No they are not. Case and point. I tied my age group national record in the mile. So do I go around claiming to be the fastest American ever in the mile for my age....or do I know that somebody like Lagat would jog and finish 150m ahead of "my" national record?
We're decent age groupers (on the world stage) trying to relive the good ole days of winning but more likely the old days of running fast.
No they are not. Case and point. I tied my age group national record in the mile. So do I go around claiming to be the fastest American ever in the mile for my age....or do I know that somebody like Lagat would jog and finish 150m ahead of "my" national record?
We're decent age groupers (on the world stage) trying to relive the good ole days of winning but more likely the old days of running fast.
What age group has a national record in the mile that is tied?
No they are not. Case and point. I tied my age group national record in the mile. So do I go around claiming to be the fastest American ever in the mile for my age....or do I know that somebody like Lagat would jog and finish 150m ahead of "my" national record?
We're decent age groupers (on the world stage) trying to relive the good ole days of winning but more likely the old days of running fast.
Age graded performances help to sort things out. It takes much more time and dedication to train for the marathon and hit 90% AG then it does for say the 800m. One can hit 90% in the 800 on 4-5 days training and about 45-60 minutes dedicated per session. even if you are working and raising a family, it is possible. That would be like a 2:05.71 age 50, 2:10.65 age 55, 2:15.82 age 60. If someone in an age group sets an American or World record, well then they are the fastest in that event. It doesn't matter if Lagat is competing or not- until he does it, then sorry he isn't the fastest.
No they are not. Case and point. I tied my age group national record in the mile. So do I go around claiming to be the fastest American ever in the mile for my age....or do I know that somebody like Lagat would jog and finish 150m ahead of "my" national record?
We're decent age groupers (on the world stage) trying to relive the good ole days of winning but more likely the old days of running fast.
Age graded performances help to sort things out. It takes much more time and dedication to train for the marathon and hit 90% AG then it does for say the 800m. One can hit 90% in the 800 on 4-5 days training and about 45-60 minutes dedicated per session. even if you are working and raising a family, it is possible. That would be like a 2:05.71 age 50, 2:10.65 age 55, 2:15.82 age 60. If someone in an age group sets an American or World record, well then they are the fastest in that event. It doesn't matter if Lagat is competing or not- until he does it, then sorry he isn't the fastest.
Good point on the difficulty of reaching the higher age grade levels when the distance gets longer! And well said on being the fastest in an event for your age by actually doing it.
I've noticed that I am closer to the 85% grade levels in the 5K and 10K, then I am in the half and marathon, even though I train more for the Half and Marathon.
Why do you think the age grading is harder for the longer distances?
Why do you think the age grading is harder for the longer distances?
Cause olds guys would rather hobby jog for a couple of hours than to do a hard workout... Seriously running fast is a big injury risk and lots of people avoid it. You can run really good marathoner with mileage and some HM paced running... I also think there is a lot of self selection going on about who keeps running as they age. If you really like running (i.e. want to spend 2 hours on Sunday) you are probably more of a marathoner than 5k guy. You get a lot more guys training seriously for marathons than you do for some 10k as far as seeing up a 16 week training block. And finding track races are tough in a lot of areas..
Why do you think the age grading is harder for the longer distances?
Cause olds guys would rather hobby jog for a couple of hours than to do a hard workout... Seriously running fast is a big injury risk and lots of people avoid it. You can run really good marathoner with mileage and some HM paced running... I also think there is a lot of self selection going on about who keeps running as they age. If you really like running (i.e. want to spend 2 hours on Sunday) you are probably more of a marathoner than 5k guy. You get a lot more guys training seriously for marathons than you do for some 10k as far as seeing up a 16 week training block. And finding track races are tough in a lot of areas..
Very interesting. That's a great point. More old timers do seem to go for the marathon than the 10K for their training.
Cause olds guys would rather hobby jog for a couple of hours than to do a hard workout... Seriously running fast is a big injury risk and lots of people avoid it. You can run really good marathoner with mileage and some HM paced running... I also think there is a lot of self selection going on about who keeps running as they age. If you really like running (i.e. want to spend 2 hours on Sunday) you are probably more of a marathoner than 5k guy. You get a lot more guys training seriously for marathons than you do for some 10k as far as seeing up a 16 week training block. And finding track races are tough in a lot of areas..
Very interesting. That's a great point. More old timers do seem to go for the marathon than the 10K for their training.
I was at the outdoor Western USATF track regionals today. Lots of speedy runners.
It is certainly a risk to run that fast and put in the speedwork on the track. Just to add to my previous post, an 800m runner with good speed can run those times on 25 miles per week. 2 speed sessions, longer run, 2 medium recovery runs, rest day and a cross training day. There are many runners - good runners in the 10k, half, and longer, who may have the ability to get a higher age graded score in a shorter race if they really trained for it - like the mile for example. They choose not to train for say a 3K, 1500, 800 on the track. Why? First off you need access to a track just about year round which is difficult and you have to be willing to put in short intense sessions, which are not fun. Also, racing on the track immediately exposes you to everyone watching, just how good you are compared to everyone else on the track. Mentally it is a bit easier to run in a crowd like in a big road race. Finishing a half in 1:22 compared to the leaders in your age group going 1:17 or so doesn't sound so bad, but if you were in a track race, you'd be shamefully lapped a couple of times. Training for a half marathon it not easy, but overall the intensity is less, but longer of course. That's my best response, but I'm sure there are 1 or 2 more factors involved.
Very interesting. That's a great point. More old timers do seem to go for the marathon than the 10K for their training.
I was at the outdoor Western USATF track regionals today. Lots of speedy runners.
It is certainly a risk to run that fast and put in the speedwork on the track. Just to add to my previous post, an 800m runner with good speed can run those times on 25 miles per week. 2 speed sessions, longer run, 2 medium recovery runs, rest day and a cross training day. There are many runners - good runners in the 10k, half, and longer, who may have the ability to get a higher age graded score in a shorter race if they really trained for it - like the mile for example. They choose not to train for say a 3K, 1500, 800 on the track. Why? First off you need access to a track just about year round which is difficult and you have to be willing to put in short intense sessions, which are not fun. Also, racing on the track immediately exposes you to everyone watching, just how good you are compared to everyone else on the track. Mentally it is a bit easier to run in a crowd like in a big road race. Finishing a half in 1:22 compared to the leaders in your age group going 1:17 or so doesn't sound so bad, but if you were in a track race, you'd be shamefully lapped a couple of times. Training for a half marathon it not easy, but overall the intensity is less, but longer of course. That's my best response, but I'm sure there are 1 or 2 more factors involved.
I agree, it does seem like many older runners are choosing the half and marathons and, in the process, avoiding the shorter, more intense workouts. And that's a great point for the track events, that it's harder to show up mentally for a mile to 10K on the track!
Looking at the all time best lists for the different distances, people do seem to be scoring around 95% age grade about the same frequency at each distance.
For the 10K (on the road), 15K, 10M, and Half, do you think older runners choose the Marathon more because they want to avoid the more intense workouts? (similar to what you said for why they avoid the mile). I think so, so in that respect, I find the difficulty of attaining USATF Championship times in those distances just as hard as the marathon times.
USATF Masters 10 Mile 2022 Championship 45 to 49 - 1. Gregory Mitchell 52:57, 2. Jason Troxler 53:49, 3. Jacques Sallberg 54:49 50 to 54 - 1. Jaime Heilpern 55:11, 2. Mark Callon 56:03, 3. Ivan Lieben 56:38 55 to 59 - 1. Nat Larson 57:11, 2. Thomas Tayeri 58:05, 3. Anthony McGrath 58:07 60 to 64 - 1. Tim Degrado 59:47, 2. Iain Mickle 59:57, 3. Paul Hughes 1:03:00
Very interesting. That's a great point. More old timers do seem to go for the marathon than the 10K for their training.
I was at the outdoor Western USATF track regionals today. Lots of speedy runners.
It is certainly a risk to run that fast and put in the speedwork on the track. Just to add to my previous post, an 800m runner with good speed can run those times on 25 miles per week. 2 speed sessions, longer run, 2 medium recovery runs, rest day and a cross training day. There are many runners - good runners in the 10k, half, and longer, who may have the ability to get a higher age graded score in a shorter race if they really trained for it - like the mile for example. They choose not to train for say a 3K, 1500, 800 on the track. Why? First off you need access to a track just about year round which is difficult and you have to be willing to put in short intense sessions, which are not fun. Also, racing on the track immediately exposes you to everyone watching, just how good you are compared to everyone else on the track. Mentally it is a bit easier to run in a crowd like in a big road race. Finishing a half in 1:22 compared to the leaders in your age group going 1:17 or so doesn't sound so bad, but if you were in a track race, you'd be shamefully lapped a couple of times. Training for a half marathon it not easy, but overall the intensity is less, but longer of course. That's my best response, but I'm sure there are 1 or 2 more factors involved.
That’s a pretty good post. I’m thinking the biggest problem with the shorter distances is finding opportunities. If someone’s sweet spot is the two-mile, there are a lot less opportunities in finding a track 3000m, vs a road 5k.
Certified road 5k’s are out there, but is the emphasis on certification waning?
Looking at the all time best lists for the different distances, people do seem to be scoring around 95% age grade about the same frequency at each distance.
From my perspective, there’s huge chasm in performance between 80% and 85%. So 95% is other-worldly.
Looking at the all time best lists for the different distances, people do seem to be scoring around 95% age grade about the same frequency at each distance.
From my perspective, there’s huge chasm in performance between 80% and 85%. So 95% is other-worldly.
It is! Those are top 15 times in each distance all-time. It looks like the top 15 times in each distance in a given year are more from 85% to low 90%'s.
there is a women near me to won a few medals at the World Masters and carries them around showing them off to anyone she can. Meanwhile at the US Masters champs she can't even make it out of the trials and keeps changing events looking for an easy medal.
As someone who has run extensively at both T&F and road National Masters Champs, and has been heavily involved in the Road Age-grading tables since 2015, let me make a few points.
1. The age grading tables are based on the best single-age performance, per sex, (world wide) at each distance. A smooth curve is then developed from the Open WR or WB to age 99. The curve is intended to mostly prevent age-grades >100%. A 100% AG is equal to the Open WR for a runner of that age. The 2020 age grade tables were developed by Alan Jones using my data and data from the Assoc. of Road Running Statisticians. So for example, Kipchoge's 2:01:39 =100% and a 100% AG for a 50 year old male = 2:31:07. In case you're, yes, super shoes had a huge impact on the 2020 tables.
2. Generally, good head-to-head competition, at least in the 800m - 10,000m distances, is rare at National Masters T&F champs. If you compare Masters ARs, you will often see Road times that are better than those on the track. In 2016, I set the M65 AR for 5000m at 17:44.03. (Ten days before the race, and 5 days before my 65th birthday, I ran a 17:17 5K on the road.) Three months later, I set the M65 5K Road record at 17:31 in Syracuse. at the same level of fitness. When I set the track mark, it was windy, and I had to continuously run around lapped older runners. In the road race, even though I ran the worst paced race of my life, I always had younger runners to chase. It's also important to remember, that there are prize purses at National Masters Road Champs (usually about $7000-$10000) with the best money allotted for the best age-grades. For National Masters T&F Champs, you get a medal and a patch.
3. If you compare the all-time top age-grades at the top four distances (5K, 10K, H Mar and Marathon) they are not that different. Due to the influence of super shoes, the 2020 age-grade standards got a lot tougher for the H Mar & Marathon and that accounts for much of the difference.
No they are not. Case and point. I tied my age group national record in the mile. So do I go around claiming to be the fastest American ever in the mile for my age....or do I know that somebody like Lagat would jog and finish 150m ahead of "my" national record?
We're decent age groupers (on the world stage) trying to relive the good ole days of winning but more likely the old days of running fast.
As mentioned, national championship road races tend to produce better finishing times because they often offer prize money, while track championships do not and competition in those can be hit and miss.
I won a few masters national championships on the track but never on the road, where my best time might get me a medal but not the win, as faster guys show up for the money.
45 to 49 - 1. Jason Holroyd 33:37, 2. Mike Cole 33:56, 3. Aaron Price 34:17
50 to 54 - 1. Mark Carroll 33:38, 2. Richard Falcone 33:39, 3. Gregory Putnam 34:09
55 to 59 - 1. Nat Larson 34:22, 2. Brian Crowley 35:03, 3. Scott Grandfield 36:21
60 to 64 - 1. Tim Degrado 35:59, 2. Rick Lee 36:41, 3. Paul McGovern 36:54
USATF Masters 10 Mile 2022 Championship
45 to 49 - 1. Gregory Mitchell 52:57, 2. Jason Troxler 53:49, 3. Jacques Sallberg 54:49
50 to 54 - 1. Jaime Heilpern 55:11, 2. Mark Callon 56:03, 3. Ivan Lieben 56:38
55 to 59 - 1. Nat Larson 57:11, 2. Thomas Tayeri 58:05, 3. Anthony McGrath 58:07
60 to 64 - 1. Tim Degrado 59:47, 2. Iain Mickle 59:57, 3. Paul Hughes 1:03:00
Do they test at these events?
Not going to name the name, but I've seen one of these guys running locally, and I wonder about T doping. He was a fast runner in his youth, but the first time I saw him (and before I knew how fast he could run), the thought crossed my mind, wondering if he was possibly visiting the mens clinic.
45 to 49 - 1. Jason Holroyd 33:37, 2. Mike Cole 33:56, 3. Aaron Price 34:17
50 to 54 - 1. Mark Carroll 33:38, 2. Richard Falcone 33:39, 3. Gregory Putnam 34:09
55 to 59 - 1. Nat Larson 34:22, 2. Brian Crowley 35:03, 3. Scott Grandfield 36:21
60 to 64 - 1. Tim Degrado 35:59, 2. Rick Lee 36:41, 3. Paul McGovern 36:54
USATF Masters 10 Mile 2022 Championship
45 to 49 - 1. Gregory Mitchell 52:57, 2. Jason Troxler 53:49, 3. Jacques Sallberg 54:49
50 to 54 - 1. Jaime Heilpern 55:11, 2. Mark Callon 56:03, 3. Ivan Lieben 56:38
55 to 59 - 1. Nat Larson 57:11, 2. Thomas Tayeri 58:05, 3. Anthony McGrath 58:07
60 to 64 - 1. Tim Degrado 59:47, 2. Iain Mickle 59:57, 3. Paul Hughes 1:03:00
Do they test at these events?
Not going to name the name, but I've seen one of these guys running locally, and I wonder about T doping. He was a fast runner in his youth, but the first time I saw him (and before I knew how fast he could run), the thought crossed my mind, wondering if he was possibly visiting the mens clinic.
I can't speak for all of the championship events, but I ran one last spring and was tested by USADA immediately following the race. However, they only tested 2 men and 2 women, supposedly at random, from the top 10 overall. If that's how they always do it, that likely precludes the older groups from ever being tested.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.