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.
Fair enough. One thing we can all do is compile a list of USA crossers in merit. Goodge said a month ago to his detractors: "you're f*cking maggots, I'm going to go WAY quicker than 64 just to piss you off." He is as good as his word and yesterday said this will either be a 57 or a 58. We know some 300 have logged the trip, and many more privately.
So we have:
1) PK 42.25 2) FG 46.36
3) Bassano 46.7
4) Cottrell 48.1
5) Ulrich 52.5
6) Girard 53.0
7) Brooks 53.3 8) Lees 53.8 9) Ball 53.9
10) Mittleman 57.0
So there it is... the UK record is not possible despite all their disgraceful publicity, but top 10 of all time is. One heck of a lot of talent has been thrown at this down the years. Will be interesting to do a little research into some of these in the top 10. We know Lees was Team GB for starters. The fact that he race walked is irrelevant - these pedestrians are hugely fit and skilled and it can be much more economical to speed walk than run, often. Richard Brown a great example of that.
Another thing we have is that we know Transcon takes 4.3 times as long as Jogle and we know if done honestly, WG would do Jogle in around 18, due to his 110 mile quality for 24 hours. His 15.5 in 2019 as a novice does not ring true in any way whatsoever.
So going into this, an educated prediction for his Transcon would have been 77 days. Which still places him high on the all time leaderboard.
He has had four ultra races in his career and they're all either non-descript or absolutely dire, like 35 to the winner's 18 at MDS. So you can perhaps see why I struggle to have him at top 10 of all time here, without a tracker, or a pulse.
No not really - if you check out the three examples i sent you, two of them drop 30bpm over the course of the run, and are full of fast ks in the second half.
I personally always start abnormally high for the first couple of hours in a race due to adrenalin rush, then settle into a pace and HR naturally fades over time. All i'm saying is Balengers HR data strikes a very similar pattern to mine on a hundred.
Also lets look at it in further context. He does 100miles in 18:07, on a flat loop, support points every 6 miles. Compare that to Thames Path 100 the other week, which is another flat route, less support points - his 18:07 wouldn't have even got him into the top 10. I'd say 18:07 is a fair reflection of his ability - hes a guy who clearly does do a lot of running so i'd say is capable of running 100 miles (unless hes faking all of his strava data), so why would he need to cheat on a 100, and if he did cheat why then post such a mediocre time?!
The MUT community is generally a pretty humble group. What’s rankling a lot of people is the arrogance of these guys. They are pretty average runners, claiming to be “world record” holders based off obscure feats that other more accomplished runners simply haven’t bothered to attempt. If it really is so easy and their heart rate is actually that low, why not test yourself going for a legitimate record or in a race against truly elite competition? The answer is because it would shatter the fantasy they’ve created for themselves and their social media followers. Not saying only elites should be able to make a living off promoting themselves, but a little humility goes a long way. I think it’s sort of the same thing turning people off with Seth Demoor right now (who actually is a pretty good runner when he’s not beating himself into the ground).
This is where I'm at. That Instagram story WG posted yesterday made him look like a grade one a-hole. I would wipe the floor with him if I had the crew he had at a transcon. I wouldn't be crowing my excellence even in the HIGHLY unlikely event of going faster than PK. Why? This is the way. Look at love between PK and Frank when PK got the record. Just huge mutual respect.
You are making excuses and the rigorous analysis has already been provided. And I don't agree that I'm the anomoly of having multiday experience and disbelieving this run. I think most experienced multiday runners in the discussion do, but we have no poll to be sure.
I do agree with you that this run isn't that high class and Will C has overegged the supposed top class nature of it. I'm also with you in regards to it being possible to negative split multi days. But WG is not genuinely negative splitting all these individual days in the way they make out. And his Jogle negative split is so clearly an outright con. Watch the Youtube video - it's like Rocky Balboa level comeback from the dead!
However while I disagree with some aspects of Will C's analysis, I don't think any of his possible mistakes detract from the general correctness of his main points, or the correct nature of his conclusion. This run stinks!
If you and Chris Heinz were the sherrif and detective of a town with a serial killer, then the whole bloody town would get murdered before either of you two would want to point the finger of blame at someone.
And even when it's just you two and the serial killer left in the town you'd still have a discussion saying, 'well it could be the last man standing in the town that's the killer, but maybe all those wounds that look like bullet wounds were just caused by a mysterious disease that nobody has been able to explain. And we both like to always believe in the good in people so lets not accuse anybody just yet'.
And then, 'bang! Bang!' You're both dead.
Well, hello again Luke...
How do you know he isn't negative splitting the days? Are you there, no. Do you have any evidence to show that he is. YOU...do you have a single original thought about this, or are you only a lap dog to WillC's interpretation/opinion on this?
To 's point, where's the evidence? Not the thoughts and opinions, but evidence on THIS run? Not some attempt to tie it to a different event, or even a different person, but to this run?
Hi all,here's an update on another thread about the British runner William Goodge doing Transcon at the moment and some worrying irregularities.Namely that he runs at 150-170bpm in the first two days of his multidayers, colla...
You say that 50+ and I would let the 'whole bloody town get murdered' ... wow, and ouch! Your thoughts that if you can't see it, you can still believe it is cute (nice job pulling in the ultimate trump card of religion to bring that thought home). But, what we are talking about here is evidence. If I were a sheriff, then I would need evidence to convict. Without it, I couldn't even arrest them...you can't arrest just because you think someone is doing something shady. Evidence is what's needed.
What's the supposed evidence here: 1) WillC's premise that HR is too low except when he intervenes...wow, he is powerful. 2) WillC's new opinion that his 8k splits are far too fast for a multi-dayer 3) He has a big support crew of ultra runners 4) He gets too much money from sponsors 5) He covers his face sometimes 6) He is too positive and doesn't share much about his suffering 7) His body build is too big for a traditional ultra runner 8) He doesn't have the pedigree 9) You uses colorful language 10) He/team yelled at WillC when he was calling them a fraud 11) He has abs 12) He's an influencer 13) He hasn't grown a bear and doesn't look scruffy 14) He uses sponsors products to recover 15) He made a bold statement and put it on the van 16) No one in history/never been seen before/just not possible are the terms to describe this journey. 17) He is using GoFundMe for fundraising
If I were the defense attorney, everyone of those would be easy to tear apart: 1) There have been multiple other users on LR that have found fault in the statistical analysis, and it is being run using Strava data rather than the original data source. Just yesterday I showed the cadence stats from my own Strava vs Garmin data, and they were different...supposively Strava is pulling from the original source...there is proof Strava pulls the numbers differently. 2) Just because WillC doesn't believe WG should be able to run those 8k splits doesn't make it impossible (ie, Roger Bannister-no one ever running a 4min mile) 3) Congrats to WG for doing this with a support crew rather than having to suffer with 1 other person or self supported 4) Congrats to WG for pulling in sponsorship $$ to help fund his journey and the team...has any TCer ever said they wanted to do it on a shoestring or wondering where the funds to pay for it were coming from? 5) So what? If the head/face gets burnt, you suffer a ton 6) That is his personal choice to show the joys of running rather than the possible misery. (If you didn't know by now, I would do the same) 7) Sorry he doesn't fall into the "mold" 8) No one has the pedigree until they actually do something. Proves nothing 9) That's his choice to use whatever words he wants to use...some are not offended by them 10) If someone called me a fraud, I would probably yell too 11)If I had his abs, I would just throw every shirt I own away 12) It's great that he is bringing attention and inspiration to the sport 13) It's a crime to want to look good? 14) It seems pretty smart of him to use products that HE BELIEVES are helping him 15) That's called marketing 16) Too many absolutes, and when refuted, they are dismissed because they don't fit the narative 17) It is the single largest fundraising platform in the world. Why wouldn't he use it to raise money for multiple charities?
Facts vs opinions...innocent until proven guilty with facts. You can't convict without facts. Peace out!
But, what we are talking about here is evidence. If I were a sheriff, then I would need evidence to convict. Without it, I couldn't even arrest them...you can't arrest just because you think someone is doing something shady. Evidence is what's needed.
Facts vs opinions...innocent until proven guilty with facts. You can't convict without facts. Peace out!
I haven’t seen anyone calling for Goodge to be arrested. You’re correct: we cannot prove Goodge is cheating without definitive evidence. But we can doubt him. Will C may not have given us enough evidence to prove Goodge is cheating, but he has given us plenty of reason to doubt Goodge.
Here’s hoping others step up to gather evidence of Goodge’s cheating.
I haven’t seen anyone calling for Goodge to be arrested. You’re correct: we cannot prove Goodge is cheating without definitive evidence. But we can doubt him. Will C may not have given us enough evidence to prove Goodge is cheating, but he has given us plenty of reason to doubt Goodge.
Here’s hoping others step up to gather evidence of Goodge’s cheating.
Absolutely true on no one is saying he should be arrested...oh wait, WillC said he was going to/should contact Scottland Yard.
My diatribe above was based on Ivory's crass analogy that 50+ and I would let a murder go...
To your last statement, how about we change it to "Here’s hoping others step up to gather evidence to show that WG is, in fact, running every step of the way or prove that he is not." How about we don't jump to the belief that he is cheating as a lapdog to WillC's opinions.
All 3 of the runs you've posted are pure as the driven snow. Simply don't know what you're on about. Obviously the 2nd one has a complete freeze for a few K, but otherwise nothing untoward at all.
I'm looking for stuff like taking 2 minutes off K's but reducing heartrate, and you're sending me 5s at 140, 6s at 130 and 7s at 120... absolutely perfect. Why on earth would you think I need to see that?
So you don't see a HR fade over time? accompanied with a slight slow down in pace? Exactly as what RB is showing - when you look at the graphical data and not hone in on particular isolated ks.
I guess if not then theres no reasoning with you - if you're convinced this run is fake then theres nothing anyone can say or show you thats going to change your mind.
And for that reason i'm done wasting time posting on here. and i'll spend all the extra time i have doing some actual running!
the guy that ran 6 miles with him as "proof" of anything is a bit odd. if Goodge is twinning (which seems to be the case, because who covers their face like that? in the US in May? it has to be freaking awful.), running 6 miles which amounts to about 10% of his miles per day doesn't seem definitive of anything. neither does Rocco Madonna running 26 miles. that's still less than half of the day's miles.
the only days which were 100% monitored were with willvlc there, and Goodge/team didn't pull any funny business.
Of course I see an HR fade, I'm not blind, but only by some 10-15%, not 20-50. But I also see pretty much every K fitting perfectly with the data, whereas with RB he has 7s at 155 and 6s at 130 much later; whereas you've sent me 5s at 140, and 7s at 120.
I asked for anomalies, and you sent me perfection.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
the guy that ran 6 miles with him as "proof" of anything is a bit odd. if Goodge is twinning (which seems to be the case, because who covers their face like that? in the US in May? it has to be freaking awful.), running 6 miles which amounts to about 10% of his miles per day doesn't seem definitive of anything. neither does Rocco Madonna running 26 miles. that's still less than half of the day's miles.
the only days which were 100% monitored were with willvlc there, and Goodge/team didn't pull any funny business.
nobody finds that odd?
Isn't WC's observation of 1.5 days only equate to only 3% of WG's running? I was that guy that ran with him for those 6 miles. HR didn't fluctuate a bit the entire day from what it was when I was running with him and the rest of the day. Based on WC's premise that almost no one runs that long with that low of a HR. So, you're believing that someone else on his team runs the exact same HR, cadence, stride as to not throw off the stats? That is highly unlikely. Add some logic to the equation.
no my observation was 5 days [last of which was from a big distance as it was after the rock throwing but it wasn't important, as rain was in the air, and he doesn't run in the rain], around 450kms.
98.5% clean data [aside from the Balenger spell], no freakish running or outlandish splits, and massive positive splits, two of which were around an hour. Less than 10% clean data since I left.
the guy that ran 6 miles with him as "proof" of anything is a bit odd. if Goodge is twinning (which seems to be the case, because who covers their face like that? in the US in May? it has to be freaking awful.), running 6 miles which amounts to about 10% of his miles per day doesn't seem definitive of anything. neither does Rocco Madonna running 26 miles. that's still less than half of the day's miles.
the only days which were 100% monitored were with willvlc there, and Goodge/team didn't pull any funny business.
nobody finds that odd?
Isn't WC's observation of 1.5 days only equate to only 3% of WG's running? I was that guy that ran with him for those 6 miles. HR didn't fluctuate a bit the entire day from what it was when I was running with him and the rest of the day. Based on WC's premise that almost no one runs that long with that low of a HR. So, you're believing that someone else on his team runs the exact same HR, cadence, stride as to not throw off the stats? That is highly unlikely. Add some logic to the equation.
that's not how logic works, especially when the twinning seems to be happening on half-day increments and there were no anomalies when WC was present. your 6 miles is proof of nothing because 90% of the day was unmonitored. WC's 1.5 days is proof that for 100% of the time for 1.5 days WG was clean and the pace/HR was where it was expected to be.
how did you even verify WG's heart rate? asking him? WG and RB know there is something funky with their HR data and they're not trying to disprove it. this isn't normal. tech fails are not this consistent, only when not being monitored. if i were WG and my heartrate was this low i'd be at a doctor thinking i was having heart failure. what is his HR when he's asleep? 20bpm? give me a break.
the "X ran a couple miles with him for one day" are red herrings that are completely meaningless if a twin runs the second split.
no my observation was 5 days [last of which was from a big distance as it was after the rock throwing but it wasn't important, as rain was in the air, and he doesn't run in the rain], around 450kms.
98.5% clean data [aside from the Balenger spell], no freakish running or outlandish splits, and massive positive splits, two of which were around an hour. Less than 10% clean data since I left.
sorry for my just now post of 1.5 days. i haven't been following close, so just went with 1.5 days because that's what the troll up there said. if it was 5 days, that's even worse.
Of course I see an HR fade, I'm not blind, but only by some 10-15%, not 20-50. But I also see pretty much every K fitting perfectly with the data, whereas with RB he has 7s at 155 and 6s at 130 much later; whereas you've sent me 5s at 140, and 7s at 120.
I asked for anomalies, and you sent me perfection.
Umm no. Looking at the Rory H run.
KM 1: 5:28 Pace, 164 HR
KM 2: 8:30 Pace 162 HR
Much slower pace, very similar HR
KM 4: 4:50 Pace 148 HR
KM 7: 11:11 Pace 149 HR
Over twice as slow, higher HR.
I've literally looked at the first 7km and blown your pace vs HR analysis out of the water.
no my observation was 5 days [last of which was from a big distance as it was after the rock throwing but it wasn't important, as rain was in the air, and he doesn't run in the rain], around 450kms.
98.5% clean data [aside from the Balenger spell], no freakish running or outlandish splits, and massive positive splits, two of which were around an hour. Less than 10% clean data since I left.
On one of your posts on FB you stating that you only were able to actually observe to 1.5 days. Since you deleted it all, nothing to reference back to. From your obversation, sounds like those were rough weather days including heavy headwind (as I recall from one of your-or his- videos). So, you seeing 5 days worth is the equivalent to me running with him for 6 miles...10% (mine was 10% of the day and yours was 10% of the run). 10% is a sampling not a majority, yes?
I am looking at 70k spells, I am au fait enough to see that Ks can blend into each other and corrupt the next one. What I don't get is such an absolutely massive decline for that second 70k of 158 to 128 and then back to 165 for the last 20 even though he slows down even more by quite a bit.
And the graph looks absolutely nuts.
You've sent data in the first 7k which is clearly absolutely fine with a lovely high HR. Of course there would be nothing afoot there, it's just tiny anomalies, the likes of which we all have. Nothing like the 70k and nearly 8 hours of running that I'm flagging.