SUB 5 at 50

Thank you for the compliment!

I'm guessing there aren't that many, but that isn't necessarily so much because of how hard it would be, but of the fact that most people give up staying in shape, much less doing mile training, by that age.

Actually, most people give up staying in shape about 30 years prior to turning 50.

Consider This wrote:

I'm guessing there aren't that many, but that isn't necessarily so much because of how hard it would be, but of the fact that most people give up staying in shape, much less doing mile training, by that age.

It's amazing how a 5:30 can feel just as fast as a 4:45.

runn wrote:

It's amazing how a 5:30 can feel just as fast as a 4:45.

Doesn't feel as fast, but fairly close...but surely hurts more!

Reality Bath wrote:

Actually, most people give up staying in shape about 30 years prior to turning 50.

Consider This wrote:

I'm guessing there aren't that many, but that isn't necessarily so much because of how hard it would be, but of the fact that most people give up staying in shape, much less doing mile training, by that age.

Sort of yes sort of no on that. There are a lot of runners in the 50+ demographic, very few actually do run sub 5 at 50. In the dozens, not hundreds or thousands. Indeed however, a lot more could if there were some incentive say a $1,000 rebate for health insurance or something like a geezer running fellowship where those who broke 5 could get something of value.

Anyway, missed by just a few 10ths of a sec at 50 (just jumped into a mile while marathon training) and 51 (more or less solo). Lost a big chunk (10-12 sec) at 52-53, due to injury-recovery, but hoping to give it a good go at 54. Why? Because it's there.

You see so many track races that it looks easy and you think, "how hard is it to string 4 75s together?" But for me at least, it became gut-wrenching on the back-straight of lap 1. I made it by just over 1 second when I was 51, and only by somehow picking it up a little over the final 220. It's hard.

I went 4:46 for 1500m (about 5:09) at 47 and that wasn't ez. First goal now that I'm 50 is a sub 5 1500m. A sub 5 mile seems out of reach for my ability level, but if I can string together some consistent training ...

Anselm LeBourne, M50, just ran 4:10.07 for 1500m at the Armory. Damn that's fast.

chinocochino wrote:

I always liked basketball but since I was too short (not even 6 feet) and not quick, I switched to track and was much better suited for it.

You don't have to be taller than 6 ft to be an all-time great at basketball. It's the size of your balls man that matters.

I'd be shocked if there's even 500 50+ who can go under 5:00.

I was at a meet 2 weeks ago that regularly sees at least 1/3 of the top 50+ guys who would even run the mile in the region and there were 4 guys (all teammates) who went under. 5:00 makes for a pretty select bunch at that age. It's harder at 50 than I think most people, especially the OP, get. Either you're math and statistical skills are really awful, or your just trying to stir stuff up.

Either way, I'd guess there's less than 100 nationally, not by much, but given that New England (where I'm at) and Cali have the highest concentration of runners of all ages and the fact that there are maybe 15 guys in this region who can go sub-5:00, I'd say -100 might be in the right ballpark.

Not to mention what percentage of 50+ guys are healthy enough to make the attempt at any given point, a factor any 50+ year-old will tell you matters big-time.

I think there are close to a dozen in my area who could do it. They rarely run the mile as it is not available to run often. But they run consistent 5k's and up.

Some were onetime sub-elites and others just hard working masters who found the sport late.

As I am approaching 50 this is one of many goals. And, not for talent but hard work, I think I will get there.

100,000 is way too high. There are only 300,000,000 people total in the US. 100,000 is probably closer to the number who can break 5 regardless of age.

Based on the number of people I personally know who have done it (3) and also the general number in the state I live in who are capable of doing it based on 5k time (~10), I'm guessing the total number in the country is probably in the range of 200-300 or so. The majority of these are also probably in the 50-53 range, older than that and the number probably starts to drop precipitously.

I'm surprised by these low numbers, given the zeal/fanaticism/commitment to training exhibited by the distance runners I know.

I love the 100,000 guess.

There are about 50 Americans that can run sub 4 in a given year and somehow 100,000 can break 5 when they are 50.

I know the number was a joke but it gets a good reaction. Nice job.

It's really a lifestyle issue. People have bad habits, poor eating habits, stress, lack of sleep, inappropriate training. If someone took good care of his body, at 50, one should at least be able to run the times one ran as a junior in high school.

wuzthere wrote:

It's really a lifestyle issue. People have bad habits, poor eating habits, stress, lack of sleep, inappropriate training. If someone took good care of his body, at 50, one should at least be able to run the times one ran as a junior in high school.

I suspect that it's more an injury problem and lack of opportunity. I was a 4:10 m/9:00 2m in college and continued running on the track into my 30s. However, the track opportunities became fewer, so I ran more and more road races. During this time, I suffered a lot of injuries, became slower and slower, and eventually gave up running.

Today, in my early 50s, I'm still very active. I bike at 20mph and do a lot of aerobic work. However, the last time I got on the track, running a single 75 was far too painful. Four full laps at that pace is just not in the realm of possibility.

I have no doubt that if I had stayed healthy, I would have run 5 min post-50. However, I'm just happy that I can still maintain a good aerobic condition.

wuzthere wrote:

It's really a lifestyle issue. People have bad habits, poor eating habits, stress, lack of sleep, inappropriate training. If someone took good care of his body, at 50, one should at least be able to run the times one ran as a junior in high school.

I ran 5:16 as a junior. I'm shooting for 5:15 this year at 49, so we'll see if your theory is correct.

I think there are at least five limiting factors:

1. Talent - innate ability.

2. Motivation - training for the mile is very different from usual distance running in your local club. Not many people are willing to endure it, and it is difficult to find mates to train with.

3. Lack of coaching - those with motivation have a hard time finding coaching, related to overwhelming focus on 10K to marathon distances in your local running club.

4. Opportunity - there are 5K-marathon races in your area every week, but few opportunities to race the mile.

5. Injuries - always a problem, especially for masters, and switching from distance training to mile training too rapidly increases chances of injury.

So, the number with the talent, motivation, coaching or sufficient self-coaching who find the opportunity to race before succumbing to injury ends up being pretty small.

I ran 4:57 at 51, was injured in the summer of my 52nd year, hope to do it again now at 53.