This and his other work inspired me to contribute to his site. I think his type of work could be used to examine outliers that suggest further investigation when it comes to doping in all running, including age groupers. If you were to take finisher times for thounsands of runners over a 10-12 year period there would be a standard pattern of performances for people. There would be improvements early on and then the changes in times would start to decline. There would be age differences in these patterns. Patterns outside of normal would be worth further investigation.
Every time this type of thing comes up, the counter to publicising this basically boils down to "why does it matter?"
I think in this case especially, but in most others too, it matters for a few reasons:
1 - None of this matters on the surface. Who cares which normie runs which race at which speed? In simple terms, it doesn't matter at all. But take a look a bit deeper: the reason sport matters at all is because it instills ideals of hard work, honesty, fair play, the challenging and betterment of oneself, and the satisfaction with a job well done. There are health benefits as well, both physical and mental. All of those things largely reply on the sport being completed honestly. If someone, or many people, are cheating, then the only reason why sport matters is neutralised. Why are we even here, whether we agree with what Derek does or not? Honest participation is at the soul of what we love doing.
2 - In this case, the alleged perpetrator writes about her exploits for a largely very-amateur crowd. She apparently claimed that she ran a 3:18 marathon with no fuelling strategy, only one long run of 16 miles in January (everything else just "regular" runs), plus the no chip, no watch nonsense. It's a baaaaaaad idea to put out the notion to inexperienced runners that this is doable. For reference, the Instagram post talks about her lack of a fuel strategy, and the rest came from her notes/comments on the now-deleted Strava entry. That's dangerous, for a journalist to be putting out in the world. I do not want to see a mostly untrained, under-fuelled newish runner attempt a marathon on the back of a journalist telling them that she ran that time like that. And people do read this stuff.
3 - Journalists shouldn't lie. Doesn't matter if it's about sport; none of them should do it. They do, I know, I know. But they shouldn't, and if they're caught, they should be held to account.
4 - Running is a hard sport. We might find it easy in some ways now, but it's generally something that the average person struggles to do well for a long period. It's plain rude to cheat others out of what they've earned via training, given that many amateurs start from a place of finding running extremely challenging. I'm one of them: when I went on my first run, aged 22, I made is about 2 miles before I nearly threw up. Years later, so far I have a sub-40 10k and a sub-90 half, and I plan on working more to get faster. I am in Kate's gender and (almost) age categories, I am running roughly the times she's run, or is claiming to have run (her fake 1:32 at the Landmarks Half is close enough to my PR to give me pause). I don't think any of us should be cheated out of placings by cheats.
"Why does this matter?" demeans the dedication and work ethic of everyone who does this stuff honestly. That's why it matters.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
clarity
This and his other work inspired me to contribute to his site. I think his type of work could be used to examine outliers that suggest further investigation when it comes to doping in all running, including age groupers. If you were to take finisher times for thounsands of runners over a 10-12 year period there would be a standard pattern of performances for people. There would be improvements early on and then the changes in times would start to decline. There would be age differences in these patterns. Patterns outside of normal would be worth further investigation.
what other work? Bullying old people into suicide? Dude is seriously mentally unstable.
Every time this type of thing comes up, the counter to publicising this basically boils down to "why does it matter?"
I think in this case especially, but in most others too, it matters for a few reasons:
1 - None of this matters on the surface. Who cares which normie runs which race at which speed? In simple terms, it doesn't matter at all. But take a look a bit deeper: the reason sport matters at all is because it instills ideals of hard work, honesty, fair play, the challenging and betterment of oneself, and the satisfaction with a job well done. There are health benefits as well, both physical and mental. All of those things largely reply on the sport being completed honestly. If someone, or many people, are cheating, then the only reason why sport matters is neutralised. Why are we even here, whether we agree with what Derek does or not? Honest participation is at the soul of what we love doing.
2 - In this case, the alleged perpetrator writes about her exploits for a largely very-amateur crowd. She apparently claimed that she ran a 3:18 marathon with no fuelling strategy, only one long run of 16 miles in January (everything else just "regular" runs), plus the no chip, no watch nonsense. It's a baaaaaaad idea to put out the notion to inexperienced runners that this is doable. For reference, the Instagram post talks about her lack of a fuel strategy, and the rest came from her notes/comments on the now-deleted Strava entry. That's dangerous, for a journalist to be putting out in the world. I do not want to see a mostly untrained, under-fuelled newish runner attempt a marathon on the back of a journalist telling them that she ran that time like that. And people do read this stuff.
3 - Journalists shouldn't lie. Doesn't matter if it's about sport; none of them should do it. They do, I know, I know. But they shouldn't, and if they're caught, they should be held to account.
4 - Running is a hard sport. We might find it easy in some ways now, but it's generally something that the average person struggles to do well for a long period. It's plain rude to cheat others out of what they've earned via training, given that many amateurs start from a place of finding running extremely challenging. I'm one of them: when I went on my first run, aged 22, I made is about 2 miles before I nearly threw up. Years later, so far I have a sub-40 10k and a sub-90 half, and I plan on working more to get faster. I am in Kate's gender and (almost) age categories, I am running roughly the times she's run, or is claiming to have run (her fake 1:32 at the Landmarks Half is close enough to my PR to give me pause). I don't think any of us should be cheated out of placings by cheats.
"Why does this matter?" demeans the dedication and work ethic of everyone who does this stuff honestly. That's why it matters.
Every time this type of thing comes up, the counter to publicising this basically boils down to "why does it matter?"
I think in this case especially, but in most others too, it matters for a few reasons:
1 - None of this matters on the surface. Who cares which normie runs which race at which speed? In simple terms, it doesn't matter at all. But take a look a bit deeper: the reason sport matters at all is because it instills ideals of hard work, honesty, fair play, the challenging and betterment of oneself, and the satisfaction with a job well done. There are health benefits as well, both physical and mental. All of those things largely reply on the sport being completed honestly. If someone, or many people, are cheating, then the only reason why sport matters is neutralised. Why are we even here, whether we agree with what Derek does or not? Honest participation is at the soul of what we love doing.
2 - In this case, the alleged perpetrator writes about her exploits for a largely very-amateur crowd. She apparently claimed that she ran a 3:18 marathon with no fuelling strategy, only one long run of 16 miles in January (everything else just "regular" runs), plus the no chip, no watch nonsense. It's a baaaaaaad idea to put out the notion to inexperienced runners that this is doable. For reference, the Instagram post talks about her lack of a fuel strategy, and the rest came from her notes/comments on the now-deleted Strava entry. That's dangerous, for a journalist to be putting out in the world. I do not want to see a mostly untrained, under-fuelled newish runner attempt a marathon on the back of a journalist telling them that she ran that time like that. And people do read this stuff.
3 - Journalists shouldn't lie. Doesn't matter if it's about sport; none of them should do it. They do, I know, I know. But they shouldn't, and if they're caught, they should be held to account.
4 - Running is a hard sport. We might find it easy in some ways now, but it's generally something that the average person struggles to do well for a long period. It's plain rude to cheat others out of what they've earned via training, given that many amateurs start from a place of finding running extremely challenging. I'm one of them: when I went on my first run, aged 22, I made is about 2 miles before I nearly threw up. Years later, so far I have a sub-40 10k and a sub-90 half, and I plan on working more to get faster. I am in Kate's gender and (almost) age categories, I am running roughly the times she's run, or is claiming to have run (her fake 1:32 at the Landmarks Half is close enough to my PR to give me pause). I don't think any of us should be cheated out of placings by cheats.
"Why does this matter?" demeans the dedication and work ethic of everyone who does this stuff honestly. That's why it matters.
This and his other work inspired me to contribute to his site. I think his type of work could be used to examine outliers that suggest further investigation when it comes to doping in all running, including age groupers. If you were to take finisher times for thounsands of runners over a 10-12 year period there would be a standard pattern of performances for people. There would be improvements early on and then the changes in times would start to decline. There would be age differences in these patterns. Patterns outside of normal would be worth further investigation.
what other work? Bullying old people into suicide? Dude is seriously mentally unstable.
Every time this type of thing comes up, the counter to publicising this basically boils down to "why does it matter?"
I think in this case especially, but in most others too, it matters for a few reasons:
1 - None of this matters on the surface. Who cares which normie runs which race at which speed? In simple terms, it doesn't matter at all. But take a look a bit deeper: the reason sport matters at all is because it instills ideals of hard work, honesty, fair play, the challenging and betterment of oneself, and the satisfaction with a job well done. There are health benefits as well, both physical and mental. All of those things largely reply on the sport being completed honestly. If someone, or many people, are cheating, then the only reason why sport matters is neutralised. Why are we even here, whether we agree with what Derek does or not? Honest participation is at the soul of what we love doing.
2 - In this case, the alleged perpetrator writes about her exploits for a largely very-amateur crowd. She apparently claimed that she ran a 3:18 marathon with no fuelling strategy, only one long run of 16 miles in January (everything else just "regular" runs), plus the no chip, no watch nonsense. It's a baaaaaaad idea to put out the notion to inexperienced runners that this is doable. For reference, the Instagram post talks about her lack of a fuel strategy, and the rest came from her notes/comments on the now-deleted Strava entry. That's dangerous, for a journalist to be putting out in the world. I do not want to see a mostly untrained, under-fuelled newish runner attempt a marathon on the back of a journalist telling them that she ran that time like that. And people do read this stuff.
3 - Journalists shouldn't lie. Doesn't matter if it's about sport; none of them should do it. They do, I know, I know. But they shouldn't, and if they're caught, they should be held to account.
4 - Running is a hard sport. We might find it easy in some ways now, but it's generally something that the average person struggles to do well for a long period. It's plain rude to cheat others out of what they've earned via training, given that many amateurs start from a place of finding running extremely challenging. I'm one of them: when I went on my first run, aged 22, I made is about 2 miles before I nearly threw up. Years later, so far I have a sub-40 10k and a sub-90 half, and I plan on working more to get faster. I am in Kate's gender and (almost) age categories, I am running roughly the times she's run, or is claiming to have run (her fake 1:32 at the Landmarks Half is close enough to my PR to give me pause). I don't think any of us should be cheated out of placings by cheats.
"Why does this matter?" demeans the dedication and work ethic of everyone who does this stuff honestly. That's why it matters.
Every time this type of thing comes up, the counter to publicising this basically boils down to "why does it matter?"
I think in this case especially, but in most others too, it matters for a few reasons:
1 - None of this matters on the surface. Who cares which normie runs which race at which speed? In simple terms, it doesn't matter at all. But take a look a bit deeper: the reason sport matters at all is because it instills ideals of hard work, honesty, fair play, the challenging and betterment of oneself, and the satisfaction with a job well done. There are health benefits as well, both physical and mental. All of those things largely reply on the sport being completed honestly. If someone, or many people, are cheating, then the only reason why sport matters is neutralised. Why are we even here, whether we agree with what Derek does or not? Honest participation is at the soul of what we love doing.
2 - In this case, the alleged perpetrator writes about her exploits for a largely very-amateur crowd. She apparently claimed that she ran a 3:18 marathon with no fuelling strategy, only one long run of 16 miles in January (everything else just "regular" runs), plus the no chip, no watch nonsense. It's a baaaaaaad idea to put out the notion to inexperienced runners that this is doable. For reference, the Instagram post talks about her lack of a fuel strategy, and the rest came from her notes/comments on the now-deleted Strava entry. That's dangerous, for a journalist to be putting out in the world. I do not want to see a mostly untrained, under-fuelled newish runner attempt a marathon on the back of a journalist telling them that she ran that time like that. And people do read this stuff.
3 - Journalists shouldn't lie. Doesn't matter if it's about sport; none of them should do it. They do, I know, I know. But they shouldn't, and if they're caught, they should be held to account.
4 - Running is a hard sport. We might find it easy in some ways now, but it's generally something that the average person struggles to do well for a long period. It's plain rude to cheat others out of what they've earned via training, given that many amateurs start from a place of finding running extremely challenging. I'm one of them: when I went on my first run, aged 22, I made is about 2 miles before I nearly threw up. Years later, so far I have a sub-40 10k and a sub-90 half, and I plan on working more to get faster. I am in Kate's gender and (almost) age categories, I am running roughly the times she's run, or is claiming to have run (her fake 1:32 at the Landmarks Half is close enough to my PR to give me pause). I don't think any of us should be cheated out of placings by cheats.
"Why does this matter?" demeans the dedication and work ethic of everyone who does this stuff honestly. That's why it matters.
I think honesty matters and if she cheated she deserves negative consequences. But I think you overstate the danger of her description of preparation and race. Most newbies consult a number of sources, so one outlier doesn't matter much even if she is an editor of RW. Moreover, everyone is different. I ran my first marathon at age 28 on a base of 33 miles a week and one "long" run of 17 miles. I had no fueling strategy. I ate sushi the night before and drank water during the race when I felt like it. My gun time was 3:08. Many people would have done worse with that prep, but I suspect a number of people would have done better.
I’m disappointed, I hope she responds soon. I enjoyed her videos on the running channel and she always seemed to be a genuine person, at least compared to other YouTubers. Not sure why she would have to lie about things though, if she ran a 3:13 or a 3:43 I wouldn’t even give it any thought.
Another jump to conclusions screed based on flimsy evidence and conjecture. Derek is a failed runner looking to punish anyone who more successful than him.
2
86
Lady and her friends just give up and stop posting
Another jump to conclusions screed based on flimsy evidence and conjecture. Derek is a failed runner looking to punish anyone who more successful than him.
Flimsy evidence? Did you read the article and have you ever participated in these types of events? Once, for an obvious honest mistake is flimsy, this is a pretty clear cut example of intentional manipulation.
pinning the number folded in half alone as a preloaded excuse for either the timing mat or the lack of photos or both is just brutal. the dead watch that wasn’t dead? it’s not one thing, it’s like 10 things. smoke….fire
people need to drop their ego and admit they cheated apologize and begin to move on, they aren't even a pro athlete don't know why they are egoing and lying about their strava glitching our during the race. Everyone knows its BS she should just fess up, seriously was not a huge deal till she lied.
Derek? The guy who bullied an old man into killing himself? the guy who bullied anoother woman who he MIS identified? The fat loser who said he was shutting down his site and lied about it? or the guy who post on letsrun under assumed names to drive traffic?
The old man that killed himself has no one to blame but himself. Derek will never bully me because I don't cheat and if I do cheat I deserve to be publicly humiliated. That dead POS was a stain on humanity like all cheaters.
Derek? The guy who bullied an old man into killing himself? the guy who bullied anoother woman who he MIS identified? The fat loser who said he was shutting down his site and lied about it? or the guy who post on letsrun under assumed names to drive traffic?
The old man that killed himself has no one to blame but himself. Derek will never bully me because I don't cheat and if I do cheat I deserve to be publicly humiliated. That dead POS was a stain on humanity like all cheaters.
Dude that's way, way harsh. I agree that it wasn't Derek's fault and cheaters should be called out. But it's sad that the guy had such a hard time with the consequences of his actions that he ended his life. Yes he cheated at marathons, but I don't think his whole value as a person is defined by the poor decisions he made in one area of his life.
"The Marathon that Never Happened - I created this GPX file by copying the trackpoints in Kate's original GPX file, using GPX Studio to create my file. I downloaded Kate's file from Strava on 24/04/2023, before it was deleted. Kate's file appears to have been made in GPX Studio or similar. This file has no original data from Kate's file in it. I was able to add cadence in Gotoes after creating the GPX file."