This thread was originally titled, "Incredible development in the $612,000 Transcon Goodge run, currently ongoing" but the new title is more descriptive. The description of the run is here.
Bro, quiet the critics. Just have your team provide the data files ASAP to WC or a respected intermediary for qualified independent analysis.
You must have missed the 100 pages of this thread where I already downloaded the data files and Cockerell couldn't even figure out what downloading means.
You must have missed the 100 pages of this thread where I already downloaded the data files and Cockerell couldn't even figure out what downloading means.
You must have missed the 100 pages of this thread where I already downloaded the data files and Cockerell couldn't even figure out what downloading means.
Stop fronting and provide the direct data files.
Only if Cockerell admits he is a huge fraud who never did the Strava data analysis he claims to have
You've completely missed my point. Stop trying to convince me. I've seen it all before.
My advice was that when trying to convince the outside world, heart rates aren't going to wash, no matter what pattern they show. You responded with the usual histrionics about how I must think all Garmin engineers are idiots. Then a day later up pops Professor Buckingham to confirm exactly what I said.
The thing about projection is that it is obvious to all but the author. Those names you quote mean nothing at all to me other than you have mentioned one a few times, to what end I don't know.
Good point. After giving the article another read, I also object to us being described rather derisively as a “tiny minority of running nerds who obsess over this stuff.” Such characterization makes it seem like our concerns are trivial. “This stuff” consists of integrity, accuracy of records, and respect for other runners. I think “this stuff” warrants our attention and care.
Yes, oddly enough a great many of the insults that Huber hits me and us with are exactly the same as what Balenger threw my way before he blocked me - that I was "a sad sad man", and a "f*cking looser". It's basically what the scribe is saying about me here and the guy clearly hates my guts, but grudgingly concurs I raise some strong points, although he left an awful lot of the cutting room floor - probably my strongest stuff and biggest breakthroughs actually.
Just before he released the piece he wrote to me to say: "Please know that this is all "on background" for me. To put it bluntly, I don't see Outside taking an interest in conducting an extensive investigation into something like this." I knew then I was in trouble.
Huber did reach about the state trooper, and I sent him the Trooper's warning about taking too long to pull out - the precise opposite to what is claimed - I was being too cautious. He acknowledged it, but ignored it, and swayed it all in Balenger's favour with the foul lie about erratic driving.
But in short, it's terrible to dismiss whistleblowers as nerds and people with no life as this sort of thing would then just happen all the more: people can just say and claim whatever they like... rip off other people's records with no penalty or comeback... live the life of millionaires due to massive social media followings and sponsors because you're "a world record holder" [false], "faster than a speeding car" [RB, false]; Fastest Brit across America [false].
Also, Huber is stone cold wrong about us being a "tiny minority". About 95% of runners that I speak to hate what's happened here, but it's always left to the most passionate, the most assured statisticians, the ones who have studied the sport the deepest, as I have since Coe drove a stake thru my heart at Moscow 1980 with that haywire run, those who have trained the hardest, those who have paid the blood price, and those who want to preserve all that is good and true and noble about running.
Hilton can dismiss us all, like Balenger has, as pathetic losers, but he is mistaken.
Fortunately, despite the shellacking, I still came out on top on points in the piece. It says a lot.
FWIW, I did not come away thinking the author “hates your guts”. I thought it basically portrayed you as someone passionate about the integrity of the sport.
You must have missed the 100 pages of this thread where I already downloaded the data files and Cockerell couldn't even figure out what downloading means.
Just out of curiosity I looked at the Strava API and followed a decent write up with example code.
You must have missed the 100 pages of this thread where I already downloaded the data files and Cockerell couldn't even figure out what downloading means.
Just out of curiosity I looked at the Strava API and followed a decent write up with example code.
I managed to get hold of and manipulate my activities, I don't see how you get hold of someone else's activity data without their cooperation.
Jesus H. Christ! After all this time and you still haven't figured out how to download Goodge's Strava that is all public? How many pages is this thread has it been? This isn't rocket science, it's a simple download.
Jesus H. Christ! After all this time and you still haven't figured out how to download Goodge's Strava that is all public? How many pages is this thread has it been? This isn't rocket science, it's a simple download.
Until about 14:00 this afternoon I hadn't been interested enough to look as I don't believe a word you say but I was sitting in a cafe waiting for someone and had a quick search and play on my laptop. As you have provided zero evidence of what you claim I am not really bothered about trying to look into "simple downloads".
First, Sneakers has done some real work on the data. He has chosen some metrics, provided the link to the data source (the only to do so, if I recall correctly), described his method, and provided his results in an understandable format. Not only is this far more than most others appear to have done with the data, but he has been pretty transparent about it. For people to question him because he hasn't provided all his code is ridiculous.
After 4 years of a computer science education and a few years working in research, never once have I heard someone say it's ridiculous to provide source code. I also provided links to the Strava streams, the same data that Sneakers claims we are not smart enough to access. I would love to do some real analysis, not an Excel histogram like Sneakers, but I'm too many years removed from this. It would take me a whole-@ss weekend because I suck at writing Python now. I proposed better methods for analyzing HR, but Sneakers decided it wasn't worth taking a look at it.
This depends on context. My colleagues can ask me for code any time they want. If they ask respectfully, they will get it. But I have presented interpretations of data many, many times, and not once do I recall being asked for my code. That's effectively asking me to show my work, but I already show my work in an accessible and summarised form. I state my assumptions, outline my method when it's not obvious, and show the results, and that seems to be enough for them. For some reason they have never felt the need to accuse me of fabricating data, and demanding as proof of innocence that I produce my code. If that were to happen, even in a collegial environment, I would require some evidence for questioning my morals. How much more so in the adversarial world of LRC? So the context matters a lot.
Note that the above is not saying I would never share my code. I do so freely, as training material and as productivity aids. The above is also not saying that I am unreceptive to someone thinking the analysis looks off and wanting a deeper dive into my work. Errors happen, and any help in locating and correcting is welcome.
Thanks for the point of view from your experience. Since you read my post carefully and respectfully, I'm happy to respond.
Jesus H. Christ! After all this time and you still haven't figured out how to download Goodge's Strava that is all public? How many pages is this thread has it been? This isn't rocket science, it's a simple download.
Until about 14:00 this afternoon I hadn't been interested enough to look as I don't believe a word you say but I was sitting in a cafe waiting for someone and had a quick search and play on my laptop. As you have provided zero evidence of what you claim I am not really bothered about trying to look into "simple downloads".
Yeah, you and all the other Cockerell shills who are not "interested" but have been trying to figure out how to do a simple download since forever and keep pestering me for the files that anyone in grade school can get.
After 4 years of a computer science education and a few years working in research, never once have I heard someone say it's ridiculous to provide source code. I also provided links to the Strava streams, the same data that Sneakers claims we are not smart enough to access. I would love to do some real analysis, not an Excel histogram like Sneakers, but I'm too many years removed from this. It would take me a whole-@ss weekend because I suck at writing Python now. I proposed better methods for analyzing HR, but Sneakers decided it wasn't worth taking a look at it.
This depends on context. My colleagues can ask me for code any time they want. If they ask respectfully, they will get it. But I have presented interpretations of data many, many times, and not once do I recall being asked for my code. That's effectively asking me to show my work, but I already show my work in an accessible and summarised form. I state my assumptions, outline my method when it's not obvious, and show the results, and that seems to be enough for them. For some reason they have never felt the need to accuse me of fabricating data, and demanding as proof of innocence that I produce my code. If that were to happen, even in a collegial environment, I would require some evidence for questioning my morals. How much more so in the adversarial world of LRC? So the context matters a lot.
Note that the above is not saying I would never share my code. I do so freely, as training material and as productivity aids. The above is also not saying that I am unreceptive to someone thinking the analysis looks off and wanting a deeper dive into my work. Errors happen, and any help in locating and correcting is welcome.
Thanks for the point of view from your experience. Since you read my post carefully and respectfully, I'm happy to respond.
Agreed! I can show stuff at work and not provide every point of data and instead display the summary and the main takeaways and no one ever has a problem because they believe me. Sometimes someone has a question and I happily answer.
With Sneakers, he's pretending the Strava data streams are both some arcane mystery that requires a four digit IQ to access AND so simple that a 1st grader could do it. The truth is somewhere in between. It requires a bit of software skills to get the data and comprehend it, but I had no problem posting a link to it. Sneakers won't post the link because I assume he doesn't want others to access it. I'll admit, it requires some skill to make a basic histogram like he did. It requires more skill to do a proper analysis that no one has done yet. It requires a different skill set to piece it all together into a convincing presentation.
I've posted the links to the streams multiple times and I'll do it again below via copy/paste.
----------
Alright dorks, if you wanna put together something more interesting I have an idea. I'm past my prime scripting and statistics days, but surely someone here could bang this out in Python pretty quickly. A few ideas:
* You can get all the data you'd ever need from Strava's API. Not sure if this is what Will C did earlier or not. Here's an example from Will G's most recent day: * From there you have CSVs (edit: not CSVs, JSON formatted files :) ) for all of his metrics * I would obviously be interested in the correlation between HR and pace, there's a million different ways you could do that. Maybe you could try looking at bands of HR and their associated pace and variability. For example, just making this up: ** HR: 140–150BPM, Avg Pace: 14:00, Med Pace: 13:58, Variance: 1:00 ** HR: 130–140BPM, ... ** ... ** ... ** HR: 100– 110BPM, Avg Pace: 14:00, Med Pace: 14:02, Variance: 3:00 *I would at first do the above with the standard pace that Strava provides. I would then repeat with the GAP, because I suspect it's even more damning when you take into the account that it looks like he didn't slow his cheating on big uphills.
Just some thoughts, I'm nowhere near as good at these things as I used to be.
Adding on more thoughts... If someone does track him for the final 2 days, it totally plausible that he slogs it in on his own. However, that doesn't mean they didn't generate more evidence. You could expand upon my previously outlined data analysis by comparing the days where he was observed by Will C and potentially this new observer to the days he was unobserved. There's another strong data point.
Anyone fresh out of college, looking for a data science portfolio builder project? I'd love to hear you tell me about this during an interview instead of some made up case study!
Sneakers man, I don’t understand the vitriol coming from Team WG. Based on Team WG’s behavior, I basically think there are two possible options for how this thing unfolded.
The first is that Team WG did complete a version of the transcon.* However, Team WG is a bunch of immature and amateur idiots who can’t handle the criticism that comes from being in the spotlight. Instead of diffusing the situation by behaving reasonably and heading over data to establish that the challenge was completed as advertised, they resort to rock throwing, attacking critics, and posting shallow stuff on social.^
Alternatively, Team WG got in way over their heads on an adventure they discovered WG was not physically or mentally capable of completing. The territory of the United States is much larger and more unforgiving than anticipated. Since Team WG was in so deep with social media and sponsors, information was fabricated to make it appear that WG ultimately completed the transcon.
* I’m not here to argue over what constitutes the official format of transcon or whether it’s sea to shining sea, etc.
^Accusing someone of having ED or prostate problems. Really?