So in 2004 he was 33-34 yo. and you would not think that he would slow down after 6-7 years? I know there is a huge difference between your early 30's and your 40's. The recovery time is a real issue as the injuries.
socal cush wrote:
i'm not an expert on drugs or kevin castille, but there doesn't seem to be any circumstantial evidence of drugs--he's maintained almost the same fitness from 2004-2007 (sub-14/sub-29 in those years). that's far from impossible--i'm actually faster than i was throughout my thirties, and guys like tony young and jim sorenson were able to stay close to their times from when they were in their 20s. up to about 2 years ago i don't think there was anything physically stopping me from approaching (not reaching or surpassing) even my mile and especially my 5k prs from the 90s. the body (and mind) is a funny thing--i remember joking with tony that his masters times showed two things: he is a freak of nature; and, he should have run faster when he was younger. castille's times may be showing the same thing.
i suppose this is when i'd get suspicious: if i run a mile/5k pr at the age of 40+ (a la rj and others), somebody test me. if castille busts a 13:30 or something, yeah, i'll be skeptical. until then, and i never thought i'd say this, i'll just look forward to october when i'm out of his age group, and april when i get hopefully another crack at him...