Ranking 2K 40-49 Hwts

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 10:29 am

hjs wrote:Poul Bysted 42 DEN 2000 06:07.5 RACE
is the fastest 40 plus man this year, no one else.

That is correct hjs.

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 10:33 am

Chad Williams wrote:
hjs wrote:Poul Bysted 42 DEN 2000 06:07.5 RACE
is the fastest 40 plus man this year, no one else.
That is correct hjs.

I stand corrected; fastest is Ralph Eckhart, from Germany who rowed 5:59.2 in Boston in Feb this year.

Daren · Post by **Daren** » March 23rd, 2006, 10:36 am

Chad, when's the "big reveal", when you laugh at all the people that have congratulated you at your row, telling them how foolish and gullible they are, and revealing the details of your dastardly deed on Saturday?

I'd hate to miss it. =)

I'm sure you have to do the "big reveal", in order to actually demonstrate your point.

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 10:39 am

A RACE takes higher priority and holdS total credibility compared to an IND_V

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 23rd, 2006, 10:40 am

Chad Williams wrote:
Chad Williams wrote:
hjs wrote:Poul Bysted 42 DEN 2000 06:07.5 RACE
is the fastest 40 plus man this year, no one else.
That is correct hjs.
I stand corrected; fastest is Ralph Eckhart, from Germany who rowed 5:59.2 in Boston in Feb this year.

sorry,

Ralph is yes.
That's another thing in the rankings. Why doesn,t C2 simply puts al races in the ranks?

PaulS · Post by **PaulS** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:01 am

hjs wrote:
michaelb wrote:I think you have put it in print enough, Chad. You have no evidence, and you will never post evidence that Dwayne's times, including his witnessed rows, are not real.

What I find baffling about this thread, and your behavior, is why you would behave this way if you really are the fastest 40 HWT of all time. You will never enjoy the respect and admiration that you may have been entitled to, or even regain your standing in this forum or in the indoor rowing community.
this : Poul Bysted 42 DEN 2000 06:07.5 RACE
is the fastest 40 plus man this year, no one else.

From 2006 WIRC results page for 40-49 M
1 Eckhart,Ralph Team Germany 5:59.20

The only sub-6 40+ race result in a number of years, though I didn't go back to see when the previous one was, it might even be since Karpinnen.

michaelb · Post by **michaelb** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:10 am

I am not sure why were are now talking about actual race results and actual champions.

My point was that Chad claims that he is 15 secs faster than anyone over 40 in the history of the sport, but because of how he has made that claim, and how he has behaved, he is doubted and not believed, and even if he goes to BIRC and wins, people will remember and think of him as a jerk.

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:12 am

michaelb wrote:but because of how he has made that claim, and how he has behaved, he is doubted and not believed.

Just like Dwayne. But with more proof of the row!

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:15 am

michaelb wrote:My point was that Chad claims that he is 15 secs faster than anyone over 40 in the history of the sport,

Just like Dwayne has.

Daren · Post by **Daren** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:18 am

Chad Williams wrote:Just like Dwayne. But with more proof of the row!

So you and Dwayne are both equally great ergers; is that your point?

Or are you going to come clean, admit that your time and verification code was attained by underhand means, and try using some warped logic to claim that this proves that Dwayne's time must also therefore be false?

Note, I am fully aware that Dwayne's time may be false. I'm just trying to see what you think you're gaining from this exercise.

Chad Williams · Post by **Chad Williams** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:21 am

I think it is time to move this issue on another step now.

Sorry to have pulled the wool over some of your eyes, but that 5.44.9 was indeed a manipulated time. I will remove it from the on line ranking system today.

At this moment in time, my best 2000m time is that of 5.58.1. If I was to keep that ranked IND_V time of 5.44.9 on the rankings do you think that I would ever be able to perform at a public race in the future with the self knowledge that I will never be able to get close to that time?
If I kept that 5.44.9 listed what is stopping me posting more of the fastest times for other distances and logging them to. I would never have to prove my ability as the only way to do that would be to row in a public event, something that I could chose never to do, sound familiar?
I will however be rowing at BiRC this year and aiming for sub 5.55.0 you will get to see what I can do in a public event.
We will never see Dwayne rowing at a public again as he is know caught in his own web of disseat.

The PM’s I sent to people with regards to my training are not made up, that is my training and the Rugby Test row was also a true reflection of my ability, an ability that I will display at BiRC along with other members of the rowing community that have nothing to hide.

My reason for proving that the system can be manipulated is for the right reasons, some people may feel that they have been made to look foolish by congratulating me on the row; they have played a big part in proving that people can be taken in. I provided more evidence than Dwayne ever has for one of his IND_V rows yet lots of people have been taken in with what he has been doing over the many years he has been erging.
Looking from the outside in, I would have found it hard not to believe the 5.44.9 as the proof was there fore all to see.

It is not important on how the 5.44.9 was achieved, it is important to know that it can be done easily and with full data to back it up.

I know the ranking system is an honour system, but it is open to abuse. Maybe having times within a certain percentage of current world records can only be logged in the top 5 of the rankings.
Something needs to be done. We need to work along side of C2 to progress this whole issue.

I am trying to help move this sport forward by getting rid of the dead wood that makes a mockery of the system, the system that can be played as I have just proved.

People say I have some sort of personal vendetta against Dwayne, this is not the case, Dwayne is the highest profile player of the system, and he is not the only one, that I do know.
Until Dwayne races in public or withdraws his false ranking times I will continue to prove that he is a fake. It is a shame that Dwayne can not to the honourable thing and withdraw his times from the C2 rankings and get himself a RACE ranking like I will at BiRC, the only sure fire way not to be questioned.

No doubt some people will now take the moral high ground with me, say what you want to say, but let’s keep it constructive.

Daren · Post by **Daren** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:39 am

Chad Williams wrote:Until Dwayne races in public or withdraws his false ranking times I will continue to prove that he is a fake.

But this is one of the points I take issue with. You haven't proven that he's a fake. He may very well be, I don't know, but nothing you've said proves or demonstrates that he is.

All you've done is something that we knew was possible anyway. I could do the same, without resorting to a relay event. I could go to my local gym, get one of the powerful young guys there to blast me a 500m time, grab the IND_V code and log it as a top-3 LWT time for my age group. But that would no more demonstrate that that's what anyone else has done than what you've done.

To prove that Dwayne is a fake, you have to show your evidence. For whatever reason, you say that's not possible. Fine; but why should I or anyone take your word for it any more or less than we take Dwayne's word for his times?

In my opinion, neither the nature of your initial attack (the poll on the old forum), nor this exercise have shown that you're honourable yourself, though at least you've finally owned up.

michaelb · Post by **michaelb** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:43 am

Darin: thanks for bringing this to a closure. Chad: we can assume that you will come clean with C2 so that they can address whatever it is you did. I agree that you probably shouldn't post here how to cheat. Would your method have fooled a witness to the row? There is still no evidence to question that 3 of Dwayne's rows were witnessed, and that even recently one of the those witnesses was contacted by someone on this forum and they confirmed the row and time.

I was opposed to adding the ind-v system last year, and I still favor having the rankings be based on trust and honor so I would prefer that C2 not add additional restrictions.

michaelb · Post by **michaelb** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:46 am

Darin, I don't want to search around the old forum to try to find this, so I will ask you or any one else who remembers. I thought that C2 said that the verification system would detect a relay event, by the variation in the stroke data? Am I remembering that wrong?

Daren · Post by **Daren** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:54 am

michaelb wrote:Darin, I don't want to search around the old forum to try to find this, so I will ask you or any one else who remembers. I thought that C2 said that the verification system would detect a relay event, by the variation in the stroke data? Am I remembering that wrong?

No, I think they said that the verification code would indicate that a session was rowed as intervals.

It's impossible to state with any certainty that a row was done as a relay from stroke data, anyway, I would think. The rower could just be taking short rests. It could only lend weight to an argument that that's what happened, rather than prove it.