Oops. Not What I Had Planned.

Earlier today I posted an open letter to Jim Walmsley that was meant to promote healthy discussion about a serious issue facing our sport. I hesitated printing an anonymous piece, but decided that it would be the right decision and would help focus the conversation on solutions rather than focusing on the author.

I made a mistake.

Many read the post differently than I had, and the implications behind the posts and comments were not what I had intended. I have no problem with healthy discussion, but when a large part of the URP audience reads something in a way that implicates someone else, and completely differently than I had interpreted it, I needed to reconsider my judgement to post it in the first place. To be clear, I didn’t write the letter.

I deleted the letter and can only offer an oops and an apology.

–Eric

32 Responses to "Oops. Not What I Had Planned."

Tom D. says:

November 17, 2016 at 1:00 pm

Hi Eric – I was answering your reply to my comment just now, hit submit, and it went nowhere and then I saw you’d deleted the letter. Just wanted to say I appreciate that you didn’t write it, and I think you took the right step in removing it. Back to enjoying your MUT news links, which I check every morning and really enjoy. Cheers.

Reply
1. Alicia says:
  
  November 17, 2016 at 1:21 pm
  
  Tom, the letter raises very important questions. It would be a huge disservice to bury our heads in the sand and not discuss the issue of PEDs in ultra running. If no one will talk about it or raise flags then some runners will dope without hesitation. We only need to look to cycling and road and track racing to see how that plays out.
  
  Reply
  1. Tom D. says:
    
    November 17, 2016 at 2:54 pm
    
    Hi Alicia – I absolutely understand why those of you who run for money and sponsorships care about PEDs giving another runner who is more willing to disrespect his or her body an edge. But, given that you run for Nike (if this is Ms. Vargo), you must understand the impossibility of telling Jim to go to his primary sponsor and demand that they only sponsor clean athletes. There are ways to have this discussion without an anonymous letter putting one person in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation.
    
    Reply
    1. Alicia says:
      
      November 18, 2016 at 8:45 am
      
      Hi Tom- Yes, this is Mrs Vargo 🙂 I don’t disagree with you that it is unreasonable for an athlete to ask his/her sponsor to pay for drug testing. There really is not a precedent for that in running or other sports… or at least I can’t think of an example. It’s become pretty obvious that as a collective effort sponsors and especially shoe companies are not going to be the ones to champion an anti-doping campaign. The tricky thing with trail/ultra running is that we have no governing body like USADA. I think that a possible approach is to appeal to USADA to have a small group of the best trail/ultra runners be added to their out of competition testing pool since they already have the infrastructure to test athletes. When I first moved to Flagstaff and was on the out of competition testing list I was tested at least 1-2/month!
      
      There has obviously been elements of corruption within USADA over the years but that is hopefully changing for the better. So I agree with you that asking shoe companies to pay for testing is not a good approach. That just won’t happen. Moreover, I think that suggesting that an athlete should ask his shoe company to pay for testing is an even worse idea. The entity that is in charge of testing should have no invested interest in the outcome of the testing.
      
      I do disagree with the mindset that we should just brush this topic aside because if we do that then the sport will likely have no better outcome than the current state of track and field, road running and cycling.
      
      Honesty, if my performances were ever in question because I started running freakishly faster than every other female in the sport, I would pay for my own testing to maintain that I compete clean. I would ask, beg and plead USADA if I could be added to out of competition testing. I would take on any cost for my own testing. That would be my own short term solution until something else is in place. Above all, I think that it’s important that the topic is discussed in a fair and objective manner. Thank you for the dialogue and thank you Eric for being will to tread upon on tricky issue!
      
      Reply
Devon says:

November 17, 2016 at 1:13 pm

Not even close to how I read the letter. People are so sensitive, my god. Very well written. It’s your site. Do with it as you wish. No apology needed. Thanks for posting. Jim is revolutionizing front of the pack ultra running. If you deny this, you’re not paying much attention.

Reply
1. Meghan says:
  
  November 17, 2016 at 2:58 pm
  
  I thought it was a good letter too! I didn’t think it was pressuring Jim… just a suggestion….
  
  Reply
2. Steve Day says:
  
  November 17, 2016 at 4:46 pm
  
  I agree, it was a good letter and healthy discussion. But why so anonymous? My complaint is not with the content but the anonymity. Seems odd… and makes everyone question the motives of the author.
  
  Reply
  1. Devon says:
    
    November 20, 2016 at 7:40 pm
    
    It is odd, and you do have to wonder what stature this individual holds in the sport, and true motives. Reveal the author! hahaha
    
    Reply
  2. Devon says:
    
    November 20, 2016 at 7:53 pm
    
    At the end of the day, if you dope in ultra running at this point, you’re not very smart, because there are a lot of ways to make lots more money, much more easily. Or, you’re just an ass, with a few insecurities. Or both. The money just isn’t there ($12,000 purse is the biggest in a 100 miler). That’s very little ROI. Compare that to marathoning purses, etc. Not comparable. There are a small handful of ultra guys/gals actually making running their job (with compensation), and we all know their names.
    
    Reply
3. Mel says:
  
  November 18, 2016 at 11:10 am
  
  Sensitivity is not such a terrible thing. Eric has influence. Anonymity is irresponsible.
  
  Reply
  1. eric schranz says:
    
    November 18, 2016 at 11:15 am
    
    I won’t be posting any more anonymous posts. I’ve learned my lesson.
    
    Reply
Adam says:

November 17, 2016 at 1:17 pm

I read your letter, I love the idea of the sponsors putting together clean teams. I love the idea of being able to point my kids towards an athlete and say, that’s a good guy who plays by the rules and still wins.

In the early 90’s, I was at a baseball card convention as a kid and wanted an autograph by Jose Canceco (no idea if I spelled the names correctly and I don’t care) so bad, my dad told me that he is great ball players but a bad person because of what he was doing in his personal life off the field. I didn’t get the autograph; I was disappointed at the time, but it had a huge influence on me as a kid. That being honest and good is the more important than being the star.

We all need positive role models, and I love the clean team idea.

I think that maybe singling out an individual was where you made your mistake, good on you for apologizing.

Reply
Ed says:

November 17, 2016 at 1:45 pm

Weird to delete something then post this. Why not leave the letter up with the disclaimer? Now it really leaves a cloud over you as we speculate what the hell it implied.

Reply
1. eric schranz says:
  
  November 17, 2016 at 2:16 pm
  
  It appears I can’t win this, but I do welcome clouds. I’ve got a ton of winter gear to review.
  
  Reply
  1. eric says:
    
    November 18, 2016 at 5:18 am
    
    cant win for tryin……. the internet……
    
    Reply
Tim Stafford says:

November 17, 2016 at 1:51 pm

I read the letter earlier today, and thought it couldn’t be clearer, and was incredibly respectful. I’m now annoyed I missed all the comments below it ;-), but imagine there was a lot of random conspiracy theories, and half-baked thoughts about what it insinuated.

I thought it was a great idea – get those with the most money to trailblaze a way to show that the sport is clean, before it becomes a problem.

Plus – don’t forget the letter didn’t just mention Jim…

Reply
andy says:

November 17, 2016 at 2:08 pm

Hmm, why delete something that can be viewed through online cache anyway?

The letter said: “All the while you can erase any doubt from our supportive community as you run towards becoming a legend.”

Who is doubting besides the author hiding behind an anonymous letter? Ultra shuffle days are not really a thing anymore, sorry.

Reply
Nelson says:

November 17, 2016 at 2:32 pm

Eric, it’s obvious you feel strongly about the need to discuss PEDs in the sport of MUT running. In that light, it’s easy to understand how you saw the letter as a chance to further the discussion, and maybe that’s why you didn’t consider how (IMO) it might put the runner in question in an unfair position. Removing the letter was the right call, I’d agree.

On the issue of PEDs, maybe I’m naive but I don’t think there’s doping among elite ultrarunners. In a sport where there’s hardly any money, the amount of hard work, time, and commitment needed to perform at such high level has to come from some place deeper than the desire of FKT notoriety or winning a race. Someone with this work ethic doesn’t cut corners, I want to believe.

I think we’re more likely to find doping within the midpack. In other running disciplines where testing is common, there’s been an increase of PED use among amateurs. To which I say, they’re only cheating themselves. And putting their health at risk in the process.

Reply
1. SageCanaday says:
  
  November 17, 2016 at 10:19 pm
  
  I saw the letter this morning (and no I didn’t write it and I have no idea who did). I think we’re all in this together though (especially sponsored runners and the brands). Even wrote my own blog post about it.
  
  I agree with you that there is probably some doping in the mid pack. But there is for sure doping in the front of the back…probably a lot more dirty than most people think. I mean, a guy that was top 10 at UTMB got busted for EPO just last year….on a race day test! Imagine how many more we could probably catch with surprise tests 4,6, 8 or 10 weeks before a key race (when the hardest training and gains are being made).
  
  The incentive is this: It’s not just about the prize money (aside from $40,000 to win something like Comrades). To be a top level athlete in this sport has some major perks: International travel perks, bonus cash money from sponsors, a total change in lifestyle (time and money to train full time!), not to mention free shoes and gear and a big ego boost.
  
  I’ve heard from people (rumors I’ll admit as I don’t know the details at all so I could be wrong) a good supply of EPO is only about $1000…ordered online…shipped to your door. Since we hardly ever get tested in MUT Running (and never during hard training between races), it would be pretty easy to take that kind of stuff and never get caught…and the performance boosts would be huge. (Top level, elite runner I’d guess maybe 2-3% improvement and maybe much more with extra hard “superhuman” training on hills…for midpackers maybe 7-8%).
  
  One final note: “being a nice guy (or gal)” has nothing to do with it. I raced guys on the roads at 10km-half marathon that got busted for EPO. Nice guys..friendly, seemingly full of integrity and respect. They raced frequently and they recovered fast and their improvements just weren’t marginal enough. It was never a surprise when they did get busted (at least not to me).
  
  Reply
  1. Doug says:
    
    November 18, 2016 at 6:01 am
    
    Sage just wanted to say I love that you’re out in front of this issue and willing to put yourself out there pushing for testing. Keep up the good work brother.
    
    Reply
    1. Meghan says:
      
      November 18, 2016 at 6:30 am
      
      Alright come out with it already… now you have me curious…. who do all you think wrote it?
      
      Reply
Jenny Darrow says:

November 17, 2016 at 2:57 pm

Eric, I admire you for taking a stand, recognized a “mistake” (I don’t think it was), and owned up to it. For god sake, we need more people like you who can say “I made a mistake” and own it. I admire that.

Reply
Andrew says:

November 17, 2016 at 3:29 pm

I wish i had some frame of reference so I knew what everyone was talking about. Wish you had t deleted the letter.

Reply
1. anonymous says:
  
  November 18, 2016 at 5:25 am
  
  find the link one google (i.e. search “Open Letter to Jim Wamsley”, Click green arrow beside the url link (below the title of the page), click ‘cached’
  
  Reply
Dave says:

November 17, 2016 at 9:44 pm

The original letter is easily available on Google, though I haven’t seen the comments (hint – look for the cached version!).

Unfortunately, the style leads one to believe that it is targeted and posting a letter like this which implies ‘stand up for the sport and be honourable’, while hiding your name… that seems pretty cowardly. You are asking someone else to stand up and put his livelihood at risk without being willing to do it yourself.

Reply
Candice says:

November 18, 2016 at 7:13 am

Good call Eric. It just didn’t make sense for the letter to call out Jim alone and by default it by brought up questions about him and PED use. No, the letter didn’t accuse him directly but when I first saw the title that’s what I expected. Why not call out Kilian? He has accomplished far more up to this point. Or why not call out another elite who has broken records? I’m sure if the writer took a bit more time to craft the message he or she wanted to get across and not anonymously calling for all elites to get sponsors to chip in for testing then it would have been a respectable opinion piece. I don’t think it’s feasible or a good idea personally for many reasons, but I would’ve respected the writer’s motives and opinion if it had been done that way. Sponsors are not going to pay for testing, I am sure of that. Many sponsors barely have a budget for ultra teams. Keep up the good work Eric. You just can’t be a writer (or podcaster) without pissing some people off or making mistakes, and you did the right thing in my opinion.

Reply
1. George says:
  
  November 18, 2016 at 9:56 am
  
  I agree with this response. While the letter made some valid points, it made no sense to focus on Jim during his “little moment on the top” (as he himself said it in the article from Wednesday).
  
  Reply
2. andy says:
  
  November 18, 2016 at 10:43 am
  
  Actually, it did call Jim out, in a way.
  
  The letter said: “All the while you can erase any doubt from our supportive community as you run towards becoming a legend.”
  
  To me, the author appears to think that Jim is doping, but is too cowardly to say it without hiding. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if this was another pro runner, or even a teammate.
  
  Reply
Luke Garten says:

November 18, 2016 at 3:35 pm

Can’t make everyone happy with everything you post. As long as you make more people entertained or happy than you piss off, you are doing great!

Reply
Mic says:

November 18, 2016 at 9:07 pm

Geez Eric, *nothing* gets deleted on the internet! (Thanks Google Cache).

I read the letter. Reads fine to me. What’s the fuss about? Sure it hints he could be doping, but welcome to 2016. It happens now sadly. To think any athlete could come from nowhere, smash records like Lance and then expect people to just assume you’re clean is kinda naive. Anything is possible, hell, you guys just voted in Trump!

Mic Z. Australia.

Reply
1. Doug says:
  
  November 19, 2016 at 2:55 am
  
  I read it too.. No big deal to me really.. Seems like a plausible request of athletes to their sponsors and actually would benefit the sponsors too
  
  Reply
Walker says:

November 19, 2016 at 8:49 am

If you’re going to win and break records today you must have proof you’re doing it legitimately. If you don’t the current climate dictates you will be questioned. This should not be a surprise.

Reply

Please use real name. Anonymous comments will be deleted. Thanks.Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.