Good Ed Whitlock story in NYT today

I started last year at 116, gradually went down to 112. Due to a couple of colds and some aches and pains my training fell off in the latter part of the year and by the beginning of this year I was at 120. I don't think the extra weight has any benefit from a running point of view, even training.

He's right, Mr. Whitlock. We are humbled by your presence. You are an inspiration to more runners than you can possibly imagine.

I stand corrected. Thanks Ed. I didn't mean to say you look fat in those shorts. lol

You sir, are awe-inspiring and inspirational.

What shoes do you train in, if I may ask?

Long may you run.

Ed,

I'm very inspired by your training and performances, regardless of your age.

Do you really train 2-3 hours a day in one run per day? If you are doing 3 hour runs, how many of those do you do per week? Do you do 2 hour runs on the other days then? What do you think your average pace is on these runs?

In the 20 weeks before last September's marathon, I ran 67 sessions of 3 hours, 22 sessions 2 to 2.5 hrs, 6 sessions 1 to 2 hours, 13 tempo or fartlek sessions, 13 races (1500m to 15k), I missed running on 13 days for various reasons. Only a single training session per day. On 2 calendar weeks I ran 3 hours every day. Not sure of pace on 3 hour runs, maybe a bit over 8 minute miles.

I am not particular about my training shoes. I just run in ones I have won. As the article mentions, I have about 10 on the go in various stages of wear (some past due) and rotate them so that I don't get in a groove with one shoe and when it comes time to start a new pair there is no dramatic change as I only wear them for one day before rotating to the others. I am more particular about my racing shoes which are light and flexible.

Wow Ed, thanks for posting. I know a lot of people here are curious about your training, so it's great to hear the details.

How did you come to emphasize volume over faster training? Is that the way you've always trained, or did you emphasize intervals in high school and college? A little arithmetic tells me you were 20 years only in around 1952, when people were starting to emulate Zatopek's interval training. Is that the kind of training that you did then?

Hi Ed,

Any other races you have planned for this year?

Thanks a lot for the reply! Quite impressive.

I was at the local Chapters today, reading the new Running Times and noticed that Ed was the "Master of Masters" this year, based on some very fine performances here in the GTA. Of note is the age graded marathon time he ran at the Scotiabank Marathon: 2:03!!! Ed, you're the world record holder in the marathon! Congrats!!!!

Ed, to a person, all of us applaud your dedication, focus and accomplishments! Regardless of the formula used to 'grade' your performances, they defy labels and apt characterization. What you're doing, routine as it may seem to you, is ground breaking stuff. When I first saw you at Crim a couple years ago I thought, 'Who is this guy, HOW old is he and how the hell can he run so FAST?' It's guys like you that are regulary resetting the bar in the sports world and how we think about gettin' older.

Some math as you circle your cemetary route:

(At just over 8 min per mile....)

1 x 3 hrs-22 miles

1 week of 3 hr sessions-154 miles

67 x 3 hrs-1475 miles

22 x 2, 2 1/2 hrs-350 miles

In 89 single sessions-1825 miles!

This does not account for 32 days of other training and racing...for a 70+ year old man. My mind goes foggy thinking of all those miles and your times...they show no regard for limitations. I want to be like you when I grow up!

Thanks for coming on here and sharing. Think of Crim this August.

Scotth,

Ed's achievements will be even more mind boggling to you when you mature. I am 5 years younger than Ed and I can do very little compared to him. He has good genes but his mechanics are also superior. There seems to be a handful of runners througout the world that just age better than the rest of us from an athletic standpoint. Earl Fee is another. What I wonder is how come Ed and Earl are both in Canada? I should have stayed in my home country. Or maybe we should import Canadian water.

I applaud anyone who is even training at the later ages. I envy and commend those who succeed!

Ed, we all want to hear as much about it as you have time to tell us.

By the way, another thing that Ed and Earl have in common is that they both have Engineering Degrees.

I think age grading is a good concept and kudos to the people who thought it up, did the reseach etc. However I don't think its a good idea to use the percentages to convert back to an open runner's time at the same percentage, I think that leads to critisism of the concept. I think its fine to say that an older runner did 90%AG whereas the open winner only did 88% and therefore the older runner did relatively better, just don't convert the time back.

On the issue of why I do volume and not quality. I evolved into that in my 60s as I found the interval training I did when I first became a master and was concentrating on middle distance was aggravating a chronic achilles problem which the LSD did not. My training around 1950 when I was at University was neither sufficient in quality or quantity even by the reduced standards of those days. I was not coached and it was very haphazard.

No other big race committments at the moment. A few indoor meets in the near future. Hope to make the Crim this year.

Ed,

All through the 1960s, I did very hard interval training as the bulk of my training. In the 1970s, I started to do what you are doing now with races often and some fartlek as I felt like it as the bulk of my speed work. I did run my long runs faster than you do because I felt like it, was younger than we are now and was sometimes with others for a particular run. I think the training in the 60s did get me near the fastest point I could be at all distances but I think I would have been a better runner at the longer distances then if I had run a lot easier and longer and omitted the speed work. I may have had fewer injuries also.

I know you are more interested in the shorter races than I but how do you think you would have done as a youth training as you do now? Do you think you would be doing as well as you are now if you had not done the type of training that you did in your younger days?

Orville

Ed,

It would be educational, interesting and fun for we older runners if you would post on the weekly thread by Old Man By The Sea entitled "Masters Weekend Races and Runs".........at least occasionally.

Or, if you would rather wait until after your big races and then post some of your training and comments then, we would learn from and enjoy that too.

I do not expect an answer to this particular post.

Orville

Orville Atkins wrote:

By the way, another thing that Ed and Earl have in common is that they both have Engineering Degrees.

I suspect that that's not a coincidence. Engineers tend to relish problem-solving, and they no doubt apply that approach to their running. Ed mentioned that he shifted to LSD after finding that faster training aggravated his chronic achilles problem. I think a lot of master runners would have thrown in the towel after struggling with a chronic injury for years. But an engineer sees a chronic injury as a problem to be solved. So he tinkers until he finds something that works. In Ed's case, it has worked very well.

I think younger runners also could benefit from that sort of problem-solving approach, rather than simply repeating the cycle of training-injury-healing-training. I know I wish I'd taken a more analytical approach to my injuries when I was younger.

Thanks again for so patiently answering our pesky questions, Ed. I, for one, am learning a lot.

Sonny Boy,

I had hoped and expected an answer such as yours. I think you are correct. There is one other type of runner who will not give up the sport no matter what injuries occur. That is the runner that loves the sport. There are a lot of those on this message board and especially on Old Man By the Sea's Weekly Masters thread.

Orville

Ed-I completely agree about the Age-Grading; I think it is useful to compare performances at different ages with it but don't "convert" it to an open-class performance. Using your marathon record as an example, i would go so far as to say that it age-converts to a higher level than the current open-class record, but to say that it is like a 2:03 marathon or whatever is counterproductive, innaccurate and opens the door for critics.

As someone who has worked from the 81% level on the WAVA tables to the 89% over the last 32 years, I can say that it is damn hard work, and that you guys in the 90+% class (our own Tony Young is 97%) are genuinely great athletes!

I look at the accomplishmnents of athletes like you, Earl Fee, and Eamonn Coghlin as comparable to the pioneering efforts of Nurmi, Zatopek and Bannister. We now that they weren't supermen, but were rare individuals who didn't accept the "normal" limitations of what the human body and mind are capable of. To me, the current upsurge in master's competition is the purest and most exciting aspect of our sport right now. Thanks for making it more personal and real by posting here.