Let's say you can wear the best super shoes, take as much EPO as you want, train at high altitude, take steroids, whatever you want.
After ~45 everyone becomes very slow and the decline is very rapid year over year as muscle mass and bone density falls off a cliff. So, I am thinking it is humanly impossible for anyone to go sub-4 at age 50.
Let's say you can wear the best super shoes, take as much EPO as you want, train at high altitude, take steroids, whatever you want.
After ~45 everyone becomes very slow and the decline is very rapid year over year as muscle mass and bone density falls off a cliff. So, I am thinking it is humanly impossible for anyone to go sub-4 at age 50.
Possible or nah in your opinion?
Leave out the EPO part and ask the question.
Add in- with pacers the whole way.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
agreed, its a valid question without steroids or epo. its unfortunately just a thought experiment, because nobody will ever have the incentive to dedicate the years aged 40-50 to staying at the sharp edge of the requirement, much less overcoming the list of age related physiological factors that mandate working even harder to overcome.
i would say an athlete that was fast at a young age and retained that associated fitness through middle age without training or competing as an elite athlete, and then began a focused attempt at elite training from age 35 to 50, could accomplish that task.
Let's say you can wear the best super shoes, take as much EPO as you want, train at high altitude, take steroids, whatever you want.
After ~45 everyone becomes very slow and the decline is very rapid year over year as muscle mass and bone density falls off a cliff. So, I am thinking it is humanly impossible for anyone to go sub-4 at age 50.
Possible or nah in your opinion?
Leave out the EPO part and ask the question.
Add in- with pacers the whole way.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
I'm 49 now. Will let you know.
I'm turning 50 in less than 6 weeks, and considered making the same statement!
Bernard Lagat would need to answer this question. I know the answers are a search result away, but I'm just going to say I recall he ran something like 354 mile as 40+ didn't he? And also a 13:06 5000 in the Olympics, over 40. If there was a human that could do it in the next handful of years, he's the answer.
But yea, I think someone will do it some day, and it's going to be unlocked by the genetic modifications and treatments that will happen. Humans will solve aging by a great extent soon and it will first be noticed by super human longevity in sports. Doping with it before it becomes available more generally.
Now that the sub 4 over 40 has happend a couple times, it will be natural for some person some time to think that they have a shot at the next barrier. And maybe they'll fall short. But the next person will use that marker and exceed it. I think physiologically, it is within certain humans in certain circumstances. It's not the same as asking for a sub 2 hour marathon from a natural born female.
In order to race sub-4 mile, one needs to be a legit sub-52 400m person. Just know, master world record for 50-something male is 50.xx 400m. Let's see a retired elite 800m to 5000m runner sprint f.a.t. sub-52 400m first.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
agreed, its a valid question without steroids or epo. its unfortunately just a thought experiment, because nobody will ever have the incentive to dedicate the years aged 40-50 to staying at the sharp edge of the requirement, much less overcoming the list of age related physiological factors that mandate working even harder to overcome.
i would say an athlete that was fast at a young age and retained that associated fitness through middle age without training or competing as an elite athlete, and then began a focused attempt at elite training from age 35 to 50, could accomplish that task.
Really? There seems to be no dearth of losers on this site who seem to have plenty of incentive to run the crap out of their life because they have little else meaningful to do with their time.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
agreed, its a valid question without steroids or epo. its unfortunately just a thought experiment, because nobody will ever have the incentive to dedicate the years aged 40-50 to staying at the sharp edge of the requirement, much less overcoming the list of age related physiological factors that mandate working even harder to overcome.
i would say an athlete that was fast at a young age and retained that associated fitness through middle age without training or competing as an elite athlete, and then began a focused attempt at elite training from age 35 to 50, could accomplish that task.
Odd timing for this thread because thirty years ago yesterday (Feb 20, 1994), Eamonn Coghlan became the first person over forty to do it.
It could make for a serious, interesting conversation.
agreed, its a valid question without steroids or epo. its unfortunately just a thought experiment, because nobody will ever have the incentive to dedicate the years aged 40-50 to staying at the sharp edge of the requirement, much less overcoming the list of age related physiological factors that mandate working even harder to overcome.
i would say an athlete that was fast at a young age and retained that associated fitness through middle age without training or competing as an elite athlete, and then began a focused attempt at elite training from age 35 to 50, could accomplish that task.
Well Bernard Lagat was probably on the same stuff, and training just as hard, when he ran 3:54 at 40 as he was when he ran 3:47 at 25.
If Bernard Lagat had kept going, there is no way even he could have broken 4 minutes at 50. Tony Wightman could 'only' manage 4:10 at 45 (still the VM45 WR).
I'm turning 50 in less than 6 weeks, and considered making the same statement!
Bernard Lagat would need to answer this question. I know the answers are a search result away, but I'm just going to say I recall he ran something like 354 mile as 40+ didn't he? And also a 13:06 5000 in the Olympics, over 40. If there was a human that could do it in the next handful of years, he's the answer.
But yea, I think someone will do it some day, and it's going to be unlocked by the genetic modifications and treatments that will happen. Humans will solve aging by a great extent soon and it will first be noticed by super human longevity in sports. Doping with it before it becomes available more generally.
Now that the sub 4 over 40 has happend a couple times, it will be natural for some person some time to think that they have a shot at the next barrier. And maybe they'll fall short. But the next person will use that marker and exceed it. I think physiologically, it is within certain humans in certain circumstances. It's not the same as asking for a sub 2 hour marathon from a natural born female.
I believe that physically, it can be done, but on a practical basis, it won’t happen. I can’t see someone putting that much effort for 10+ years just to be the answer to a trivia question. Elites don’t train seriously until age 50 so there would be no context as well.
agreed, its a valid question without steroids or epo. its unfortunately just a thought experiment, because nobody will ever have the incentive to dedicate the years aged 40-50 to staying at the sharp edge of the requirement, much less overcoming the list of age related physiological factors that mandate working even harder to overcome.
i would say an athlete that was fast at a young age and retained that associated fitness through middle age without training or competing as an elite athlete, and then began a focused attempt at elite training from age 35 to 50, could accomplish that task.
Well Bernard Lagat was probably on the same stuff, and training just as hard, when he ran 3:54 at 40 as he was when he ran 3:47 at 25.
If Bernard Lagat had kept going, there is no way even he could have broken 4 minutes at 50. Tony Wightman could 'only' manage 4:10 at 45 (still the VM45 WR).
His 1500m was a bit faster. Throw in some shoes and Lagat being like 6s faster and breaking 4 at 45 is on the edge of possible. But people are losing almost 10/s every 5 years. Running sub 4 at 50 feels like it is still a long way off. let them load up on test, high, and epo and all bets are off…
In order to race sub-4 mile, one needs to be a legit sub-52 400m person. Just know, master world record for 50-something male is 50.xx 400m. Let's see a retired elite 800m to 5000m runner sprint f.a.t. sub-52 400m first.
The problem is doing the training required without getting injured. Racing/training after 40 is just a balance of hard sessions and the elliptical until you get into the mindset of it being ok to bank off or change a workout.
His 1500m was a bit faster. Throw in some shoes and Lagat being like 6s faster and breaking 4 at 45 is on the edge of possible. But people are losing almost 10/s every 5 years. Running sub 4 at 50 feels like it is still a long way off. let them load up on test, high, and epo and all bets are off…
I agree with this. Maybe Lagat could break 4 at 45, but it is very unlikely he could do it at 50. Between 45 and 50 the drop in speed is substantial. The current mile WR for 50-54 is 9 seconds slower than that of 45-49. Even if the assume that Lagat could lose only 5 seconds, it will still be out of reach.