Run Daddy give it a rest.....there is a limit to what you can do but simply because others dont have the same limit or have found a way to make it work doesnt mean they have given the family less than they deserve. Train as best as you can..run as hard as you can..and enjoy without making it sound like everybody else trains more at the cost of thier family life.
Up at 3 too wrote:
Run Daddy give it a rest.....there is a limit to what you can do but simply because others dont have the same limit or have found a way to make it work doesnt mean they have given the family less than they deserve. Train as best as you can..run as hard as you can..and enjoy without making it sound like everybody else trains more at the cost of thier family life.
I agree with you, largely. Everyone's situation is different and it's hard to compare one to the other. But while you're correct to say it's unfair to judge someone's commitment as a parent or professional because they still manage to run 100mpw, I would argue that it's equally unfair to judge someone who only manages 50mpw a bit of a slacker who uses the excuse of family and job to not run more. That's the only point I was trying to make.
Rundaddy, you started this by questioning someone who runs 100mpw and his ability to be there for his family.
Dont expect to be handed a pass when you are the one initiating the questioning.
Pete's secret is to train in Santa Monica with guys 2/3's his age (Fluffy Bunny Track Club). And to run the Steps with Eva Longoria.
All things are relative RunDaddy...you feel like you were called a slacker for running 50 miles a week and having work and a family....and yet you generalize about those who are out of shape in the exact same way....just run what you can run and as fast you can run given your situation.
As one of the few guys in his age group who might have a chance at beating him, I too am interesting in how Pete can run that fast at 47! Amazing stuff.
As the other Pete (Canadian Pete) mentioned, I'm a masters guy who ran at an elite level as a high school and open guy, and who basically never stopped. I've had the discussion about who's better positioned to run fast, guys like me, who never had a break, or guys like socal Pete, who were born again in their 30s and 40s. I think it's a toss-up. I'm a lot more scarred-up (quite literally-- my hamstring attachments are a mess) than I would guess socal Pete is, but I also had the advantage of coming into my 40s with some serious physiological adaptations and tremendous knowledge and experience about both my own body and training in general. In my case, my only limitation as a master seems to be my ability to sprint, or run for any distance at anywhere near my old middle distance pace (and I was an 800/1500 guy in high school). I simply don't have the range of motion anymore, in spite of doing all the little things to maintain my speed and power (weights, core, stretching). This is why my best performances by far have come at 10k to HM (1:05:42 at age 42) and X-C (to speak to that subject). Yet, I also don't find that my body can handle all that much mileage anymore either. I can only average maybe 60-65 miles per week these days. My only other liability is that I'm Canadian and have to deal with some really shitty weather four about 4 months every year (just got a treadmill at home, though, so I'm working on that one!). I find it MUCH more difficult to maintain my shape, or even just stay uninjured, in the winter now than I did as an open guy, and I have less and less energy for serious X-training as the years go by. By the time I finally get back to top shape again following the winter(usually by late November), we're back into it again. I don't think it's a coincidence that two of your top masters (socal Pete and TY) guys of late have come from temperate climes!
As for the question of motivation, I don't think there's any necessarily difference between those of us who gave it a hard go in our 20s and 30s and guys like socal Pete. Like socal Pete, I have a passion for the whole process, and the lifestyle that goes along with it (which is why I also coach seriously). Having that passion for the sport also explains how its possible to work and have kids while training at a serious level. Those who deeply love the sport will always find a way to do it, and those who love THEM will never resent them for it. Their are far bigger and more selfish wastes of time than training to race.
Apologies for the opus-like post, ladies and gents, and happy racing and training in 09!
halliburton wrote:
Rundaddy, you started this by questioning someone who runs 100mpw and his ability to be there for his family.
Dont expect to be handed a pass when you are the one initiating the questioning.
I was just sort of defending the guy who got ripped on here for saying he doesn't have time to train seriously anymore. I'm not looking for a 'pass'. I can take the heat if I've pissed anyone off out there. If someone can log 100mpw and meet all their other obligations, more power to them.
I will tell you that I coached a kid recently whose Dad was a big triathlete, and I never saw the Dad at Saturday morning games because he was out doing a long ride. He'd drop the kid off and go do his big ride or run. He probably had some great rationalization as to how he was actually setting the example by being super fit, but all the kid really cared about was having his old man there to watch him.
That's just one anecdote, for sure. And I'm sure the guy is a great dad in many ways, but I just think he had his priorities mixed up. And it doesn't mean every father running 100mpw is a shitty parent. Of course not. But if someone is putting their training obligations on the same level as their parental obligations (unless they are an elite athlete and it is actually their job), they are a little too self-absorbed, in my opinion. I'll stand by that and you can rip me all you want.
Given your comments I'm guessing you have no clue what thier situation was, what discussions they had on the subject, or what the rest of the week at thier house was like....one parent misses a game on saturday....the other generalizes about people he doesnt know based on thier own narrow hypocritical standards....I cant see that one is any worse than the other.
Except that humans have tissue that replaces itself, cars don't.
Rundaddy, did you know for a fact that this kid wanted his father there at his practice watching him? In my experience, most parents are at their kid's practices because THEY want to watch them, not because their kid wants or needs a parent around. I generally think the fewer parents hanging around kid's sports, and the more time kid's have to socialize with one another around their sporting activities, the better. I rather like the idea of a guy who goes and does his own workout while his kid is working out. I'm sure there's a great sense of camaraderie, athlete-to-athlete, between this kid and his dad on the way home. But then this is a whole other subject...
To get back to the topic of the thread, I'm going to suggest that, based on what he has said, the one thing the socal Peter does that many other good but no great masters guys do is work on his plyometric strength. Many of us do, or have done, a ton of mileage, but socal Pete seems to pay special attention to maintaining the bases of his middle distance speed, and is somehow able to do it without breaking down all the time (which is the thing of which I'd like to know the secret!)
Rundaddy, did you know for a fact that this kid wanted his father there at his practice watching him? In my experience, most parents are at their kid's practices because THEY want to watch them, not because their kid wants or needs a parent around. I generally think the fewer parents hanging around kid's sports, and the more time kid's have to socialize with one another around their sporting activities, the better. I rather like the idea of a guy who goes and does his own workout while his kid is working out. I'm sure there's a great sense of camaraderie, athlete-to-athlete, between this kid and his dad on the way home. But then this is a whole other subject...
To get back to the topic of the thread, I'm going to suggest that, based on what he has said, the one thing the socal Peter does that many other good but not great masters guys do is work on his plyometric strength. Many of us do, or have done, a ton of mileage, but socal Pete seems to pay special attention to maintaining the bases of his middle distance speed, and is somehow able to do it without breaking down all the time (which is the thing of which I'd like to know the secret!)
Like socal Pete, I have a passion for the whole process, and the lifestyle that goes along with it (which is why I also coach seriously). Having that passion for the sport also explains how its possible to work and have kids while training at a serious level. Those who deeply love the sport will always find a way to do it, and those who love THEM will never resent them for it. Their are far bigger and more selfish wastes of time than training to race.SB - Amen! Thank you SO much for saying that and it's also true that you don't have to be as fast as you and Pete to have a passion for it.
SB wrote:
As one of the few guys in his age group who might have a chance at beating him, I too am interesting in how Pete can run that fast at 47! Amazing stuff.
As the other Pete (Canadian Pete) mentioned, I'm a masters guy who ran at an elite level as a high school and open guy, and who basically never stopped. I've had the discussion about who's better positioned to run fast, guys like me, who never had a break, or guys like socal Pete, who were born again in their 30s and 40s. I think it's a toss-up. I'm a lot more scarred-up (quite literally-- my hamstring attachments are a mess) than I would guess socal Pete is, but I also had the advantage of coming into my 40s with some serious physiological adaptations and tremendous knowledge and experience about both my own body and training in general. In my case, my only limitation as a master seems to be my ability to sprint, or run for any distance at anywhere near my old middle distance pace (and I was an 800/1500 guy in high school). I simply don't have the range of motion anymore, in spite of doing all the little things to maintain my speed and power (weights, core, stretching). This is why my best performances by far have come at 10k to HM (1:05:42 at age 42) and X-C (to speak to that subject). Yet, I also don't find that my body can handle all that much mileage anymore either. I can only average maybe 60-65 miles per week these days. My only other liability is that I'm Canadian and have to deal with some really shitty weather four about 4 months every year (just got a treadmill at home, though, so I'm working on that one!). I find it MUCH more difficult to maintain my shape, or even just stay uninjured, in the winter now than I did as an open guy, and I have less and less energy for serious X-training as the years go by. By the time I finally get back to top shape again following the winter(usually by late November), we're back into it again. I don't think it's a coincidence that two of your top masters (socal Pete and TY) guys of late have come from temperate climes!
As for the question of motivation, I don't think there's any necessarily difference between those of us who gave it a hard go in our 20s and 30s and guys like socal Pete. Like socal Pete, I have a passion for the whole process, and the lifestyle that goes along with it (which is why I also coach seriously). Having that passion for the sport also explains how its possible to work and have kids while training at a serious level. Those who deeply love the sport will always find a way to do it, and those who love THEM will never resent them for it. Their are far bigger and more selfish wastes of time than training to race.
Apologies for the opus-like post, ladies and gents, and happy racing and training in 09!
SB - One of these days, we have to meet up for a race! Preferably something 5K or less ... ;-)
Anything over that, I'll almost willing to concede up front - the same way I concede anything under 3000 meters to TY!
Seriously, you hit the nail on the head: technique drills, short hill reps, long hill reps. I do 'em all for the express purpose of maintaining my stride (which translates to middle-distance speed).
What I don't do is try to run "fast" in training (e.g.--fast 200s, time trials, etc.), because those just seem to take money out of the bank these days.
But if my stride is strong. And if my legs feel loose and rested. Then I can take my endurance (gleaned from many miles of easy running and various interval/fartlek/etc. sessions), combine it with good stride length and turnover, and translate all of it into a fast race.
As to the other topic that's taken over this thread ... Um, why on earth are people visiting a running website in order to judge others based upon how much they do or don't run? And not just "others," but complete strangers? C'mon, folks, all we know about one another is that we love to run. It's a passion and a hobby. Like American Idol and watching college basketball are to some people. Or baking. Or knitting. Or sex. Or beer.
And if you honestly think you can accurately judge an entire human being based upon nothing more than their mileage - if in your mind you believe you can extrapolate that to their value as a parent, spouse, employee, and fellow human being - then you are seriously over-estimating your paranormal ability.
Okay, time to get my name off the front page. Let's let this thread die and get back to the important stuff ... you know, like denying climate change or guessing some 14-year-old's potential for 5K. Later.
My experience was a little different. At 16 I ran 25:04 for 5 miles and by 17 lost interest in the sport. Then at 183 pounds picked it up again at 34. In less than a year I lost 35 pounds, ran a 3:09 marathon and a 37:30 10k. Fast forward to my 40th birthday where I ran 28:12 for 8k and a 2:51 marathon and 59:04 10 miler. My first race as a master was an overall win in a popular local 5k. Obviously the point I am trying to make is that the 17 year break I took from racing and running saved my body from wear and tear, not to mention the mental aspect. I am 43 now and still running strong but I believe that it's true that your body does age and slow down but your mental tenacity tends to go first. Basically life gets in the way and one may not be inclined to "put it all on the line" once you've gotten to a certain point in life which makes what Pete and Tony do all the more impressive. I recall Tony setting a masters record in the 10k at Shelter Island about 8 years ago in just over 30 minutes. Very impressive!
rundaddy-
the problem started and finished with "This kids father was a triathlete" Nuff said.
You cant choose your parents, but if you can, may god guide your towards runners as opposed to triathletes
SB wrote:
Rundaddy, did you know for a fact that this kid wanted his father there at his practice watching him? In my experience, most parents are at their kid's practices because THEY want to watch them, not because their kid wants or needs a parent around. I generally think the fewer parents hanging around kid's sports, and the more time kid's have to socialize with one another around their sporting activities, the better. I rather like the idea of a guy who goes and does his own workout while his kid is working out. I'm sure there's a great sense of camaraderie, athlete-to-athlete, between this kid and his dad on the way home. But then this is a whole other subject...
To get back to the topic of the thread, I'm going to suggest that, based on what he has said, the one thing the socal Peter does that many other good but not great masters guys do is work on his plyometric strength. Many of us do, or have done, a ton of mileage, but socal Pete seems to pay special attention to maintaining the bases of his middle distance speed, and is somehow able to do it without breaking down all the time (which is the thing of which I'd like to know the secret!)
These were games, not practices. And I have my other suspicions based on some things the kid said to my son. But whatever - I was just trying to illustrate an example. I got the whole 'helicopter parent' thing, but would kids' sports really be better if no parents came to games? I'm ever grateful to my father for coming to all my games, even in the crappiest weather.
Pete's right about not judging others based on mileage. That's not what I intended. I was simply trying to defend a guy who got bashed for saying he couldn't train seriously anymore because of family commitments. We don't know his situation anymore than we know the situation of the guy managing 100mpw. I love this sport and I take it probably too seriously. Nothing wrong with lots of passion for the sport and getting in every mile possible.
But let's all be honest with one another - there are some people who have such demanding professional responsibilities that they couldn't possibly make time to run twice a day without detracting from the mission. My boss is such a person. He's a great athlete and still keeps in good shape, but at this point in his career in his present assignment if he were running over 2 hours a day you all as taxpayers would have every right to go to your Congressional delegation and demand an investigation!!
halliburton wrote:
rundaddy-
the problem started and finished with "This kids father was a triathlete" Nuff said.
You cant choose your parents, but if you can, may god guide your towards runners as opposed to triathletes
Now that's true!!
I don't believe you CAN run 100 mpw and not be neglecting areas of your family or professional life if you have kids still at home.
I choose a balanced 40-50 mpw.
SoCal Pete wrote:
SB - One of these days, we have to meet up for a race! Preferably something 5K or less ... ;-)
Anything over that, I'll almost willing to concede up front - the same way I concede anything under 3000 meters to TY!
Seriously, you hit the nail on the head: technique drills, short hill reps, long hill reps. I do 'em all for the express purpose of maintaining my stride (which translates to middle-distance speed).
What I don't do is try to run "fast" in training (e.g.--fast 200s, time trials, etc.), because those just seem to take money out of the bank these days.
But if my stride is strong. And if my legs feel loose and rested. Then I can take my endurance (gleaned from many miles of easy running and various interval/fartlek/etc. sessions), combine it with good stride length and turnover, and translate all of it into a fast race.
As to the other topic that's taken over this thread ... Um, why on earth are people visiting a running website in order to judge others based upon how much they do or don't run? And not just "others," but complete strangers? C'mon, folks, all we know about one another is that we love to run. It's a passion and a hobby. Like American Idol and watching college basketball are to some people. Or baking. Or knitting. Or sex. Or beer.
And if you honestly think you can accurately judge an entire human being based upon nothing more than their mileage - if in your mind you believe you can extrapolate that to their value as a parent, spouse, employee, and fellow human being - then you are seriously over-estimating your paranormal ability.
Okay, time to get my name off the front page. Let's let this thread die and get back to the important stuff ... you know, like denying climate change or guessing some 14-year-old's potential for 5K. Later.
SoCal, exemplary post. And, indeed,we will have to race at some point. I'll take your example to heart, train with my high school boys, and see what I can do over 5k! And not only will we have to race, we will have to have a post-race drink. With your combination of seriousness as an athlete, humility, humor, and wisdom concerning what's really important in the end-- enjoying the process and the relationships made along the way--, you sound like my kind of guy!
Cheers,
SB
SB,
After that post you better wipe your mouth!