Dear
Ms. McKeever and Committee,
I
am writing to you, as well as copying this email to sponsors of the Lehigh
Valley Marathon ("LVM"), several local and national news outlets, newspapers
and magazines, sporting/running organizations (including the Boston Marathon and
its Racing Director), and other social media venues regarding your flawed
statement, convoluted logic and perplexing decision not to disqualify Mike Rossi
in spite of compelling, if not conclusive, photographic evidence that he did
not run 26.2 miles. I realize that the
LVM Committee's task was not easy. Most
decisions and issues of this nature and magnitude seldom are. In fact, I'm sure you've been inundated by
e-mails and phone calls in light of the decision not to disqualify Mike Rossi
from the LVM. I share the sentiment of all
runners and non-runners alike who expressed their disappointment and shock with
the decision. I don't know if there is
any room for you to reconsider the decision but you and the LVM Committee were
entrusted to uphold the integrity of the race, the spirit of competition and the
reliability of the results, especially since the results of this race are often
used in an effort to qualify for the Boston Marathon. Sadly however, the statement released on May
29, 2015 by Lisa Walkiewicz on behalf of the LVM Committee demonstrated that
you and the LVM Committee failed on all accounts, resulting in the loss of
credibility of the race and its directors and a stain not soon forgotten on the
sport of running. It is a bit ironic that
the LVM advertises that it is the second fastest marathon in the country because
that byline has already become the butt of jokes as to the reason why it is
such a "fast" marathon.
The
statement that "…the Marathon committee concluded that while there is data from
Rossi’s participation in other racing events indicating that Rossi’s time may
not be accurate, there is not conclusive evidence that his time in the 2014
LVHN Via Marathon is inaccurate"
is troubling for several
reasons. First, Mike Rossi's LVM time is
nowhere near consistent with his other published race results, training logs
and social media posts, yet his race time seems to be the only issue that the LVM
Committee really considered, although there is another, much more compelling
piece of evidence that is discussed below but seemingly without comment in the
LVM Committee’s statement. Nevertheless,
it appears inconceivable that with only two years of running experience and
covering just 1,000 miles in 18 months leading up to the marathon (a fact taken
from Mike Rossi's own postings) that he could run the pace that he did given
his age and in the weather conditions that were present on the day of the
race. The number of training miles just
doesn’t equate to a 3:11 marathon time, nor do any of his prior race times or
training runs. Moreover, he had run much
shorter races with higher per mile times.
In fact, his reported a half marathon time of 1:40, equates to a
marathon time of 3:32. That is not a few
minutes difference, not even a ten minute difference, but a 21 minute
difference! Essentially he ran twice the
distance and shaved 21 minutes off of his extrapolated half marathon time in
very warm, sunny, and humid conditions. By
virtue of those numbers, he may be one of the best unheard of (up until now) runners
of past 50 years based on that level of improvement coupled with his low number
of training miles. Just imagine what he
could have accomplished he had started to run 25 years earlier. I am not saying that that level of
improvement is impossible, but it is highly improbable given his newness to the
sport, his age and the weather conditions on race day. Does that level of improvement really seem
consistent with a 46-year old man who hadn't put in the traditional number of training
miles per week? Another runner wrote (http://therunnereclectic.com/2015/05/06/race-times-physiology-and-statistics/) the following, which sums it up perfectly. "His 10k, 10M, and half marathon times
are all at a slower pace than his alleged marathon PR. This isn’t just unlikely; it is only possible
in an alternate universe." Are any
of you runners? Does this really pass
the smell test?
Look at the times and distances in this table of
his races. http://i.imgur.com/Jlmsy2q.png. His two
half marathon times/pace of 1:40:44/8:34 (4/13/14) and 1:47:03/8:10 (6/8/14)
are far above his LVM time and even the interim 3.1 mile race pace times (for
drastically shorter races) were at or above his LVM time. Does that really make sense? Have you looked at or considered using the https://www.mcmillanrunning.com calculator in your flawed determination that there
was not any conclusive evidence?
Second, the statement that "…there is not
conclusive evidence that his time in the 2014 LVHN Via Marathon is inaccurate"
begs the questions, ones which absolutely need to be addressed and answered. Specifically,
is there, and does LVM have, any conclusive evidence that Mike Rossi’s time was
accurate or more importantly, that he actually ran the entire 26.2 miles? In addition, what would be considered
conclusive evidence? Let's
assume for a moment that his time of 3:11 was possible (although highly improbable)
and giving him (and you) the benefit of doubt, then the answer to those
questions is vital and crucial to this debacle because while your statement
that "there is not conclusive evidence that his time in the 2014 LVHN
Via Marathon is inaccurate", the following (third) point is undeniably
conclusive proof by any standards of any reasonable person that Mike Rossi did
not run the entire race and thus, his time is inaccurate.
Third and perhaps the
most direct, compelling and incontrovertible piece
of evidence of Mike Rossi not running the entire race (and
therefore his time is not accurate) is the lack of his pictures among the
18,000+ taken by professional photographers.
This is a key piece of evidence that the LVM Committee did not address or
mention in its statement. Why is that? The mere fact that the Committee did not even
address the absence of photographs of Mike Rossi calls into question the
integrity, credibility and thoroughness of the LVM Committee, its findings and
its statement. Did the Committee review
(all) the photos, not think that anyone would notice that you did not mention anything
about the photos in your statement, or did you review every photo and but had
no opinion on him missing from the enormous number of photos? Mike Rossi is the only runner out of all the
full marathon participants that did NOT have any photos on the course except at
the finish line! Think about that for a
moment. The photographers took an
extraordinary number of photos. There is
at least one spot on the course where there is no gap in photos during the
period of time he would have been expected to pass by. Mike Rossi could not have been missed had he
passed this area. Every other runner is
seen here except Mike Rossi. I believe
it was determined that there was a six second interval between photos (based on
the time stamps in the metadata) that covered 100 meters. Not even Usain Bolt could cover that distance
in that time. If you want conclusive
proof, look no further than the lack of one single photograph of Mike Rossi
except at the finish line. It is
unfathomable and absurd to think otherwise or discount this piece of direct,
compelling and conclusive evidence. No
one can step up and say they didn't see him on the race course and then be able
to prove that negative assertion. It is
ludicrous. However, the camera can since
it caught every other of the over 1,000 full marathon racers at least at one or
more spots on the course. Below is
spreadsheet of racers and their photographic information.
Go to the last tab of
the spreadsheet entitled “Top 200 in Bridge Photos”. Every runner has photos except Mike Rossi. Below is a video of all the Top 200 finishers’
photos taken at 5 separate photo checkpoints. While ione may try to argue that a professional photographer could miss Mike Rossi at one location while taking photos in rapid fire succession, missing him at all five locations is hard to fathom or explain. Coincidence, I think not nor would any reasonable person. Strangely absent at all five photo checkpoints is Mike Rossi.
What more conclusive
and direct evidence does the LVM Committee need? Again, this begs the questions to which the
public and racers/runners (including your sponsors and the Boston Marathon)
deserve an answer to. What evidence does
the LVM have to support that Mike Rossi ran the entire 26.2 mile race? Why is this not considered conclusive
proof? The photographers and their cameras
are essentially the timing mats (aka anti-cheating mats) that the LVM did not
have in place. It is not like there is
not precedence to DQ someone. Other
runners have been DQ'd in other races. There is undeniably more evidence that he did
not run the entire race (and therefore his time is not accurate) and that his
time was not possible than there is that he ran the race because to date, not
one piece of evidence, conclusive or otherwise, has been presented by LVM, the
Committee or Mike Rossi himself that he ran the entire race thus making his
time “accurate”.
Much less important,
but still interesting and strong circumstantial evidence that something was
amiss, is the fact that Mike Rossi had posted and boasted ad nauseam about
every race and training run. After
questioning arose about his marathon time being inconsistent with all his other
race times and training times, he tried to say that he wasn’t trying in the 20 or
so other races he ran (see the link in which he said wasn’t trying http://sports.yahoo.com/news/-dad-of-the-year--boston-marathon-runner-under-investigation-over-qualification-questions-205004421.html) in even though his
post history, which has been saved says the complete opposite, as can be viewed
here https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/36714219/Mike%20Rossi_%20May%202014.pdf.
Many
other postings and information about Mike Rossi can be seen here
Most compelling is
that in every other race, he posted his time and numerous pictures before,
during and after the race. In the case
of the LVM, a race in which he smashed his PR/personal best by inhuman
proportions and qualified for the Boston Marathon, he suddenly becomes modest
and barely posts a thing about his incredible time and qualifying for the
Boston Marathon. While that is certainly
not grounds for a DQ on its own, it is an additional and fairly supportive piece
of circumstantial evidence to consider among the more concrete and
incontrovertible evidence presented previously, in particular, not one single
photo.
In addition, while I am
hesitant to bring up the school issue that went viral and initially brought
attention to him, I need to add that there is one piece of that story that speaks
to his “honesty”, which is directly relevant in this fiasco. When asked about the school issue going viral,
Mike Rossi said in TV and print interviews that he did not actively post the
school's letter that was sent to him or his response to the principal except on
his own Facebook page, which he claims resulted in "friends" or
others reposting it elsewhere, creating the viral problem. That is patently false and a lie, which is
why it is mentioned here. You can see
here, http://imgur.com/dSU3P9v , which is a cached
page of his Twitter account in which he posted and reposted both items over and
over again. The story was/is also posted
on his company's website http://www.eastcoasteventgroup.co/blog . He lied about his participation in this viral
debacle, and the fact that he blatantly lied about not doing any posting
outside of his Facebook page demonstrates, in part, his lack of integrity and
truthfulness and therefore this behavior should also be taken into
consideration when weighing any information provided by him to the Committee.
In addition, my understanding is that there was also a relay race going
on concurrently with the marathon, so it is no surprise that "The LVHN Via Marathon has not received any
reports from the more [than] 2,500 race participants, thousands of spectators,
and more than 600 volunteers, course marshals, security personnel, medical
personnel or race officials on the course of any wrong doing by any runner". First, consider that it is has now been
reported that he was not photographed on the course (except at the finish
line), which is fairly conclusive that there was wrong doing on the course
because there is no way he made up the time it took 199 other runners to pass
that first photo check point and for him to smash his PR in oppressive marathon
conditions. Moreover, no one is actively
looking for a cheater and given the weather conditions that day and the relay
race going on; it is very plausible that Mike Rossi could have easily avoided
detection. It is also conceivable that
he was able to "sneak" in at one of the, if not perhaps the last,
relay points and not be detected by the more than 2,500 race participants. How many people came forward to say they saw
him at some point on the course? Are
there any? Not one single photo of him
has been presented, with the exception of him crossing the finishing line,
which by the way, we know does not mean that you ran the entire race. Did you try contacting any other
runners? If someone said they did not
see him, is that proof enough that he did not run the entire race? Probably not, because you can't prove not
seeing him, although the 18,000 photos have affirmed that he was not on the
racecourse at various photo check points.
I would think and hope that as part of the Committee's due diligence
that it tried to contact runners that finished before and after Mike Rossi to
see if they recall passing him, being passed by him or running alongside of him
at some point of the marathon. Sure, it
is a long shot to recall a single person months later, but it could/does happen,
especially if you run alongside of someone for any stretch of time. More importantly, it is part of being
thorough in an investigation. If you
don’t try and don't ask those other runners with similar times, you will never
know and your thoroughness and credibility will always be questioned.
While
I and many others are not privy to what evidence the LVM Committee reviewed, or
more accurately, what evidence the LVM Committee may have that is not in the
public domain, I would think that it would behoove the LVM be transparent and to
share any information it may have in an effort to support LVM Committee's
conclusion and defend the integrity and credibility of the race and its
directors. I implore the Committee to
provide evidence that it has that supports that Mike Rossi ran 26.2 miles or
his time is accurate, or in your own words, “no conclusive evidence that his
time is not inaccurate”. Every other
runner can at least point to pictures of themselves throughout the race, which
is a lot more than can be said for only one person, Mike Rossi. The fact that he wasn’t seen in a single photo
on the course, the burden of proof should have shifted to Mike Rossi to provide
some shred of evidence that he ran the race (GPS data, photos, statements from
fellow competitors, spectators or family members, etc.) or was at least
physically capable of something close to a 3:11:45 (training logs, GPS data,
statements from training partners), and if he did or did not, then that should
have been included in the Committee's statement. If he did provide evidence, then that should
be provided in the spirit of transparency.
Of course, if the LVM has been threatened by a lawsuit that really
should not dissuade the Committee or have any effect on your conclusion whatsoever.
To do otherwise would make you complicit
in this debacle. If you believe he his
time many not be accurate, aka, cheated, and can point to proof such as the next
best thing to timing mats, that is, the photographers and the lack of any
photos out of over 18,000 taken, then he should be DQd whether or not he has an
attorney who may threaten legal action. As
part of running the LVM, he agreed to the terms and conditions of the LVM,
which included the following: "I agree to abide by any and all
rulings of event officials, even if such ruling results in my disqualification."
So the challenge to you and the LVM Committee is to publicly
disclose what evidence you have that Mike Rossi actually ran the entire race
and therefore his time is “accurate” and answer to the other questions asked
earlier. You owe it not only to individuals
who ran the race, but to all runners, the credibility and integrity of the LVM,
its supporters, volunteers, sponsors and those who use the LVM as a Boston
Marathon qualifying event etc.
To
the LVM sponsors, the Boston Marathon, the USTAF, and others copied on this
email, I implore you to conduct your own review, insist that the LVM be
transparent and share how they arrived at their apparently flawed decision, question
the LVM on why the lack of photos is not conclusive proof that Mike Rossi's time
is not accurate and consider DQ'ing Mike Rossi from the Boston Marathon. This has become bigger and much more far
reaching than the LVM, and it is at the heart of running, sportsmanship,
competition and fairness. Each of you
should be concerned about the integrity and credibility of the LVM and the
Boston Marathon, our beloved sport of running and brand images/names used to
support the LVM and the Boston Marathon.
I am not sure which is worse; the apparent cheating by this individual
or the LVM Committee's overlooking the lack of one single photo of Mike Rossi
on the course except at the finish line and saying that they found no
conclusive evidence. I further implore
you to ask the LVM what would be considered conclusive evidence. As noted before, the photographs are in
essence the timing mats (aka anti-cheating mats) that were inexplicably missing
throughout the race, a serious omission when you consider the demand to qualify
for the arguably the most prestigious marathon in the world, the Boston
Marathon. To the Boston Marathon Race
Director, if the same facts were presented to you about a runner in your race,
what would you do? Would you DQ the
runner or turn a blind eye?
Thank
you for your time and consideration.
Runners
United
LVM pictures of top 200 where he should have been seen turned into
a gifs
If you want to do your own sleuthing, the photos
are at
