3 ms·

This reads like a witch hunt. If the article's facts are correct, someone cheated, got caught and punished/banned. The article doesn't have much more (hand wai

This reads like a witch hunt. If the article's facts are correct, someone cheated, got caught and punished/banned. The article doesn't have much more (hand waiving, ends in "no clue what she did"). This sentence reads like harassment to me: "In several email exchanges, on the telephone, and in a brief conversation at the front door of her house in Squamish, Miller declined to be interviewed for this article"

johnm1019 11y ago
That's a reporter doing their job. If they called one time and left a voicemail, there would be outcry because, "they never gave her a chance to tell her side of the story."
- mbritton72 11y ago
  One can imagine the reporter being vilified and accused of "bullying."
trymas 11y ago
This article could've been at least twice as short, than it is now. Though there are too many facts against Miller: - Photographers have not seen her twice on the running laps - Competitors have not seen her - The photo evidence of 1.4/13.8 mile running checkpoint shows that she was there in ~86 minutes from bike finish. Either she crawled those 1.4 miles or she had a rocket pack on her back as the best male result for 13.8 mile run was 90 minutes. - If she really would've seen after the bike stage, that she is missing her timing chip, she or her assistant (if she had one) would've informed competition staff. Because competitors know 'no chip - no time, means disqualification'. - Not giving GPS data of her Garmin sports watch (athletes of this level save their sports data and log in their diaries religiously, and they simply 'not loose it' or their 'dogs eat it'). If you are clean, you will happily show your GPS logs, easiest proof and everybody is happy.
- yes_or_gnome 11y ago
  > - The photo evidence of 1.4/13.8 mile running checkpoint shows that she was there in ~86 minutes from bike finish. Either she crawled those 1.4 miles or she had a rocket pack on her back as the best male result for 13.8 mile run was 90 minutes. One of the things that I didn't like about the article is that it doesn't provide Davis' reported times. Quote, emphasis added: > Davis, who comes from Carlsbad, Calif., and is one of the top triathletes in her age group in the world, had been first out of the water and first off her bike — she was sure of it. It would be fairly easy, and more transparent, if the author would have simply provided the data from other competitors to compare against the times that Miller had registered from before the marathon portion. About Miller's cycling end-time. As it seems, there is no photographic evidence of Miller at that checkpoint, to me, that suggests that either A) the time is correct and she took a 60-75min break from the competition, or B) had an accomplice take the chip to the check-in before her actual arrival time. The former is the more likely explanation assuming that is when(if) she tampered with the device. She would have needed time to get out of eyesight, lose the device, and then, have a rest. The latter would be more insidious, but shouldn't be too hard to rule out. There are records for every competitor at the location, and the volunteers there should be recorded too; I would imagine coaches and bystanders are roped off from the area. Did any of people have a close association with Miller? Although, that may be beside the point because she has had several questionable past events. You could look at these other events to see if there is a correlation of volunteers or if Miller's time pairs too closely to another competitor would be extraordinary. EDIT: It hadn't occurred to me until after writing this up that there's another possibility, in support of Miller's claim. That is, the chip could have been found by another competitor and delivered to that checkpoint. I believe the article states that Miller explains that it was lost between changing from the swim portion to the biking section.
  - davros 11y ago
    If you'd like all those details and more its all online eg http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/IM_Canada_F40-44%3A_new_thread_P5674186 http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triat... which includes links to detailed analyses of the photo times and splits (which I find convincing).
chasing 11y ago
A "witch hunt" is going after someone unfairly. Maybe they're personally unpopular. Maybe they hold an unpopular view. It implies injustice. I don't see that here. This woman has apparently been fairly well proven a cheater. And if you regularly cheat in order to win a relatively major sporting event, you run the risk of the New York Times writing an article about it -- and maybe sending you a few e-mails or knocking on your door to get your side of the story. The people who deserve sympathy are those racers who played by the rules but got fucked out of a spot in higher-level races because of this woman. And the people who actually won those races but didn't get to enjoy their moment of celebration at the top of podium. Small things, maybe, but nevertheless it's shitty that those experiences were stolen from people who worked very hard for them.

johnm1019 11y ago

That's a reporter doing their job. If they called one time and left a voicemail, there would be outcry because, "they never gave her a chance to tell her side of the story."

mbritton72 11y ago
One can imagine the reporter being vilified and accused of "bullying."

trymas 11y ago

This article could've been at least twice as short, than it is now. Though there are too many facts against Miller: - Photographers have not seen her twice on the running laps - Competitors have not seen her - The photo evidence of 1.4/13.8 mile running checkpoint shows that she was there in ~86 minutes from bike finish. Either she crawled those 1.4 miles or she had a rocket pack on her back as the best male result for 13.8 mile run was 90 minutes. - If she really would've seen after the bike stage, that she is missing her timing chip, she or her assistant (if she had one) would've informed competition staff. Because competitors know 'no chip - no time, means disqualification'. - Not giving GPS data of her Garmin sports watch (athletes of this level save their sports data and log in their diaries religiously, and they simply 'not loose it' or their 'dogs eat it'). If you are clean, you will happily show your GPS logs, easiest proof and everybody is happy.

yes_or_gnome 11y ago
> - The photo evidence of 1.4/13.8 mile running checkpoint shows that she was there in ~86 minutes from bike finish. Either she crawled those 1.4 miles or she had a rocket pack on her back as the best male result for 13.8 mile run was 90 minutes. One of the things that I didn't like about the article is that it doesn't provide Davis' reported times. Quote, emphasis added: > Davis, who comes from Carlsbad, Calif., and is one of the top triathletes in her age group in the world, had been first out of the water and first off her bike — she was sure of it. It would be fairly easy, and more transparent, if the author would have simply provided the data from other competitors to compare against the times that Miller had registered from before the marathon portion. About Miller's cycling end-time. As it seems, there is no photographic evidence of Miller at that checkpoint, to me, that suggests that either A) the time is correct and she took a 60-75min break from the competition, or B) had an accomplice take the chip to the check-in before her actual arrival time. The former is the more likely explanation assuming that is when(if) she tampered with the device. She would have needed time to get out of eyesight, lose the device, and then, have a rest. The latter would be more insidious, but shouldn't be too hard to rule out. There are records for every competitor at the location, and the volunteers there should be recorded too; I would imagine coaches and bystanders are roped off from the area. Did any of people have a close association with Miller? Although, that may be beside the point because she has had several questionable past events. You could look at these other events to see if there is a correlation of volunteers or if Miller's time pairs too closely to another competitor would be extraordinary. EDIT: It hadn't occurred to me until after writing this up that there's another possibility, in support of Miller's claim. That is, the chip could have been found by another competitor and delivered to that checkpoint. I believe the article states that Miller explains that it was lost between changing from the swim portion to the biking section.
- davros 11y ago
  If you'd like all those details and more its all online eg http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/IM_Canada_F40-44%3A_new_thread_P5674186 http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triat... which includes links to detailed analyses of the photo times and splits (which I find convincing).

chasing 11y ago

A "witch hunt" is going after someone unfairly. Maybe they're personally unpopular. Maybe they hold an unpopular view. It implies injustice. I don't see that here. This woman has apparently been fairly well proven a cheater. And if you regularly cheat in order to win a relatively major sporting event, you run the risk of the New York Times writing an article about it -- and maybe sending you a few e-mails or knocking on your door to get your side of the story. The people who deserve sympathy are those racers who played by the rules but got fucked out of a spot in higher-level races because of this woman. And the people who actually won those races but didn't get to enjoy their moment of celebration at the top of podium. Small things, maybe, but nevertheless it's shitty that those experiences were stolen from people who worked very hard for them.