, who founded the race and then gave it to Via, for comment on the Rossi situation, he summed up the situation very well, “I have the same statement for everybody when they ask me. ‘The people at Via, their job is to work with the disabled citizens of the Lehigh Valley. I don’t want them wasting time on Mike Rossi.'”

They defend, rationalization and justify this continued crusade by saying that they are the only true defenders of the integrity of the sport. This is almost laughable because on their dimension, the semi official line between running and jogging is a 7:00 mile or roughly a 3 hour marathon and had Rossi gone onto the site and bragged about his 3:11 time, I am sure more then a few would have dismissed this as the merger accomplishment of a field filler.

The guy has been publicly shamed, driven off the social media and his "accomplishment" and reputation in tatters and yet like a dog with a bone, they cannot let it go. I suppose they are really no different then any other set of religious fanatics on a holy crusade.

I was surprised this story was still going, seems like it should have "run its course" by now (pun partially intended).

Makes for good forum fodder and I'll bet their story got a lot of clicks, so LetsRun wins the internet.

jono

[HCcD]

They have now increased the ante if he runs a 3:11:45 ...

http://runningmagazine.ca/letsrun-offer ... run-31145/

[Dstew]

I am starting to feel very sad for those at Lets Run. Good on them to uncover how someone cheated their way into Boston. They have driven a self absorbed narcissist off social media and can there be any greater punishment then that? I suspect he will never enter any other road races. But now, psychotic stalkers who have restraining orders against them are starting to say that Lets Run really does just need to let this obsession go. Bert Yasso has told them that this was a charity event and so to protect the integrity of the "sport" would take away money from the real reason for many such races, the charities.

On a personal note, I had lost track of the fact that this is a nice hobby. It motivated me to run faster, further and more frequently. I got to go to Boston, to stand on a podium a number of times and collect some nice medals and awards but cut through everything and it is a hobby. I do approve, condone or even understand cheating because this is a voluntary hobby but on the other hand, I do appreciate why race organizers do not want to do much more then they are doing. They are probably more worried about how can we justify closing down major streets and so the charity aspect is as good a reason as any. So their limited time and resources are going towards that or to attract more star power. How much time and effort is required to stop a few morons from cheating and in the end, accomplishing nothing? But like Lets Run, I lost focus on the reality and was enchanted by the illusion. The result for me is a permanently damaged back. For them, this is clearly gnawing at their very souls and so I feel sorry for them.

[drghfx]

I find it hard to believe that a shiny finisher's medal is some people's motivation.

Also, the last time I was in San Antonio, I noted that she put herself down for a marathon time in her own race. But I knew she had spent the day in the starting area and not on course.

I know years ago the Co-race organizer for the Bluenose Marathon in Halifax would run the course the night before the race to double-check everything and to "run" his own marathon. Perhaps that is what this woman did.

[canalrunner]

:) That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000

I'll say this, they put their money where their mouth is. No mealy mouthed "questions are being raised...nobody knows for sure" journalism speak in that article.

They certainly did. The only thing that will likely keep them from being sued is that they're probably right. It will be interesting to see what kind of fallout will result from the inevitable future scenario where an internet witchhunt snags an honest runner.

One problem I have with their article could also put their $10,000 at risk: comparing various race times statistically with the assumption that they were all run at maximum effort and with identical fitness. Most runners, particularly those who are trying to qualify for Boston for the first time, improve dramatically over the course of a training cycle, therefore there's only so much that a 5K in April can tell me about how fast someone can run a marathon in September. As a result, assuming that this guy was only a 3:45 marathoner at the end of last year and is not currently injured, it would be quite possible to improve to the 3:25 level with an extended cycle of solid training.

Well, at least he would have then proven worthy of his place in Boston, even though he would have run his qualifying race after his Boston Marathon.

I am about done with the story. At some point, I wish he would just tell the truth. That might be tougher than a BQ. Interestingly the LetsRun challenge is not to match his claimed qualifying time of 3:11 but 3:25 and everyone who has run around that time knows those are tough minutes to find so I would see this as a rather generous offer, and one that could be reachable if he is a 3:45 marathoner. Maybe a way to collect some dignity for him (still wouldn't believe he ran 3:11) Just to come full circle on this story. When I ran Boston, I took my kids out of school to watch because it is such an event and was so meaningful to me that I wanted to share. Interestly when I qualified I went from a 3:45 marathon to a 3:21 marathon in six months (Please unleash the LetsRun dogs of war to verify my BQ) Didn't get a note from the school but would have also understood why they'd send it. Still wonder why he decided pompous was the best course of action and what he is now telling his kids. I don't feel sorry for him, I do feel sorry for his kids. To Boston Dad, I say: Train seriously. Lose the Flashdance-Jazz Hands running outfit, get the $10k and have something to show your kids before they actually start learning math at school and figure out for themselves what you did and did not do.

[Robinandamelia]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy training; $10,000 if he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

[canalrunner]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy training; $10,000 if he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

I think the $100K is safe, but he would have a reasonable shot at a sub 20 min 5k or 3:25 marathon. I'd be happy to run with him to either of the last two goals (and have a side wager that I could beat him to the line) Not sure a 3:11 is now reachable for me...even if there was $100k on the line.

[HCcD]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

A perfecr reality tv show, perhaps? Just to prove that it is possible to achieve ??

[canalrunner]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

And I think it should be retroactive--cheque please:

2005-05-29
ING Ottawa Marathon
MARK WIGMORE
03:21:52

2004-09-26
Scotiabank Toronto Waterfront Marathon
Marathon Results
Mark Wigmore
03:52:28

[Jwolf]

There are a lot of examples of people making large improvements in relatively short periods of time. But that is not the only evidence they are using to make their accusation. Yes they could be wrong.

[canalrunner]

There are a lot of examples of people making large improvements in relatively short periods of time. But that is not the only evidence they are using to make their accusation. Yes they could be wrong.

Oh, I don't think they are wrong. I think he cheated. No doubt in my mind. A couple of those goals would be doable (the $10K goals) and could create a false illusion that he didn't. I don't think he would come anywhere near repeating a 3:11 marathon within a year. Be very surprised if he is still running....at least in races.

[Dstew]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

And I think it should be retroactive--cheque please:

2005-05-29
ING Ottawa Marathon
MARK WIGMORE
03:21:52

2004-09-26
Scotiabank Toronto Waterfront Marathon
Marathon Results
Mark Wigmore
03:52:28

July 11, 2004 3:57:58

July 10, 2005 3:16:59


Both at the Calgary Marathon

And the improvement was due to doing long runs when I was not playing golf twice a weekend and so had a total of 3 X 30 K runs and 1 X 40 K run and no training plan to speak of other then run 2 or 3 times a week doing 5 - 9.5 K to averaging 50 K a week for a couple of months. I know that back then when I was on Runners World and Lets Run, what I did was impossible according to them. So there challenges are based upon their twisted world view that a "cheater" or anyone else could not make the sort of improvement they are willing to pay for. When one thinks about it, a very dumb thing to do for although the proof of the cheating would seem to overwhelming, if the accused accepts the challenge and wins the $10,000, then are is Lets Run basically saying that they may be wrong? I suppose I really do not get what they are doing or what they think they are proving other then their own insanity and OCD tendencies.

[canalrunner]

When one thinks about it, a very dumb thing to do for although the proof of the cheating would seem to overwhelming, if the accused accepts the challenge and wins the $10,000, then are is Lets Run basically saying that they may be wrong? I suppose I really do not get what they are doing or what they think they are proving other then their own insanity and OCD tendencies.

Agreed. Weird challenge. For me, only another run around the same 3:11 time would work. Would LetsRun issue an apology along with their $10K? or Would it be here is your $10K but we still think..... He would end up richer but still a no man's land of doubt, I think.

BTW Dstew that is an awesome drop in time. Other big drop in times are between first and second marathons since training and understanding rises exponentially. Think I went from a 4:13 first marathon to a 3:25 second back in the middle ages. (once again, unleash the LetsRun dogs of war)

[turd ferguson]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

And I think it should be retroactive--cheque please:

2005-05-29
ING Ottawa Marathon
MARK WIGMORE
03:21:52

2004-09-26
Scotiabank Toronto Waterfront Marathon
Marathon Results
Mark Wigmore
03:52:28

July 11, 2004 3:57:58

July 10, 2005 3:16:59


Both at the Calgary Marathon

And the improvement was due to doing long runs when I was not playing golf twice a weekend and so had a total of 3 X 30 K runs and 1 X 40 K run and no training plan to speak of other then run 2 or 3 times a week doing 5 - 9.5 K to averaging 50 K a week for a couple of months. I know that back then when I was on Runners World and Lets Run, what I did was impossible according to them. So there challenges are based upon their twisted world view that a "cheater" or anyone else could not make the sort of improvement they are willing to pay for. When one thinks about it, a very dumb thing to do for although the proof of the cheating would seem to overwhelming, if the accused accepts the challenge and wins the $10,000, then are is Lets Run basically saying that they may be wrong? I suppose I really do not get what they are doing or what they think they are proving other then their own insanity and OCD tendencies.

If you had gone from 3:57 to 3:16 and in a race of 100 people there were multiple photos of every racer except you on the course and you had literally no other races in your race history which indicated you were capable of running anywhere near 3:16, then we're talking apples and apples.

And even then, nobody would care if you did cheat, because you aren't a social media whore like this guy.

[jonovision_man]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

A perfecr reality tv show, perhaps? Just to prove that it is possible to achieve ??

Absolutely! This guy should cash in on a reality show that follows him as he trains to try to bag that $100,000. The only thing standing between him being just an internet whore and not a TV whore with a paycheque is hiring the right agent!

jono

[canalrunner]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

A perfecr reality tv show, perhaps? Just to prove that it is possible to achieve ??

Absolutely! This guy should cash in on a reality show that follows him as he trains to try to bag that $100,000. The only thing standing between him being just an internet whore and not a TV whore with a paycheque is hiring the right agent!

jono

Throw in a Kardashian and I think there is a hit. Perhaps have Alberto Salazar train him. What would the series be called "Run Boston Dad Run" ? Redemption Run? Cheat Once, Run Twice?

[turd ferguson]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

A perfecr reality tv show, perhaps? Just to prove that it is possible to achieve ??

Absolutely! This guy should cash in on a reality show that follows him as he trains to try to bag that $100,000. The only thing standing between him being just an internet whore and not a TV whore with a paycheque is hiring the right agent!

jono

Throw in a Kardashian and I think there is a hit. Perhaps have Alberto Salazar train him. What would the series be called "Run Boston Dad Run" ? Redemption Run? Cheat Once, Run Twice?

Maybe Jeans Marines could sponsor him?

[canalrunner]

Maybe Jeans Marines could sponsor him?

I like your thinking. Maybe have him the new spokesperson for Cheetah sports drink (sorry Ben). Am sure Nike would be all over it. And perhaps Coke and Bud Light Lime now that they may have detected a wee bit of ethical challenges in FIFA soccer---their risk tolerance seems high.

[Dstew]

$100,000 if he runs a 3:11:45 man I'd be doing some heavy trainiopportunityif he runs a 3:25 or a variety of other times for shorter distances....

Dead horse or not, that's a lot of cash

http://www.runnersworld.com/general-int ... 9815486986

Think that anybody currently at a legitimate 3:45:xx marathon should be given a similar opportunity for this $100,000 / $10,000 Challenge by Let's Run.

And I think it should be retroactive--cheque please:

2005-05-29
ING Ottawa Marathon
MARK WIGMORE
03:21:52

2004-09-26
Scotiabank Toronto Waterfront Marathon
Marathon Results
Mark Wigmore
03:52:28

July 11, 2004 3:57:58

July 10, 2005 3:16:59


Both at the Calgary Marathon

And the improvement was due to doing long runs when I was not playing golf twice a weekend and so had a total of 3 X 30 K runs and 1 X 40 K run and no training plan to speak of other then run 2 or 3 times a week doing 5 - 9.5 K to averaging 50 K a week for a couple of months. I know that back then when I was on Runners World and Lets Run, what I did was impossible according to them. So there challenges are based upon their twisted world view that a "cheater" or anyone else could not make the sort of improvement they are willing to pay for. When one thinks about it, a very dumb thing to do for although the proof of the cheating would seem to overwhelming, if the accused accepts the challenge and wins the $10,000, then are is Lets Run basically saying that they may be wrong? I suppose I really do not get what they are doing or what they think they are proving other then their own insanity and OCD tendencies.

If you had gone from 3:57 to 3:16 and in a race of 100 people there were multiple photos of every racer except you on the course and you had literally no other races in your race history which indicated you were capable of running anywhere near 3:16, then we're talking apples and apples.

And even then, nobody would care if you did cheat, because you aren't a social media whore like this guy.

The story of me qualifying for Boston was actually published in a book Canadian Marathon Stories so I did attempt to whore myself out but it just back then, other then some fellow runners and friends and family, no one cared.


If I was the guy, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind I would go for the sub 20 minute 5 K mark. In 2004, I was close, did it twice and eased up because I had such a lead over the third place guy but beaten by over a kilometer in a 5 K race that I eased up rather then do it a third time. I have run a 1:29 half marathon as well and of all my accomplishments, the sub 20 minute mark was the easiest by far. Most of that training was inside on a treadmill or a 200 meter track. The workout I believe was responsible was doing 1 K repeats at less then 4 minutes per kilometer X 5 and with enough rest in between that I could maintain such a pace. Again, I have zero idea why they thought making such a challenge was a good idea. I ran a 19:39 5 K and according to McMillian, I should have been in theory able to run 3:11. But in my heart of hearts, I had just about perfect training for me, a perfectly run race where the adrenaline of knowing I was going to qualify for Boston had me speed up in the last 10 K and so literally anything quicker would have been a pipe dream. When I attempted to add mileage, I ended up with a stress fracture and that started me down a long and nasty road of chronic and rotating injuries I cannot leave. And I should add, the year I broke the 20 minute mark was the year I just ran the marathon in under 4 hours and so even further proof being able to run a short race fast may not translate into anything. It would seem there is little doubt he cheated but in their arrogance, Lets Run is just about offering this guy a get out of jail card and to have egg on their face. So why not cash in as he was doing something like this for free before, why not do it for money now. If I were a good coach who also needed some publicity, why not offer the services for free.

[canalrunner]

The story of me qualifying for Boston was actually published in a book Canadian Marathon Stories so I did attempt to whore myself out but it just back then, other then some fellow runners and friends and family, no one cared.


If I was the guy, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind I would go for the sub 20 minute 5 K mark. In 2004, I was close, did it twice and eased up because I had such a lead over the third place guy but beaten by over a kilometer in a 5 K race that I eased up rather then do it a third time. I have run a 1:29 half marathon as well and of all my accomplishments, the sub 20 minute mark was the easiest by far. Most of that training was inside on a treadmill or a 200 meter track. The workout I believe was responsible was doing 1 K repeats at less then 4 minutes per kilometer X 5 and with enough rest in between that I could maintain such a pace. Again, I have zero idea why they thought making such a challenge was a good idea. I ran a 19:39 5 K and according to McMillian, I should have been in theory able to run 3:11. But in my heart of hearts, I had just about perfect training for me, a perfectly run race where the adrenaline of knowing I was going to qualify for Boston had me speed up in the last 10 K and so literally anything quicker would have been a pipe dream. When I attempted to add mileage, I ended up with a stress fracture and that started me down a long and nasty road of chronic and rotating injuries I cannot leave. And I should add, the year I broke the 20 minute mark was the year I just ran the marathon in under 4 hours and so even further proof being able to run a short race fast may not translate into anything. It would seem there is little doubt he cheated but in their arrogance, Lets Run is just about offering this guy a get out of jail card and to have egg on their face. So why not cash in as he was doing something like this for free before, why not do it for money now. If I were a good coach who also needed some publicity, why not offer the services for free.

Agree sub 20 5k is likely softest target. And when he breaks it, he donates the $10k to a Boston charity, once again regaining his moral high ground made of sand and deception. Parlays the Get out of Jail free card, into Free Parking. Likely overplayed by LetsRun.

[ian]

While we're in agreement that it might not be prohibitively difficult to meet the LR challenge, I would still be surprised to see anything come of this on account of:
(1) Rossi wanting to keep a low profile and avoid having another round of shame stories circulating.
(2) Additional strings attached to the challenge should it ever get serious (e.g., sign a contract, run with a LR pacer, submit to drug testing, etc.)