50+ Masters Training and Racing Open Forum

As opposed to vaping, obesity is going to kill thousands this month, as the politically incorrect guy points out....

https://youtu.be/Dm4TAdiEFn0

No, I understand the difference. Marijuana has been approved in some states for CBD products and recreational drug use. Both have been used taxed sales to plug budget holes in respective states. It is my understanding that the FDA has approved one marijuana derivative for medical use. I am skeptical that there are many positives for regular use of either. Fortunately I am not charged with making those decisions and this is just an opinion.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

No, I understand the difference. Marijuana has been approved in some states for CBD products and recreational drug use. Both have been used taxed sales to plug budget holes in respective states. It is my understanding that the FDA has approved one marijuana derivative for medical use. I am skeptical that there are many positives for regular use of either. Fortunately I am not charged with making those decisions and this is just an opinion.

Of course, the same could be said of alcohol. The difference is that it has been widely studied and we are well aware of its negative impacts. Yet that hasn’t stopped you from imbibing.

Terpene Tec wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

No, I understand the difference. Marijuana has been approved in some states for CBD products and recreational drug use. Both have been used taxed sales to plug budget holes in respective states. It is my understanding that the FDA has approved one marijuana derivative for medical use. I am skeptical that there are many positives for regular use of either. Fortunately I am not charged with making those decisions and this is just an opinion.

Of course, the same could be said of alcohol. The difference is that it has been widely studied and we are well aware of its negative impacts. Yet that hasn’t stopped you from imbibing.

Fair enough. I admit to consuming a five ounce glass of wine or one 12 ounce beer most evenings. The last time I was drunk was a birthday party for a friend in 2002. My lifetime consumption of alcohol post 21 is probably under three drinks a week. The evidence is pretty clear my consumption of alcohol is below moderate and may be more of a benefit than a hindrance. I don’t believe the same facts apply to the casual or regular user of marijuana. Again just an opinion.

Igy

Arthritic Old Runner wrote:

Running over 50 can be brutal for some but a pot of gold for others

I don’t know why, and I am sure I am the only one. However, this statement at the end of a post reminded me of this exchange from 1981’s “Excalibur”-

Merlin: You brought me back. Your love brought me back. Back to where you are now. In the land of dreams.

Arthur: Are you a dream, Merlin?

Merlin: [softly] A dream to some.

[Yelling]

Merlin: A nightmare to others.

As I read it, I even heard and envisioned it in Nicol Williamson’s voice yelling out the last part, “...but a pot of gold to others!” as AOR disappears in a puff of smoke.

At times, I feel that I could push myself to a 4:05-4:15 time. Then, my brain remembers the reality of your next sentence, and I try to be more realistic and prudent. The irrational exuberance is still there, and I see and feel the glimmer of my old body giving me tantalizing glimpses of it’s former glory. I guess I could push myself to get to something not too far north of 4 hours, but the ratio of risk to reward of completely busting with a serious injury or worse seems too high. The closer I get, I am starting to question even the plausibility, let alone the possibility of a time that strong for me.

Thanks for the supporting remarks and encouragement.

dhaaga wrote:

it's funny you mentioned "Breaking Away" as a favorite sports movie -- i loved that one. The scene in which the young cyclist is so excited about Italian superstars coming to town for a big race ("the Italians are coming!") and IIRC his friends don't really care came to mind for me a few years ago when Molly Huddle showed up for .us12k in Alexandria VA -- i told my students with great excitement that a superstart would be in our midst that weekend and..........nothing. I guess running famous is not the same as generally famous

....

Dave

I just realized I’m older than Paul Dooley the actor that played the dad in that movie was when it was filmed. To me that was always officially old. I don’t know if I am in better shape than he was, but I am holding on to the belief that I look better on a bike than he did at the end of the movie trying to get healthier.

Are you still in the Alexandria area? That is not too far from my neck of the woods.

Terpene Tec wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

No, I understand the difference. Marijuana has been approved in some states for CBD products and recreational drug use. Both have been used taxed sales to plug budget holes in respective states. It is my understanding that the FDA has approved one marijuana derivative for medical use. I am skeptical that there are many positives for regular use of either. Fortunately I am not charged with making those decisions and this is just an opinion.

Of course, the same could be said of alcohol. The difference is that it has been widely studied and we are well aware of its negative impacts. Yet that hasn’t stopped you from imbibing.

I apologize if I give the impression I am moralizing on the subject. On a personal level I am pretty much a Libertarian on such issues. Though I do think public policy should be made on facts rather than expediency. If I personally felt physically better after one drink, I would have more, but that is not the case. I have smoked marijuana twice and cigarettes a similar amount and cared for neither. Hard liquor the same. Just a personal choice, nothing more.

Igy

Are you equally understanding of those who go the TRT TUE route to improved perfomances?

Are you equally understanding of those who go the TRT TUE route to improved perfomances?

Please stop with the tiresome platitudes. Equipment, including shoes, is constantly evolving/improving in all sports, not just running. Example: compare the ski gear used by Olympians now to the past (re: leather boots, straight skis, etc..) - it's almost comical. Ditto all sports - nobody considers it cheating and nearly everyone is excited about technological improvements in their own respective sports.

PEDs are an entirely different discussion. Let's keep it that way.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Terpene Tec wrote:

Of course, the same could be said of alcohol. The difference is that it has been widely studied and we are well aware of its negative impacts. Yet that hasn’t stopped you from imbibing.

I apologize if I give the impression I am moralizing on the subject. On a personal level I am pretty much a Libertarian on such issues. Though I do think public policy should be made on facts rather than expediency. If I personally felt physically better after one drink, I would have more, but that is not the case. I have smoked marijuana twice and cigarettes a similar amount and cared for neither. Hard liquor the same. Just a personal choice, nothing more.

Igy

I’m not a big fan of marijuana, but the problem from a public policy debate is it has never really been studied. The U.S. government has banned all studies until fairly recently or they are still banned, IRC. My suspicion is that marijuana has more benefits and less problems than alcohol if they were both rigorously studied. Alcohol has a built in cultural society tolerance due to it being legal for most of US history. Also, I believe more marijuana usage would cut into the profits of the established alcohol status quo. I don’t know how to implement marijuana consumption equitably. It seems like the states that have legalized have had problems with an oligarchy situation. I would prefer people grow it themselves or small sellers like a farmer’s market or co-op situation.

I also think we don’t have the opioid epidemic if marijuana was a viable option in many cases. The pharmacy companies are another oligarchy. I used to work for a large medical center and had to deal with pharmaceutical reps. They are basically pimps and dealers under the veneer of legality and respectability. I would read some of the drug trial results for some of the products they were pushing and even in the trials they did for their own product the efficacy would be 16%, while the placebo drug would be 8%!

OK, one toke over the line. I’m in.....

Just Another Run of the Mill ex-D1 er wrote:

Equipment, including shoes, is constantly evolving/improving in all sports, not just running.

Please stop with the excuses and hair-splitting. Medicine is always advancing, too, as is the normalization and popularity of therapies. I can find a doctor who will legitimately prescribe me TRT and hGH as treatment. If there happens to be a performance benefit, and there definitely should be, well that wasn't my direct intent. I can file a TUE, compete and try for records, and never fail a PED test. It's not considered a PED in that circumstance, it's available to anyone who receives the diagnosis (few 50+ men would fail to) and can afford the treatment protocol. It's simply a hoop by a different name to jump through than seeking out a shoe studies show aids performance. It originates in the same shortcut-seeking mindset. You never answered the question anyway, do you not look askance at Masters competitors who cop to medically-prescribed TRT?

Old Fat n Stoopid wrote:

At times, I feel that I could push myself to a 4:05-4:15 time. Then, my brain remembers the reality ...

I've been yo-yoing between trying to accept non-runner status, and delusions of racing again. The first step towards the former would be to kick the LRC habit. Tends to fire up the competitive fires ...

Meanwhile, in the throes of the latter, I'm planning a trip to the running store tomorrow to try on a pair of low-drop, cushioned training shoes.

I have a $50 gift certificate that expires soon ... Age Group prize from a 15K last October. Hard to believe, 1:01:02, 6:33 pace -- 81.3% age-grade. Ha! What a difference 11 months can make ... :(

Re: Walking. Thanks for the tips, folks. I guess "walking" as training isn't just ambling among, kickin' down the cobblestones and feeling groovy? Dang, it sounds like hard work ...

Needles McDoperface wrote:

You never answered the question anyway, do you not look askance at Masters competitors who cop to medically-prescribed TRT?

This inquiry isn't on the offensive, understand that it doesn't exactly matter which way you answer. Many who ingest caffeine and B vitamins before and during races would draw the line at hormone enhancement, even though to many a rational mind it appears they are already down a slippery slope. It's not unusual for hypocrisy to exist in human minds, in fact it's extraordinarily normal. All these answers show is where personal bias falls to color an individual's interpretation of integrity. Despite the username I've chosen to use here, typically employed to skewer a certain AW drug cheat who is a mid here, I personally don't have a strong interest in nor problem with using either performance-enhancing shoes or performance-enhancing medicine, even if the latter would also confer general life enhancements. I'm not one who fights age, I don't wear skinny jeans, I don't dye my grey hair, I don't get botox injections, I don't go for hormones that would make me want to hump the sofa, and I don't much care what the clock reads at the finish nor how many who are arbitrarily within the same 10-year chronological age range as me in a given race finished ahead of or behind me. It's most fun to me to compete in a truly present sense, with all who happen to be around where I am in a race field. Numbers and statistics that are only seen after the event are of little interest. Anyway, this is digressing. I also don't give a rodent's rump if you or anyone else fuels the flame with prescription drugs, OTC drugs, carbon spring shoes, aerodynamic kit and body lube, or a costume. Do your thang, man. Just know that for all the logical contortions employed to justify grabbing for a known performance enhancement, someone else is probably doing the same for something else that you have chosen to damn.

Allen1959 wrote:

Old Fat n Stoopid wrote:

At times, I feel that I could push myself to a 4:05-4:15 time. Then, my brain remembers the reality ...

I've been yo-yoing between trying to accept non-runner status, and delusions of racing again. The first step towards the former would be to kick the LRC habit. Tends to fire up the competitive fires ...

Meanwhile, in the throes of the latter, I'm planning a trip to the running store tomorrow to try on a pair of low-drop, cushioned training shoes.

I have a $50 gift certificate that expires soon ... Age Group prize from a 15K last October. Hard to believe, 1:01:02, 6:33 pace -- 81.3% age-grade. Ha! What a difference 11 months can make ... :(

Re: Walking. Thanks for the tips, folks. I guess "walking" as training isn't just ambling among, kickin' down the cobblestones and feeling groovy? Dang, it sounds like hard work ...

Most of us 60 plus crew aren't gonna race fast. Last year I was limping about and struggling to finish 3 km runs. I am back running ok and just finishe'd a season of 20 races from April- August.

I was running 20 to 30 secs per km slower than I would've liked. Funny thing was I was finishing those races alongside many of my longtime rivals of similar age.

My program from January to July went mostly like this.

M. Long kayak. T. Long mountain bike. W. Long run. T. Faster kayak. F. Faster road bike. S. Faster run/race. S. Faster run/race. Often with another mountain bike ride on the weekend.

I was fit and could kayak, ride and run hard. I just couldn't do any of them fast.

I try to get in 5 or 6 kms of walking a day. I don't smash out those walks I just roll along about 6 kph.

I substitute steep hill hiking for my trail runs when I am too sore to run.

Last year in France I was lugging 81kg. During this racing season I was around 76kg. No dieting but just trying not too eat too stupidly.

I caught up with an old buddy this year. 63 and now a cyclist. He had lots of injuries related to being a builder. His last serious racing was in claiming the State 55-59 overall winter crown. The effort to claim that ended his serious running. Last year he started running park runs with his dog. Got down under 21 mins off one run per week and his cycling. Added a bit more running each week and ran 19 and also a 41 10 km.

But he is happy to mostly to just roll around in 20 something and occasionally go for another easy social run when it suits him.

We can still be runners without being highly focused dedicated athletes.

"It's simply a hoop by a different name to jump through than seeking out a shoe studies show aids performance. It originates in the same shortcut-seeking mindset."

Honestly, cut the faux drama already. Unless you run barefoot on all natural surfaces (re: no roads, tracks, or otherwise man-made) you have no point.

Me - I wear shoes, the best I can find that fit well - like everyone else I know and have ever seen. Gave up on Nike years ago and have zero interest in the VF's - but everyone else can have at it if they please.

"You never answered the question anyway, do you not look askance at Masters competitors who cop to medically-prescribed TRT?"

I was never asked that question to begin with, but PEDs/TUEs, and such are a separate topic not to be confused with shoes.

Allen1959 wrote:

Old Fat n Stoopid wrote:

At times, I feel that I could push myself to a 4:05-4:15 time. Then, my brain remembers the reality ...

I've been yo-yoing between trying to accept non-runner status, and delusions of racing again. The first step towards the former would be to kick the LRC habit. Tends to fire up the competitive fires ...

Meanwhile, in the throes of the latter, I'm planning a trip to the running store tomorrow to try on a pair of low-drop, cushioned training shoes.

I have a $50 gift certificate that expires soon ... Age Group prize from a 15K last October. Hard to believe, 1:01:02, 6:33 pace -- 81.3% age-grade. Ha! What a difference 11 months can make ... :(

Re: Walking. Thanks for the tips, folks. I guess "walking" as training isn't just ambling among, kickin' down the cobblestones and feeling groovy? Dang, it sounds like hard work ...

Sometimes delusions are necessary- they can keep you motivated at times and some times those delusions can turn into reality. Just as often- perhaps more often- those delusions can get you in trouble and it's hard to tell when to act on it or understand that it is just that.

I'm probably on a different side of this running thing than most on the forum. Just started last year and ran my first 5K at the age of 55 with no training at all. It was a 23 minute plus laugher and I felt physically bad for two days afterwards. Got the time down to 21 plus by the end of the year with little training and no idea how to run a race. This year did more training and finally got into the 19's which was a goal that I have to say I did not think would happen after the 1st race of the year which clocked in at nearly 22. Still working out how best to run the races.

Of course it's easy to drop time when you are first starting out- now the challenge will be to see if more can be dropped even as the body is decaying. I like to think so and have the delusion that I can get into the 18's. It's an interesting experiment and trying different training ideas out is also interesting and motivating.

As far as I can tell, Allen1959, someone who just bought a new pair of running shoes is not quite ready to hang them up- more delusions to chase.