50+ Masters Training and Racing Open Forum

Allen1959 wrote:

Question for folks here. I was chatting with the M60-64 winner after Friday's 5K. He had worn brand new Nike Vaporflies, and said they were unbelievable. He felt they made a 20-second difference. Particularly for older runners who really feel the impact of each footfall, he thinks the benefit of the cushioned ride was huge. A couple others cited the same 15-20 second improvement with the Vapor flies in the same race. Anyone experience the same?

Allen, read Pete Magill's journal for why he'll never EVER run in Vaporflys again. Quoting him will not do it justice.

happy birthday lucKY, and nice racing to those who toed the line the last few weeks.

a short post for me: finally, 5 consecutive days of pain-free running to end august, 3-4 miles everyday this week except for saturday, where i managed 6 with my h.s. team. probably running around 7:15-7:30 pace with minimal effort, so i'm guessing my elliptigo work in july/august is already paying dividends. having never cross-trained this much, i'll be curious to see how it impacts how quickly i get back into racing shape...

on the multiple shoes question: i'm a big believer of this, for all the reasons mentioned earlier. i often will have a long tempo pair, a short tempo pair, a track workout pair, and 1-2 recovery run pairs, not to mention a racing flat. maybe it's the half-filipino/imelda marcos influence in me. i do remember my college coach, bob larson, once talking about how it takes over 24 hours for your shoes' cushioning to "reform" or recover or something like that, so he felt it was wise to alternate daily. not sure this is true, but sounded good to me at the time...

carpe crepusculum,

cush

socalcush wrote:

probably running around 7:15-7:30 pace with minimal effort, so i'm guessing my elliptigo work in july/august is already paying dividends. having never cross-trained this much, i'll be curious to see how it impacts how quickly i get back into racing shape...

on the multiple shoes question: i'm a big believer of this, for all the reasons mentioned earlier. i often will have a long tempo pair, a short tempo pair, a track workout pair, and 1-2 recovery run pairs, not to mention a racing flat.

Hey cush, could you elaborate on what you look for in a long tempo versus short and recovery run pair of shoes?

Also, can I just say I envy anyone who gets to exercise with an elliptigo??

KCgeezer wrote:

Allen, read Pete Magill's journal for why he'll never EVER run in Vaporflys again. Quoting him will not do it justice.

Well, I believe I found the quote. I guess it's the "spring" effect he objects to. I don't quite follow his point about "altered form."

If I train in a shoe with significant drop, and race in a minimal low-drop flat, my form changes quite a bit. The racing flat forces an "altered form." I'm more likely to land mid-foot rather than heel-strike, have reduced ground-contact time, etc., making me run faster. I think.

That said, I'm not rushing out to buy the 4% or next percents.

Here's his quote, referencing his first time wearing them:

"I alter my form to land correctly. Struggling on an incline, I lean forward, and the spring engages, catapulting me up the hill. Jogging between reps, I rock back on my heels. And drop 20 seconds-per-mile from my recovery pace. I resolve never to race in the shoes. If adapting your stride to footwear—to equipment—makes you faster, that’s unfair performance enhancement in my book."

as for Vaporflys, no.

I wear Adidas for 5K and up and have a light pair of Brooks for the shorter races.

I'm not saying never. But happy with what I have.

Happy Birthday Lucky. Glad everyone is having a good week. I felt dead all week with little running only doing 30min easy on the treadmill. No long run especially after back to back races and traveling. I am tired. Probably will start feeling better this week. Have a great Labor day to all.

Hi Allen1959! My point about altering my form is not that my form changed a little in relation to the shoe's design. It's that I had to alter my form to effectively engage the "spring." If I ran with my normal stride, the shoes didn't do much. When I altered my stride, I was able to trigger the shoes artificial recoil (analogous to our tendons' natural elastic recoil), gaining an advantage. This demanded such a significant change in my normal stride that (as documented in my PodiumRunner log) I was sore in both hamstrings, hip flexors, and calves the next day--it's the first case of significant DOMS I've had in years.

My point is that you could recreate the exact size, weight, heel-toe offset, basically everything about the shoe EXCEPT the "spring" they've somehow created from the combo of carbon fiber plate and foam (my understanding is they're not even sure exactly why it works so well), and the shoe would be just another 7-ounce racing flat--i.e., slower than a 4-ounce racing flat. By adding a non-human-generated source of locomotion, requiring (for me--not saying for everyone) a significant alteration to my normal stride in order to engage, they've created equipment that creates faster race times. But it IS a non-human performance enhancement. That's why I won't race in them. I pass absolutely no judgment on anyone else who chooses differently, as it's currently within the rules to use them.

I am a big believer in switching shoe use, sometimes after 2 or 3 runs in a row with the same (they feel good for me for a couple runs/days usually) but allowing myself to adjust to a different pair/landing feels good by allowing my legs/muscles to land/adjust differently and rest the ones that have been worked a bit more/harder.

I run on asphalt for 99 percent of the time, and only use concrete to get from one side of the road to another waiting for traffic. I do think the track can help, as my back feels better today from my walk that included over a mile on the track. Did a total of 12 km of walking today (sounds more impressive than miles when you are still walking off the back issues).

I am also a huge believer in replacing shoes by 500 to 600 miles at the very most (even before I started working at a run specialty store). Midsole materials compress in 300 to 600 miles by over 50 percent. Our joints absorb the rest, and I value my joints mightily! Seeing how bad shoes are before they are replaced has only reinforced how important it is to me to care for my legs.

For those of you not knowing, my back pain came from aggressive coughing last month d/t a respiratory illness and deep congestion. This week I am up to 26 miles walking and 2.5 miles run, getting there!

SoCal Pete wrote:

If I ran with my normal stride, the shoes didn't do much. When I altered my stride, I was able to trigger the shoes artificial recoil (analogous to our tendons' natural elastic recoil), gaining an advantage. This demanded such a significant change in my normal stride that (as documented in my PodiumRunner log) I was sore in both hamstrings, hip flexors, and calves the next day--it's the first case of significant DOMS I've had in years.

Thanks, Pete! I get it now. I didn't read the next day's post.

For most of my running life I've been rotating at least three and usually four (sometimes more!) pairs of shoes in my regular training. I like the idea of stressing my feet/legs in slightly different ways on different days, and I also like to make sure that each pair of shoes is completely dried out before wearing them again if it was raining or puddly. I currently rotate four pairs of shoes: two different versions of the Saucony Kinvara, one Skechers, and one Nike Lunar Tempo 2. They're all fairly similar lightweight neutral trainers with smallish but nonzero drop, but they all feel somewhat different and are all in different stages of their lives. Once you reach a steady state it doesn't cost any more to rotate many different shoes--you have more shoes, but each pair lasts longer.

I also put a lot of miles on my shoes. I don't keep logs for each shoe, but based on how often I buy shoes and how many miles I run, I typically get 1000 miles or more on a pair of shoes. I take them out of the rotation once significant wear shows in the soles, which for me is under the ball of the foot and under the big toe. It probably helps that I'm about 115 pounds and wear a women's size 9 or 9.5--big feet for my weight.

KCgeezer wrote:

I have SoCal Pete's 5K book, as well as the free ebook which, according to the copyright page, it essentially IS in print form. I still think print is handier and am glad to have this. ...

KCgeezer - The new book, FAST 5K, is definitely derived from the old eBook. VeloPress asked me to write a 5K training book for them, and I told them that I'd already done a self-published Kindle book covering just that. They read the book, then asked me if I'd rewrite it, add a little more depth to some of the keys, combine a few keys and add a couple more, create a chart or table for every key, and supplement it with more in-depth sample training programs (why I went with 4 programs and added the daily and weekly coach's notes to the workouts/schedules). I agreed, and I pulled the Kindle from Amazon.

At first, I wasn't sure whether it was going to turn out well. But I have to say, I'm actually really proud of how this book turned out. If BUILD YOUR RUNNING BODY was my magnum opus on everything running, this is my short and sweet guide to grabbing the best workouts and practices and using them to improve performance--in other words, this is the nitty gritty of how I train and how I've coached runners. It's going to be my last running book, so I'm glad to rest on this one. ;-) I know it's shameless self-promotion, but if anyone wants to check it out, it's now available on Amazon here (will be in bookstores in the next week or two):

amkelley wrote:

In Central California now, low 18’s would be almost guaranteed to win the women’s division of any smallish 5K and would sometimes beat all of the men. It’s never been clear to me whether this difference is a function of time or of place

I think it's more a function of time. Most all the races here are comparable to what you see in Central California. It was very different in the 80s and even the 90s. Fewer races, and the fast people tended to race locally, and race more often, I think.

There was a reason my 5K on Friday had more depth than usual. This year it was the USATF regional 5K open and masters championship, so attracted many of the better area runners. 17:17 won the Open women's race.

A good friend of my wife's and mine won the W60-64. She races very often, running 24:43 Friday. A very respectable time, especially as she's 64. She's been racing well for decades.

On the rotating shoes..I had vague memory that we were having a Deja vu all over again moment...just scroll down to 9.2.12 at 4:46 pm....

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4064465&page=72

Rtype Good One! Only seven years ago feels more like twenty aging wise.

So rotate shoes,shoe models and surfaces daily and you will still get injured if you run too much/hard or long enough;)

Why do we love running so much? )

Charlie wrote:

Rtype Good One! Only seven years ago feels more like twenty aging wise.

So rotate shoes,shoe models and surfaces daily and you will still get injured if you run too much/hard or long enough;)

Why do we love running so much? )

Ha ha, we have rocks/sand for brains. There is very little we have not covered in this thread.

Rtype wrote:

Charlie wrote:

Rtype Good One! Only seven years ago feels more like twenty aging wise.

So rotate shoes,shoe models and surfaces daily and you will still get injured if you run too much/hard or long enough;)

Why do we love running so much? )

Ha ha, we have rocks/sand for brains. There is very little we have not covered in this thread.

Cause and effect or placebo effect. Good thing I never had to buy five pairs of shoes as a coach. Pole vault poles did enough damage to the budget.

Charlie wrote:

Rtype Good One! Only seven years ago feels more like twenty aging wise.

So rotate shoes,shoe models and surfaces daily and you will still get injured if you run too much/hard or long enough;)

Why do we love running so much? )

I often ask myself that question on most post-running days as I'm sitting in pain with ice bags on my Achilles and ankle, Tylenol tablets in one hand and a cold brew in the other. Lol. It never used to be this way, but when I hit the double nickel 4 yrs ago things went South - torn tendons, strained muscles and early onset OA made me feel like an 80 yr old man instead of someone on the short side of 60.

On the flip side, I hit the weights and non-weightbearing cardio (spin bike & elliptical) several times a week and feel darn good when I done. But for the first time in decades of running, it doesn't feel as good as it used to. Funny how for some people our body as it ages deteriorates for high-impact activities but seems to thrive and enjoy physical activity that's less impact.

Que Sera Sera.....

ABM cheerup half full and all that stuff .... You still feel good with the non impact hammering

So Here is my theory/WAG on why we hit the wall of aches and pains with running.

Usually I deplore using analogies but in this case I will

I used to drive a retired police car crown vic midnight blue take home a real cherry.

One day I made a last minute attempt to turn into a drive way it was a no line at the car wash deal

I hit a high curb driver's side doing 35 or so and it was brace for impact and nada nothing Man I loved that car.

The suspension on the p71 was superb:

Another difference is Ford's "severe duty" shock absorbers that offer a stiffer ride than the standard Crown Victoria. They also have black steel wheels with stainless steel or chromed plastic hubcaps.

A couple a years ago I high a much smaller curb at the same speed in my scion The impact bottomed out the suspension ended up with a blown tired and dented wheel.

So we start out as crown vics and end up as yugos. We try and run but our elasticity is not longer as elastic so we incur way more impact damage iow our suspension bottoms out a lot ezr and shoes are not gonna fix this. Sand fixes this for me in fact I am pretty sure running on soft sand has improved my elasticity!

Hey NIKE and the Seven Dwarfs are you listening? Come up with a shoe that actually reduces impact forces such as to keep our suspension from bottoming out until then I am keeping it on the sand.

KCgeezer wrote:

Allen1959 wrote:

Question for folks here. I was chatting with the M60-64 winner after Friday's 5K. He had worn brand new Nike Vaporflies, and said they were unbelievable. He felt they made a 20-second difference. Particularly for older runners who really feel the impact of each footfall, he thinks the benefit of the cushioned ride was huge. A couple others cited the same 15-20 second improvement with the Vapor flies in the same race. Anyone experience the same?

Allen, read Pete Magill's journal for why he'll never EVER run in Vaporflys again. Quoting him will not do it justice.

First and foremost a belated Happy Birthday to lucKY2b and the a new age group! (I was gone yesterday to a race and a night away at an Air B&B. As a result, I am late writing).

So Vaporflys for a 5K? Results of an experiment of one; They work for me. I believe most of the advantage is 1) Likely a placebo effect 2) the light weight 8.3 oz size 10.5 3) The ample mid-sole cushioning.

I don't think they would be advisable on a track or a course with a lot of turns. Do they trim a few seconds? Maybe, but I got a lot more serious with my training in 2019, so who knows? THE MAJOR advantage (IMO) is my calves feel much much better wearing these versus other racing flats with less cushion.

Today's handicap 5Km in Hillsdale Michigan this morning went 'okay' Slightly rolling, but 99% paved scenic route largely along a lake shore and through a park. But who can really enjoy the scenery when you are running full throttle?

They race director changed up the 'handicap' from what was advertised on the website. Not at all happy about that. 60-64 Males were changed from 7:00 to 6:00. But they left the 65-69 at 9:00 (??). That spelled the difference between me finishing overall 1st versus 4th - lol! But what are you going to do? So basically a quasi - time trial on a beautiful morning and an acceptable (for me) time of 20:18 WMA Ages for 62.66 years at a touch over 80%. Still want to break 20:00 again, but will have to wait for a flatter course with more faster people ahead of me or to work with.

Glad to have slightly cooler weather - I will be sure to regret saying that in a couple of months. But I am just happy to be able to run and race in any type of weather. Everyday is a gift...