I admit I am late to the party here but a 2:21 at age 45 is obviously the greatest nonAfrican female performance in history. How does this even happen? OK super shoes but I mean come on now. Like wow…Please delete this thread if there are others.
Staton broke the world record for her age group at the London Marathon, two decades after being part of an historic 1-2-3 for Australia at the Commonwealth Games.
There was another thread that I've locked to new posts. I didn't like it as the 2nd post just said, "Doped to the gills.". Look if you want to say, "I find it highly suspicious that she can do this at age 45 "and then provide somme logic, that's fine. But you can't say, "She's doped to the gills" as a fact and then not provide an explanation. You can say you think she is and then explain why but just labelling all fast times as doping is crazy. There were some good posts like that.
Here is the first post in that thread. It was titled: "45 year old Sinead Diver is likely faster than you despite…"
I do the HP on Wed and Thursdays and just came across the details of how wild her story is.
In linking to the following article, I was basically highlighting what the OP in the other thread was highlighting. On the HP, I'm going to say,
"Meet Australia's new marathon national record holder - She's 45, a mother of two, has a full-time job and didn't start running until age 33" And she just ran 2:21:34.
Being 45 years old Has two kids Works a full time job Sleeps 6 hours a night https://www.runnerstribe.com/interviews/sinead-diver-q-and-a-in-top-form-and-working-towards-tokyo-2020/Y’all need to be posting less garbage...
One thing she has going for her, and attributes her success to is getting a late start - at 33, not trashing her body, and running it into the ground in her 20s and 30s.
If you mean "age graded performance", then you should say that - though I'm sure Sinead would absolutely hate people contextualising her performance in this way. She is an open athlete, and doesn't care about the masters category in the slightest.
I think what Sinead's story demonstrates is that most people give up on reaching their potential too early. We have this false idea that age 40 is some irremovable barrier - on the other side of which is nothing but sharp decline. This is a complete and utter socio-cultural construction.
In an endurance sport, and with the aid of modern diets, lifestyles, medicine and equipment, perhaps the window for elite performance is much larger than we once assumed. That is the lesson we should take from this.
If you mean "age graded performance", then you should say that - though I'm sure Sinead would absolutely hate people contextualising her performance in this way. She is an open athlete, and doesn't care about the masters category in the slightest.
I think what Sinead's story demonstrates is that most people give up on reaching their potential too early. We have this false idea that age 40 is some irremovable barrier - on the other side of which is nothing but sharp decline. This is a complete and utter socio-cultural construction.
In an endurance sport, and with the aid of modern diets, lifestyles, medicine and equipment, perhaps the window for elite performance is much larger than we once assumed. That is the lesson we should take from this.
You are incorrect and way over your head in this discussion. When I stated her performance is the greatest nonAfrican female performance I did not feel the need to explain why. Your knowledge about aging, physiology and athletic performance is woefully inadequate. NOBODY is capable of running a marathon as fast at 45 as at 28, for example, all else being equal. Surely you can grasp this?
No woman at age 40 has been able to run as fast as Sinead has now run at age 45. For you the “take home” is that the 40 year olds just didn’t try hard enough. Some of us know better.
Nothing would surprise me re: P.E.D.'s with her, or anyone else.
On the other hand, a lot of the comments such as that she didn't start marathoning 'til she was 33 - that actually is beneficial as she hasn't broken down her body training and racing from say 15-35. It's not a sport like tennis where you have to start as a child. Look at runners (and their injuries) who took that route (Rupp for instance).
Another observation is the "she has three kids" and is an "It consultant." Yeah well, most pro athletes in their 30's+ have kids. Rupp has kids as well. Who cares. LIkewise with a job. Plenty of US Olympic marathoners going back decades also held down day jobs. And have kids. Those aren't suspicious factors.
And lastly, maybe I'm wrong, but there's a lot of antipathy on this board for female runners and their accomplishments. For example, no one ever highlights that Rupp (and a thousand other marathoners) has kids as if it's a smoking gun that he/they must dope.
I don't condone doping and don't know whether she did or didn't. But let's say that she did... Well, she's still 45 and so on... Which is to say that she must be an incredible athlete at her baseline (w/o PEDs).