I am 67 and am confident I could train down to sub-60 in the 10K. But why? I’m in shape. Lift two or three times a week. Walk everywhere. Age-group racing puzzles me. Running starting really beating me up about five years ago, so I essentially stopped running (any time I walk I throw in some 100-yard strides so I don’t forget how to run in case I HAVE to).
This age-group record is impressive, but I don’t really care. If people in their 60s, 70s, etc. want to train like demons, fine, but I don’t get it.
Me too. Absolutely no-one cares except sometimes friends and family. Even if clean most people think you dope, and whatever you do (clean or not) to get those times harms you in the end, usually injury or something.
Sadly, i'm completely over being excited about any masters records since there is no random drug testing.
Here's what is needed to determine whether we should celebrate or determine he's dirty. 1. When did he start running 2. How fast did he run in his 40s and 50s If he started running 10 years ago and he was hitting 45min 10k back at that point, i'd say it's legit. But if he started running 20+ years ago and was running 35s in his late 50s, i'd say he's dirty
He was a 29 min guy back in the day. Took 20 or so years off and restarted at 58.
Me too. Absolutely no-one cares except sometimes friends and family. Even if clean most people think you dope, and whatever you do (clean or not) to get those times harms you in the end, usually injury or something.
Most people don´t care by a bunch of anonymous East Africans either.
He’s on a Scottish running group im in on Facebook and posts regular.
He lives in a fairly rural type area and does a lot of miles on hilly roads or off road over fields and hills,so builds a lot of strength and saves a lot of pounding on his body that way.
Was a decent athlete when he was young and works very hard now,very goal orientated.
I’m running in a race as he’s entered soon so hopefully I don’t get beat down by a pensioner..
Sadly, i'm completely over being excited about any masters records since there is no random drug testing.
Here's what is needed to determine whether we should celebrate or determine he's dirty. 1. When did he start running 2. How fast did he run in his 40s and 50s If he started running 10 years ago and he was hitting 45min 10k back at that point, i'd say it's legit. But if he started running 20+ years ago and was running 35s in his late 50s, i'd say he's dirty
He was a 29 min guy back in the day. Took 20 or so years off and restarted at 58.
fantastic. did some quick googling. the comeback at age 58 was not without obstacles but a true work ethic helped him to improve over the years: 50 miles/week, two speed sessions and one long run, the rest continuous runs. he ramped up the mileage and is out every day, 70 miles/week.
time to make conclusions:
1. serious continuous running wears down the body after some years. be happy if you can break records as a youngster, in your 30s and perhaps early 40s. you want to be a masters star in your 50s or later? have a look at step 2; otherwise stop here to read.
2. either you start a running career very late (end of your 30's) or you stop it when you are young like alistair walker (in his prime, as a 29min guy). don't run for many, many years and restart at a higher age like alistair walker and others.
3. train like a youngster, though you are old. this works in most cases. if you are a lucky guy with optimal genetics you can handle the necessary volume and all the pain. others who tried to run hard their whole life without a break will have zero chance usually.
I can't believe the pathetic, jealous remarks about this man's performance and to suggest he is taking PEDs suggests something very wrong with your eyesight unless every recently retired headteacher is also on drugs.
He was a 29 min guy back in the day. Took 20 or so years off and restarted at 58.
fantastic. did some quick googling. the comeback at age 58 was not without obstacles but a true work ethic helped him to improve over the years: 50 miles/week, two speed sessions and one long run, the rest continuous runs. he ramped up the mileage and is out every day, 70 miles/week.
time to make conclusions:
1. serious continuous running wears down the body after some years. be happy if you can break records as a youngster, in your 30s and perhaps early 40s. you want to be a masters star in your 50s or later? have a look at step 2; otherwise stop here to read.
2. either you start a running career very late (end of your 30's) or you stop it when you are young like alistair walker (in his prime, as a 29min guy). don't run for many, many years and restart at a higher age like alistair walker and others.
3. train like a youngster, though you are old. this works in most cases. if you are a lucky guy with optimal genetics you can handle the necessary volume and all the pain. others who tried to run hard their whole life without a break will have zero chance usually.
Definitely and add to this- motivation. I never thought my motivation to train hard and race would ever wane. To me, that's the toughest aspect to overcome.
I am 67 and am confident I could train down to sub-60 in the 10K. But why? I’m in shape. Lift two or three times a week. Walk everywhere. Age-group racing puzzles me. Running starting really beating me up about five years ago, so I essentially stopped running (any time I walk I throw in some 100-yard strides so I don’t forget how to run in case I HAVE to).
This age-group record is impressive, but I don’t really care. If people in their 60s, 70s, etc. want to train like demons, fine, but I don’t get it.
I love to see that.
If you had problems to run 5 years ago you are not going to run sub 60 in a 10k ever again.
Sadly, i'm completely over being excited about any masters records since there is no random drug testing.
Here's what is needed to determine whether we should celebrate or determine he's dirty. 1. When did he start running 2. How fast did he run in his 40s and 50s If he started running 10 years ago and he was hitting 45min 10k back at that point, i'd say it's legit. But if he started running 20+ years ago and was running 35s in his late 50s, i'd say he's dirty
Patterns
Background of being good not great during prime of life years. Long periods without improvement/stagnation followed by a sudden large sustained improvement (5 percent age graded) . So they all of a sudden can train harder and race more without much downtime.
A less suspicous scenario is when a good veteran runner achieve a brief improvement of 5 percent ( age graded score) after years of work.
So this guy like too many other old farts is in the gray zone in my book.
As I have said many times get rid of USADA and WADA embrace better living thru chemistry. If I thought the upside of say TRT was a net gain in my life I would do it. However cheating is just wrong in my book. So if I did take a banned substance I would disqualify myself . The problem is cheating not doping. Open legal enhancement leads to better quality of life. Stupid archaic rules that are nothing more than a power grab need to be gone.
Shelby would be sponsored by Nado as well as NIKE. Heck NIKE might become a pharmaceutical company like Google/Alpha/Altos.
Rather than congratulate the achievement, you turn it into who’s better than who? Why do you start threads like a teen YouTuber?
This.
I only see rojo's posts when I sign out because he rarely has a good thing to say. weldon has a little more on the ball at least.
M-mid 60s. Ran 37s last year, but think I have some 36s in me on the right day. The biggest 10Ks are Peachtree, Bolder Boulder, and the USATF 10K masters championships this weekend, but none of these are on fast courses. Faster courses like Cooper River or Crescent City don't usually draw the fastest masters. The masters championships are usually the deepest of those events.
You get over 60 and there are a few extreme outliers like Walker, or a Gene Dykes or a Whitlock, and they set the records. After that just a handful or two in the >90% age grade level (say sub 38 for a 65 year old). Sub 40 10K is very competitive for 60+ and under 38 will almost certainly podium at most races, and it's fast enough to win the 65+ division unless a record-setter type shows up. It doesn't get any easier as you age.
I am 67 and am confident I could train down to sub-60 in the 10K. But why? I’m in shape. Lift two or three times a week. Walk everywhere. Age-group racing puzzles me. Running starting really beating me up about five years ago, so I essentially stopped running (any time I walk I throw in some 100-yard strides so I don’t forget how to run in case I HAVE to).
This age-group record is impressive, but I don’t really care. If people in their 60s, 70s, etc. want to train like demons, fine, but I don’t get it.
Me too. Absolutely no-one cares except sometimes friends and family. Even if clean most people think you dope, and whatever you do (clean or not) to get those times harms you in the end, usually injury or something.
If no one but family and friends care how do we have a two page thread about it?