Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Moderation is locking the thread, "hiding-deleting" is disciplining. Showing not only that you have the power to do it but admonishing the contributors that they aren't playing nice.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [ttmonkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Moderation is locking the thread, "hiding-deleting" is disciplining. Showing not only that you have the power to do it but admonishing the contributors that they aren't playing nice."

okay, except at the very moment that thread went away, this one was born, for the continuation of the discussion. i told none of you you couldn't discuss this topic. the people online at the time that thread was closed, and the last several posts, convinced me that the discussion was turning into entertainment at the expense of julie miller, and her friends and her family and everyone who was dealing with the recent revelations.

as well as i can tell all the proof, the data, the charts, the former and current DQs, what might be the future DQs, there here on this thread or will be here as additional facts come to light. i understand that you feel that the intervention was overly tight and restrictive. a large number of posts, PMs and private emails suggest otherwise. here is one i got this morning:

"
I want to thank you for allowing the original Julie Miller Thread to run as long as it did. It did indeed serve its purpose and for it to continue served only to amuse people that were looking to hate but there still needs to be a conclusion to her other results as there are eye witnesses that are afraid to come out."

others wish, i'm sure, that thread would have been closed down more quickly.

welcome to democracy. welcome to the internet. welcome to the differences of opinion on how things ought to be done when the sample size of stakeholders grows.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
i must agree with what others have written. friends of mine have done some pretty unpalatable things. cheated on their spouses. were dopers. even cut courses. and other equally unpalatable stuff, or worse.

they're all still my friends, and i will stick up for them when they are accused of being entirely bad because they have one particular failing, weakness, or when a bad angel sits on one shoulder.

it is easy to hold more than one idea in your head about the same person. you just have to open yourself up to the realization that people can be very good, very honorable, very giving, yet have one or more dark, weak failings. in fact, ask yourself if that's you. because it's me.

Just to make myself clear...To Dan and others, I agree. I have have the same friends and in the eyes of many of my own friends I have done some truly hurtful things (I have) and they are still with me (thankfully). My mistake was reading her statement that she would "stand by a friend no matter what information anyone uncovers" while I am at work and biased by this I thought of the worst case scenario (you really don't want to know). I'm sure she wrote it in that of her own context, which is probably one of sports/hobbies and I'm guessing, a more "sheltered" life and again I agree, what she has done it is not the end of the world and it is not something that needs nonconstructive shaming/bullying.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
At least I challenged him to his face. Others races know exactly what happened. Still interesting that I got made out to be the bad guy for calling out this person for not doing the race correctly.


I had a similar experience. Someone posted a time that was simply too good to be true. I stated it and everyone, people who didn't know the guy, jumped down my throat and said I was wrong.

I wasn't wrong. His time was wrong because he started in 1 swim wave early. Regardless, he still won the overall but it was funny how pointing out the obvious makes you a bad guy.

And note... I never even said he cheated; all I said was, "there is something wrong there. That time is not possible."
Last edited by: BrentwoodTriGuy: Aug 28, 15 12:21
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is motivate an acceptable topic to discuss? I personally don't think KQ'ing or winning for the sake of winning was the goal for cutting the course. I think she was a top performer in the past which earned her an admirable following. And once your performance starts to fade, she probably didn't want to disappoint all of those who held her in such high esteem, so she cut the course, not to win for herself, but to win to not disappoint everyone who "expected" her to win.

In my opinion, that's a pretty likely motive. The shame of disappointing those who care so much about you would be a pretty rough thing to deal with. I'll have a similar situation in a few weeks in Tahoe. My parents are driving 2000 miles to watch me race, and as much as I want to win, I don't want to disappoint them. Obviously I'm not going to cheat to do it, and whatever happens that day happens, but I know I'll be thinking about them when shit gets real during the marathon.

Not to derail, but I think there's a psychological side to racing that a lot of people don't talk about. Physically, racing is very demanding, but it's also equally psychologically demanding as well.
Last edited by: krez: Aug 28, 15 12:29
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [krez] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
thank you for asking. i would prefer we didn't talk about this yet. this opens up all manner of amateur diagnoses, and some are going to be silly and hurtful. what i hope is that one day soon we'll know more. i think that's more likely if we just exercise a little patience and see if it doesn't happen on its own. if it does, and when we know more, then by all means you all can have at it.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
the people online at the time that thread was closed, and the last several posts, convinced me that the discussion was turning into entertainment at the expense of julie miller, and her friends and her family and everyone who was dealing with the recent revelations.


This is why it is "your" sandbox. I actually don't think the intervention was overly tight or restrictive, these are the rules we operate with as contributors. We don't pay for hosting or content, this is your site and you are pretty liberal in allowing discussion up to a point. That point was obviously surpassed by a contribution but without knowing what the specific content was that got the thread hidden, it maybe only a matter of time before this thread suffers a similar fate. It seems incongruous and disingenuous when other threads of similar character are treated differently.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [deh20] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
deh20 wrote:
While I would probably agree that the previous thread had exceeded its usefulness and deserved to be locked, I seriously question deleting the thread entirely. Sure, I wouldn't want my kids to read that about me, but if I didn't want my kids to find out I was a thief, I wouldn't steal. More importantly, though, it sets a new precedent. To my knowledge, similar threads have been locked (or not), but not deleted. I'm thinking specifically about Finman and T3. What is different in this case that warrants some sort of different treatment? That she seems otherwise honorable? That she has young children? Those seem like arbitrary criteria.

I'd appreciate some more insight as to why the thread was deleted rather than locked, because it really feels like arbitrary censorship.

Dan, I tend to agree with deh20...lock it, but don't delete it. Locking it leaves a record of how the community reacted to the scenario, both the good and bad sides of "us" collectively. I don't feel that it is fair to any of those who have contributed our time to any thread to delete threads in entirety. Some massively objectionable posts have been and should be deleted, but entire threads that are an overall contribution by community members would be better left up. Locked yes, Deleted, no. I am pretty sure that the thread technically is not "deleted" but the 1's and "0's" are still on your servers, but rather you/moderators have the option of making it no longer visible or accessible. If that is the case, I would urge you to make it visible but lock it
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
it seems as if the previous thread on this topic has exhausted its purpose. accordingly, from here on in i'd prefer that you limit your posts to anything that you want to say regarding the factual elements of this particular case. catching someone who has cut a course, yes, i'm all for that. these discussions serve a purpose, as we ought to have the expectation of fair sport and uncovering cases where contestants do not finish the prescribed course, whether inadvertently or on purpose, is helpful. this is where my interest in these threads starts and stops.

Well it seems that we Canadians have succeeded in giving the sporting world the original 100m doping convict (Ben Johnson) and now the original masters course cutting Mdot age group KQ champion....whoever said that Canadians were nice. Now carry on with this thread and don't trust any of those stupid doping cheating course cutting Canadians. Man, I am going to have to find an island in the South Pacific near the international date line and take out citizenship there. We're on a roll up here in Canada! Thankfully we have sportstats to keep everyone honest around here in the course cutting front.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [ttmonkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"This is why it is "your" sandbox."

fine. just as long as we all agree that every sandbox, whether private or public, will have a governor, moderator, policeman, and that person's sense of appropriateness will rule until you all replace him with someone else. so, you can complain that it's my sandbox, but you will always FREELY CHOOSE to have a sandbox czar act as a referee. the NFL is roger goodell's sandbox. robert kraft disagrees mightily with decisions goodell made. robert kraft is goodell's employer. kraft freely chose to place goodell in charge of the sandbox. if kraft could oust goodell from his post, he would simply replace him with another sandbox czar, and every owner would willfully submit to the best wisdom of the NFL sandbox czar. many will think the sandbox czar unfair. arbitrary. unwise. stupid. corrupt. but they'll always have a sandbox czar.

so when you say it's my sandbox, you will always have a sandbox czar, who makes final decisions, and it will always be your preference to have one whether you realize it or not.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
+1 The baby was thrown out with the bathwater when the thread disappeared. I would prefer to see it displayed and locked following deleting that which is unacceptable.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Runout] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Given that there are now public accusations of cyber-bulling, no doubt related, in part, to the pulled thread, I think hiding it (temporarily or permanently) was the correct action to take. There have been a couple of very high-profile cases in Canada related to cyber-bulling and teenagers. While this isn't at all of the same magnitude, I would argue that shutting down certain topics of conversations and hiding the other discussion is the right things to do at this time.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Runout] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Runout wrote:
+1 The baby was thrown out with the bathwater when the thread disappeared. I would prefer to see it displayed and locked following deleting that which is unacceptable.

+2

Would welcome removal (moderation?:)) of the mob amusemt from posts 250 and out, but the discussion before that was fine, imo.

Also - slowman mentioned something about the coaches post as reason to hide the thread. If the thread stays hidden I'd like to hear a bit more detail on why the coach's post should get buried (I'd get it if there was suspicion that it was not the actual coach coming forward though..)
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [lovegoat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lovegoat wrote:
Runout wrote:
+1 The baby was thrown out with the bathwater when the thread disappeared. I would prefer to see it displayed and locked following deleting that which is unacceptable.

+2

Would welcome removal (moderation?:)) of the mob amusemt from posts 250 and out, but the discussion before that was fine, imo.

Also - slowman mentioned something about the coaches post as reason to hide the thread. If the thread stays hidden I'd like to hear a bit more detail on why the coach's post should get buried (I'd get it if there was suspicion that it was not the actual coach coming forward though..)

Quite honestly I still don't quite understand how her coach didn't pick up on any red flags. I have been coached, and my spouse is a couch. Unless you have so many athletes you're coaching that you are not able to dedicate the time and effort to analyzing any of their training and race results, then I don't see how some of JM's performances could go without suspicion. I understand that she didn't post training files, but still... Some of her performances involved out-biking or out-running many of the pro men and women. How does that pass even the mildest sniff test? Further, these were performances at high profile races, not local sprints, where one would expect a higher level of post-race analysis.

I can give the coach the benefit of the doubt that he genuinely didn't pick up on any of the anomalies, but that, to me, suggests he didn't spend much time discussing her racing goals or looking at her performances and discussing them with her afterwards. Maybe it was a combination of them: some suspicions existed, but we're not followed up on, and JM was just one of a very many athletes being coached?
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [BrentwoodTriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BrentwoodTriGuy wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
At least I challenged him to his face. Others races know exactly what happened. Still interesting that I got made out to be the bad guy for calling out this person for not doing the race correctly.


I had a similar experience. Someone posted a time that was simply too good to be true. I stated it and everyone, people who didn't know the guy, jumped down my throat and said I was wrong.

I wasn't wrong. His time was wrong because he started in 1 swim wave early. Regardless, he still won the overall but it was funny how pointing out the obvious makes you a bad guy.

And note... I never even said he cheated; all I said was, "there is something wrong there. That time is not possible."

Agreed. This is why I smile when some ask posters why they did not bring the concerns up to the RD, etc.

.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [banana] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
banana wrote:
Given that there are now public accusations of cyber-bulling, no doubt related, in part, to the pulled thread, I think hiding it (temporarily or permanently) was the correct action to take. There have been a couple of very high-profile cases in Canada related to cyber-bulling and teenagers. While this isn't at all of the same magnitude, I would argue that shutting down certain topics of conversations and hiding the other discussion is the right things to do at this time.

Well,I don't think you can draw any link between thread in question and cyber bullying. We might think there is a link and there might be a link but first you have to prove something factually as slowman has asked on numerous fronts in the past. If there is bad behaviour from people in cyberspace towards the course cutter, that is disappointing. I think it is entirely OK to discuss her actions in public related to racing and course cutting. The other character assassinations are not needed and as slowman said, there can be parts of the persons persona that imperfect and perhaps repugnant while others that may even be admirable (I don't know the course cutter in any way, but being a human like the rest of us, I suspect there are positive aspects of her personality outside racing that may even be awesome, while her course cutting is going to be vilified by the community). I don't think she deserves a pass on the vilification of her course cutting and having the original thread pulled because she may have some positive aspects of her personality. This being a tri forum, we're focused on her behaviour in triathlon and hopefully the original thread can be locked and made publicly viewable once slowman has pulled a few non triathlon related character assassination posts.

As others said, no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
i must agree with what others have written. friends of mine have done some pretty unpalatable things. cheated on their spouses. were dopers. even cut courses. and other equally unpalatable stuff, or worse.

they're all still my friends, and i will stick up for them when they are accused of being entirely bad because they have one particular failing, weakness, or when a bad angel sits on one shoulder.

it is easy to hold more than one idea in your head about the same person. you just have to open yourself up to the realization that people can be very good, very honorable, very giving, yet have one or more dark, weak failings. in fact, ask yourself if that's you. because it's me.

I agree people can make bad choices, make mistakes, hurt others, lie, steal, cheat etc. And we still love and support our friends. However, we do not condone, turn our backs and ignore the indiscretion, pretend it did not happen, and even REWARD them.
I am sure people, even ST posters are willing to forgive. But she has to admit that she cheated. She lied. She stole from her fellow athletes. She took trips that she didn't deserve. Took awards she didn't deserve and took them from others. Deceived her supporters. Shall I go on?
Last edited by: Ty: Aug 28, 15 14:18
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [lovegoat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"If the thread stays hidden I'd like to hear a bit more detail on why the coach's post should get buried"

i'm happy hosting the coach's post. if anybody's got it handy, post it. if not i'll dig it out and post it here.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ossenbrink wrote:
Hi everyone,
Thanks for the feedback, criticism and positive words regarding my coaching and coaching ethics.
As you would expect, I have cut my ties from Julie Miller. A lot of you have put in a lot of amazing work researching her performances and have found questionable results or even evidence that she did not follow the rules and cut the course. I don't know what it takes for a person to do something like this - there are dopers and there are drafters and course cutters - all of these are serious rule infractions

I agree with some you that I should have researched or analyzed her results after some races more in detail but I did not and this was my mistake! I coached Julie based on her feedback. She did not use Garmin devices or a Powermeter or even a bike computer or downloadable watch. I relied purely on her feedback through TrainingPeaks which was only provided to 10% with some HR numbers. Never was there a any doubt brought up to me from others that she might hav cut courses short or cheated in other ways leading up to this.
I tolerate ZERO cheating with my athletes and as I said before it is possible that I could have caught this earlier with paying better attention - my fault but as a coach I'm not out there to question every race result athletes produce. Nobody expects this from people. I'm NOT responsible for any athletes action and these actions she produced are out of my control.

I have been talking to Dan Empfield (slowman) and Jimmy Riccitello (Head IM official) trying to assist as much as I can.

Im open to discuss this further. Do it directly, you can contact me via the message board and I will exchange email or a phone after to discuss.

Thanks,
Bjoern
Last edited by: Uncle Phil: Aug 28, 15 14:26
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Ty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lance admitted his mistakes but many sure do not seem to be willing to let it go.

I think many would have considered doing exactly what Lance did if they were in his shoes.

I am still a Lance supporter. I can forgive.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Ty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
to you, and to dev, there is a school of thought that forgiveness can be extended, but it's not granted unless it's accepted. everyone to whom i have spoken feels this way about this situation. even her supporters to whom i've spoken are supporters rather than abettors. they support her, and maintain their confidence in her, but don't absolve the acts.

i have not spoken to anyone who thinks she ought to be given a pass, absent her accepting the forgiveness and that means acknowledging the need for it. nobody wants to be forgiven for an act that he or she does not acknowledge requires forgiveness. that's the stand-off. last i knew, that's where we're at. i just don't know that 100 more posts reiterating this serves the purpose.

i have 3 dogs, and there's a 12-foot long, 4" diameter piece of PVC pipe on the property where we walk in the morning. when there's a varmint in that pipe, a dog gets on each end of the pipe and barks repeatedly, reasoning i guess that enough barking will convince the varmint to come out and get eaten. that tactic never works. it's cathartic for the dogs, i guess, but it never coaxes the varmint out. in fact, it probably convinces the varmint to stay put.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
to you, and to dev, there is a school of thought that forgiveness can be extended, but it's not granted unless it's accepted. everyone to whom i have spoken feels this way about this situation. even her supporters to whom i've spoken are supporters rather than abettors. they support her, and maintain their confidence in her, but don't absolve the acts.

i have not spoken to anyone who thinks she ought to be given a pass, absent her accepting the forgiveness and that means acknowledging the need for it. nobody wants to be forgiven for an act that he or she does not acknowledge requires forgiveness. that's the stand-off. last i knew, that's where we're at. i just don't know that 100 more posts reiterating this serves the purpose.

i have 3 dogs, and there's a 12-foot long, 4" diameter piece of PVC pipe on the property where we walk in the morning. when there's a varmint in that pipe, a dog gets on each end of the pipe and barks repeatedly, reasoning i guess that enough barking will convince the varmint to come out and get eaten. that tactic never works. it's cathartic for the dogs, i guess, but it never coaxes the varmint out. in fact, it probably convinces the varmint to stay put.

Dan, given that I don't know the course cutter athlete, I don't really care if she admits to it or not.

What I care is that what was taken from others is restored (podium placements, Kona slots etc) and that measures are put in place so that neither Julie Miller nor anyone in our community can easily circumvent the system. The most important thing is that courses are properly designed and timing wires put in place for early alert of course cutting (intentional or unintentional makes no diff from a pure results angle).

I don't care if she repents or not, because unlike a pro athlete who I might have a vested interest in following, I have no vested interest in this athlete. I only care that she nor others have future chances to steal podiums, Kona slots or placements that rightfully were earned by others.

I sat down with Marc Roy CEO of sportstats and he showed me the complex analytics they run on the data to catch the 5-10 athletes at every race that either try to intentionally or non intentionally cut corners. You don't hear about all these folks who get DQ'd. Sportstats on the night of IM Whislter, alerted WTC to the course cutting and recommended a DQ. Marc was timing at IMLP and was also helping his team remotely who were in BC. They check all the top 40 age group finishers who might be in line for a KQ immediately the night before rolldown and can see where entire segments are being cut, or where there are sudden "speed ups" (for example, an athlete could get a lift in a car, but if that athletes pace on a segment was out of line with the median change in pace and their own pace, it shows up rather glaringly). They go through a fairly complex analysis of Mdot race results, but they can only work with race course set up and where timing wires are put in place or not. They make recommendations on placements of wires etc to ensure there is no course cutting, but RD's due to budgets may or may not pay for that.

I have gone to way too many races (including IM Branded) where there is no timing wire at the turnarounds on the bike or run, or in the case of Whistler, no return to land after swim loop 1 for chip "in" before swim loop 2. These are fundamentally flawed problems in course design. Part of the big value that WTC holds is the keys to Kona, but if they can't put on a fair competition for those who strive to get access to the elusive KQ club, then they are de valuing their own Goose that is laying the golden eggs. After a while the eggs won't look so golden, when you have course cutters, drafters and dopers rewarded (or as a minimum no means of catching them in action).
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I sat down with Marc Roy CEO of sportstats and he showed me the complex analytics they run on the data to catch the 5-10 athletes at every race that either try to intentionally or non intentionally cut corners. You don't hear about all these folks who get DQ'd. Sportstats on the night of IM Whislter, alerted WTC to the course cutting and recommended a DQ. Marc was timing at IMLP and was also helping his team remotely who were in BC. They check all the top 40 age group finishers who might be in line for a KQ immediately the night before rolldown and can see where entire segments are being cut, or where there are sudden "speed ups" (for example, an athlete could get a lift in a car, but if that athletes pace on a segment was out of line with the median change in pace and their own pace, it shows up rather glaringly). They go through a fairly complex analysis of Mdot race results, but they can only work with race course set up and where timing wires are put in place or not. They make recommendations on placements of wires etc to ensure there is no course cutting, but RD's due to budgets may or may not pay for that.
Thanks for sharing this with us! I'm curious why WTC choose not to DQ as recommended by Sportstats initially and only DQ'd now? I'm like you Paul in that I personally don't care if she admits to it, but I will be disappointed if WTC or Canada's triathlon governing body doesn't come down with at least a two year suspension. It is quite obvious that she has cut courses at multiple races and is a habitual cheater.


Tony
http://www.triathleteguru.com
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dev, the technology is there is catch most, if not all, folks that do not do the full swim correctly, the full bike correctly, or the full run correctly.

I have been to a number of world events where there was no technology used on a multi lap bike or run course. There ended up being a number of
issues with folks doing only 1 lap or cutting the course. Since these races had not installed timing locations such that this was impossible to not catch,
things were a real mess. I have seen them in my AG. I have seen them impact other racers at these world events. For what we all pay, to have
these level of races "cut the corners" to save a few dollars is, well, ....

So, any race that wants to do it right

Needs to have a timing mat at the beginning of the swim. And if a multi lap, we need to come out of the water and go across another timing mat.

I really like the post about a timing chip that is put on the bike helmet so there can be timing mats at the the furthest part of the bike course.

Any run course, needs to have mats at the furthest point on the run. And depending on configuration, multiple mats.

So easy to do and it really dose not cost that much compared to us athletes having to "prove" to the RD that someones races results are in question.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: IM Canada F40-44: new thread [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"What I care is that what was taken from others is restored (podium placements, Kona slots etc) and that measures are put in place so that neither Julie Miller nor anyone in our community can easily circumvent the system."

so, i called triathlon canada about this. you have this athlete. do you have an interest in what's going on? either helping her be vindicated, or if she's guilty helping inoculate future competitors against the specter of course cutting?

at first, it took me one entire conversation just to convince the media liaison person that, yes, IM Canada was sanctioned by the NF. but i got a follow up email:

"please note that while the course was sanctioned by Triathlon BC, the race competition rules for the event are enforced and sanctioned by World Triathlon Corporation (WTC) and its franchisees, and therefore any participant infringement and/or appeal will be a matter for WTC. As noted previously, I therefore suggest you direct your queries to the WTC organisation or Ironman Canada for further comment and information."

so, the idea that you're going to get triathlon canada to take ANY interest AT ALL in anything that includes participation in an ironman race must be considered against the paragraph quoted above.

so, somebody cuts a course, and let's leave ms. miller out of it. somebody cuts a course. an american man. an australian woman. just, in general. let us assume that the course cutting was found to be deliberate. you might determine this because of multiple factors (no chip + course cut), or multiple races where this occurred, or eyewitnesses. i won't recommend what constitutes proof, just, let's assume that you're pretty confident there's proof of the intention to cut the course.

in which bucket to you throw this infraction? is intentional course cutting a single-race-specific violation, like littering? or a suspension-from-racing violation?

most competitors think it's a suspension-type violation, but most race organizations and federations do not treat it with the same ardency.

i'm not going to opine right now on where we ought to be on this; what we ought to do, as a sport. i don't know. i just know there's a gulf between what athletes probably want and what federations are prepared to do. they have no problem suspending you for a year if you use your buddies ID in a race, but how many of these other suspensions occur?



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: Aug 28, 15 15:34
Quote Reply

Prev Next