Fudging fast times on mastersrankings.com? Truth sought
Steve Bunn: Are his sprint times bunk?
|
My favorite motto in masters track is: āThe older I get, the faster I was.ā This suggests the fibs we tell our friends, family and co-workers about our prowess āback in the day.ā But thereās one place where lying is seriously bad form: mastersrankings.com. Launched in 2003 as a service of USATF Masters T&F Committee, this amazing site allows athletes, meet directors and others to post marks in real time ā making it possible for athletes, fans and journalists to instantly see top age-group performances around the country. The database technology that underlies this site was devised by masters thrower John Seto. Itās a wonder to behold. It works on the honor system.
In December 2006, I asked then Rankings Committee chairman Dave Clingan if there were any punishment for bogus entries.
Dave replied: āNo punishment, really. As rankings administrator, I will simply remove any marks that are bogus from the lists. We havenāt really discussed this, but I could probably have a tool which enables me to block the system from accepting marks from anyone with a given name and date of birth. I doubt this would ever be necessary.ā
Sixteen months later, we have a case of falsehoods on mastersrankings.com.
Steven Bunn of Belleville, Illinois, a 44-year-old sprinter, is shown wearing a USATF national masters championship patch (April 24 update: Steve says the patch is from a USATF regional meet) on a staff page at a place he works ā an aquatics and fitness business.
On the page, this is said of him:
Steve has a BS in Recreation Management with an emphasis on Exercise Physiology from Northern State University. Steve is also a USATF World Class sprinter and is the head track and field coach for the St. Louis Wheelchair Athletic Association.
World-class sprinter? Well, thatās a stretch. (He was an M35 also-ran in the 100 and 200 at Illinois masters nationals in 2004.)
The marks posted under his name on mastersrankings.com are definitely top-notch. But are they true?
I sent a query to one of Steveās email address last Friday at his business, noting how three marks submitted under his name to mastersrankings.com werenāt what the results reported for him.
Results showed he ran 7.87 for 60 meters at the USATF Ohio masters indoor championships February 17, 2008, but mastersrankings.com has Steve listed as having run 7.67.
Results showed he ran 7.32 for 55 meters at the KTCCA meet March 1, 2008, in Kentucky, but mastersrankings.com has Steve down for 6.68.
Results showed he ran 7.80 for 60 meters at the USATF Midwest masters indoor regionals on March 8, 2008, in Kenosha, Wisconsin, but mastersrankings.com says Steve ran 7.60.
Masters track has a long and inglorious tradition of bogus seed times submitted for major national and world meets. But those marks arenāt meant to be official. Frequently, they just reflect a misunderstanding of what āqualifying marksā are about ā recent bests or all-time records? It can be a hoot.
But the Bunn matter ātaint funny. It smacks of fakery and raises serious questions. Iām looking forward to hearing from Mr. Bunn.
30 Responses
We have seen another tool since the inception of our honor system. The athletes notify me of people who submit marks that do not match the posted results. Certainly all posted results are not correct but, thanks to you athletes, I have a list of people who have submitted several conflicting results. So far, we have corrected results where necessary. I will install a block on any athlete who continues to abuse after they have been notified.
I thought this was all about pride in accomplishment. If you’re faking the accomplishment, what are you getting out of it?
John, the very same “athletes” get out of doping.
Yes, but the younger athletes have a shot at some degree of fame and fortune. A small handful of masters stars can achieve a very limited amount of fame (without the fortune), but they could never get away with fudging the numbers. So to me, this remains a case of fudging the numbers with no potential pay-off as far as I can see it.
Fudged or not if/when everyone lines up at Nationals (or any other meets) the proof is in the pudding. Adding the website that the official results are on should remedy any suspicions. As far as fortune and fame? HA, Pa-lease…I go broke each summer for the love of athletics!
It must suck to see your name and smiling face in this blog under these circumstances. That’ll ruin all the fun for you!
What about hand times? Are some of those slipping into the FAT list?
Something tells me John Seto is working overtime on the Rankings! I know he’s helped me with a couple issues and he seemed more than happy to do it. We all need to thank him for his work.
Thank you John!
I know of someone who routinely posts outrageous seed times, but I will let her get caught on her own. Personally, I would be leery of posting a time I’m not close to running because I’m apt to run even slower if I’m getting my doors blown off right out of the blocks. I think posting the official results along with seed times would go a long ways towards curbing this behavior. The only problem would be for athletes who might get injured in the course of a race and choose to finish anyway. We probably all know someone who “embellishes” and whenever we see their name listed, we put a mental asterisk next to it.
Ken,
You are way out of line. Check it out send the guy an email and let it ride. Posting his picture and making this a big issue in your blog is overkill.
Slow news day?
I believe it’s up to all of us to help as well. Only on a few occasions, I’ve had to research marks that have looked suspicious or odd and came out of no where. I let Dave know about them. He always looked into it and had the final say in the matter. I only had one problem with one of his decisions…rankings that came from a throwers meet with no results posted on a website, no previous advertisement on the meet. But there it was, a bunch of high rankings from throwers I’d never really heard of that never threw again after that meet. If it looks weird, look it up , research it, then let John know about it. This ranking system, of ours has been the best world wide in my opinion. Let’s not let a few people make it a joke. As track and field athletes we live by tenths and hundredths of seconds…by inches, feet and meters…by points large and small. We evaluate ourselves through our performances…we compete from within, against elusive P.R.’s that dangle in front of our eyes reminding us where we need to be headed. We should all compete with honor and integrity because when it’s all said and done, that’s really all we keep when we walk away from the track or field, at the end of the day, season or career….that sense of satifaction and pride that ONLY comes from within… and no where else.
I think there’s a huge difference between entering a seed time that you’ve actually run but don’t live up to in the meet and actually entering a false time.
The first is simply unfortunate for you and the second is straight lying.
For many meets (early season in particular), people enter their season bests from the prior year. I don’t see anything wrong with that- it’s a recent measure of what an athlete is capable of and many times, athletes want to be placed into a race that will help them run a faster time.
But we all know things happen. People have bad days and run a lot slower than their seed time.
Now, if you falsify a seed time (enter a time you’ve never run) or enter a time that you ran in college (and you’re now a masters athlete) then that’s out of line.
Anyone who actually enters a false time into mastersrankings.com has other major issues to deal with in my opinion.
Yup, I think we got your drift, Johnny!
Usually, in my experience, meet organisers are reasonably specific about what they want you to base your seed time on. “Best last season”, “best indoors in last 12 months” and so on. If people still then enter a time that falls outside that definition, and meet organisers don’t check (how can they, of course?), then we all suffer messed up prelim draws, etc.
We had Russian M50s in the last European outdoors declaring times like 10.03 for 100m. Did they ever! Language misunderstandings were no doubt blamed, but that doesn’t hold water for me. The only way we can deal with the false entries is peer pressure, and I think Ken’s right to highlight what might not be a big problem in the overall scheme of things, but seems a persistent one.
With the new system, I think people should post all marksā not just the good ones. I like the system because it helps me keep track of my progress. I posted a discus mark that was about 30 feet off my best. The meet was conducted in a driving rainstorm and I was wearing a sweater and a jacket. It was still a mark (even though it sucked).
Hey Tom- =)
Yeah, there were some issues with posting comments but fortunately, Ken was kind enough to erase the duplicated posts…thanks, Ken…
the beauty of this sport is precise to me.no matter what someone says they can do, the clock and the tape don’t lie, or cheat.when someone puts a “dream” seed in, i just smile, and let” mother nature” and “father time” sort it out.sometimes they’re very generous, and sometimes they’re downright cruel..give ’em enough rope
In reply to Gary John: I’ve now sent email to four addresses for Steven Bunn, the first note going out last Friday and the final two just a few minutes ago.
I took pains not to directly accuse Steve. It’s possible someone posted the marks under his name. I’m looking forward to hearing from Steve.
Milton: The last sentence in your comment was VERY well-said. I believe any “true” athlete will concur with that statement.
Tom Fahey raised a point I always had a question about. My practice had been to submit a mark after the first meet, and then to only submit marks that were improvements. In effect I was posting season bests, to-date. I had assumed that was the purpose of the ranking page. Is it intended to be a record of all competitions?
The other question is what to do during a season in which you move up an age group. I know Tom posted marks in one age group, and then also in the next age group after he had his birthday. I move up an age group in a couple of weeks and although I’ve competed this year, my plan was to only post marks in meets after my birthday. What does everyone else do?
I and many other are often put off by bogus seed times and even results. However Ken this blog should not be a forum for personal attacks on anyone. While I appreciate the spirit of the post THE BOGUS TIMES it certainly could have been approached without singling out Steve, channel your negative energy elsewhere.
Response to John Stilbert: John, the rankings are intended to have the best performances for the season posted. This means that your results for both age groups are appropriate and legitimate. The new system also has the added feature of listing all results. You can use this as a record of all your performances throughout the season. Additionally, we import complete meet results where we can so typically, an athlete will have multiple results listed within a season.
I would like to make a comment about their “recent” best performance people post when registering for a meeting. Sometimes there is a language problem, but sometimes there is a strategy behind it. In high jump, the person with the best performance ends up jumping last – which is an advantage. For that reason some people will send in “dream” performances which are frequently better than the world record. Some people will do anything to get some advantage. Maybe cheating is part of a human make up and is genetically encoded :-). It is in slime mold:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7182/full/nature06558.html
Ken,
I just had this information forwarded to me and I am shocked. First, I was not aware that results could be altered on the site until today upon recieving this email. I believe someone in the masters community is having a little fun with me at my expense. Over the last 5 years or so I have met many of you and formed many lasting relationships through masters track and field. It seems I am presumed guilty. I can assure you all that I have NOT manipulated any times posted on the site nor have I personally submitted any times for the 2008 indoor season. Those of you who know me personally as well as the work I do both professionally and in the community can attest to my character. I am deeply offended and upset over the matter.
Steve Bunn
Steve-
I admire your courage for coming on this site and explaining the situation. I have never met you and don’t know anything about you personally and so will withhold judgment knowing that if it had been my name and photo attached, I would have been hurt myself. So, if you will be making it to Spokane in August, I look forward to meeting you then.
Best of luck.
I have met Steve on a number of occasions and have found him to be a quality person who does a lot of good work and is very well respected,
Steve, I hope you can get through this and will continue to participate in track, most of us do not see ourselves as judge and jury and do not take this track and field hobby on a personal level.I stress the word hobby, this is something we do for fun!!!!
Wow, I can’t believe that anyone at this site would go after this particular guy. I have met Steve on numerous occasions as well as seen him perform throughout Illinois at a very high level. What he does in his community is amazing. I am sorry that this has happened and I hope Steve will realize that a few do not represent the entire masters track and field community. I am not sure what is up with the rankings but Steve is the last guy who needs to make up times. The guy runs Great!
Jeff S
I don’t think your blog is the place to go after one individual on a personal basis. Going forward; will you be investigating all master’s times turned in as qualifying marks ? Will you also be personally investigating all master’s throwers to make sure they do not slip illeagal implements into meets ? Have you appointed yourself the investigative arm of master’s track and field or did you choose to go after one individual personally. i would bet a weeks pay there is more behind your personal crusage than is being disclosed. I will tell you that you a extremley fortunate you did not choose a national forum like this to attack me,on a personal basis — Can you spell s-l-a-n-d-e-r ?
I am not sure if I unintentionally offended someone somewhere along the line. But I cannot understand why anyone would forward the actual blog accusing me to me as well as my place of business and also where I have been a volunteer coach for several years unless it was intended to do harm. I have forwarded my personal phone number to Ken. I would appreciate some kind of apology or retraction sent to those places as well. Again if I offended someone in some way let me know and I will make it right as well.
Steve Bunn
FR: David E. Ortman (M55)
Two completely different different issues on this thread.
#1. Seed Times for meets. Meet Entry forms are not always clear (the last Boston National Indoor Meet form didn’t even specify who the check should be made out to for entry fees). Seed times are used for heats and should reflect best season or last season times/heights/distance. But if you didn’t have a mark last season you are stuck with a NM or NT. Which doesn’t help the meet officials much either.
#2. The wonderful masters rankings site. If you think there are a few suspect marks now, you should have seen the problems in the past with trying to comply ranking lists by hand! In this sense, the masters T&F ranking site operates like golf. In golf, you keep track of your own score and your own penalties, even if no one else saw what happened. With the number of people posting and keeping an eye on the rankings I think that the occasional odd mark will stand out and be corrected during the season.
Given that some competitors may attend a meet a week, I think the rankings site should reflect an athletes current best mark in an age group event (which means listing marks in both age groups if you advance to a new age group during the indoor or outdoor season). Since this is a real time site, a person can post his/her first mark of the season. If there is improvement each week, then the mark gets updated. If the first mark turns out to be the best mark of the season, there is no point in listing lesser marks.
It is a great website and great tool and another big thank you from a former event ranker!
Ken,
You are a devoted and able reporter and watchdog for masters T&F, devoted to the sport. We’d never know about most of what you tell us any other way, and all of in the sport care about these developments. Many thanks for all you do.
Bob Weiner, Chair, USATF Masters Media Committee
as a fellow Blogger, I enjoy reading Ken’s Blog despite the sensational Journalism at times. Check out his credentials – he’s a Journalist! There isn’t a site dedicated to Masters News out there that is free of charge. You have to admit, the content has a lot of diversity that you wouldn’t find elsewhere (NMN, GeezerJock comes to mind)
When you go to the newsstand, there are paid newspapers and free mini-newspapers (or tabloids if you wish to call them that).. the choice is yours to read.
Ken, keep up the good work, unless, of course, you change to a paid subscription :o)
This is a little late but better than never. I have been in Seattle running Spring Fling. As has been the case sometime Ken has been a little strong on something he sees as a wrong. I have been the target sometime, but understand where Ken is coming from. You might not always like what Ken has to say, but I think a lot of people are interested in reading it. He is the only place Masters Track people can get real news on what’s going on in our sport. Not that National Masters News doesn’t have it’s important place in the information flow. I really appreciate all that Ken does. Paricularly for what he charges. He should charge, or at least Google Adsense for his trouble.
I visit Ken’s site everyday to get information on the sport I love. Especially since I have been blackballed (information wise) after my resignation. No respect for all my years of service. I always respected my predessors
What has not been mentioned is that Ken is watching and bringing out the suspect information. I don’t think that Ken actually called Steve a liar, but asked for an explaination which was delivered and accepted. I’m sure Steve didn’t want to take credit for false information. He seems like a quality guy. The situation that someone would falsify is very sad.
Also I don’t think we should be knocking the ranking system that I know most athletes love. I know John Seto and his predecessors worked their asses off making these ranking work. Thank You to them.
Unfortunately, I believe they need to go to a password system to protect the innocent.
While they are at it I believe they should institute the “UNSANCTIONED ASTERISKS” FOR UNSANCTIONED MEETS which was ageed to when I was Chairman. These unsanctioned rankings should follow the the sanctioned meet rankings. Some meets where they loc knows the facility isn’t legal eg. downhill slope fields don’t get sanctions for that reason. These results (rankings)should have a place somwhere?
Leave a Reply