LetsRun sleuths, did Chelsea Clinton really run NYC Marathon in 3:59:09 today under a fake name?

I fail to see why this is rubbing some people the wrong way, she certainly looks like she did some training in the photo and its not stretch to think a trained individual at her age could run under 4:00. The anon entry makes sense (look at the posts on here) - why make it easy for the idiots out there who might want to either harm her or draw attention to themselves - esp. when you think of the vitriol directed at her parents, heck - if one of Trump's family ran NYC I would expect them to do the exact same thing. Why take risks you don't have too? The fact she ran for a charity, like many others, and got to do her hometown marathon is a perfectly normal thing to want to do. I see only positives all around - good for her.

The fact that she felt compelled to run under a fake name shows how f'ed up human nature truly is. Too many people having mundane lives so they compensate to entertain themselves by obsessing over others and using them for their own source of entertainment.

Congrats to her. I’m a moderate, actually lean right, and this should have nothing to do with politics.

A sub 4 for a middle aged adult woman is solid. You can’t just do a few long runs and get it done. At least, most people can’t. NYC course isn’t exactly fast either.

It’s not a mind blowing time, but it’s very good.

Barack B. wrote:

If you haven't figured out that Democrat leaders play by different rules than everyone else by now, I don't know what to tell you...

Yours is probably the stupidest take humanly possible. It's the crazed morans on the right who won't shake their weird obsession with the Clintons. Normally I would think it's ridiculous for the daughter of a former politician to receive such treatment, but the heavily armed dimwits on the right make this continuously necessary.

Oh, please!

Enemy of the Podcast wrote:

Tracking + U.S. Secret Service, moran.

I agree that it was probably a USSS mandate that if she were to run, all possible safety protocols would be put in place. I also agree that if you're going to call someone a moron, you should probably spell it correctly so you do not also come off looking like a moron.

ghost of mike rossi wrote:

[quote]RW wrote:

Chelsea Clinton—3:59:09

I'm supposed to believe she averaged 9:07 per mile for a marathon? That seems fast to me. That's some real running.

Huh? A 3:59 marathon is not real running for a 41 year old female. But I would be impressed if Bill or Hilary did it.

This thread is fricken weird man. Why are you all obsessed with finding the details about her race?It's really creepy and it's justifying why they were secretive about it.

I wouldn't be surprised if this thread gets flagged by some government agency.

PutoLuto wrote: I also agree that if you're going to call someone a moron, you should probably spell it correctly so you do not also come off looking like a moron.

Your knew hear.

if you're going to call someone a moron, maybe be familiar with the site memes enough that you don't come off looking like a moran.

I always race under an alias. Some of us have a reason or more for not wanting to be named in the "official" results.

Considering the average nat'l time is four hours and twenty-something minutes, a sub-4 isn't that too far off.

I finished my first marathon in 3:54 and only trained to finish not to run fast. It's not that hard.

That's certainly an attainable result for a healthy 41-year-old woman who trains sufficiently, but was NYC her first marathon ? The photo with her parents casts a pall of suspicion over the whole thing because they are, well, her parents. Chicanery and shenanigans are old hat to them.

Remember how her mother allegedly parlayed $1,000 into $99,000 playing commodities futures ?

Calling Derek Murphy.

ghost of mike rossi wrote:

Ignorning the fact that I'd imagine running under a fake name is against USATF rules and worthy of a DQ, I'm having a hard time believing Ms. Clinton ran 3:59:09 today.

What a colossal loser you are.

juvie wrote:

Sub 4 is a legit effort and would have required a serious training block. I wonder if she trained principally on a treadmill indoors or if she trained outdoors which would have entailed some secret service accompaniment

It’s funny how everyone on here talks about how running sub-3 requires no talent and not that many miles, but when someone runs 3:59 people are in shock and talk about how much effort she’d have to put into it. So she must have cheated! 🙄

Sure, she’s a 40 year old woman, so change that sub-3 to 3:15 or 3:20. Point stands. For what it’s worth, I do think sub-4 takes some work, but it’s not that crazy for a somewhat fit woman to go 3:59 if there is some effort put in.

Not An Expert wrote:

ghost of mike rossi wrote:

Ignorning the fact that I'd imagine running under a fake name is against USATF rules and worthy of a DQ

Business leaders, politicians, celebrities—many of them run under pseudonyms, frequently coordinated with the race. Oftentimes they then have their name converted back after the fact. People who are being stalked also sometimes do the same (frequently minus the “converted back” part). This definitely doesn’t seem “worthy of a DQ” to me, especially if it was coordinated with NYRR (which it almost certainly was).

And if someone doesn't think that being a Clinton comes with "legit security concerns" you are kidding yourself.

For what it's worth, her name does come up on MarathonFoto- bib # 27996. No official results posted for this bib #, however.

I'm as anti Dem/Prog as you will find. I think they are the scourge of the earth and should be fought at every turn. They are currently the greatest threat to freedom and are likely plunging us into a 2nd middle ages. There are my bonafides.

If CC ran 3:59:09, all I can say is, nice run! I didn't think she had it in her. That's pretty decent for some 40 year old off the couch, and took some dedication. Good job Chelsea!

FlashyRaisin wrote:

For what it's worth, her name does come up on MarathonFoto- bib # 27996. No official results posted for this bib #, however.

Damn, wow, how did you find that? Did you go through every possible bib starting with 2 and ending with 6? Impressive.

How is anyone dumb enough to not realize the seriousness of security measures for U.S. Presidents and their families, even after they leave office? If the child of a U.S. President was ever kidnapped, it would force the U.S. government to respond. Such response could spark international conflict. Just the optics of a family member of a former US president being kidnapped or something would create world headlines and could lead to severe international instability.

My goodness LetsRun, can you use just a scintilla of critical thought for once?

I would be willing to bet that she had some type of plan clothes security run the race close to her as well.