Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

marathoninvestigation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 197 posts

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#111

Post by flocial »

wingerlang wrote: post #38
npunt wrote: post #20

Regardless of the cheating, this type of post doesn't fully sit right with me. Given the permanence of record on the internet, this does bring up the issue of how we police bad behavior, and how we incorporate forgiveness into that. That said, the poster was pretty fair, and generally refer to her as "the runner". It definitely reads as an obsessive sleuthing, no doubt in part because there were follow-on discoveries…

> It definitely reads as an obsessive sleuthing The whole blog (business?) is about identifying cheaters in marathons. Just in case you missed it (I only noticed the second time I went to the page).

The domain name is quite straight forward. I honestly don't understand the discussion revolving around the morality of investigating falsified competition times in a recorded sports event with prizes for placement.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#112

Post by Ntrails »

barking wrote: post #108
Ntrails wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? If I choose to cheat on a test to pass a class and avoid studying it's a poor decision (from a risk vs reward perspective) and also a dishonest one (from a societal perspective). Many dishonest choices are poor ones. I guess you're arguing that poor implies bad judgement which is a lesser crime than dishonesty? But actually in some cases I'd rather have the latter than the former.

Poor is deliberately chosen in an effort to understate things. I can see why she would try to downplay her actions and hope that everyone else would play along.

Here's how I interpret the two phrases:

"I done fucked up" vs "I lied"

Personally I don't really read it as downplaying (though I accept I may not attach a normal level of stigma to dishonesty)

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#113

Post by flocial »

Dowwie wrote: post #68

I am not of the few vocal minority here who sympathizes with the person who cheated. Marathons are shared, sacred experiences organized by a community of volunteers. The marathoninvestigation.com author is protecting that which is sacred and shared among the running community. That is a noble cause and worth commending.

I agree but perhaps it's because the majority of apologists do not truly appreciate the challenges of running such races that they place a higher value on an amateur runner's privacy than the results of an arbitrary running event being skewed by a cheater.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#114

Post by gjem97 »

gk1 wrote: post #104
jomar wrote: post #57

You would think the turnaround point would be a natural place for the race organisers to put a timing mat. They would capture an extra split time and be able to automatically identify runners succumbing to this temptation.

Timing mats are usually placed at the same distance in every race: 5k, 10k, 13.1mi, etc. Adding extra mats probably means more cost. That didn't prevent the 2016 Philadelphia Marathon organizers from placing an unannounced mat at a turnaround point 22 miles into the race. It helped them catch hundreds of cheaters. And even if you can afford the extra mats, another challenge is where to place them. It's obvious with a…

Hundreds of cheaters?! Now I'm starting to understand why marathon sleuthing is the cottage industry that it is.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#115

Post by flocial »

creo wrote: post #23

Publicly shaming people for money is not right way for holding the true, athletic, fair-play spirit of running. While his work and methods are outstanding, it's still ethical burden to ask for donations just to humiliate wrongdoers. Don't get me wrong, i'm a runner myself and i'm all about reporting, but making it opportunistic just doesn't feel right for me.

All sports governing bodies do exeactly that. How else do you uphold the spirit of fairness?

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#116

Post by Bartweiss »

aioprisan wrote: post #107
npunt wrote: post #20

Regardless of the cheating, this type of post doesn't fully sit right with me. Given the permanence of record on the internet, this does bring up the issue of how we police bad behavior, and how we incorporate forgiveness into that. That said, the poster was pretty fair, and generally refer to her as "the runner". It definitely reads as an obsessive sleuthing, no doubt in part because there were follow-on discoveries…

Why should someone who cheated at a PUBLIC event and very publicly claimed the prize and actively misled other runners and the judging committee not be exposed publicly? Is it not in the public interest to punish these peoples? Or should we never report on such misdeeds for fear of any personal and professional retribution? Isn't that part of being a responsible adult in a civil society? She's a sponsored running/lif…

I don't think there's any reason this post shouldn't have happened, or the cheating shouldn't have been given a public, lasting record. And yeah, the sponsorship and team membership raise this from "costing someone else a medal" to "serious manipulation".

But I share the sense that something is weird here. Maybe it's just the section trying to cast doubt on the claim that she was feeling nauseous - there's a sentiment here that I find strange regardless of the bare facts.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#117

Post by dmix »

pc86 wrote: post #97
Belphemur wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the big picture. As said in the parent, other news are covering also the story with her real name and pictures. It's a shame fest with media trying to give as much info on the woman they can. Not this article in particular, but the coverage of the story is borderline hateful. The Internet don't like cheater.

> other news are covering also the story with her real name and pictures Should they blur her face and not use her name?

This is a good question. It's easy to ask people to be reasonable and not take it too far. But there will always be writers online who don't have that filter.

Social media loves a good witch hunt.

At most we can only really be directly critical on a case by case basis. And try to push back generally.

Should this particular blog post have blurred her face? If it's certain she will be identified in other races regardless if her pic is spread around then I agree, it would probably be wise to blur it to at least temper the hivemind.

This is more about personal responsibility than unrealistically expecting everyone to follow your world view.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#118

Post by agentgt »

Not to be too tangential but I'm actually looking for a good running watch (I'm just getting back into running) and possibly heart rate monitor + gps. I noticed in the article they show her watch (to show the discrepancy in distance). What watch is that? What is the running software?

EDIT (I missed the Garmin 235 link and paragraph). I am not sure how I missed it over and over (I was using my phone) and yes I feel dumb for posting the comment.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#119

Post by Bartweiss »

roadnottaken wrote: post #50
fergie wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thirded. It can be really easy to make navigational errors in amateur races, especially with turnaround points. Usually there is no crowd lining the whole course, signage is bad, and the marshalling can be spotty. Yes, this person is a bit narcissistic and a tad dishonest, but it might just have been easier to go along with the misunderstanding rather than fess up to messing up. EDIT: OK, OK, "very dishonest" then. M…

No way. I've missed turnarounds in races multiple times (although this usually results in running farther than intended) and it would NEVER occur to me to just go with it and grab a podium spot. This goes way beyond "a tad dishonest".

Tangential question: do runners get disqualified for overruns? I can't imagine many people running too far reach the podium, but I'm curious whether accidentally adding a half mile is still a disqualifying error.

Re: Runner Disqualified After Claiming 2nd Place in Fort Lauderdale Half Marathon

#120

Post by dmix »

kbart wrote: post #88
DanBC wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I don't see any "shame-fest" here. Did you read all the comments? Did you see she's closed her social media accounts?

I was talking about the article itself. I don't usually read comments bar selected few sites (HN included), because there are always trolls and haters. It's not the article's fault that we have such dire situation on the whole Internet.

> It's not the article's fault that we have such dire situation on the whole Internet.

On a related note, Milo Yiannopoulos got banned from Twitter for the actions of his followers. It's commonly cited throughout the media that he was banned for racism but he was actually blamed for some of his followers who jumped into the thread. At most from his 4-5 tweets during the incident you could say that he was insensitive, but he never crossed the line into racism or said anything particularly heinous.

This brings up good questions about the responsibility of people for their followers online. At what level are you responsible for drawing out this behaviour? Should they be regulating random people who comment on their blog post?

Note: not debating Milo in general, just the rationale for this one case of permanently banning a person from Twitter

Post reply on HN