rojo wrote:
There is supposed to be a tradeoff for hard training. Nowadays with pill and thryoid meds, some of that tradeoff is gone.
been on thyroid meds for 14 years and my recovery is still worse than every other runner i know.
rojo wrote:
There is supposed to be a tradeoff for hard training. Nowadays with pill and thryoid meds, some of that tradeoff is gone.
been on thyroid meds for 14 years and my recovery is still worse than every other runner i know.
Slaney should be in prison right now for theft. It is a crime what that filthy doping cheater did to ZB. Slaney is every bit as evil as her sleazy coach.
vnsldfkjeuie wrote:
Uniyun wrote:You don't get it. Slaney is lying. Slaney was not "a great runner at 50." She would have been working hard at 7 minute pace at age 50.
Disagree. I was never fast enough to run track in HS, and my 10K road PR was 37 min at age 33, but I was comfortably running 15-20 mi runs at age 51 at 7:30 pace, so I don't see why Mary couldn't run at 7:00 pace!
BTW, she's 58 now.
What are you disagreeing with? I never stated that MDS could not run 7 minute pace at age 50. I asserted that it would it would not be a slow jog for her anymore.
Anabolic steroids cause injuries because 1.they allow the athlete to train harder than is normal for his/her body and 2. frequently cause tendon injuries or rupture.
If she was positive for testosterone back then, then she was very, very doped. It is very hard to fail that test. I guess her husband was her dealer, like in many other athletic couples before and since then.
Uniyun wrote:
vnsldfkjeuie wrote:Disagree. I was never fast enough to run track in HS, and my 10K road PR was 37 min at age 33, but I was comfortably running 15-20 mi runs at age 51 at 7:30 pace, so I don't see why Mary couldn't run at 7:00 pace!
BTW, she's 58 now.
What are you disagreeing with? I never stated that MDS could not run 7 minute pace at age 50. I asserted that it would it would not be a slow jog for her anymore.
I am truly sorry and I apologize for not making myself clear. I am disagreeing with your statement that she would have been working hard at 7-minute pace at age 50. I have zero natural talent, have been way up and down in weight over my life, but managed to be training at 7:30 pace on 15+ mile runs at age 51. That was training. I could run faster in 5K or 10K races. Yes, I am a man, but Mary was always faster than me at every distance and at every age--a lot faster. So I do not agree that 7:00 pace would have been "working hard" for her at age 50, unless she is so crippled by orthopedic stuff. I'm calling you out to prove that "She is lying" and that "She would have been working hard at 7 minute pace at age 50."
vnsldfkjeuie wrote:
Uniyun wrote:What are you disagreeing with? I never stated that MDS could not run 7 minute pace at age 50. I asserted that it would it would not be a slow jog for her anymore.
I am truly sorry and I apologize for not making myself clear. I am disagreeing with your statement that she would have been working hard at 7-minute pace at age 50. I have zero natural talent, have been way up and down in weight over my life, but managed to be training at 7:30 pace on 15+ mile runs at age 51. That was training. I could run faster in 5K or 10K races. Yes, I am a man, but Mary was always faster than me at every distance and at every age--a lot faster. So I do not agree that 7:00 pace would have been "working hard" for her at age 50, unless she is so crippled by orthopedic stuff. I'm calling you out to prove that "She is lying" and that "She would have been working hard at 7 minute pace at age 50."
Mary is lying. You probably are too. What was your training pace for a 15 mile run when you ran 37 minutes at age 33? It should have been around 7:30 then, so how the hell are you doing it at age 51? If you are, you are working hard, and Mary was not on a slow jog at 7 minute pace at age 50. That would have been a challenging pace for her standard run.
world record for half marathon for 50 year old woman is around 1:15 - for a 55 year old woman, it drops to around 1:20 by the time women are 53 to 55.
So let's say for sake of argument that she was around world record shape at age 51 - which we all know, she most certainly was not. Even for a 1:15 half marathoner, 7 min miles is not a shuffle. It might be described as something close to an average, maybe even an easier day; but it certainly isn't a breeze.
she is full of crap
I'm 58 too and ran against Mary back when she was a Blue Angel. I don't even seriously train, just run slowly across the island back and forth to work at my very physically active job and I have, in the past couple of years" raced 5k- 10k in the 7:23- 7:40 ranges. No intervals, No tempos, just slogging on my commute to train. The race pace isn't particularly hard, but I am limited by my Achilles' tendons, and like Mary, can't get up on my toes to run anymore. I ran a lot more marathons and was never anywhere close to being as fast as she was. There are a lot of old ladies in New York who run a good deal faster than me too, so it is not out of the realm of possiblility for 7 minute pace to feel pretty easy for an over 50 year old woman. Glad that Mary is happy with what's she is doing. The arthritis thing is interesting. The eliptigos look like fun.
Compared to how fast Slaney trained and raced in her prime, 7:00/mile is somewhat of a shuffle. She's probably just comparing that pace to what she once was able to do, not what a super fit 50+ year old woman is capable of.
I agree with the previous poster who was also 4:15 miler that 7 minute pace is not a shuffle. I was a 4:08 miler and doing a long run at 7 minute pace was certainly no problem but I wouldn't term it an easy shuffle.
Also interesting that Mary had quite the wild reputation before she got married, although unlike SFH she wasn't charging for it.
No she was healthier, stronger and faster at moderate volume.
Typical light run was 5:50/mi on wood chips
dsrunner wrote:
No she was healthier, stronger and faster at moderate volume.
Typical light run was 5:50/mi on wood chips
For what ....800 meters ?
5:50 per mile for anything three miles or longer is not easy /light .
Shuffling at 7:00 pace per mile at age 50 + is total bullshit for even one mile .
Test Osterone wrote:
Also interesting that Mary had quite the wild reputation before she got married, although unlike SFH she wasn't charging for it.
You must be confusing her with the high jumper of legend who lived on the roof of the Olympic village and ran a one-after-another train up there.
rjm33 wrote:
fred.
Do you think there is something wrong with the memory of Ms. Mary Decker Slaney?
In 1996, at the age of 37, as she qualified for the 5000 meters at the Atlanta Olympics, Decker became involved in controversy. A urine test taken in June at the Olympic Trials showed a testosterone to epitestosterone (T/E) ratio greater than the allowable maximum of six to one.[12] At the time of the positive test Decker was being coached by Alberto Salazar.[13]
Decker and her lawyers contended that the T/E ratio test is unreliable for women, especially women in their late 30s or older who are taking birth control pills. In the meantime, Decker was eliminated in the heats at the Olympics.[4]
In June 1997, the IAAF banned Decker from competition. In September 1999, a USATF panel reinstated her.[14][15] The IAAF cleared her to compete but took the case to arbitration. In April, 1999, the arbitration panel ruled against her, after which the IAAF – through a retroactive ban, even though she was cleared to compete – stripped her of a silver medal she had won in the 1500 meters at the 1997 World Indoor Championships.[16][17]
In April 1999, Decker filed suit against both the IAAF and the U.S. Olympic Committee which administered the test, arguing that the test is flawed and cannot distinguish between androgens caused by the use of banned substances and androgens resulting from the use of birth control pills.[18] The court ruled that it had no jurisdiction, a decision that was upheld on appeal.[19]
The (T/E) ratio test has seen its standards tightened to a 4:1 ratio, instead of the previous 6:1 ratio, and laboratories now also run a carbon isotope ratio test (CIR) if the ratio is unusually high.[20]
Mary Decker Slaney is our US golden girl…and role model to our poster with arthritis.
She is very pure and innocent. Mary is just a victim... of stupid doping tests.
I agree.
Doping tests are stupid.
Do you think that the reason Mary Decker Slaney was able to win double gold at the 1983 WC against the doped up evil Russians…was because Mary was as doped up as the evil Russians…or maybe even MORE DOPED than the evil Russians?
Mary Doper Decker Slaney Doping>>>>>>>>>>>>>Evil Russians Doping!
Do you think that is really possible with our Golden Girl and Role Model?
I do.
Oh well.
Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:
Cavorty wrote:No. I'm a 59-year-old guy and ran similar times to MD when younger. Also did similar mileage/intensity. I'm trying to come back from injuries now, and have been told to keep steady runs to 8 min/mile and it feels ridiculously slow.
When I was 50, I would have definitely wanted to be sub 7 min/mile, so I can well believe that 7-8 min miling would have felt like shuffling to a woman of that class, even at 50.
"wanted to be sub 7:00" and having 7:00 miles "feel like shuffling" are two very different things.
I'm not buying what you or Mary are stating, sorry. (especially the 7:00 pace. if she wanted to say 8:00 and above, she should have, she didn't).
In High School I ran basically equivalent to what Mary's all-time PR's are in the 1500/mile. I ran a lot of miles with my teammates (most who weren't as fast as I was), so I did run "with in" myself, and I know we ran a fair amount of 7:00 miles, and no, even then it didn't "feel like shuffling." nope. It was pretty easy for me, but still felt like "real running", not slogging/shuffling, not at all. In my 30's, I came back after many injuries, and ran a few track races, and ran close to my HS times, and again, 7:00 pace on training runs didn't "feel iike shuffling." And yes, I was an 800/1500 guy with more pure speed than Mary. And everyone knows, as you age and slow down, the "feel" of running a slower speed is often similar to how you felt running the faster speed when younger. For instance, if I hit the track now, I feel like I am moving at sub 5:00 pace (for some shorter repeats). It's an effort, but it still FEELS fast, because I never hit those really fast speed any more, this is as fast as I move, so it feels like a sprint.
So.....even if she ran 6:00 pace for her training runs, 7:00 pace decades laters, when she doesn't do ANY speed or track races, should feel like she is MOVING, certainly not shuffling.
Same with you. Sorry, don't buy it.
this^
Nice workout gear:
http://shop.elliptigo.com/site/assets/images/1elliptigo%20commuter.jpg
(yes I get that they are trying to sell the idea that you can ride it to work)
Flagpole wrote:
Nice workout gear:
http://shop.elliptigo.com/site/assets/images/1elliptigo%20commuter.jpg(yes I get that they are trying to sell the idea that you can ride it to work)
As an owner of an ElliptiGO, I am pretty sure they are not trying to suggest you can ride like that to work. You better have a shower ready if you do commute on one as you will be sweating up a storm dressing like that or even in workout gear!
TDF wrote:
This is what you do when you can no longer run and you still enjoy the movement and the rush of a workout. Good for Mary! I ride the same mileage on my ElliptiGO, but still miss running.
There's a guy I used play tennis with who was a total workout/fitness buff. He ran a lot, biked, swam, lifted weights, in addition to the sports he played; and he ate very well.
He screwed up his knee and has never really recovered, even after surgery. At first, it was no more things like tennis with the constant change of directions; but he could still do things (run, bike) where his knee was essentially in line. Then he had to even give those things up. He was miserable at first, but since he's a positive guy, made the most of it and the Elliptigo became his big thing.
D-Nice wrote:
TDF wrote:This is what you do when you can no longer run and you still enjoy the movement and the rush of a workout. Good for Mary! I ride the same mileage on my ElliptiGO, but still miss running.
There's a guy I used play tennis with who was a total workout/fitness buff. He ran a lot, biked, swam, lifted weights, in addition to the sports he played; and he ate very well.
He screwed up his knee and has never really recovered, even after surgery. At first, it was no more things like tennis with the constant change of directions; but he could still do things (run, bike) where his knee was essentially in line. Then he had to even give those things up. He was miserable at first, but since he's a positive guy, made the most of it and the Elliptigo became his big thing.
Not sure why the Elliptigo is better for his knee than biking. I guess the angle.
D-Nice wrote:
D-Nice wrote:There's a guy I used play tennis with who was a total workout/fitness buff. He ran a lot, biked, swam, lifted weights, in addition to the sports he played; and he ate very well.
He screwed up his knee and has never really recovered, even after surgery. At first, it was no more things like tennis with the constant change of directions; but he could still do things (run, bike) where his knee was essentially in line. Then he had to even give those things up. He was miserable at first, but since he's a positive guy, made the most of it and the Elliptigo became his big thing.
Not sure why the Elliptigo is better for his knee than biking. I guess the angle.
Yes, I have heard a former female Boston Marathon champ say that! I would assume the lack of pounding. too! For me it is a bad hip that keeps me from running.
