Master runner recoveryr

Yes. We get less motivated at some point.

I don't agree with the idea of doing a lot less mileage as we get older. In my opinion we all need a certain volume of training to be able to train effectively at every pace to attain race fitness.

Part of the problem is that 40 is an arbitrary age to draw a line between masters and everyone else. At 40, there isn't that big of a difference physically. But things really do change in a big way once you get closer to 50 than you are to 40. If a study looked at a bunch of runners in their early 40s, they are not going to find big differences.

The other issue is that measures of "recovery" are at best incomplete. There is nothing that really measures how well soft/connective tissue recovers. But we all know that a bad achilles or patellar tendinitis will sap all the strength from a runner's legs. I suspect that the fatigue masters runners feel is largely due to a lack of soft tissue recovery.

When Sean Wade ran a bunch of 50+ records, he spent hours aqua jogging and did very limited road/track mileage. He ran faster at 50+ than he did in most of his 40s. So, if there is any sort of fountain of youth, it is probably reducing pounding on the joints and shifting hard aerobic efforts to zero impact workouts like aqua jogging.

For me, I hate aqua jogging and am happy to just say good bye to the days of PRs and 70-90 mpw. Just because you really love something doesn't mean you have to do it forever.

Precious Roy is correct... once you get close to 50 years old, connective tissue problems mount and take longer to recover from. In addition to Sean Wade, Dan King also limited the pounding on his legs and still runs very fast...

DougC wrote:

Precious Roy is correct... once you get close to 50 years old, connective tissue problems mount and take longer to recover from. In addition to Sean Wade, Dan King also limited the pounding on his legs and still runs very fast...

....and so it follows that at 60 the difference from early 50s is even more pronounced. It seems our 'decline' if you will, is kind of linear until we hit 50ish and then becomes more exponential from there on out. At 62 now, I don't even want to hear any 50 year olds bellyache. And when I hit 70 I'm sure I won't want to hear the moaning of any 62 year olds!

DougC wrote:

In addition to Sean Wade, Dan King also limited the pounding on his legs and still runs very fast...

You likely know more about Dan King's training than the little I'm aware of. Are you referring to his use of a bike for cross-training, and/or something else? As an oldster newbie, I'm interested in anything credible that might help.

I agree with Precious Roy. 40 is where some top Marathoners have their last excellent performance. The real drop starts after 45-50. Of course it all depends who much did you run in all these years before that.

The people who excel in setting older age group records usually did start their running very late.

I must admit I have two almost running free days a week, doing easy to moderate biking instead of easy running + some strides and hill sprints after. I recover a lot those days, and especially muscularly.

53 and just backing up what others have said, in my 40's I could still run well, and hit big weeks, fairly fast times... at 50 it is just very hard for me to get to 50M weeks.

I would still like to run fast and I do enjoy the work that goes into running fast times, but now I can't "do the training that allows me to train". There's just a certain volume you need and whenever I get up to 50ish, the knees and lower leg issues crop up again.

I found the discussion of the research I referred to. No reference further, but the reasearch had been done on masters of 55 yo on average compared to pre-master runners. This had been done on cycling and not running. And I think that is a big but, how this translates to running. Anyway the masters were not too young and they found evidence that masters percieved their recovery less than the young group, but it did not show on the performance or the measured muscular markers.

I am 50 and feel I can recover fast, and do workouts 3 days a week + a moderate 75min run with progression . That is a lot, but what is the biggest problem in recovery is really the stiffness from the hard days and not how much energy there is 2-3 days after the workout. Cycling 2 of the 3 easy days makes a big difference. Maybe this is the point? that the muscle flexibility cannot cope with too much?

I’m 45 and find I typically need 3 days of easy running between workouts, long run included(I’ll do the second half at marathon pace). I’ve brought my 5k time down from around 20mins to 17:30 after 18 months of training although I was jogging a couple years prior just to loose weight. Lately I’ve been wondering if I shouldn’t crunch my easy days down to 2 in between workouts but it seems that when I try I dig myself into a bit of a hole half the time. Not sure if this would have been more workable when I was younger since I never really trained in a organized way but all in all it seems like I’m injured less.

I will say that even at 53, aerobically and strength wise I'm pretty good... it's my joints! That is what requires the longer recovery. If I could eliminate the joint pains, I could really perform well, and I could put in big weeks of big gobs of miles.

Right now if I tried that my progression would go something like 50>58>65> 0>0> 0... ortho visit.

I find running on slightly uneven ground solves the joint problems. This makes me think it is not age related decay that is the problem but repetitive strain from too much of the same thing.

Here is an easy test to see how much you've recovered after a hard run. On the day after a hard run, run easily to warm up for at least ten minutes. Then, without stopping, run a measured distance keeping your HR on the upper end of your recovery zone. Check your time over the measured distance. Now, the very next day, do exactly the same run. Are you significantly faster? If so, you need more than one day to recover.

Conversely, you could run on a track and hit the exact same pace and check your HR for each day. I've done this and after a moderately hard interval session, my speed on the 2nd recovery day would be only a little faster. But after a long run or a very hard session, my average HR would be a lot higher on the first recovery day compared to the second recovery day.

I'm 47 and resumed training after a 2+ year layoff, about a year and a half ago. I've been able to hit mileage (up to 70 mpw) I never could when 15-20 years younger, when I constantly was getting shin splints or ankle inflammation at half the mileage. I've shed extra weight getting my BMI down to 20-21, whereas before I was always 30-50+ lbs heavier. I'm sure that added up to a lot of wear and tear and being lighter has lessened the impact. I never ran cross country in HS or college, so I have less total lifetime mileage on me (at least for now). I'm trying to enjoy it while it lasts, because I know it won't last forever.

My right ankle does act up after long runs or speed work, but for now, cools off when I do achilles and gastroc stretching and strengthening.