Concept2 Forum

At the CRASH-B's I was chided by some friends for remaining silent on a certain controversial topic after the door had been opened. And I have to admit to feeling guilty for not being supportive of the position that most closely resembles my own. While procrastinating and trying to put forth an opinion without becoming public enemy #2 I came across this during some reading on an unrelated subject:

"As I've said, cognition interprets and understands the world around
you, while emotions allow you to make quick decisions about it.
Usually, you react emotionally to a situation before you assess itcognitively, since survival is more important than understanding."
--from EMOTIONAL DESIGN:
Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things
by Donald A. Norman (nonfiction)

It spurred me into motion, thinking that maybe that statement helps me to make some sense of what is happening, or at least can start to explain why I think differently about the situation than some of my friends do.

I first met Dwayne Adams somewhere over the Atlantic while on the way to the 2002 BIRC. I sat with him and his fiancee on the trip over, at several dinners in Birmingham, and then on the long flight back. The guy is tall, handsome, strong, and personable. Emotionally, what's not to like? Being with him and the now Mrs. Adams brings to mind the Keith Urban song "Who wouldn't want to be me."

A.) The first Huh? came at those dinner tables. He seemed somewhat clueless about simple things like drag factor and raved about how much he was learning. I suppose that doesn't seem all that unusual, since we all started that way. But he was a guy with a 6:01.5 who got the free trip based an assumption that he was one of the most likely of all the ergers in America to win a gold medal in his division. One of the reasons often given for belief in his scores is that he was twice observed by qualified people in his USIRT trials. With all the time at the boathouse and training to reach 6:01.5 and observations by USIRT people he learned next to nothing compared to what he learned in a couple of minutes at the dinner table? Possible, I suppose, but unlikely, I believe.

B.) BIRC. Something just didn't seem right. It was just a subjective feeling, but it didn't LOOK like a 6:01 guy on the erg (guys like Nik Fleming, Tony Larkman & Chris Rushton did) and the big screen was showing 1:37's (6:28 pace) before the back injury. Still, you want to believe. Maybe just a diamond in the rough. If he's legit we'll be hearing from him in the future.

Less than two months later his profile notes that he broke 6:00. A 5:56.1 on January 8, 2003 that ended up being the only non-race time in the top 18 30-39 Hwts for the year. And he entered a race in California. Great. We will get to see the potential come to fruition. Then,

C.) He races and doesn't even break 7:00, let alone 6:00. Cognition is chipping away at Emotion. The report is that he was sick. Maybe he is extraordinarily unlucky.

Next Fall rolls around and he is again picked for the USIRT. Strange. With so few spots available several of us who have been following the progress are baffled at the choice. None of us are baffled though by

D.) Did not Start at the European Championship. Slipped in the shower just before. Shucks! Not only extraordinarily unlucky but mega-extraordinarily unlucky. Cognition overwhelms Emotion. Maybe it's the worst case of stage fright in sports history. That's about the most optimistic explanation that some of us can muster and still hope that this great guy is what he claims to be.

Last Saturday Chippy and Taffy Adams wrote on the Taff Attack thread about Dwayne's reported times compared to people who do not hide but put it on the line. I noticed the same thing two years ago when Grahm Benton won at Boston with a fine 5:51.4 and within days Dwayne came on the forum and posted

E.) that he cried when he saw Graham's time because he KNEW he would have won instead. The gall. A guy with a 100% failure rate in public appearances raining on the parade of a worthy champion. I've never seen a more blatant cry for attention. When I didn't support him he played the loyalty card to try to make me feel guilty, complaining that I wasn't supporting a fellow American. By now his privately rowed PB was down to 5:49.1, ahead of James Cracknell and just slightly behind Matthew Pinsent as 2nd for the year in the 30-39 Hwt rankings. He apparently figured that was sufficient to claim superiority over Benton and question his worthiness as champion. I seemed to be pretty much alone in my view though. I acknowledge that some of my friends who remember that episode don’t see it as I do. But I don’t know how anyone who has looked at the faces of their fellow competitors at CRASH-B’s can see it any other way. I wish Chippy and Taffy had been around then and maybe things could have been nipped there.

But momentum grew. He joined Taff Attack and had the ego fed on a daily basis. He found a place where no one questioned what he reported no matter how spectacular or unproven. Need meters for the honor board, no problem. At the end of the year when someone else was at the top, like magic

F.) some "previously done but unrecorded meters" were found at the last minute to sweep him into first place in quantity as well as quality. Even John Rupp, who did give Dwayne the support that he was looking for in comparing himself favorably to Graham Benton, got his feathers ruffled and his faith shaken by that. No challenge could go by without Dwayne at the top. Even the kids 4 minute ranking had to have Dwayne at the top.

The thread on Annual Meters-Distance that Chad started isn’t the first comment on the training volume. Xeno made a reference to it a while back, noting that it is considerably more than Xeno himself did at the height of his rowing career as the Olympic Gold medalist. Again, some of my friends interpreted it differently from me. They saw it as a lighthearted compliment of Dwayne’s massive commitment to age-group erging. I read it as skepticism. Only Xeno knows for sure what he meant. On the one hand we have

G.) The Olympic Gold medalist at the top of his athletic career, presumably training about as hard and as long as is believed possible without breaking down. On the other hand we have a 40+ age-group erger training at a higher volume, doing serious weight training, holding down a full-time job, having family duties to a wife and child, being one of the most prolific posters on the forum, maintaining email correspondence and support to his fellow ergers, and doing times that are faster than what Olympic champions have done. Day after day, year round, year after year. Possible?, maybe. Likely?, I seriously doubt it.

This past summer when he was part of the C2 Development Squad he was sent a PM3 for the express purpose of validating the times of the pieces that the team members were supposed to do. All the team members did so except for one

H.) Dwayne and only Dwayne refused to use his, saying that he donated it to his gym, thereby sidestepping any attempt by C2 to verify what he did. No one knew at that time that the PM3 could be fooled. He wasn’t singled out as a potential cheat. It wasn’t an issue of his honor being questioned. All team members were sent the PM3 for verification. But he chose to keep his scores unverified, and that seems suspicious to some of us.

The point has been made that it is probably a serious imposition on his time and finances to go to erging competitions. Maybe. But as one of the UK forum posters noted,

I.)Last summer he traveled from the southern part of the United States to Edmonton in Canada for the water rowing Masters races. At that sport he is at best mediocre. His boats were not close to winning and his times were beaten by boats with older lightweights in them whose 2kms on the erg are barely within a minute of Dwayne’s reported times (although faster than his actual race times). Yet he took the time, did the traveling, and spent the money. It doesn’t make sense to me that the supposedly fastest erger in the world would do that yet remain uninterested in competing at his specialty. Another thing that is possible, but something that is so unlike anything I’ve ever seen in sports that it strains credulity.

Attorneys for the defense would certainly take each point one by one and show it to be possible. For me, that would be taking it out of context, the context being points A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, & I all occurring over a period of some four years of near-flawless spectacular reported scores juxtaposed by 100% failure at competitions. For me, and several others, that is too far-fetched.

Again, some of my friends have faith in all posted times in general and Dwayne’s times in particular, and I still love them like brothers and sisters. They probably in turn think of me as overly cynical, and they may be right. I hope that they can see that I came to my opinion only after a lot of thought and after a lifetime of seeing scams and hearing tall tales.

Now at this point some of the people who acknowledge this point of view usually respond with comments like, “So what? What difference does it make to you? He’s not in your division.” “What would someone have to gain from posting bogus times?” “No money changes hands, so who cares?” Or some other such squelch.

My own feeling is that honesty matters. I don’t accept that honesty might only matter in important things but not in such minor things as indoor rowing. Without an assumption of honesty the rankings would be meaningless. How many of us would be interested in the rankings if it were stated on each page that “At least 50% of the scores on this page are actual efforts, the rest are estimates of what people think they can do and a few are fraudulent. We hope that you enjoy adding your own times and being a part of it. These rankings are for your benefit.” It has been said more than once about Chad that “All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for honest people to do nothing.” I agree with the quote, but not as applied to Chad. To see suspect scores in the rankings and say nothing is to invite more suspect scores in the future. In addition to Dwayne, there are already at least two 50+ lightweights with suspect scores, at least one 40+ lightweight with suspect scores, and a last season a teen with what another younger person felt was at least an outrageously fast score. I wouldn’t be surprised if others see suspicious entries in their own divisions that the rest of us just don’t notice because we don’t look there. Left unchecked, how long would it take to have the rankings deteriorate into an unreliable listing? Would 5% bogus times be acceptable? 10%? 20%? Would it only be a problem if someone was a whistleblower? That is, if the rankings end up spoiled will the bad guys be the ones who posted times that they didn’t do or the ones who questioned those times? The current sentiment seems to be in favor of unquestioned acceptance. And that baffles me to no end.

People have actually written that they don’t care whether his times are real or not. I’ve got to admit that people really think that way because I’ve the words with my own eyes. But never before in sports have I seen participants flat out state that they don’t care if other participants cheat. I can’t explain that, let alone explain why someone would bother posting bogus times. My best guess, since the question repeatedly comes up, is that some people like the attention that they get. Unfortunately it leaves us with many age group records that may never be beaten by someone who really gets onto a machine and does it for real, and that’s not fair to legitimate rowers of today or the others yet to come.

As for money changing hands, I don’t understand how that matters. This forum has been hacked several times, twice destroying it completely and several other times taking it down temporarily. No money changed hands then either. Does that mean it didn’t matter? Why did someone do it? I don’t know! But we know it happened. If whoever it was successfully destroys the forum forever will we all be worse off for it, even though no money changed hands? I think so.

What astounds me the most though is the tidal wave of outrage expressed when C2 announced the first efforts at making at least the top times more valid. While the IND_V isn’t foolproof (it doesn’t deal with lwt for instance, or a faster rower doing a piece for a slower rower) it did at least assure that a piece was actually rowed instead of just typed in on a keyboard, and that cheaters needed to enlist the help of another dishonest person. It seemed like a reasonable first step to me, yet it was met with almost universal disdain. As with some other things here it is most strange for me to see people lobbying for the rejection of a validation even the top few times. It seems like sending out a bulk email stating “Cheaters welcome here.” I know that nobody is really saying that, but I can see how it could be taken that way by people seeking accolades without effort.

Many of these posts end with a comment about how the poster hopes that someday Dwayne will race (when and if he feels like it). I don’t share that view any longer. I lost interest when he dissed Graham Benton’s Boston win. If he wants to be the greatest erger to never win a race so be it.

Like Fox Mulder on the X-Files I used to be of the frame of mind that “I Want To Believe.” But I now believe that I stand a better chance of seeing the inside of an alien spacecraft than seeing Dwayne row a sub-6:00 2km.

Rick Bayko,

Slower than Dennis Hastings, John Harvey, Roger Prowse, Rod Stewart, Alain Mangin, Henry Baker, and David Aldridge at venue racing.
Faster than Dwayne Adams at venue racing.

(Edited for spacing)

Rick,

I wouldn't denounce you (I don't think you're public enemy # anything!)--and I hope no one else does either.

This was a very brave post, considering all of the vitriol that has been posted...and I think that your description of your first impressions may be useful, as it closely matches the impression that I think many of us have had simply from the forum.

So thank you very much for a very thoughtful (and thought-provoking) post. I'm still very new to all of this and the clear, cool-headed perspective you've offered is very welcome.

The circumstantial evidence (as you've so kindly laid it out) seems overwhelming. I don't know what the proper response is to the conclusions that follow...but I will be interested to see.

Thank you very much!

Alissa

ETC: spelling

Rick:

Wow, hope you feel better now that that's off your chest! From the looks of it, it must have been weighing heavy ... like world peace and topics like that.

Just kidding ... well, not really.

I'm going to write this last note and be done with this topic.

In addition to emotion and logic, I believe this topic (Dwayne's times) has brought to the forefront a behavior I call "projection" as well as what I'll call "leaps of logic".

The first is that people tend to comment on someone's actions from the perspective of how they would act if placed in a similar circumstance.

The second is taking feelings or emotions or unrelated facts, and cobbling them together to be presented as a factual conclusion, as opposed to a hypothesis.

It's clear that lots of projecting and leaping took place here. Your note has some of those leaps. Factual yes. Unequivocal, no.

Many of us who have been accused of saying that we don't care if Dwayne's times are true or lies were mis-quoted ... or quoted with some omission. What I believe most of us who had this feeling were saying was, "It matters little to us if Dwayne's times are true or lies, because it's not that important to us, and it will likely never be able to be proven one way or the other to everyone's satisfaction. What does matter is when someone accuses another here of cheating, yet has no factual backup for that accusation. Only feelings, emotion, disjointed facts, and whatever else that's cobbled together and called 'proof', which any reasonable person would say it's not."

Circumstantial evidence perhaps. Evidence that would cause one to "feel" that Dwayne's times are lies, perhaps. Unequivocal evidence? No.

That's it in a nutshell. I believe that's what most of the debate was about, because I'll wager that over 75% of the people here (not just those who post, but all who have read and considered the topic ... the general rowing population that is) couldn't care any less whether Dwayne is cheating or not. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. I would also wager that over 75% of the people here thought the accuser's behavior was poor.

What I believe we've all learned here is that we each have a different perspective on how important ranking times are, and that nothing will beat head-to-head venue racing. While it's nice to race over the Internet, or pull IND_V PBs, everything can be questioned except venue performance with eye witnesses.

The topic has also helped us get into the heads of the other people here. I know a whole bunch more about the men and women behind the IDs than I did before the topic started, which made it interesting in itself.

I can't wait to meet the people who posted about this face-to-face to see if my mental picture of what they are like is what I've hypothesized. That will be fun.

Warm regards ... Mark

Thanks Rick. This post and Mike Caviston's post are the first real substance on the subject we have seen. Just a couple of points and a question.

Did no one on the USIRT see Dwayne row? Don't you stay together, wouldn't people warm up, train, etc? How many days in advance do you arrive. I understand if that is not enough to really say anything specific.

This calls into question the selection of the USIRT for those two years. The official explanation was and has been that the qualifying rows were witnessed. Ranger has railed against that process for years, but has been only met with denial. Now it sounds like there is a suggestion that people, including Dwayne, were accepted on the team without doing qualifying rows. If the USIRT didn't witness those rows, they should admit that to the rowing community, since we have been mislead on that point for several years.

There was also the witnessed sub 5:50 row from the summer of 2004; someone on the forum contacted that witness and they confirmed that row, and the clear suggestion was that they were independent and didn't know Dwayne. To me, the existence of 3 independently witnessed rows, 2 sub 5:50, is the substantial evidence in favor of Dwayne's ability.

I think the primary objection to how this issue has been raised was related to Chad's forum behavior. Even now, 2 months later, he hasn't offered any information or evidence. In retrospect, maybe it did take someone like Chad to relentlessly push the issue, inappropriately in many ways, to allow others to come out and post as well.

Mindblowing Rick and a very compelling story. Brave of you to step up and I wholeheartedly agree something should be done to eridicate the rankings of bogus times as much as possible.

Couldn't stop reading your story, almost like a suspense thriller.

Rick,

Compliments. Very nice summary off the hole matter.

An excellent post, Rick. I have no doubt that things might be different had Chad posted this instead of his opening poll gambit. I've read it all, and it certainly gives food for thought.

Yankeerunner wrote:People have actually written that they don’t care whether his times are real or not. I’ve got to admit that people really think that way because I’ve the words with my own eyes. But never before in sports have I seen participants flat out state that they don’t care if other participants cheat.

I'm one of those, and I fully understand what you mean and where you're coming from. Maybe I should temper my position with the phrase "enough". I don't like cheats. If you ask anyone in my gaming clan what my position is regarding cheats, they'll all tell you. Spike users, bot users, wallhackers... Scum of the Earth. People that use mobiles to cheat at the pub quiz? Kill 'em all. But, with regard to the C2 rankings, I don't care enough to attack someone over it.

I also think my "don't care" position stems largely from Chad's original poll's options. If memory serves me well (and I haven't gone back to check), the three options were "Dwayne's times are genuine", "Dwayne's a cheat" or "Don't care". I don't know if they're kosher, nor do I know that they're not, so the only option (if I wanted to post a vote, as I did) was the "Don't care" one. It may have been "Don't know/don't care", I'm not sure.

If it is eventually shown that Dwayne's a big old phoney, I'm sure I'll condemn him as much as anyone else. Probably more so because I've supported his right not to be hounded, and I'd feel a sense of betrayal. But for all you've said that I agree seems somewhat rum, and for all I agree with you about honesty being a fundmental principal, I still can't find it in me to back Chad's campaign.

Maybe it's juts a subconscious thing. Maybe I feel loyalty to Dwayne beyond what I should, and maybe it has clouded my judgement. I'm aware of these possibilities.

Yankeerunner wrote:Unfortunately it leaves us with many age group records that may never be beaten by someone who really gets onto a machine and does it for real, and that’s not fair to legitimate rowers of today or the others yet to come.

With regard to records, I was under the impression that they only "count" if they're done at sanctioned events or with independent witness testimony. So, while someone may claim a record on the erg via the rankings, it wouldn't become the official C2 record just on their say-so. If I'm wrong about that, well, that's bad.

Anyway, you do put the whole scenario in terms that raise reasonable doubts. Still nothing conclusive, however, and for that reason I still won't be joining any clamour that Dwayne should "put up or shut up."

Thanks Rick, you are a brave man!!!


What I cannot understand is why some people regrets the behaviour of Chad....... I think there is only one behaviour to regret.... an it's not Chad's.

What strike me the most as odd, is the non information Dwayne shares with other forumnites. Almost never anything about stroke rates, split times, training methods or other things most ergers care about. Very bizarre, to say the least.

When people like Pete Marston can develop a Pete plan, Dwayne with all those claimed meters certainly could make up a Dwayne plan. He should know the Concept2 and how to achieve great times on that machine better than most of us. Even better than some Olympic champions.

mpukita wrote:I believe that's what most of the debate was about, because I'll wager that over 75% of the people here (not just those who post, but all who have read and considered the topic ... the general rowing population that is) couldn't care any less whether Dwayne is cheating or not. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Mark,

Not wishing to drag you in but you are wrong......I was 50% of the partnership that created Taff Attack. I was also 50% of the partnership that nagged Dwayne to Join Taff Attack - We were new to the game, and wanted someone who would put the TA on the map. Rick's comments about Dwayne's position in Taff Attack are, in my opinion, entirely justified.
However, over the last two years my opinions about Dwayne have changed - Do people care......? I can only say what everybody now knows - Myself, and the best, most honourable rowing partner I could ever ask for, have had to leave that which we cherish. Yes, I think people care. In sport integrity is everything.

Regards,
Chris (Ex Taff Attack)

Great stuff Bakes. Sort of out of John's vernacular, courage. I will admit that I am in the your camp on two key points (and most of the others as well, but two key ones), I am now at the beleieve it when I see it point, and the honesty stance is dead bang on. Yes it's just indoor rowing, but I care about honesty from the silliest of things, "Who did that?", "I don't know." to earth shaking moments. "I didn't know about the break in a Democratic Headquarters." And for what its worth, (and unrelated to your post)when I got home from Boston and got to look at the video my wife took, I was mortified by my technique. Rich panned over to the rest of the 55+ guys and I was mesmerized by how technically solid you were. I might have been a bit faster, but certainly not better. Good stuff. I know how you love to answer email but I am sending you one about some things that don't need to be answered here so check your email And once again, excellent courage. dennis

People who say they dont care about who wins or loses should not keep score and people who say they dont care about 'dodgy' times in the rankings should not rank.

The term rankings infers by its very nature that you wish to be compared against others both faster and slower - if you cant trust the veracity of the other times then what would be the point

George

Thanks Rick great post.

Thanks for the honesty Rick. My own opinion is not nearly as well formed and not ready for prime time.

My view on Ranking databases:

I think the rankings will survive just fine even with "cheaters". Why? Well because of the percentile ranking idea. If 100 people rank and 5 of them cheat their way to a score they do not deserve then just imagine the effect it has on your ranking position. It does not really impact it that much for most of us. With some cheater on top it barely affects your relative position in the rankings. I'm fairly confident I'm a top 20% rower more or less amongst rowers who have taken the time and effort, like me, to do this "ranking" thing. It would take widespread cheating for that to be false. But to really determine "The Best" we'll have to keep our eyes on the venues and be glad that C2 is generous enough to pay for "the best" to row for all of us to see (or not!).

I have faith in the rankings even with the potential of some cheating. But like a wooden bridge over a gorge, I do not put that much into it either. I really liked the ranking when I was at the bottom and found pleasure moving up the rankings and staking my name above others who had been "my competition" for a few months. It's funny but as you get better the desire to rank diminishes for me. I know for sure the top tier is mostly messed up for the absence of really good rowers who just do not care to rank (because I know them and they are not there). I'm finding the participation in the Cross-Team Challenges to be a great place to find my motivation to row/race today. Most importantly...it's fun and for me, if something loses its thrill, I find something else.

--Jim

George wrote:People who say they dont care about who wins or loses should not keep score and people who say they dont care about 'dodgy' times in the rankings should not rank.

The term rankings infers by its very nature that you wish to be compared against others both faster and slower - if you cant trust the veracity of the other times then what would be the point

George

As far as I'm concerned, it's my right to rank my pieces if I wish. I don't really care that some of the times I'm comparing myself against may be false; my belief is that the majority, by some large margin, are honest, so a few false ones here and there have little impact overall.