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

but maybe he just has young tendons

I admit that I would have my questions too.

I already have questions about a local runner who runs at least 3, often 4, sometimes more marathons a year, all at levels that gets top 20 in the masters division when the runner competes at the big ones (Boston, Chicago, NYC). This runner has run pretty consistently since college and is running faster times than earlier in life. But the runner has also become more dedicated. There are other factors at play too; but the whole thing raises red flags for me.

I just wish it didn't.

The possibility and even likelihood that runners at all levels are using stuff is really problematic. When runner's world runs and article on some masters great success and their training, you really have no way of knowing if he or she did that training with aid. A more or less novice runner might be beating himself up against something that is unmanageable without drugs or hormones for the guy he is trying to learn from.

Smoove wrote:

I admit that I would have my questions too.

I already have questions about a local runner who runs at least 3, often 4, sometimes more marathons a year, all at levels that gets top 20 in the masters division when the runner competes at the big ones (Boston, Chicago, NYC). This runner has run pretty consistently since college and is running faster times than earlier in life. But the runner has also become more dedicated. There are other factors at play too; but the whole thing raises red flags for me.

I just wish it didn't.

Unfortunately, cheating permeates all facets of life. Masters distance running is no exception.

Skate wrote:

90% isn't as fast or competitive as you might think. I was right at 90% when I was younger, injury, not concentrating on the right distance etc. Maybe I was a potential 94% level runner, who knows.

Age 50 800 of 2:09.23 =90%. Good luck getting a medal at US masters nationals with that.

M50 800 Meter Run

=======================================================================

USATF: # 1:58.65

Name Age Team Finals Points

=======================================================================

1 906 Summay, Landen M50 Tsrc Earth D,Cincin 2:04.81 8

1:04.345 (1:04.345) 2:04.806 (1:00.461)

2 68 Bergeson, Dan M51 Unattached,Green Oa 2:11.59 6

1:06.640 (1:06.640) 2:11.586 (1:04.946)

3 374 Guild, Matthew M52 Green Mounta,Bellow 2:12.23 4

1:05.545 (1:05.545) 2:12.230 (1:06.685)

4 39 Bailey, David M53 Unattached,Davenpor 2:15.59 3

Like I said - Good luck. I anticipated this type of post would follow. Understand that every year there are US nationals indoor/Out that don't always draw the top talent in the US based on location, timing,etc. If you are running 2:11.59 and think you are going to get a silver at Outdoors, good luck to you. If the competition doesn't show up you might but 2:10-2:11 is not all that impressive sorry to say. Sac 2010 was more like 2:05-2:07.

U Asked For It wrote:

Skate wrote:

90% isn't as fast or competitive as you might think. I was right at 90% when I was younger, injury, not concentrating on the right distance etc. Maybe I was a potential 94% level runner, who knows.

Age 50 800 of 2:09.23 =90%. Good luck getting a medal at US masters nationals with that.

M50 800 Meter Run

=======================================================================

USATF: # 1:58.65

Name Age Team Finals Points

=======================================================================

1 906 Summay, Landen M50 Tsrc Earth D,Cincin 2:04.81 8

1:04.345 (1:04.345) 2:04.806 (1:00.461)

2 68 Bergeson, Dan M51 Unattached,Green Oa 2:11.59 6

1:06.640 (1:06.640) 2:11.586 (1:04.946)

3 374 Guild, Matthew M52 Green Mounta,Bellow 2:12.23 4

1:05.545 (1:05.545) 2:12.230 (1:06.685)

4 39 Bailey, David M53 Unattached,Davenpor 2:15.59 3

Ummmm, ever heard of Jordan Hasay?

Skate wrote:

Like I said - Good luck.

I anticipated this type of post would follow. Understand that every year there are US nationals indoor/Out that don't always draw the top talent in the US based on location, timing,etc.

If you are running 2:11.59 and think you are going to get a silver at Outdoors, good luck to you. If the competition doesn't show up you might but 2:10-2:11 is not all that impressive sorry to say.

Sac 2010 was more like 2:05-2:07.

Tough crowd. Just come and say that Age grade 95% or better or World Medalist or you suck and go home! Will that make you feel better?

95% age graded open 800 is 1:47 , Skate is correct.

Universal interest in the top guns is expected but what I find really interesting are the guys/gals who improve their age graded performances like CM. I am somewhat familiar with his methods like lots of xc skiing which might be one of the reasons he is doing so well even though he has been running hard for a long time.

The results I posted are more typical. Cherry-picking results like 2010 or 2002 or whatever notwithstanding, 90% will usually put you in the hunt for medals at M50 and above. Of course, championships are subject to weather, strategy, etc.. I managed a silver off only an 88% performance on a windy day when everyone else paid the price of an aggressive first lap and I picked off three guys in the final 80m. If you are consistently running above 85%, you should make an effort to show up if you are healthy and a good racer. I'll see you in Spokane '18 if such is the case ;)

Skate wrote:

Like I said - Good luck.

I anticipated this type of post would follow. Understand that every year there are US nationals indoor/Out that don't always draw the top talent in the US based on location, timing,etc.

If you are running 2:11.59 and think you are going to get a silver at Outdoors, good luck to you. If the competition doesn't show up you might but 2:10-2:11 is not all that impressive sorry to say.

Sac 2010 was more like 2:05-2:07.

U Asked For It wrote:

M50 800 Meter Run

=======================================================================

USATF: # 1:58.65

Name Age Team Finals Points

=======================================================================

1 906 Summay, Landen M50 Tsrc Earth D,Cincin 2:04.81 8

1:04.345 (1:04.345) 2:04.806 (1:00.461)

2 68 Bergeson, Dan M51 Unattached,Green Oa 2:11.59 6

1:06.640 (1:06.640) 2:11.586 (1:04.946)

3 374 Guild, Matthew M52 Green Mounta,Bellow 2:12.23 4

1:05.545 (1:05.545) 2:12.230 (1:06.685)

4 39 Bailey, David M53 Unattached,Davenpor 2:15.59 3

May I ask your current ballpark times? You are really a perfect example of the original poster's point.

In fact, the title of the thread should not refer to "masters"...more like seniors and above.

This is a cool topic because we are at a point where all the runners of the running boom...that are still running...are finally able to report their findings after decades of serious running. Many of us are in uncharted territory. Not a lot written about it.

Yes, often times races are tactical and weather has an affect on the performances. I'll be 50 at end of next year. Planning on indoor worlds in 2019 men's 800 and outdoors in US nationals in 2019. 2020 Toronto WMA champs. The key will be to work on 400 speed and move back up to 800. Best to have 56 or better 400 and have that speed reserve so 61 feels comfortable. Best of luck to you.

You are right. By masters, I'm really not referring to the guys in their early to mid 40s so much, but more so in the ensuing years, with a greater divergence from those who kept fresher legs.

i like the daddik measuring that is starting to place in this thread

Smoove wrote:

I say all this to make the point that it would be nice if the default were "Wow, I am impressed that this guy is putting in that kind of work at that age!" instead of "I wonder what that dude is taking." Unfortunately, the rampant spread of PEDs makes the latter the default, and reasonably so; and I have been guilty about speculation and gossip mongering myself.

Exactly...common sense & logic (which is lacking in today's society) would suggest something's amiss when a late 50ish/early 60ish runner is training like a 25 yr old elite. Even if they're a twig with good biomechanics; running consistent 80 mpw, one or two weekly killer speed sessions, weekly 20+ mile LRs, no injuries/downtime and running eye-opening super fast times can't be done naturally at that age 🤔.

As it's been mentioned here, low-T centers are everywhere. Retired pro-athletes are even in on the act aggressively advertising for some of these centers. This is a fast growing lucrative business targeting a wide spectrum of middle-age dudes. And if you're a loaded old guy, anti-aging clinics will prescribe high-octane HGH. Heck, some of these ageless wonders could be using a T/HGH combo, and even maybe more crap to the mix.

Where there's smoke, there's usually fire....

I have not seen any of these centers but then I don't get out that much .

My question is , are any of these centers FDA approved or are they making "proprietary " blends of T/GH ?

I'm probably in the minority...but I'd like to see "anything goes" after a certain age. The only stipulation is that you have to disclose what you are doing. That way we could have honest discussions about benefits, risks, health, performance etc..

Even with an "anything goes" approach, some people are going to keep quiet, to avoid giving away whatever it is that gives them their competitive edge.

I am sort of living proof of the first part there (bold) with some caveats but you might have me on the "super fast times" part. Especially if you count what some others ("Skate") that an age grade 88-90 is nothing.

Nevertheless, just got through an 8 week block of 70 mile weeks, with a few good workouts (long tempos with surges) and a couple of good races (10K at 90, 1/2 marathon at 88.5) without much cutback. I'm not a stud by any means and good runners would laugh at me when I was younger. Even when I ran sub 4:40 for the mile at 40. True. Ask malmo.

Somehow, which I can't totally explain, I've maintained 10K and half marathon endurance pretty well since my mid 40s (late 50s now). These have slowed a bit, but less than expected by the age grade charts/calculators My mile time has fallen off the chart, 5Ks have slowed by 30-40 seconds since turning 50. But 10K (4 sec a mile slower this year compared to age 50 and HM also about 4 sec/mile loss) have stayed remarkably strong. I did train more in my 20s, but not a whole lot and back then I would have considered a block like I just did as pretty good base work for 10K and the half. I don't do drugs, hormone therapy, and do not take supplements. I just like to run and race.