Runner's goals: Win Olympic 400, 800 and 1500

[Master Po]

Re: Runner's goals: Win Olympic 400, 800 and 1500

Looks like he'll have to wait another four years...

Name     Affiliation     Mark      Status
Chris Mitchell-Horton  1:48.00  not qualified
Chris Mitchell-Horton  3:44.00  not qualified

http://www.usatf.org/events/2012/Olympi ... status.asp

OMG - he actually had the gall to enter??!! :shock:
If someone actually did 'sponsor' him, now he can say that USATF made a clerical error and denied him his dream!!!

I realize it might be odd to be on this guy's side even hypothetically, but -- if those times were real -- then it seems he should have entered, at least in the 800. After all, the OT "B" is 1:48.30. If I knew an athlete who met the OT "B" standard, I would certainly encourage that person to submit an entry. As for the 1500, the OT "B" is 3:43.00, so I would not quite see the point of submitting an entry with a 3:44.

All that stated, the ".00" for each suggests something not real about these times...

I hope that later he doesn't post to his site that he was "entered" in the 2012 OT. That would be like me writing in my name on the Fall election ballot and then putting on my resume that I ran for President.

[Marlow]

Re: Runner's goals: Win Olympic 400, 800 and 1500

Looks like he'll have to wait another four years...

Name     Affiliation     Mark      Status
Chris Mitchell-Horton  1:48.00  not qualified
Chris Mitchell-Horton  3:44.00  not qualified

http://www.usatf.org/events/2012/Olympi ... status.asp

OMG - he actually had the gall to enter??!! :shock:
If someone actually did 'sponsor' him, now he can say that USATF made a clerical error and denied him his dream!!!

[LopenUupunut]

Re: Runner's goals: Win Olympic 400, 800 and 1500

Looks like he'll have to wait another four years...

Name     Affiliation     Mark      Status
Chris Mitchell-Horton  1:48.00  not qualified
Chris Mitchell-Horton  3:44.00  not qualified

http://www.usatf.org/events/2012/Olympi ... status.asp

[NorCalAngler]

Re: Runner's goals: Win Olympic 400, 800 and 1500

I have to dig this one up again. Anybody have anything new on this guy?

[3]

The sponsors appear to be tied into the website, not actual athletic sponsors. Even so, they likely have no idea to what they are being associated.

[Marlow]

I definitely respect your opinion, but it was most definitely not 'straight up'. The intent was for him to give us answers that we could ridicule even more. The guy has some issues, and I get squeamish when we pick on the Matt Marriotts of the world.

Ken's questions were completely "straight up" and all legitimate. The point that you appear to be missing is that this guy has proactively positioned himself in public as someone who is shooting for an incredible Olympic Dream and is soliciting sponsorship support for that dream. How can you possibly believe that he shouldn't be questioned about such a blatant fraud and the lies on his athletic resume? I actually thought Ken went easy on the guy. Frankly, who the hell cares if it makes you feel squeamish or not?

I care if it makes me squeamish, you limey b*stard! :twisted:
But . . . that said, I guess I do agree that a fraud is a fraud is a fraud, so I retract my objections. :?

[lonewolf]

I vote for Ken on this one.

[steve]

He absolutely deserves to be called out. "Silly dreams" are one thing, lying on your track resume in order to solicit sponsorship is another. It's fraud...

Yeah, I gotta agree with that. (Caveat emptor tells us they should not have taken him at face value, though - bad on them for being gullible.)

So, if you agree, what are you waiting for........go tell his wife!! :lol:

[runsaul]

I agree that he's open to public punking!
I mean a guy who puts up an actual website of himself deserves to get laughed at and questioned if he cant back up his lies. I wish he was interviewed by Joel Grover from Channel 4 news. This guy exposes fraud all the time.
Maybe he can do the same here.
HA!

[marknhj]

I definitely respect your opinion, but it was most definitely not 'straight up'. The intent was for him to give us answers that we could ridicule even more. The guy has some issues, and I get squeamish when we pick on the Matt Marriotts of the world.

Ken's questions were completely "straight up" and all legitimate. The point that you appear to be missing is that this guy has proactively positioned himself in public as someone who is shooting for an incredible Olympic Dream and is soliciting sponsorship support for that dream. How can you possibly believe that he shouldn't be questioned about such a blatant fraud and the lies on his athletic resume? I actually thought Ken went easy on the guy. Frankly, who the hell cares if it makes you feel squeamish or not?

[tandfman]

I'm with Steve on this one. The guy has apparently defrauded, or attempted to defraud, ignorant individuals who might have thought that they were helping to support legitimate Olympic aspirations. Whether he's an out-and-out con artist or is just a loon, when he seeks the financial support of others, he becomes fair game for public scrutiny.

[Marlow]

You are not off-base very often, Marlow, but you sure are this time. Ken interviewed him straight up.

I definitely respect your opinion, but it was most definitely not 'straight up'. The intent was for him to give us answers that we could ridicule even more. The guy has some issues, and I get squeamish when we pick on the Matt Marriotts of the world.

[tlb747]

Yep. The guy is a fraud on top of being a joke.

Well, I had dreams of winning in the Summer Olympics, then I realized you have to work really hard to accomplished that goal. Maybe we can a game out of this and put our marks and performances to promote ourselves for fifteen seconds of fame, or shame. It can be called the "Trackandfieldnews Olympics" using the same events as the oringinal person did. Gold, silver, and bronze medals (or let them know that they did a god job) to the individuals with the highest scores from the following events [scoring from the decathlon format (although there are eight events listd below) or other]. I do not know how the points system works in the decathlon, but I will start. Deadline of the possible games? You decide.

100 meters: 10.82 (1997) Points: ?
200 meters: 20.92 (1999) Points: ?
400 meters: 45.61 (2001) Points: ?
800 meters: 1:55.45 (1997) Points: ?
5000 meters: 19:45 (2007) Points: ?
10000 meters: NM (However, 50:32 in a 11K; 2005) Points: 0
Half-marathon: NM (Too scared to run that distance) Points: 0
Marathon: Same as above Points: 0

Total Score: # Points

[dukehjsteve]

My interview with Chris Mitchell-Horton is here:
http://masterstrack.com/blog/006091.html
Enjoy! :twisted:
K E N

this time he deserves a little more scrutiny.

Why? There's nothing enjoyable about ridiculing a man to his face. Posting our skepticism here is one thing, but interviewing him for the purpose of our amusment is a little much, don't you think? :cry:

You are not off-base very often, Marlow, but you sure are this time. Ken interviewed him straight up. Ken, like most of us, and this should include you, don't like liars, particularly ones that are raising money for themselves under false pretenses. Either that or he is mentally not all there... and the latter is all Ken overtly said about him in writing.

[dukehjsteve]

Good work Ken. Done the right way, by playing it "straight" with him. Then he's got the shovel, he digs the grave.