| Old Fat Guy |
| ||
|
I'm 55, about 40 pounds over running weight and getting back into it after about 6 years off. I'll lose the weight and end up running somewhere between 17 and 19 for 5K. I'll have fun. However, I wouldn't mind hopping in a 200, 400 or maybe even a 100 meter race just to get the legs working again. Neurologically, I can still run about 12 seconds for 100 meters. That's a guess. However, if I were to ever try that, my groin would pull probably within the first few strides coming out of the blocks and certainly both hamstrings would give way anywhere near top speed. So how do I get my muscles to catch up to my nervous system or is this just the way it goes, you get old, the muscles go first, the nerves go later and you can't go back? Any old sprinters know what I'm talking about? |
| Reality Bath |
| ||
Uh...no. |
| Some oler guy |
| ||
|
You need to build up to sprinting gently. Easy strides to start, then some hill running and bounding. Once you have the bounce back in your legs you can push the strides more. It will probably take about a year to get the connective tissue back in shape for full on sprinting, but it is feasible if you are patient. |
| chinocochio |
| ||
|
How fast did you run for the 5K and other distance events when you were young and in shape? As a frame of reference, a guy that I run with is 55 and runs in the low 17's. When he was 49, he ran 15:30 and when he was at his peak he was at 14:30. I would bet the house, the wife, the car, everything that you would not run 17 at age 55 and being 40 pounds overweight.
|
| science ! |
| ||
|
You need to work on your foot neurological speed, then,your leg sympathetic turnover. Velocity is tertiary. |
| Cliff Clavin |
| ||
Sprintgeezer, is that you? |
| pr100 |
| ||
What's your goal here? You talk about ending up doing 5k, but in the mean time talk about sprinting. If you want to run 5ks then forget about sprinting for now - build up some easy mileage whilst you lose weight.... |
| Sprintgeezer |
| ||
Sprintgeezer, is that you?[/quote] Ha, no. My training is going well, thank-you! I love the quote "neurologically, I can still run about 12 seconds for 100 meters" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ROTFLMAO! Even though I'm around 11.5, neurologically I'm sure I'm somewhere around 10.05 In fact, in writing out that sentence, I just busted out a neurological 10.12 which indicates that I'm in pretty good neurological shape. The best thing about neurological performances is that they are unaffected by wind or altitude. BTW, I'm the second-oldest male athlete to have broken the neurological 10-second barrier...Bobcat Goldthwaite was the first, IIRC. I eagerly await Old Guy's inevitable injury reports! |
| Junk Master |
| ||
|
Neurologically, I can break 10 at 45, but I'd fail the drug test for Thorazine. |
| Junk Master |
| ||
|
Sprint Geezer, can you break 20 for a 5k yet? What chance would you give yourself to run sub-18 in ten years, and forty pounds? Though, I'd bet Henry Rono could. Drunk. |
| Sprintgeezer |
| ||
|
With all the treadmill stuff I did this winter, I can do a 19:30 at the drop of a hat, something that used to be hard for me. I'm still a solid 184 lbs, but I learned to manage a distance stride better, I think...it is shorter now, with better cycling under the body. I worked on leg recovery a lot, because I think that was where I was weak. My guess is that I could now do a 19:00 without insanely much trouble (on the treadmill), and that I could maybe even get an 18:40-18:45 I'm sprint training outdoors now, and am back to doing cleans, step-ups, etc. in the weight room. Weights are up, power is up, sprint training is coming well, I'm sure aerobic endurance is waning accordingly. By my standards, obviously the OP is a massive troll. BTW, endocrinally, I'm in sub-15 shape, for sure. In fact, those 19:30's are endocrinally 14:30's...if only I could lose 50 lbs!!!!!!!!!!! I often wonder what the typical weight is for a really good 5k/10k runner at 5'10" |
| track town sub 13 |
| ||
|
12?? Seb Coe would struggle to break 12 out of blocks and he ran a 46s open 400! |
| pr100 |
| ||
I don't have any concrete statistics - but when you see height/weight figures for world class distance runners they're often around 19-20 BMI. That would be about 140lbs at 5'10" for a 20 BMI, 132lbs for a 19 BMI. Everyone is different, but that's probably the right ballpark. |
| Double Dog |
| ||
I don't have any concrete statistics - but when you see height/weight figures for world class distance runners they're often around 19-20 BMI. That would be about 140lbs at 5'10" for a 20 BMI, 132lbs for a 19 BMI. Everyone is different, but that's probably the right ballpark.[/quote] 132 lbs seems awfully light for someone 5'10" tall. |
| pr100 |
| ||
It's certainly light compared to the average 5'10" American. But I would suggest that's it's not especially light for the average 5'10" world class distance runner. It's within the "normal" range for the BMI - which is usually defined as being between 18 and 25. Our perceptions about weight have changed a lot over the last 50 years, because people in the western world generally, and the US in particular, have got heavier. But a good racing weight hasn't changed in that period - so top distance runners are further from the average now than they used to be... |
| Sprintgeezer |
| ||
Damn straight! |
| Sprintgeezer |
| ||
|
OK, let's say 140... I can't imagine that I'm running around with a 45-lb plate strapped to me! I could use another 10 lbs in the quads, 5 lbs per quad, to improve my hole shot. 5'10"/195 lbs would be a Frankensprinter. I wonder what Blake actually weighs right now, and how Demps is doing. Blake's ass alone has to weigh 50 lbs. |