M55 10,000m WR

LIP - I am 178cm and 69kg

and thanks ukathleticscoach - I have updated the profile but of course the results are only one ones I have done in UK when there on holiday

Walking is not permitted! - jogging

This is very impressive Master Bateman. Congrats...

Congrats, awesome time!

ghost wrote:

The vast majority of top runners in the 50+ age group took up running late. Having relatively fresh legs is important,and there is a window of opportunity in running with an average of around 10 years to improve from the start. Ghost in Saudi,

http://www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today.

Vast Majority???

You made that up.

It's not true.

Steroids. Obvious.

Wow. That's amazing. Keep the ball rolling.

Keith, you seem to stress running form.

1. Has your running form changed over the years?

2. Has barefoot running improved your running form?

3. Why are you running better at 56, than at 36?

Thanks.

Congratulations old and wise one =D!. I can't believe there are 3 pages and no trolling yet..

Well, this will probably be seen as a troll, but I really want to know what sort of drug testing occurs when an AG record is set. Unfortunately, the onus is now upon the athlete now. After Eddie, Regina Jacobs, etc. I am fairly certain I am not the only person who casts a skeptical eye upon these achievements. I honestly hope this is legit - no one wants to believe that this is possible more than I do, but burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice...

Hi Silly Old Fossil (I doubt that).

1. Yes dramatically I was over striding and heel striking in 2007 (went to bio-mechanic) and a technique change started the improvement in times times down by 1.6% - 6.6% up until last Saturday when that improved even further.

2. yes Barefoot strengthens and reinforces good technique - I am fortunate to be able to run all speed and tempo sessions on grass barefoot and all year round.

3. first: there has been a progression in steps as I have made changes and this is demonstrated in my 10k times which have shown 11 years of steady improvement.

things I can think of off the top of my head.

a. my technique used to be bad (I know that now but didn't then) and although I was strong 36:36 was the best I could do before 2000 - also I was training basically alone knowing very little about training - I was a member of the local club that had about 10 members spread across many remote miles so had no help.

b. When I came to Sydney I saw some good runners, approached them and joined their club and then for the first time I had groups to run with - that was the first major change; regular training with others and regular (monthly 10k races) - that went on for 3 years and I obviously improved - to about 35min 10k, I think

c. I found a coach and a fantastic squad so that was another step up the ladder

d. I saw a dietitian and within a month my times jumped down again

c. I saw a bio-mechanic and had a fantastic, detailed analysis - I changed my technique (got rid of over-stride) and within 3 months my 1500m time went from 4:15 to 4:11 (other times went down too)

d. I stopped taking full milk in coffee and dropped 2.5kg in 6 weeks! (was 75kg for years and am now under 70kg all the time)

e. I tweaked my technique a little (less knee lift and a sharper foot pick-up)

f. I changed my back foot action slightly (keeping the ankle more of a right angle after take off like Bernard Lagat does)- 1 month ago.

Also I have been able to train almost continuously because of lack of injury and with the best runners around these parts and I have a fairly stress-free life and eat a boring but excellent diet :-)

So there are reasons.

And to the posters who quite rightly question the logic (that's how I work too) then I say I would love to be drug tested - any time any where and if you want to arrange it - great - id just love it - I take no offence - I know I am, always have been and always will be clean.

Phew! - need meat and 2 veg now ...

Just had an email telling me this record was broken by a Spanish runner 19th March - reported here:

http://rfea.es/

Google translation: "Sergio Fernandez Infestas athlete set a new world record for veterans in the category M-55 on Saturday March 19 in the Cantabrian town of Los Corrales de Buelna, the new brand is 32:15.2, lowering the previous 12 seconds, force since 2006.

Madrid athlete enrolled in the ranks of SSReyes-C.Menorca is one of the most important Spanish veteran athletes at international level, with a dense history of medals at major championships and collects records in the categories through which passes, background at distances (from 3000 to the half marathon.)"

It never rains but it pours!

ghost wrote:

The vast majority of top runners in the 50+ age group took up running late. Having relatively fresh legs is important,and there is a window of opportunity in running with an average of around 10 years to improve from the start.

I doubt Keith was running much at age 20 or 30, and if he had been running then, it is unlikely that he was training to his full potential.

Ghost in Saudi,

http://www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today.

Thanks for the info! Given that I trained up to 100 miles per week in my 20's, setting PRs that I will never again touch, I'd better quit now that 50 is three months away! And so should my 48-year-old teammate Shorter Than Frank, who was a multiple NCAA All-American, raced through his 20s, and just ran 4:11 for 1500 at age 48. And so should my two 49-year-old teammates, who ran hard from high school through, well, age 49, and were both in my club's top 5 on our Masters XC National Championship squad last December.

Ghost, like Mike said, you're just making stuff up.

ScabbyMcPeter - You may not be a troll, but I wonder if you realize how rude it is to accuse runners in a public forum (a forum on which those runners are taking part) of being drug cheats. I know this from personal experience, as every time I run a good time some anonymous dweebs raise the same issue. The fact is that the onus is not on the athlete. Athletes who are setting age group records hate drug cheats more than anyone, because they destroy the environment for other top age group athletes. There's no money or fame on the line for almost all age group runners (unlike Eddy and Regina), so all we have is the joy of running hard and enjoying the respect and camaraderie of our peers. So sure, you have the right to think whatever you want. But remember that there's a real person out there setting these records, and maybe keep those thoughts to yourself. Otherwise, you aren't a troll, you're an a-hole.

Keith - unbelievable run. Simply. Un. Believable.

I'm not accusing him at all. I have no idea. Nor do any of us. I asked if there was testing - there really should be. It should be part of any WR claim after the problems we've had. I tried, apparently unsuccessfully, that anyone who sets a record will immediately come under suspicion because of what some have done in the past, and I think thorough drug testing as it least one way to help keep this process credible. I mean, would Keith rather have taken a drug test and at least have some data out their in his favor, or would he rather have a lot of folks simply go around thinking "no way a guy can do that without drugs".

I actually think it is possible for folks in these age groups to put up truly amazing times without drugs, but I'm not sure many of them do. Claiming to want to be tested means nothing - how many athletes (Landis, Armstrong, Eddie, Marion) claimed test me, test me, so that means nothing either.

I do know there is a real person out there, and I'm guessing that real person, if clean, would want to be tested by all means possible. If I did something this amazing and was clean I would not want a single person to doubt me.

So, while I appreciate your advice to keep my opinions to myself, I will not. I don't know if Keith is clean or not. Neither do you. Only Keith does, and all he can do is claim he isn't. Well, that sucks for him because both clean athletes and dirty athletes says that exact thing. HGH and other things are so easy to come by, and have such a huge effect at our age that only real testing can eliminate the suspicion. Keith didn't do anything wrong. All he did was run amazingly fast. But if you want to have your effort recognized as a record than this comes with the territory. If he doesn't want the scrutiny, just run fast and forget about having records ratified.

Keith, cogratulations. However I must say, your biomechanics info is off. Your stride didn't get shorter. Overstriding is the wrong word.

Pete, didn't you take 12 years off of running in your 30s? That is a huge break. I can't run within 5 minutes of my college 10K times and I am about your age but I never took a long break either. People drop off at different rates and the legs do lose their responsiveness at some point.

No problems from me guys - it's a logical question :-)

Absolutely right - wrong word - you are right as my stride is longer now that it ever was but the foot now lands in the right place - thanks - have been pestering my Physicist son to go through the mechanics with me but he just says "sorry, don't do classical physics" - Kids!

Keith Bateman wrote:

have been pestering my Physicist son to go through the mechanics with me but he just says "sorry, don't do classical physics" - Kids!

Tell him your foot strike is in a superposition of states and it really needs an observer...