Zola Budd 7th place Carolina Challenge (18:43)

I think Budd is running just fine... not my point. And you were an outlier with those times, perhaps more talented or training at a higher level than most. I am talking about the 15:30-16:00 type athlete in high school, which is the majority of the good ones.

Thinking out loud wrote:

I think Budd is running just fine... not my point. And you were an outlier with those times, perhaps more talented or training at a higher level than most. I am talking about the 15:30-16:00 type athlete in high school, which is the majority of the good ones.

And I understand that, I just don't agree that their are any 50 yo or early 50s athletes running 15:30 or 16:00 out there (who ran those type of times at age 18), much less the "several people whose personal goals were to approach their 5k and 10k PRs from high school at about age 50 +/-, and they were all successful." that you purport that there are.

That is why I asked:

"What does "approach their 5k and 10k PRs from HS ... and all were successful" mean to you?"

I think there are some guys who run 17:30, but it is not the norm, and that is not their HS best-level.

I just don't believe our physical abilities decline so much if we continue training properly. If I could find an event that caters to my strengths I believe I could still be elite in my late 40s.

mymastasays wrote:

Must be over 50 years old! Impressive.

Was Mary Decker Slaney still yelling at her??

She's 51 wrote:

I just don't believe our physical abilities decline so much if we continue training properly. If I could find an event that caters to my strengths I believe I could still be elite in my late 40s.

Billions and billions of experiences otherwise would prove you wrong.

Here's Zola Budd winning her 2nd straight World XC championship in 1986.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVsPOe-Pk5k

Just six years ago, in August 2011, she was 2nd at the World Master's XC championships, which were open to anyone 35 and up. She would have been 45 then.

The Overexplainer wrote:

She's 51 wrote:

I just don't believe our physical abilities decline so much if we continue training properly. If I could find an event that caters to my strengths I believe I could still be elite in my late 40s.

Billions and billions of experiences otherwise would prove you wrong.

How many people do you know who actually sought out an event?

If I could find an event like a 'full body steeplechase" I think I could do it.

Thinking out loud wrote:

I think Budd is running just fine... not my point. And you were an outlier with those times, perhaps more talented or training at a higher level than most. I am talking about the 15:30-16:00 type athlete in high school, which is the majority of the good ones.

I ran 15:50 and 33:25 on the roads in high school. (4:29 mile) A couple years ago at 50 I had a great year of racing. I ran 18:37 and 38:47.

Old Man strength wrote:

Just wow... wrote:

Plenty of sub-4:10 in H.S. kids are produced each year. Show me the crew of sub-4:10 50 year-olds that keeps popping up each year.

...

However aging theories are being revised every year and guys like Lagat and Whiteman will likely spur on a new wave of old guys who run like high schoolers.

I don't know about Whiteman but I would be surprised if Lagat wasn't already running sub 4 by age 18.

Aging "theory" is mostly founded on the fallacy that it's a chronological process, like tree rings, rather than a biological process whose speed depends on the individual. But I think top elites are among the least likely to hold form over time, because elite success requires very fast recovery, i.e. tissue building, which uses up stem cells. It's more likely for a 17 minute high schooler who could never handle more than 30mpw to still be doing 17 at 50, than for a 14:30 runner to stay near 14:30.

Too much nit picking- it's not just an age related decline, but the fact that she's at least 20+ lbs over her race wt in her prime. If you keep your wt down and still train at a high level many have defied age to a greater extent. Impressive nonetheless to see her still competing- wonder if the girls in the race knew who she was! Imagine turning your head and there's Zola Budd!

^ that's true too. Kids are skinny, then they naturally fill out, so running isn't a good model for aging in sport.

It's also a sport where cumulative injuries can result in drastic and permanent decline at any age.

The high school mile record is 3:53. The best master in history, Lagat, ran 1.5 seconds slower at 40.

If you can run your HS times at 50, you were underperforming in high school, or are doping as a master.

She's 51 wrote:

The Overexplainer wrote:

Billions and billions of experiences otherwise would prove you wrong.

How many people do you know who actually sought out an event?

If I could find an event like a 'full body steeplechase" I think I could do it.

So not only are you trying to draw comparisons in your own 5k age regression, when you never actually trained for a 5k in your life, to someone who used to target the event, but you're claiming you could be an elite level open age athlete, if someone ever invented the event that actually fit your talents? How many elite, open age group athletes have you ever heard of, in any sport that are 45+?

It may well be true that pure running may not be where your talent lies (though a 17:45 5k at 48 says quite clearly you never lived up to your running ability at a younger age), but the only reason you'd be more competitive is because no one else cares to be good at whatever a "full body steeplechase" is. Maybe go on Ninja Warrior and show up all the high level athletes there, that sounds pretty close to it to me; running, jumping, balance, upper body strength, ~5:00 worth of endurance, etc.?

This whole thing reminds me of my athletes that bemoan the loss of the 600m when we get to outdoors. They're All-Conference/All-Region, whatever else in the 600m in indoor, they come up short of that in the 400 or 800 in outdoor and say its because they're a 600m specialist. Of course the truth is the 600m isn't an NCAA event, so the better athletes are focusing on those events most of the time, leaving the 600m 'specialists' as the bigger fish in a small pond.

Give Til It Hurts wrote:

The high school mile record is 3:53. The best master in history, Lagat, ran 1.5 seconds slower at 40.

If you can run your HS times at 50, you were underperforming in high school, or are doping as a master.

He only tried once. He has not taken masters performance seriously. He's already coaching US track league teams i.e. retire.

Elites shouldn't be considered typical. You don't have an unlimited supply of stem cells. Elites use them up fast to become elites, probably even faster if they dope.

[quote]Some advice wrote:

but the only reason you'd be more competitive is because no one else cares to be good at whatever a "full body steeplechase" is. Maybe go on Ninja Warrior and show up all the high level athletes there, that sounds pretty close to it to me; running, jumping, balance, upper body strength, ~5:00 worth of endurance, etc.?

[quote]

But is it really fair to say such an event is any less legit than just running or any other point to point event?

Full disclosure: I was just checking to see if you were going to belittle obstacle course racing as being devoid of "true" elite athletes.

The upcoming world champs have a 3km and 15km event.

She's 51 wrote:

The Overexplainer wrote:

Billions and billions of experiences otherwise would prove you wrong.

How many people do you know who actually sought out an event?

If I could find an event like a 'full body steeplechase" I think I could do it.

You're absolutely right. that's why the majority of gold medals at the Olympics are won by athletes in their late 40s. Also check out the rosters of NFL, NBA, MLB and World Cup teams. Just as many in their 40s as 20s and 30s. Not sure why throughout the history of sports you are the first to notice the fact that it's possible to be elite in the late 40s.

oboesausage

[quote]

First thing to remember that really running elite pace wheres the body down. You never raised a sweat when it came to time keeping. That means you have plenty left in the tank.

Many of us elite guys can barely walk properly. We left it on the track when it was meaningful.

You jogged around and cheer about your multi decade endurance.

*Wears

She's 51 I'm older wrote:

She's 51 wrote:

How many people do you know who actually sought out an event?

If I could find an event like a 'full body steeplechase" I think I could do it.

You're absolutely right. that's why the majority of gold medals at the Olympics are won by athletes in their late 40s. Also check out the rosters of NFL, NBA, MLB and World Cup teams. Just as many in their 40s as 20s and 30s. Not sure why throughout the history of sports you are the first to notice the fact that it's possible to be elite in the late 40s.

Um, ever hear of George Foreman? Chris Chelios? Gordie Howe? Bill Shoemaker? Lester Piggott? Laffit Pincay?

There are many other examples, but these are still exceptions in my opinion.