This is why you won't be a competitive masters guy if you run heavy miles all your life

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

I am a life long runner (66). At times a high mileage as well as high intensity runner. From my experience weight gain is the greatest performance inhibitor. To increase longevity rest, weight training, core training, and cross training become areas worth emphasizing. That said, we are all an experiment of one.

Most definitely weight gain can be huge performance inhibitor as you get into your 50s & 60s. When you're younger you get away with a little bit bigger body as the tendons & ligaments haven't had time to degenerate yet. But as you get into those ugly 50s, degenerative issues become a problem for many and any excess weight just compounds it.

And small, lightweight bodies are the rule, rather than the exception, with the 55+ demographics running faster marathon times. Boston's police commissioner, an avid marathoner, is nicknamed "mouse"... not a big runner obviously:

I don't know if my own experience offers any perspective on this. I was what I'd call sub-competitive as an early 20-something: not good enough to make college XC, certainly. Best times by 25 were 5:02/17:27/35:49/ and a marathon in 2:53:30.

At 26 I quit racing cold turkey, and for the next 19 years I basically just jogged 3-4 times a week. Never ran more than an hour. Never ran a formal workout.

At 45, in 2003, I raced again for the first time in 19 years (a 10K more than 10 minutes slower than previous 10K), found this website, caught the bug, and began to train.

My times got faster from age 45 through 51. I lowered that 10K from 47:25 to 40:42. Best 5K was 19:28. HM in 1:30:11. BQ at 51 was 3:30:59.

In age-graded terms, the 5K/10K times were faster than my mid-20s times.

Injuries began soon after that, but I had six great years in which the next PR was always within reach; I felt fresh, fit, powerful, and came back pretty quickly from injuries.

I'm quite sure I wouldn't have had the same experience of my late 40s and early 50s if I'd been training straight through that 19-year period.

I suspect there are others in this age range who had similar latency periods, maybe gained some weight, then got hungry to run and train. Certainly my mini-renaissance was helped by this website and by my nonstop consumption of books on how to train.

For what it's worth, the ONE book that put me over the top and that I've just gone back to is Brad Hudson's and Matt Fitzgerald's RUN FASTER:

https://www.amazon.com/Run-Faster-5K-Marathon-Coach/dp/0767928229/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1493293598&sr=8-1&keywords=brad+hudson+training

getting there wrote:

I'd prefer to run fast while I still can than to save something for when I can't.

However, it's worth discussing the degree to which hard training over many years degrades your health and quality of life at 50+ years old.

Totally agree. I trained and raced hard from age 13 through my mid thirties before a major injury took me out of the game for several years. Now back to racing as a master, although not surprisingly, a lot slower than before the injury.

The guys who beat me in my age group now were not running seriously in their 20s and 30s. I would love to hang with them today, but I got so much more out of myself when I was young, and I wouldn't trade that for a minute off my 5k now.

It wasn't like I was going to decide at 25, hey, let's save it for when I'm a master.

My thought is, maybe more people can have their cake and eat it to, so to speak, ie. not perform any worse in youth yet perform at their best throughout life with an altered training strategy. I was just thinking about Lagat. Doesn't he take a full month off every year, or season, or something like that?

Just wow... wrote:

It's not burn out. Rather, it's that the natural pliability, springiness and recoil in your tendons and ligaments (Achilles, plantar fascia, etc.) will be shot from all the cumulative usage. You simply lose your bounce. I've got no data to back it up, but that's my hypothesis. Studies have been done on the Achilles tendons of diabetics vs. normal controls and found changes in the molecular structure of the collagen cross-links to explain such changes in diabetics, which is thought to contribute to their high rate of foot morbidity, leading to conditions like "Charcot foot" (a spontaneous collapse of the foot structure), and forefoot plantar ulcers, although the other major contributor in these situations is peripheral neuropathy.

I'm late 30s now, and after just running to stay in shape for the last 15 years (probably ~4 times a week, with occasional longer "no running" streaks), I just went to ultra minimalist running shoes after taking the winter off.

I've been a heal striker my entire career. It's amazing how much minimalist shoes force you to run on your midfoot/toes, and avoid pavement at all costs (it feels terrible...which it is, of course). If you have access to dirt and grass trails, give it a shot and feel what it's like for your legs and feet to work as designed. Just be careful and take days off if your calves feel strained during the first month.

He is also a low mileage guy.

To large extent masters are letting people try again. There are numerous pros that said they did what they wanted and don't see the point of running as a masters. Compare that to a guy like Trautmann who missed his prime and had a bit of a second chance as a master.

Real World Analysis wrote:

EdWhitlock luvah wrote:

Whitlock ran so consistently through his entire life that the majority of his masters records punched into an age grade calculator come out to his marathon PR as a young stud. The guy literally stayed at the top of his game his whole life.

He was very lean, had great biomechanics & a low injury history. Those factors alone will allow an aging runner to train consistently with high mileage & speed work, and consequently remain competitive. Good genetics + the discipline to train = good success for many older runners...nothing new there.

Not really true. Whitlock had several stretches of a year off and 20 years between 20 and 40. Guys on here think all of their fitness will evaporate after a week off.

can people have their cake and eat it to ?

Depends on how much god given cake you have, how fast you are eating it and luck

Exception proves the rule wrote:

Session I ran last night here in the UK....

The group was doing 3 by 600m with 15 mins rest and cant handle more that 6/7 mins of rest or 2 laps jog before i get bored, so.....

600 (89.5) 2 mins rec 4 by 200 in 29s with 200 jog

7 mins rec

600 (89.6) 2 mins rec 4 by 200 in 27/28 with 200 jog

7 mins rec

600 (83.3)

Age 45

No, you did not. Either you are trolling, your watch was broken or the track was short.

83.3 on the 600mt is well under world record pace for the 800 mt for 45+ (1:54:18)

dasasdfa wrote:

To large extent masters are letting people try again. There are numerous pros that said they did what they wanted and don't see the point of running as a masters. Compare that to a guy like Trautmann who missed his prime and had a bit of a second chance as a master.

But it's only for self satisfaction. There's very little value attached to being a very good masters runner. The money is there for those in their prime, not after. Of course there are some individuals that can profit a bit of it, but those rare.

This is one of the things that bother's me with this thread. It's basically saying don't try so hard when your in your prime.

I have a theory too wrote:

dasasdfa wrote:

To large extent masters are letting people try again. There are numerous pros that said they did what they wanted and don't see the point of running as a masters. Compare that to a guy like Trautmann who missed his prime and had a bit of a second chance as a master.

But it's only for self satisfaction. There's very little value attached to being a very good masters runner. The money is there for those in their prime, not after. Of course there are some individuals that can profit a bit of it, but those rare.

This is one of the things that bother's me with this thread. It's basically saying don't try so hard when your in your prime.

What bothers me is you indiscriminately adding apostrophes where they don't belong.

And your attitude that making money is the only good reason to race seriously. If I had that attitude, I'd have never become a runner.

I did not run much in my 20s and got back into running in my early 30s. I did 16 marathons with my best times coming just after turning 40. I had about 15 years of running 50-70 mpw with segments of 70-90 mpw when training for marathons. It was very difficult getting back into running in my early thirties. The first few years were full of injuries, including a back high hamstring problem that stayed with me for almost a decade. I wonder whether I would have done better building my running through college and my early 20s when my body was better able to recover and handle the adjustment to running high miles.

I also have regrets about not running that much when I was younger. Running as a master has generally been enjoyable, but once you are closer to 50 than 40 it just becomes a fight to keep from sliding back in the pack at races. It was a lot more fun going from a 3:00 marathon to 2:45 than it has been to try to eek out one more sub 3. Saving yourself for your masters years is kind of like never going to parties and bars when you are in your 20s so you can save your money and work extra hours. When you hit your 40s and have lots of money to go to bars and parties, it isn't as much fun as it was when you were in your 20s. I would have rather gone for it when I was young and end up with dead legs when I hit 40.

Bob Sacamano the fake one wrote:

What bothers me is you indiscriminately adding apostrophes where they don't belong.

Awe, poor bobby's hert feewings.

Impressive! I ran 1:57.5 and your first set would have been my entire training session when young.

Keep up to date fella!!

M45 World Best is now 1.52.96 and that was run indoors!!

http://www.thepowerof10.info/results/results.aspx?meetingid=187751&event=800&venue=Sheffield&date=11-Feb-17

What's competitive for different ages?

What are heavy miles--like lifetime miles? Or miles per week for X number of years?

Exception proves the rule wrote:

Keep up to date fella!!

M45 World Best is now 1.52.96 and that was run indoors!!

http://www.thepowerof10.info/results/results.aspx?meetingid=187751&event=800&venue=Sheffield&date=11-Feb-17

Ok, either you are delusional, or you are Anthony Whiteman, in the best shape of your life, running in practice within 2 seconds of your personal best on the 600mt of 5 years ago, when you were 40 and run 1:48 on the 800mt.

Some advice wrote:

Styu wrote:

What are you guys talking about? He ran a little as a young man but then stopped completely until he was already over 40. That's pretty much the opposite of training as hard as you can in your youthful prime.

Except that he ran a ton of miles from age 40 to 85. Wouldn't the OPs premise suggest that he'd lose a ton of performance from 45 years of serious mileage? That's like saying someone who did HS XC/Track and maintained strong age-group performances through age 60 was able to do so because they kept their legs fresh during middle school.

I think he started the heavy mileage much, much later. Maybe someone can confirm.

How many top masters guys are dabbling with testosterone prescriptions? There's a local guy where I'm from who looks like he's definitely on something. Ran some age graded times in the 90th percentile this winter.

I wonder what king of factor Low-T plays in master performances. Of course we all know no one has low T on letsrun.