statistically significant wrote:
Yeah, because the fact that one guy was able to do it means that everyone else can too.
Yes, his logic is ironclad.
Ed Whitlock running a low 2:50's marathon in is 70's? This clearly demonstrates that every former good runner who is now in their 70's could break 3 also if they just put in the training. There is no doubt about this, since Ed did it.
my college PRs were 49.6 and 22.3 .I just turned 70, run 5 days a week but cant break 20 in 100m. What is a realist time for a mile ? I have not run one in a meet yet and just hope not to embarrass my self but have been really struggling in practice .Its not fun to get lapped by other guys my age .I have been running in Masters meets for 2 years in the sprints .
as a former 3:55 guy, i'll chime in as well. at the risk of being immodest, i feel there is nothing physically holding me back from breaking 4 at the age of 43. if someone wants to support me and my family for the next 2 years, i'd even be willing to take a stab at it. but am i willing to make the necessary sacrifices to do it otherwise? i'd have to give up coaching my kids and my athletes the way i like to (i.e., running with them), and have my days revolve around workouts and not my family, etc. i'd have to find a coach whom i can have absolute and supreme faith in like i did with joe douglas. i'd have to accept that i may have to momentarily give up my enjoyment of running. all this just to have a CHANCE (because there are never guarantees) at breaking an arbitrary--however mythical--barrier? ain't worth it. i'm happier running sub-4:25 and enjoying the occasional glory of being a letsrun messageboard poster...