50+ Masters Training and Racing Open Forum

amkelley wrote:

A pretty bad week. My heel is persistently sore and is not getting better as I take more and more time off from running. Some nights I am awakened multiple times by severe calf cramps in the leg with the bad Achilles. I’m really hoping this is just going through a bad stage as it has before, but if it doesn’t get better soon I may be forced to take a complete hiatus from running for a while and switch over completely to the bike.

Racerdb, I’m encouraged to hear that your heel is feeling better....

It was a big decision to commit to a break from running. But I'm convinced it was 100% the right decision. And the world didn't end.

Dave

amkelley,,

Thanks. Take care of that heel and have a good race if you run. You are tough that’s for sure. I am cross training today: digging out a tree root that has pinched a sprinkler line. Neighbor came out said “even chemo can’t keep Reid down.” Kind of proud of that.

Igy

41 miles all easy, over 6 days. I was still feeling pretty off Monday so rested Tuesday and felt better each day as the week progressed. Wrapped up with a couple decent trail runs over the weekend, one at 6000 ft, another at 8000.

Good news Igy, stay and keep healthy everyone!

21 miles on 4 runs including today’s race

3 swims totaling 3.5 miles

2 lifting sessions

Ran the 10k masters in Dedham. 5th in age group in 37:30. That’s 23 sec off of last year but topped 84% on the age graded scale, which was better than my Cherry Blossom effort on a hillier course. Going to stretch out the training and travel to Ann Arbor for the half.

Have a good week all.

not half fast wrote:

21 miles on 4 runs including today’s race

3 swims totaling 3.5 miles

2 lifting sessions

Ran the 10k masters in Dedham. 5th in age group in 37:30. That’s 23 sec off of last year but topped 84% on the age graded scale, which was better than my Cherry Blossom effort on a hillier course. Going to stretch out the training and travel to Ann Arbor for the half.

Have a good week all.

Wow!...84%....very impressive! One of my user names is "Old Slow Stiff" but you guys make me feel like a really SLOW stiff! ?. My best AG as a GrandMasters (58) is a paultry 67% at a flat 5k. ? Heck, in my prime my best 10k was a pathetic 39:27! ?. Man...there is a lot of speed with aging runners on this site. How do some of you guys do it? It's becoming intimating to look at this site and see everyone's week in review (incredible mileage & speed work) & race results...that's why I can only laugh at myself. ?

M58 -- 5'11" 167 lbs

Goal -- Defend M55-59 title in 15K (August)

Training -- Week 3 of 18-week plan; 9-day cycle with long run, VO2max and LT workouts; volume progression

April 23-29, 2018

Mon -- 16.6 miles @ 7:51/mi

Tue -- off

Wed -- 1.0-mile warmup; 3 x 1.5-mile w/2-min static rest @ 6:51/mi, 6:35/mi, 6:30/mi; 0.5-mi cooldown

Thu -- 10.0 miles @ 8:24/mi

Fri -- 8.3 miles @ 8:28/mi w/6x100m strides

Sat -- off

Sun -- 7.7 miles @ 8:44/mi

WEEK TOTAL: 48.6 MILES

Wednesday's LT workout went well. I didn't have time for an adequate warm-up, so the first repeat was a bit off pace, but I was happy with the second and third reps. Despite still being a long ways behind my fitness from a year ago, I haven't given up on my 15K goal in August. I will probably need 6:25/mile pace.

Old Slow Stiff wrote:

Man...there is a lot of speed with aging runners on this site. How do some of you guys do it? It's becoming intimating to look at this site and see everyone's week in review (incredible mileage & speed work) & race results...that's why I can only laugh at myself. ?

It's all relative, and there is a range of talent represented here. I think the common goals are to stay fit, stay healthy, and reach as close to our individual potentials as possible. And, hopefully, enjoy the process and have fun racing if that's what we do. There are a lot of folks here with whom I was never competitive, and can never hope to be. And sometimes I feel like a slug in comparison, but it sure is fun to follow their exploits!

Another 30 mile or so week here. Stupid plantar fasica is barking at me now. I have been to 5 meets in 8 days. Including Penn Relays. I think it is the lack of self care. I think I got it calmed down with the roller tonight though. On the road or at a meet 11 of 16 days. Next week is the PSAC meet and finally some nice riding weather.

Have a blast everyone

skate- first of all, don't convert M50+ percentages to college/open age standards. It isn't what the system was designed for and it is by far the LEAST valid application of it. That system is subsidized by free tuition and professional $$$. Masters is the closest thing to true amateurism that still exists. Don't compare apples and oranges.

Second- you seem fixated on the medals podium as a measure of "National/World Class". Is Abel Kiprop not world class because he didn't make the podium in London '17? Is Bekele not World Class because he was out of the top three in the London Marathon? The word "class" has a much broader definition than you think it does. I will reiterate one more time: 90% WMA AG rating is WORLD CLASS. End of story.

It really was end of last week where I felt it was ok to up the intensity after my mystery side issue, never got to the bottom of it, but it's largely gone now, tender to poke, but don't notice when running. I managed it by doing some gentle foam rolling and rubbing on Tiger balm.

Got myself into a position where I could race the country champs last Thu.

Week 16

Mon: Double recovery, 3.71 + 5.66 at 8min+ pace

Tue: AM easy 4.15 @ 7:44 , PM steady treadmill 6.4 @ 7min

Wed: Easy + strides + drills 7.05 miles

Thu: 1hr easy 8.28 miles

Fri: 45min easy 6.03 miles

Sat: W/U + 3 x 8mins (5:49/5:44/5:42) + W/D 8.09 miles

Sun: Double recovery 3.76 + 5.43

WTD: 58.6

MTD: 174.3

YTD: 944.8

Streak: 252 / 2,186

Week 17

Mon: Easy + 6 x 30 secs strides

Tue: 6.3 easy

Wed: 4.5 recovery

Thu: Country 5k Road Race Champs

Pretty decent conditions for racing, fast opening half mile and then rolling for the rest.

Wasn't sure where my fitness was at and was still monitoring with my side, so took a slightly cautious approach to this. I wasn't overly concerned in the M50 category, but there were a few 48/49 year olds that I had my eye on :).

After 2k or so I'm back in 14th, there's about a 600m drag at the start of this k, so I settle in and start working the cadence, quickly reel in an M45 and set my sights on a Junior and an M35 (handy having the categories on the back), get a head of them just before the turn point (2.9k) and then need to work hard to fight them off.

Get past a senior who looks like he's blown a gasket pretty easily, then I have clear sight with 9th and 8th maybe 30 and 50 mts ahead respectively. The reverse of the 600 drag and I focus on form and increasing the effort, pass 9th (M35) with about a k to go and have my eyes on 8th (M45), draw alongside, he responds, but I hold the pace for longer and edge past with about 400 to go, slight incline, so I push again and put 6 seconds between us.

Overall 8th, 1st M50, 17:15

A bit behind my other 5k this year (17:07), but I'm pleased really, a lot did comment the 1k was long, my watch beeped about 50m before the marker and remained pretty consistent after that (5.06k at the finish).

Fri: Double recovery 3.21 + 7.65

Sat: Hilly run with some on trail 12.52 + 3.09 recovery

Sun: Paced my son in his school fund raiser, a 5k on a hilly trail, sub 22 for him, total 8.78

WTD: 62.0

MTD: 236.3

YTD: 1,007

Streak: 259/2,248

Age: soon 58

Before the women and booze and sigarettes and 80 hour weekly workloads and marriage with 3 kids took me away, I did 2:05 at 800 meter as 15 years old.

Now early retired I started three years ago runwalking 14 minutes miles at 155 bpm, and this morning i jogged 10 minutes miles at 129 bpm. (7,2 kilometers in 45 minutes).

I am running 50 km a week now and equal to that distance in biking with a k of swimming and some strenght/yoga. Will add 50% in the course of a year. Recipe: Consistency, good food, always listening to body and when ok: add a k or some hundred meters.

Goal: Do a Norseman before I die.

Shorttime: I do not race yet, I will when I am 60 and hope for 42 minute 10 k then.

Norseman film:

https://nxtri.com/videos/10th-anniversary-film/

Agree. From an aging hack hobby jogger here, who only had less than modest results as an open and masters runner until as of late, it's more about the process than the top finishes. Work your strengths, address the weaknesses, and simply enjoy being out there and being healthy.

Coyote Montane wrote:

Agree. From an aging hack hobby jogger here, who only had less than modest results as an open and masters runner until as of late, it's more about the process than the top finishes. Work your strengths, address the weaknesses, and simply enjoy being out there and being healthy.

Hobby jogger? C'mon man...you've got some serious speed for your age. You've posted some of your race results and I believe you're a 90 percenter in some distances (?). Unless those fast times you run are just mere pleasure jogging, you're far from a "hobby jogger" in my book. The gap between the fast and the slow in the middle-ages can be huge, hence the categories of "hobby joggers" and the masters/grandmasters "elite."

Not everyone here is defending a national championship or some such. My 10K PR is 38:18, and I'm not hitting that mark again anytime soon. I've run a bunch of marathons around 3:15 (PR 3:11) but the last one (more than a year ago, at age 49) was 3:29. For a long time I treated running as cross-training for other sports (rowing, rock climbing, cycling) but now it's where I devote most of my energy. It's great to get advice on this thread from a bunch of very accomplished masters runners -- it's usually a supportive and positive-minded discussion. Surprised that it hasn't been banned from LR yet ;-)

No but he has run world class times (Kiprop), I was just showing what % it takes to get a medal. Not really fixated on it, just that 90% would be lucky to make a final.

I don't agree that 90% is world class. It is a very good performance though. I just have a different take on it is all.

I appreciate your viewpoint though. You are the first person I have heard say it was designed to compare to open times, I thought that was exactly what it was designed for.

Old Slow Stiff wrote:

How do some of you guys do it? It's becoming intimating to look at this site and see everyone's week in review (incredible mileage & speed work) & race results...that's why I can only laugh at myself. ?

I haven't posted any of my times yet, but I wanted to give you a brutally honest answer to your question:

I HAVE NO IDEA.

There's enough mystery in running to keep all of us humble!

So the argument as I understand it is over what makes for a world class time.

Well for open runners let us use Olympic Qualifying times as a percent of World Best

Male 1500 3:26/3:38 206/218 = .9449

So the bottom for world class open runners is about 95 percent of world best.

A good way to think about age grading is by understanding how the percents are computed. I am no expert but I have a basic understanding of this ...

Time for a distance for open age and gender A

Time for a distance for your age and gender B

Age standard or factor C = A/B

The time you want to age grade for this distance D

Example for simple age grading:

B= 1500 60 year old Men 4:15.9 (255.9 seconds)

D = Guy runs 5 flat 300 seconds for 1500 at age 60

B/D = age grade = 85.29

Age grading really is simply percent of world best for your age and gender.

Age factor is controversial. Using the above example.

A= 1500 Open Men 3:25.8 (205.8 seconds)

C = A/B = 205.8/255.9 = .8043

D x C = 300 x .8043 = 4:01.3 (241.3 seconds)

Charlie- yes, that is sort of how I was looking at it as well. Truth is rankings are irrelevant. One year a 6th in your age division overall may be 20th the next year. Also the national level is different for each nation I suppose. I was going off of US championships. You could have someone in Romania (just picking a random country- nothing against Romania) and at age 55 could be #1 in their country with a 80% performance. Can't really go by rankings. 90% performances are backed by numerous examples of what it takes to competitive at least in the USA in many events on a national level. Some events are weaker than others, but it overall 90% is a safe bet. I would say you probably can't expect to medal though.

95% will almost guarantee you a medal anywhere you go and 100% should pretty much be a World record!

We are all racing for different reasons; some of us are chasing records, or just club records, perhaps a certain AG %, or maybe a medal. All Good.

I really think the original idea behind age grading was to give you some kind of gross idea of how you were doing given that, unfortunately, you are steadily deteriorating. In a sense, it was to throw you a bone so you don’t feel so dammed bad about slowing down with age. And also provide at least some type of comparative framework between ages.

But, because you have people like David Martin Rees or Ed Whitlock, you end up with skewed numbers, exactly like the Brainiac kid in school blowing the grading curve for the rest of us dummies. Or, with older women, the sample is so low you get crazy numbers.

Here is a link to a proposed “double-iterative” by Paul Vanderburgh where, to abbreviate, is a methodology to find a smoother curve that limits the outliers and points towards a more realistic measure of physical performance.

https://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/a-new-approach-to-age-grading-marathon-times

This was back in 2015 so I don’t know what happened with it or if it was just brushed aside.

I think several of the folks on here have commented age grading has been pretty darned predicatively close to what they are actually running.

I have a bone to pick with it because it encourages comparisons across pre-master’s times. For me I was super motivated in College and real money was on the line to perform well. Now….not so much. So I compare very unfavorably to my younger self.

It also encourages actual age-grade percentage competitions in which the 100 year old woman is going to beat a David Martin Rees every time….not that that should be a bad thing. But the calculations going into that kind of comparison are based on limited data for the 100 year old.

Still though, it’s the best thing we have and we shouldn’t get too picky with it. We should still be thanking Alan Jones and Howard Grubb. Thank you!