Boston Dad may have some explaining to do to his son

[ian]

Well, they could also have used the photographic evidence they already had- and it wouldn't have been so hard to ensure that was complete enough to use as a backup check. They just hadn't considered that it would be needed so they didn't set it up that way.

They could have done a lot of things… and I'm not necessarily arguing that they shouldn't, only that some determined cheaters will successfully circumvent (or appeal) whatever measures are put in place, all the while guaranteeing that the other 99.9% of the runners pay real costs (money and inconvenience) to preserve the appearance of integrity for an event that most don't regard as a competition. Next crisis: I claim (with no firm evidence) that at least 1% of all marathon finishers would not pass WADA-level doping controls. How much would it cost to close that loophole?

[Jwolf]

Well without going down the slippery slope argument- I would say that if nothing is done to close the timing loophole, it won't be too long before people start seeking out the races with courses that are easy to cheat in order to get their BQs.

And it's probably well more than 1% breaking drug rules.

[Jwolf]

Another thought-
If as you say, people won't be willing to pay because they don't believe a race is a competition, then perhaps we'll eventually see races have two tiers of entry-- one for those who enter just for fun, and one whose times do matter to them for one reason or another (qualifying for another race, prize money eligibility, etc.). Those who pay the higher price tier will have their times verified.

But I would also argue that most people who put on a bib and expect a race to be timed are also expecting the results to have some acceptable level of integrity.

[dgrant]

Well without going down the slippery slope argument-I would say that if nothing is done to close the timing loophole, it won't be too long before people start seeking out the races with courses that are easy to cheat in order to get their BQs.

Why would that start happening? Most marathons have always worked on the honour system... cheating has always been easy. I don't think there's a new storm cloud on the horizon.

The takeaway from this isn't that people cheat in marathons. I'd bet there are a dozen fishy Boston runners every single year and nobody cares (and nobody should). This guy got noticed because he went out of his way to court internet celebrity related to something he did fraudulently. Rather than investing resources in accurately verifying marathon performance, we as a society should be focused on imprisoning and torturing people who create or share viral internet content.

[La]

Another thought-
If as you say, people won't be willing to pay because they don't believe a race is a competition, then perhaps we'll eventually see races have two tiers of entry-- one for those who enter just for fun, and one whose times do matter to them for one reason or another (qualifying for another race, prize money eligibility, etc.). Those who pay the higher price tier will have their times verified.

But I would also argue that most people who put on a bib and expect a race to be timed are also expecting the results to have some acceptable level of integrity.

I think it's more likely that the BAA could put stipulations in place that to be considered a qualifying race it has to have a certain number of timing mats along the course. Of course, that's only if the BAA thinks that there are that many cheaters who qualified for their race that it's worth doing something about.

[Dstew]

Two words why all of this will become moot: LIVE TRACKING.

Notice that the Calgary marathon had a new feature that not only where the splits sent out, where the person was on the route was also provided. Even more so with the younger runners, providing instant updates and for the runner to go back and see how they did through each segment may be as important or more so then the integrity issue. I would hazard a guess that 80 - 90% of people would not pay more to prevent a very few, if any, cheaters in their local races. It is not that they approve or condone cheating, it is just that fees are high enough as it were. In my first marathon, that I finished in under 4 hours was the only thing that mattered to me and so if there were 1 or 2 who beat me, good for them for not accomplishing anything. Now if I were on the cusp of a BQ, I would be very interested in paying extra because I would hate not to qualify just because others cheated. Having said that and as above, tell people the few extra bucks everyone will be charged will allow friends and family to track you on a map of the actual course and you will see 5 K or whatever splits after the race, that is a much easier sell in my opinion.

[Dstew]

Looks like he closed off his blog. He's in damage control mode.

He might want to take up golf. We don't give mulligans to people who cheat their way to Boston.

Very poor analogy because something attempting to qualify for a better tournament will have their playing partner keep their score and the entire foursome will be watching to ensure the rules are adhered to. Plus, there are many examples of golfers who have called a rule violation on themselves but I do not recall any runner ever doing that. Not that there are not cheaters in golf as there is a certain segment of the population that lives by the motto if you are not cheating you are not trying.

[Jwolf]

Another thought-
If as you say, people won't be willing to pay because they don't believe a race is a competition, then perhaps we'll eventually see races have two tiers of entry-- one for those who enter just for fun, and one whose times do matter to them for one reason or another (qualifying for another race, prize money eligibility, etc.). Those who pay the higher price tier will have their times verified.

But I would also argue that most people who put on a bib and expect a race to be timed are also expecting the results to have some acceptable level of integrity.

I think it's more likely that the BAA could put stipulations in place that to be considered a qualifying race it has to have a certain number of timing mats along the course. Of course, that's only if the BAA thinks that there are that many cheaters who qualified for their race that it's worth doing something about.

I would hope that they wouldn't require this, because then as Ian said some small races would just get too expensive for their market. Since there are other ways for smaller races to verify times, that should be allowed too.

More technology isn't always the answer either...

Two words why all of this will become moot: LIVE TRACKING.

Any technology can be circumvented, and even with live tracking/timing mats, etc. there are going to be many people who try to wear their friend's chip to get them a BQ time. This already happens, probably more commonly than course-cutting, and probably easier to pull off the larger the race.

So it would to take combination of techniques, different ones working better for different sized races, to stop all the cheaters, if it's even possible.

[RobW]

I'm trying to imagine what the conversation would be like between 2 friends hatching a plan to get the other a BQ. After the race do they go out and celebrate? Do they tell their friends what an awesome race they had and hope they don't search for race photos? Maybe they tell their friends the plan and hope to hear how amazing they are in return. Perhaps the runner friend brags to their friends what an awesome person they are because they got their buddy a BQ. It just seems so weird but yes, I'm sure it happens.

[La]

I'm trying to imagine what the conversation would be like between 2 friends hatching a plan to get the other a BQ. After the race do they go out and celebrate? Do they tell their friends what an awesome race they had and hope they don't search for race photos? Maybe they tell their friends the plan and hope to hear how amazing they are in return. Perhaps the runner friend brags to their friends what an awesome person they are because they got their buddy a BQ. It just seems so weird but yes, I'm sure it happens.

I have friends who have done this (many years ago when you only needed the old BQ time to qualify, not new-BQ-minus-1:30 like it is now). They are sisters who wanted to run Boston together. The faster sister already had a BQ time, so she ran another race under her sister's name to get her a BQ time. Neither one of them thought anything wrong with it.

[Jwolf]

I'm trying to imagine what the conversation would be like between 2 friends hatching a plan to get the other a BQ. After the race do they go out and celebrate? Do they tell their friends what an awesome race they had and hope they don't search for race photos? Maybe they tell their friends the plan and hope to hear how amazing they are in return. Perhaps the runner friend brags to their friends what an awesome person they are because they got their buddy a BQ. It just seems so weird but yes, I'm sure it happens.

I have friends who have done this (many years ago when you only needed the old BQ time to qualify, not new-BQ-minus-1:30 like it is now). They are sisters who wanted to run Boston together. The faster sister already had a BQ time, so she ran another race under her sister's name to get her a BQ time. Neither one of them thought anything wrong with it.

It's POSSIBLE they would see more wrong with it now, because years ago Boston would not even fill up till February or later. Anyone who wanted to run Boston who qualified would get in, so this kind of cheating wouldn't really have been taking a space from someone who earned it.

Then again there are many people who don't think the rules apply to them, and feel a sense of entitlement for things they don't earn. I don't get it. But I wonder how much this goes on now for Boston.

[La]

I'm trying to imagine what the conversation would be like between 2 friends hatching a plan to get the other a BQ. After the race do they go out and celebrate? Do they tell their friends what an awesome race they had and hope they don't search for race photos? Maybe they tell their friends the plan and hope to hear how amazing they are in return. Perhaps the runner friend brags to their friends what an awesome person they are because they got their buddy a BQ. It just seems so weird but yes, I'm sure it happens.

I have friends who have done this (many years ago when you only needed the old BQ time to qualify, not new-BQ-minus-1:30 like it is now). They are sisters who wanted to run Boston together. The faster sister already had a BQ time, so she ran another race under her sister's name to get her a BQ time. Neither one of them thought anything wrong with it.

It's POSSIBLE they would see more wrong with it now, because years ago Boston would not even fill up till February or later. Anyone who wanted to run Boston who qualified would get in, so this kind of cheating wouldn't really have been taking a space from someone who earned it.

Then again there are many people who don't think the rules apply to them, and feel a sense of entitlement for things they don't earn. I don't get it. But I wonder how much this goes on now for Boston.

I think the first example/rationale you gave would apply in this situation. Back then (early 2000s), they weren't taking a spot away from anyone else because all qualifiers could get in. I haven't seen either of them in ages, so I don't know how they'd feel about it today.

[Dstew]

Any technology can be circumvented, and even with live tracking/timing mats, etc. there are going to be many people who try to wear their friend's chip to get them a BQ time. This already happens, probably more commonly than course-cutting, and probably easier to pull off the larger the race.

So it would to take combination of techniques, different ones working better for different sized races, to stop all the cheaters, if it's even possible.

The "Live Tracking" may discourage the more overt and lazy cheaters but until such time as one has to provide photo id with their registration and there is face recognition tied to interim timing mats of 5 k intervals, how far are race directors going to go and how much demand is there for them to do so. The Calgary "marathon" where out of the 15,000 runners, there are usually less then 900 actual marathoners and the rest, 5, 10, 21.1 and now 50 K, is promoting itself as a "charity" event more then a serious road race, national half marathon championship aside. Or the charity aspect gets at least equal billing so if there are a few cheaters that slip through the cracks and do not adversely affect podium finishes, so be it. Two runners were disqualified but that appears because of an language issue and an right turn, left turn, left turn to get to 42.2 instead of the more reasonable continue on in a straight line.

As an aside, I could never figure out why anyone would cheat. In 2004 - 2006 Calgary marathon course, there was a little 1 K or so loop at the very end of the run. Aid station, porta potties on both sides so if one wanted to, they could cut off a few minutes. I did ask myself if I had been behind pace, would I have caved into temptation. The answer was a resounding no. Getting praise for something you did not do. The Boston medal and jacket tainted and thus no more then a fraud. How can anyone take any pride or satisfaction in that? There are people who do but I do not get it.

[Jwolf]

From Runner's World: "How Common is Cheating at Marathons"

Some interesting insight into what some race directors think.

http://www.runnersworld.com/racing/how- ... 3403427089

I find it hard to believe that a shiny finisher's medal is some people's motivation.

[ian]

Potential cheater? Who the hell goes from 4:00/K to 3:37/K in the second half of a race without cutting the course?

SPLIT 1 9.7 km 00:39:11 4:02/km 9.7 km 00:39:11 8 8 3 07:39:14
SPLIT 2 11.4 km 00:45:35 3:59/km 21.1 km 01:24:46 6 6 2 08:24:49
SPLIT 3 13.9 km 00:50:26 3:37/km 35 km 02:15:12 4 4 1 09:15:15
SPLIT 4 7.2 km 00:35:06 4:52/km 42.2 km 02:50:18 4 4 1 09:50:21

These results were from my race yesterday, but similar inconsistencies are common and speak to the near impossibility of being able to use typically collected data to weed out cheaters. For the amount of money that it would take to close these loopholes (added to entry fees), I'd probably stop racing.

[Jwolf]

The point is there are plenty of cases when the existing technology identifies cheaters and race directors turn a blind eye.

In your cases your race history and explanation of the circumstances would be enough if there was any doubt you earned those times. Since they are slower than your other times it's a moot point.

[ian]

The point is there are plenty of cases when the existing technology identifies cheaters and race directors turn a blind eye.

In your cases your race history and explanation of the circumstances would be enough if there was any doubt you earned those times. Since they are slower than your other times it's a moot point.

How much time and obligation do race timers and directors have to research every superficially suspicious result, especially when no extra payment is involved and if the consequence of a false positive (i.e., a defamation lawsuit) drastically outweighs the consequence of a false negative (i.e., a cheater gets to pay thousands of dollars to run some snooty east coast race). In other words, this isn't a really important problem in the grand scheme of things.

[Spirit Unleashed]

I find it hard to believe that a shiny finisher's medal is some people's motivation.

At the Irving marathon in April, I reported a suspected cheater. Suspected cheater was someone who had publicly said she was trying to break the Guiness World Record for 1,000 marathons and Irving was to be her 800th marathon. since I knew this person, I had watched for her the whole race. The location where I saw her was completely impossible. Later I checked her splits and saw she was missing 3 of them. So I reported her. The RD did add about 2 hours to her time.

Also, the last time I was in San Antonio, I noted that she put herself down for a marathon time in her own race. But I knew she had spent the day in the starting area and not on course.

So, this person is cheating to get the world record. For her, it is more about claiming the recognition than actually earning the recognition. That is, the attention of others is desired, not the actual doing of the thing.

[Jwolf]

I find it hard to believe that a shiny finisher's medal is some people's motivation.

At the Irving marathon in April, I reported a suspected cheater. Suspected cheater was someone who had publicly said she was trying to break the Guiness World Record for 1,000 marathons and Irving was to be her 800th marathon. since I knew this person, I had watched for her the whole race. The location where I saw her was completely impossible. Later I checked her splits and saw she was missing 3 of them. So I reported her. The RD did add about 2 hours to her time.

Also, the last time I was in San Antonio, I noted that she put herself down for a marathon time in her own race. But I knew she had spent the day in the starting area and not on course.

So, this person is cheating to get the world record. For her, it is more about claiming the recognition than actually earning the recognition. That is, the attention of others is desired, not the actual doing of the thing.

So odd. This is beyond my comprehension.

[Dstew]

I believe the philosophical issue that the same reason why people cheat is the same reason why people should care. That is people cheat for external recognition but the argument to spend vast treasure to stop this is because to quote someone from the article, it "devalues" the achievement of others. I love my shinny object and to show it off but having said that, I know how hard I worked to get to the race, to run the race and so nothing anyone else does takes away from that effort and accomplishment. In the 5 Peaks races, Sports series in my neck of the woods, I would say over 50% of the people do not stick around to get their medal. Just the way the races are run and what seems to be timing issues, it is 60 - 90 minutes before medals are presented. I started to cool down and then go for a 45 minute recovery run if I won a medal and two years ago decided it was too hot and so just left. On that day, had someone had cheated and beaten me, good for them. To me, it would be meaningless because the most important person, myself would know what I actually did.

Just the other day my wife suggested I should not run on the 4th because in her words, as stupid and idiotic she thinks my racing is, at least I was always well trained for the race. And this time, I was not and so what was the point. Plus, there was a good chance I would not take account for my lack of training and she would have to live with my misery if I screwed up the rest of golf season. So I could not really care if instead of 42nd I was 44th overall or lately, 450th because cheaters "robbed" me of a couple of spots.

I do have empathy for someone who loses a chance to run Boston or accept a medal on race day but race fees are now such that to prevent very small numbers, how much time and money is to be spent chasing them down.

[HCcD]

http://runningmagazine.ca/letsrun-plays ... y-cheated/

[purdy65]

Where is that dead horse meme when you need it

[richie-rich]

Where is that dead horse meme when you need it

over with Tiger Woods in Scotland apparently....

[Jwolf]

Where is that dead horse meme when you need it

lol!

[Robinandamelia]

That's funny...those Let's Run people are relentless....but I gotta say, if I was him, I'd train and go for that $10,000