Questioning Luanne Suplick lightweight 60min WR

[wjschmidt2]

John,

Thanks for you opinion.

We have different views on Rod.

However, I do challenge all records that appear extraordinary compared to the closest competitors.

If you see something strange then you investigate.

Concept 2 is the governing body for records rowed on their machine. They have there own reasons to uphold or remove records.

Me, I would defend my record if challenged. Rod took a different approach.

Even Ranger defends himself, I respect him for that.

Respectfully submitted,

Bill

.

[Citroen]

Even Ranger defends himself, I respect him for that.

Rich Cureton deserves nothing after his failure to accept a medal last time he rowed sucessfully at the British Champs in Birmingham. He gets no respect from me.

[wjschmidt2]

Citroen,

Do you really want to bring up that topic on this thread?

I am just questioning some world records. People submit times and distances on the Concept 2 Website for various reasons. I believe for receiving some sort of recognition. When the records are outside the norm then I believe it should be looked at closer.

Ranger is good to go. Did his at a race. We have options to deal with him or not after the fact. But still a record holder. And he defends himself in his own personal way. Whether we like it or not. Yes, most do not respect him for all his talk and actions. But the guy stays in character after all these years.

Concept 2 has the guidelines to accept or not accept records.

We as participants in this erg community have our own guidelines as well. That is why I question some particular records.

Bill

[Cyclingman1]

Bogus times appear at the top of rankings fairly frequently, although most are due to error or such - using none C2 machine, etc.

World records not so much. In this case, Suplick's posted WR does not seem credible. Using a good predictive technique, using her 2K and 10K rankings from the same period, 2005, her predicted 60min would be in the area of 12325 @2:26, a far cry from 16193 @1:51.6. Some explanation is needed.

[wjschmidt2]

Jim,

Totally agree. I am still amazed by super fast times without other attempts at shorter and longer distances. People who rank their times and/or distances you would think are competitive and would attempt other events as well to see where they stand.

Thanks for your input.

Bill

[hjs]

Bogus times appear at the top of rankings fairly frequently, although most are due to error or such - using none C2 machine, etc.

World records not so much. In this case, Suplick's posted WR does not seem credible. Using a good predictive technique, using her 2K and 10K rankings from the same period, 2005, her predicted 60min would be in the area of 12325 @2:26, a far cry from 16193 @1:51.6. Some explanation is needed.

Sounds very much like a wrong callibration. So maybe she really saw those meters and pace and thought it was real. Certainly seen that gefore. In the recent ski tour, I saw a guy posting a monster 2k time. Totally out of wack with his other results, you might think, you see that, and start thinking, that can,t be right, but there is a reason the army does not allow people with below 85 IQ s

[Tenshuu]

Bogus times appear at the top of rankings fairly frequently, although most are due to error or such - using none C2 machine, etc.

World records not so much. In this case, Suplick's posted WR does not seem credible. Using a good predictive technique, using her 2K and 10K rankings from the same period, 2005, her predicted 60min would be in the area of 12325 @2:26, a far cry from 16193 @1:51.6. Some explanation is needed.

Sounds very much like a wrong callibration. So maybe she really saw those meters and pace and thought it was real. Certainly seen that gefore. In the recent ski tour, I saw a guy posting a monster 2k time. Totally out of wack with his other results, you might think, you see that, and start thinking, that can,t be right, but there is a reason the army does not allow people with below 85 IQ s

If this is the case.... The Army sets a pretty low bar.....

[wjschmidt2]

Henry,

Very true about some users. Not all are experts on modern day devices. Entering the correct data may not be on the highest priority list as well.

With the number of entries being made on the Concept 2 Website, there is bound to a percentage of errors. No doubt, we do not live in the perfect world.

I was taught, long ago, we are in a continuing process of improvement. Hope we continue this journey with the erg community.

Thanks for the input!

Bill

[hjs]

Henry,

Very true about some users. Not all are experts on modern day devices. Entering the correct data may not be on the highest priority list as well.

With the number of entries being made on the Concept 2 Website, there is bound to a percentage of errors. No doubt, we do not live in the perfect world.

I was taught, long ago, we are in a continuing process of improvement. Hope we continue this journey with the erg community.

Thanks for the input!

Bill

Cheers Bill, sounds like a wise way of looking at things. And indeed errors are sometimes made, happens to all of us.

[hjs]

Bogus times appear at the top of rankings fairly frequently, although most are due to error or such - using none C2 machine, etc.

World records not so much. In this case, Suplick's posted WR does not seem credible. Using a good predictive technique, using her 2K and 10K rankings from the same period, 2005, her predicted 60min would be in the area of 12325 @2:26, a far cry from 16193 @1:51.6. Some explanation is needed.

Sounds very much like a wrong callibration. So maybe she really saw those meters and pace and thought it was real. Certainly seen that gefore. In the recent ski tour, I saw a guy posting a monster 2k time. Totally out of wack with his other results, you might think, you see that, and start thinking, that can,t be right, but there is a reason the army does not allow people with below 85 IQ s

If this is the case.... The Army sets a pretty low bar.....

Still, a certain % does not make, which on facts means, there are no jobs simple enough. For those people is no usefull work.

[wjschmidt2]

To all,

Update:

Luanne Suplick's 60-minute record was completed as an interval workout. Dena will update the world record once she checks out the next fastest.

The next fastest is Ruth Roebuck with a 16015m for an hour. This is highly remarkable as well. I have already questioned Ruth's 10k mark.

10000 30-39 Ruth Roebuck F Lwt 39 GBR 36:52.7 2013 PM Verification Code

That is a 1:50.8 pace for a 39-year-old
,128lb lightweight! Not likely in my opinion.

Dena will check both of these records.

After these two ladies, the times and distances for the rest of the rankings look very respectable.

Bill

[Cyclingman1]

Of course, Lorraine Walker dominates the 30-39 LWT female field. When it all gets sorted out, within a year or so, she might well hold all 13 WRs in that category, even the 2K which has held since 2000.

See her profile on C2: https://www.concept2.com/news/concept2- ... ine-walker

[wjschmidt2]

Jim,

Lorraine is one of the hardest working athletes to have attacked the erg community. Her CrossFit training along with the erg workouts are truly amazing.

If we can determine the legitimacy of Ruth Roebuck's 10k and 60' marks then we will have a clearer picture of the 30-39 lightweight category.

Bill

[Cyclingman1]

Two changes have been made in the 30-39 Female LWt WRs.

10k: Anna Lewis, 37:54.4. 60 min: Jen House, 14904m.

Lorraine has a verified 10K of 37:43.9. Apparently C2 did not see this time. And she has a non-verified 60 min at 15,202.

Obviously one of these records she already has, and the other is just a matter of doing a specific distance row, instead of Just Row.

I'm amazed at the rowing background of so many of these women record holders: Olympic and World medals. At times, a great time that is 20+ yrs old is suspicious, but not in these cases. For example, Lisa Schlenker, set C2 30-39 WR 2K in 2000 at 6:56.7. She is an Olympic rower. But Lorraine is less than 2 sesc behind. She'll get it.

[wjschmidt2]

Jim,

I received the email from Dena a little while ago and gave her the corrected info about Lorraine. So, we may see some movement on the rankings. She is still waiting to hear from Ruth Roebuck but I am thinking she may have a long wait.

And, I sent Lorraine a message to do a ranking 60' before the weather gets to warm. Totally up to her as to when.

If we saw more Olympic rowers on the erg then, no doubt, more legit records would fall. Lorraine is definitely in a good position to give anyone a run for the money.

I need to focus on the rankings some more to see if there are any other unusual records.

Bill