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.
The uninformed fanboys will not change their minds.
But Ballenger and Goodge will be way more careful in the future, which is a win in my book.
Yes, thanks both. It's now very clearly the two camps, but the media are terrified of anything litigious, and their lawyers will always say the same thing: "not worth it". Outside mag took a stab, but it was completely neutral, and offensive to me in many ways, basically dismissing me as a nerd.
Otherwise a major podcast couldn't even name them, and took down another episode. It's very tough. There are few thousand of us versus 200k of them.
But what I really wanted was for them to stop with the world class adventure runs to make a pot load of money out of, and I don't think they can do another. Goodge can dismiss the proper runners in the community as "maggots" and "losers" but he'll be very surprised what happens if he sets up another stunt run.
For now, he has declared he's "going to race properly in real competition and stop making sh*t up all the time." He'll still gets loads of branding and sponsorship income from this, and although it stings, it's a free market. If companies want to back this guy, that's their bed. The 34 minute video of the Kodiak 100 is out, and only 5-10 mins deal with the race, which was like watching a quasi snuff movie.
Before it, he spoke about possibly winning. That's the sort of people we're dealing with here: Total delusion, arrogance, ignorance and total, "say whatever the hell you like, because the brands will love it, and there'll be no blow back."
I for one will never stop calling out this sort of thing. The fake Jogle record from 2002 is tragic stuff and done by exactly the same type of couple as here. WG and RB call themselves "bros", the Jogle two actually were bros, but hide that from the world [they share a sister].
The word "nobody" on your statement is enough for me. This ain't over, but I fully admit, it's the end of the beginning. It'll be an interesting next 5-10 years, and this thread will perform a crucial commentary and antidote to the poison, and my petition will be up there as well, and continues to nibble away, and has some incredibly powerful comments.
And who knows, maybe one day a big media org will take a look at it. But it took 10 years to get Armstrong and they never got Savile in 50 while he was alive. And like here, the heart of their defence was, "we're for charity, how dare you." As for the charity angle in this case, almost 6 months and no announcement of who got what. Sickening.
We'll know an awful lot more in November 2033.
Farewell my dears, but not goodbye.
I agree that it's just the end of the beginning. I think the problem of cheating influencers and digital doping will continue to grow over the coming years, but it won't grow as much if there's a campaign against it.
I'm not sure if folk in the USA will get the Jimmy Saville reference, but maybe his infamy has spread outwith the UK. He was a classic case of hiding behind charity and it's amazing how blind people can be do wrongdoings so long as someone is raising money for charity.
The Irish journalist that hounded Armstrong for years was seen as an outcast - until he was eventually proven correct. His service to the sport of cycling was huge.
I agree that it's just the end of the beginning. I think the problem of cheating influencers and digital doping will continue to grow over the coming years, but it won't grow as much if there's a campaign against it.
I'm not sure if folk in the USA will get the Jimmy Saville reference, but maybe his infamy has spread outwith the UK. He was a classic case of hiding behind charity and it's amazing how blind people can be do wrongdoings so long as someone is raising money for charity.
The Irish journalist that hounded Armstrong for years was seen as an outcast - until he was eventually proven correct. His service to the sport of cycling was huge.
It's, very very very hard to break these type of stories and go against the narrative. Everyone has a stake indirectly. It is a very dangerous thing for an individual to do. it can take a longtime to get anywhere and nowhere. It takes a huge toll on your mental wellbeing.
Exposing wrongdoing, also exposes others that let it happen. This causes inertia that prevents the story being exposed in the first place and creates more barriers against you if you try and do something.
It's, very very very hard to break these type of stories and go against the narrative. Everyone has a stake indirectly. It is a very dangerous thing for an individual to do. it can take a longtime to get anywhere and nowhere. It takes a huge toll on your mental wellbeing.Exposing wrongdoing, also exposes others that let it happen. This causes inertia that prevents the story being exposed in the first place and creates more barriers against you if you try and do something. I know this from personal experience.
The ridiculous situation with what you have described is how "Whistleblowers" seem to end up treated more unfairly than those who perpetrated the crimes they have revealed.
The ridiculous situation with what you have described is how "Whistleblowers" seem to end up treated more unfairly than those who perpetrated the crimes they have revealed.
Indeed. But when I first pointed out the problem, I saw a mistake at an individual level. At that time I never considered myself a whistleblower, I was just pointing out an issue.
With the change.org approach, this is heading in the direction that it will get noticed and Will is at risk of becoming a whistleblower. He has already come under fire on here, so it has already started.
This is so similar to my problem. I requested data to be released, after all if they "hadn't done anything wrong then it should be pretty easy to prove it". This then put the cards on the table and made it worse. Then people went into cover-up attacks even harder!
This is a great analysis. A lot of it stands out, but for me particularly it's the Marathon des Sables stats of MW vs WG.
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but with MDS, WG had a normal-ish looking heart rate. Granted the heat/terrain at MDS would be a factor, but in the space of one year, how do you go from 135-145ish averages during MDS, to (mostly) 100-110 during Transcon, when MDS was run at roughly the same pace as the Transcon efforts, and had similar elevation gains?
As has been said many times here, the race vs. non-race stats just don't add up. You could say both RB and WG go out too hard, resulting in at least one 100-miler DNF for each of them. But the low HRs in their non-races (and some of WG's track workouts) suggest they have serious engines—engines that would allow them to complete 100-milers more capably than they have.
I think generally what bothers me is: why can't you just compete in ultras like everyone else? Why so much focus on attention-grabbing efforts that appear to want to one-up accomplished ultrarunners and/or somehow stand out from the pack, and also can't easily be verified? Comments like "I didn't read the race manual" from RB (during some hiccup in his LALV attempt where he'd violated a rule about where to run) feels like this blatant nose-thumbing at the ultra community. It's a great community, so I just don't understand it.
The ridiculous situation with what you have described is how "Whistleblowers" seem to end up treated more unfairly than those who perpetrated the crimes they have revealed.
Indeed. But when I first pointed out the problem, I saw a mistake at an individual level. At that time I never considered myself a whistleblower, I was just pointing out an issue.
With the change.org approach, this is heading in the direction that it will get noticed and Will is at risk of becoming a whistleblower. He has already come under fire on here, so it has already started.
This is so similar to my problem. I requested data to be released, after all if they "hadn't done anything wrong then it should be pretty easy to prove it". This then put the cards on the table and made it worse. Then people went into cover-up attacks even harder!
I think of all the comments on the petition, this one puts it best:
michaela l·4 days ago Release the Whoop data and verify the charitable donations have been transferred in full from the GoFundMe. Then maybe we can celebrate.
These two are so easy for the Goodge camp to sort out. But they won't.
How about, start with Michaela's two suggestions and take it from there?
This is a great analysis. A lot of it stands out, but for me particularly it's the Marathon des Sables stats of MW vs WG.
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but with MDS, WG had a normal-ish looking heart rate. Granted the heat/terrain at MDS would be a factor, but in the space of one year, how do you go from 135-145ish averages during MDS, to (mostly) 100-110 during Transcon, when MDS was run at roughly the same pace as the Transcon efforts, and had similar elevation gains?
As has been said many times here, the race vs. non-race stats just don't add up. You could say both RB and WG go out too hard, resulting in at least one 100-miler DNF for each of them. But the low HRs in their non-races (and some of WG's track workouts) suggest they have serious engines—engines that would allow them to complete 100-milers more capably than they have.
I think generally what bothers me is: why can't you just compete in ultras like everyone else? Why so much focus on attention-grabbing efforts that appear to want to one-up accomplished ultrarunners and/or somehow stand out from the pack, and also can't easily be verified? Comments like "I didn't read the race manual" from RB (during some hiccup in his LALV attempt where he'd violated a rule about where to run) feels like this blatant nose-thumbing at the ultra community. It's a great community, so I just don't understand it.
And therein lies the absolute heart of the matter. These people are selling, selling, selling. Now, how do you sell? By running appallingly? Like at Cali? That was a total sh*tshow from start to finish. Someone in totally over their heads, who didn't have the slightest clue what they were doing; and Balenger having nothing like the knowledge or expertise in the sport to give it to him straight: "you will get eaten alive". But RB will have been on a very tidy fee, and he loves all the Hollywood glamour that WG brings. He wouldn't even chide WG when he said, "if I'm lucky enough to win, we're all going to Vegas." Goodge would have been more than double the winner's time - If he had even finished. And the footage of him at 50 miles and all that lengthy treatment he required... They speak about him lacking oxygen - nonsense. It was his legs and body that were a mess.
So there it is, they don't compete with the rest as how can you sell products in that guise? Notice how little Nucalm and all the Puresport products were mentionned for the Cali run.
Instead, made-up runs, which the media are too lazy to question. Even for the diabolical Tesla stunt, Balenger gets the headline that he raced a car - and won. And then you can sell, sell, sell. As for the two upcoming races: An off-the-books relay in Chile with no rules or results, and then straight into the Valencia marathon - a very slight, speedy effort for an ultrarunner.
WG has completed just four ultras in the last 4.5 years, they've all been mediocre or dire, with another a dnf.
But listen to Rich Roll: "He's an absolute beast in Ultra!" How so?
It's convenient that he's chosen to do the Atacama thing as a relay rather than the solo race. He's currently done legs of under 5km.
Yes, and now he's spammed everyone's feed by showing how they've decided to relay it, by breaking down the 300 miles into loads of 200m to 2k reps. No 6 x 50 miles for them. If they want to win the race, this is clearly the way to do it. Sprint for a about a minute, jump in a car for 5-10 mins, sprint again, and repeat.
Absolutely nothing to do with the noble sport of ultrarunning whatsoever.
Any formal race would outlaw this nonsense in a heartbeat. Consider the National 12 road relay for instance. It would be won in 3hrs20 not 4:10.
But this is the race with no rules, hence they immediately come up with a hack. And WG has already been described as a beast and a machine, for reps like 260m in 1:31. Whoo.
This post was edited 13 minutes after it was posted.
This is just further evidence Will. He, and his team, are prepared to do whatever it takes to get themselves popularity and therefore followers.
It's not against the rules, I will allow them that, but, there's a code of conduct, we call it respect, we all know they don't conform.
2 results here - he'll shill his products and advertise, he thinks it's a win, but, the community will be even more aware and more will turn against him.
This is just further evidence Will. He, and his team, are prepared to do whatever it takes to get themselves popularity and therefore followers.
It's not against the rules, I will allow them that, but, there's a code of conduct, we call it respect, we all know they don't conform.
2 results here - he'll shill his products and advertise, he thinks it's a win, but, the community will be even more aware and more will turn against him.
Yes, I went after a result with TSP and they said the result only matters if you're bothered about that sort of thing. I said, it would be nice, otherwise it's just all a glorified [and eye-wateringly expensive] paarlauf. So that inspired them to put the team result on their reels. I said the individual result would be cool as well.
The winners got 34 hours and WGs team 39 hours in 4th. It must be so straightforward doing it as a 6 man relay with minimal distance before you're relieved... but loads of commerce done, especially for 247 and NuCalm and a barmy video of him literally sprinting through the desert. One can only assume that the teams who finished some 8-12 hours back actually indulged in a little endurance running.
I'm not sure what the heck any of this was, but it ain't distance running.
Unbelievable! My wrist based HR readings were spot on at the Valencia Marathon! I retract all commentary about wrist based HR readings being crap. What reliable tech!
I don't think he stuck it to us. If anything, he's validated what we've all thought - his heart only beats normal in sanctioned events.
Absolutely!
Hi all,
Just a few notes about Valencia and WG's extraordinarily polemic, aggressive and vulgar rant:
1) As all have noted, once again, his HR is perfect for a sanctioned event. Every KM he has run since the Transcon has been absolutely fine. Here we saw precisely how the human heart works: 140s, rising to 150s at the half, and then the going got tough, with 160s to 32k and late 160s and early 170s to see it home.
2) His comment that Corporate have also had a go at him is very interesting. I wonder what that's about? I/we are not corporate. Sounds like a business or two might have asked what's going on. Good.
3) 2:58 for a 29 year old in near full-time training is completely anodyne. I know it's in the top 4% of so or marathons run, but that's throwing millions of 4-5 hour plus bodies into the mix. A friend just wrote to me to say he clocked a 2:59 at 57. I ran 3:20 at Boston in 96, then I said, "what happens if I train?" And 5 months later I ran 2:51 at Montreal, after an all-night bender, literally jogging the first half.
4) For him to be saying, "Ha, there you go, I have proven I am a good runner after all, therefore my Transcon is legit," is classic deflection. Over 5,800 Brits have gone sub 3 this year.
5) Remember too, he claims a solo 2:51 in a crowded Battersea Park, with over 50 narrow gates and loads of pedestrians, bikes, kids and dogs. Shows what utter nonsense he spouts. But if anyone asks, he claims a 2:51 marathon.
6) We are now at day 196 of asking for his Transcon Whoop. None of him or his many handlers have said one word on this request except for the shameful lie to Rich Roll that "it has been published." Where?
7) We are now at day 196 of having no clue about what funds Macmillan and American Cancer received.
Just a few notes about Valencia and WG's extraordinarily polemic, aggressive and vulgar rant:
1) As all have noted, once again, his HR is perfect for a sanctioned event. Every KM he has run since the Transcon has been absolutely fine. Here we saw precisely how the human heart works: 140s, rising to 150s at the half, and then the going got tough, with 160s to 32k and late 160s and early 170s to see it home.
2) His comment that Corporate have also had a go at him is very interesting. I wonder what that's about? I/we are not corporate. Sounds like a business or two might have asked what's going on. Good.
3) 2:58 for a 29 year old in near full-time training is completely anodyne. I know it's in the top 4% of so or marathons run, but that's throwing millions of 4-5 hour plus bodies into the mix. A friend just wrote to me to say he clocked a 2:59 at 57. I ran 3:20 at Boston in 96, then I said, "what happens if I train?" And 5 months later I ran 2:51 at Montreal, after an all-night bender, literally jogging the first half.
4) For him to be saying, "Ha, there you go, I have proven I am a good runner after all, therefore my Transcon is legit," is classic deflection. Over 5,800 Brits have gone sub 3 this year.
5) Remember too, he claims a solo 2:51 in a crowded Battersea Park, with over 50 narrow gates and loads of pedestrians, bikes, kids and dogs. Shows what utter nonsense he spouts. But if anyone asks, he claims a 2:51 marathon.
6) We are now at day 196 of asking for his Transcon Whoop. None of him or his many handlers have said one word on this request except for the shameful lie to Rich Roll that "it has been published." Where?
7) We are now at day 196 of having no clue about what funds Macmillan and American Cancer received.
Good / recent article that distinguishes athletes / influencers and lays out some the rationale for why we've seen a rise in the later.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.
