Discuss.
Sub 25 minute 5 mile at age 50
66:42 Half Marathon at age 50.
As far as I can tell, he's in another league compared to other masters - no disrespect intended to them.
How fast could he have been at age 30? (I believe he didn't take up running until he was nearly 40 so there's no data from his "prime"). The mind boggles.
Damn impressive. BUT, Andres Espinosa ran 2:08:46 Marathon at 40... also, Rees has yet to set a WR for 10,000m for M50, which is 30:56.08 and the M50 Marathon WR is 2:19:29. Rees is absolutely great, but "best masters runner ever" you have got to be kidding yourself.
First Fan wrote:
Damn impressive. BUT, Andres Espinosa ran 2:08:46 Marathon at 40... also, Rees has yet to set a WR for 10,000m for M50, which is 30:56.08 and the M50 Marathon WR is 2:19:29. Rees is absolutely great, but "best masters runner ever" you have got to be kidding yourself.
Rees ran 30.37 for 10k on the roads when he was 50,
fellow Welshman Tecwyn Davies ran 2 seconds quicker in 1988.
Some people need to do more research before they make such comments!
Tecwyn davies did run quicker than Rees over 10k, but Rees is quicker over 10m and half marathon. Question for the experts - is Rees's sub 67 minute half marathon the highest age graded performance out there?
wellnow wrote:
First Fan wrote:Damn impressive. BUT, Andres Espinosa ran 2:08:46 Marathon at 40... also, Rees has yet to set a WR for 10,000m for M50, which is 30:56.08 and the M50 Marathon WR is 2:19:29. Rees is absolutely great, but "best masters runner ever" you have got to be kidding yourself.
Rees ran 30.37 for 10k on the roads when he was 50,
fellow Welshman Tecwyn Davies ran 2 seconds quicker in 1988.
Runner!!! wrote:
Some people need to do more research before they make such comments!
If you have evidence that I'm worng, then post it, rather than insipid "some people aren't as smart as me" crap. I used the word DISCUSS in my original posting. Do you have anything to contribute?
Lardy wrote:...is Rees's sub 67 minute half marathon the highest age graded performance out there?
It's good for 100.39. Ed Whitlock's 2:54:48 at age 73 is a hair "better" at 100.78.
It's really up to the philosophers to decide which run is actually "better," but at least the WMA 2006 age-grading tables giv a slight nod to Ed.
"Best" is always subjective, but I'd give that title to Jack Foster. Winning a silver medal at the Commonwealth Games when they were a major international event at 41 tops anything I can think of. That's no disrespect to Rees who is phenomenal.
Pete wrote:
Lardy wrote:...is Rees's sub 67 minute half marathon the highest age graded performance out there?It's good for 100.39. Ed Whitlock's 2:54:48 at age 73 is a hair "better" at 100.78.
It's really up to the philosophers to decide which run is actually "better," but at least the WMA 2006 age-grading tables giv a slight nod to Ed.
Thanks for the data. So - is there any way of "back extrapolating" these performances to see what they might have run in their prime? Also, just for fun, let's say Geb runs a 66 minute half at the age of 50. Could one reasonably conclude from that that Martin Rees could have been world record holder in the marathon if he was still 30? It's all pointless, I know - but interesting all the same.
Anyhow - hats off to old men who kick young guys asses - one of the most gratifying spectacles in sport is a cocky young guy being cut down to size!
Lardy wrote:
So - is there any way of "back extrapolating" these performances to see what they might have run in their prime? Also, just for fun, let's say Geb runs a 66 minute half at the age of 50. Could one reasonably conclude from that that Martin Rees could have been world record holder in the marathon if he was still 30?
no. also, just for fun, no.
Lardy wrote:
Pete wrote:It's good for 100.39. Ed Whitlock's 2:54:48 at age 73 is a hair "better" at 100.78.
It's really up to the philosophers to decide which run is actually "better," but at least the WMA 2006 age-grading tables giv a slight nod to Ed.
Thanks for the data. So - is there any way of "back extrapolating" these performances to see what they might have run in their prime?
Yes. You can "back-track" on the age-graded tables.
Put the percentage in the bottom box. Here 100.39
Select distance from top right - marathon
Select age - choose 28 as a an example for a senior man
Then put in marathon times until they age-grade as 100.39%
In this case it is 2:04:26
http://www.howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/wmalookup06.htmlThat was doing Martin Rees's percentage in marathon terms. You could do it the same for his half marathon or for Ed Whitlock's marathon. The mechanics are the same.
This philosophy is completely missing one simple point.
Martin didn't start running untill he was 40. That means he didn't have any of the stress and strain of a full running career behind him. Everyone who takes up running a bit later (if they have some natural talent) is due a good few early years but that doesn't mean they make bigger and bigger jumps the usual trend is that they level off around their top level and make smaller jumps depending on how they train.
Bekele was running incredibly well as a junior but hasn't made huge jumps. He has increased as one would expect from consistant training.
So Martin Ress is an incredible talent for a 50 year old but there is no way you can assume he could run world class standards in his earlier years.
To get their percentages for a 28 year old man
Half marathon 58.59 = 100.4% 59.00 = 100.37%
Marathon 2:03:57 = 100.78%
He is by far the best in his age group. The problem with age
grading is that it is subjective. How can you quantify
the effects of aging??
Monica Joyce, irish native, 49 female ran a 16:01 5K in 2008 which age-grades to 104.3%.
Do you have a link for that? That is an unbelievable time for a 49 year old female!
Ghost in Saudi,
, apply today.
Wengle wrote:
This philosophy is completely missing one simple point.
Martin didn't start running untill he was 40. That means he didn't have any of the stress and strain of a full running career behind him. Everyone who takes up running a bit later (if they have some natural talent) is due a good few early years but that doesn't mean they make bigger and bigger jumps the usual trend is that they level off around their top level and make smaller jumps depending on how they train.
Bekele was running incredibly well as a junior but hasn't made huge jumps. He has increased as one would expect from consistant training.
So Martin Ress is an incredible talent for a 50 year old but there is no way you can assume he could run world class standards in his earlier years.
I think Rees was about 37 when he re-started his running. He has had some joint problems in recent years, enough to make him retire from the sport for a while, so you can't say he hasn't had his share of stress and strain.
Rees training at age 50. Ghost, anything to add?
When he was in his early 40's he was running up to 100mpw with sessions such as 5x1000 in 2.55 and 200's in 29 seconds. He was running low 30's for 10k
He is 55 now and is running well again having run a World Masters Record 32.17 for 10k in 2008 and then bettering that recently with 32.02
Martin will be 56 next month.