First finisher at Cambridge HM is not the winner

24 watchers

1
2
3
4
Next
Last

Dvorak Mar 2018 3:46pm, 5 Mar 2018 15,616 posts	0 Dvorak Why, you may ask? Well, it seems he ran the course fair and square, in 1:06:52. A more than decent time. However, he was not Andrew Rawlings V45 as he should have been according to his number, but someone known only as "Jack". Which resulted in disqualification, and the second finisher being declared the winner. cambridge-news.co.uk This raises a few questions for me. The first is "how dumb must you be to win a race under a false number?". The second is "no, really how dumb as if you can run that time you will be well aware that number swapping is not allowed?" The third being "ok, so who is this guy, because if you can run that time, unless you are from totally "away", someone is going to know." Without getting all "let's run" about it, there is an Andrew Rawlings who runs at Cambridge parkrun and is in the correct age category. So a good candidate for being the original holder of the number. There is also one fast local "Jack" at that parkrun (sub 16), who ran 1:12 last year at Cambridge and isn't on the results this year. Although in any vet category six minutes would be a big improvement for a HM And maybe our "ghost winner" isn't even really called Jack. A spokeswoman for OSB Events told the News : "It's illegal under UK athletics rules. He got disqualified. It's very annoying but there is not a lot we can do about it." As an idea, they could start by asking Mr Rawlings if there is anything he'd like to share with them.
larkim Mar 2018 3:48pm, 5 Mar 2018 4,071 posts	0 larkim LOL @ the thought of getting all "Let's run" about it... What an idiot!!!
HellsBells Mar 2018 3:49pm, 5 Mar 2018 23,516 posts	0 HellsBells There was more than one disqualification. - a friend was 5th finisher and is now 3rd
HellsBells Mar 2018 3:53pm, 5 Mar 2018 23,517 posts	0 HellsBells Explanation here bbc.co.uk
Maclennane Mar 2018 3:54pm, 5 Mar 2018 19,702 posts	0 Maclennane OK, it was me. I wasn't to know I was going to run a 45 minute PB.
HappyG(rrr) Mar 2018 3:57pm, 5 Mar 2018 28,404 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) I agree, to me, it's just stupid. The rules are pretty simple. Detection nowadays is almost inevitable, given data sharing, photo sharing etc. It's dishonest, and unhelpful if your a mid to back packer that no one will care about or notice (unless you have a heart attack and then it's bliddy annoying for emergency services and possibly for the afflicted.) But if you're going to be top ten, podium, in the prizes, in the published results, in the newspaper... I mean, what the actual f*ck? That's light robbing a bank on Facebook live. Errr. Dumbooo! G
Cerrertonia Mar 2018 4:03pm, 5 Mar 2018 7,601 posts	0 Cerrertonia To be fair, he owned up straight away, before the prizes etc. were presented. His powerof10 profile suggests he's never run a HM before, so he might not have realised that he was in with a chance of winning.
Dvorak Mar 2018 4:07pm, 5 Mar 2018 15,617 posts	0 Dvorak Aha, thank you Hells Bells I started typing long before the BBC piece was published ;-). (Any "Jack" from Cambridge parkrun not involved!) Since the second finisher (now winner) was his team-mate, it seems surprising he didn't have a word, since the last-minuteness of Jack Gray's HM debut would surely have been a bit obvious. And he must be a bit of a talent, but will surely have to face some kind of ban for this?
HappyG(rrr) Mar 2018 4:10pm, 5 Mar 2018 28,405 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) Wonder what his job is. Hope it's not "Nuclear Reactor Technician". D'oh! G
HellsBells Mar 2018 4:13pm, 5 Mar 2018 23,518 posts	0 HellsBells I was wrong on one point - my friend is now in 4th, not 3rd so only one DQ Places were being offered on Facebook constantly on Friday and Saturday as people pulled out due to not being able to travel. I expect there were far more than usual running on non-official transfers