By this logic, why don't we just do DNA tests instead of racing at any level? I age grade out from mid 80s to 90 in plenty of races. I have some genetic ability as a 14:19 open runner in college, and my age adjusted times are just about in that range. But that's because I augment whatever gifts I have with discipline, hard work and good planning. To automatically suggest it simply a matter of either PEDs or genetics denigrates the essence of the sport.
I don't know how someone who was world class is assumed to be on PEDs because he's running 16:50s in his early 50s. The only surprising thing about that is that a guy who was that good has decided to keep going to the hurt locker at all. Guys like that,guys who are performing well below their past abilities (on either an absolute or relative scale), deserve respect.
Smoove wrote:
By this logic, why don't we just do DNA tests instead of racing at any level? I age grade out from mid 80s to 90 in plenty of races. I have some genetic ability as a 14:19 open runner in college, and my age adjusted times are just about in that range. But that's because I augment whatever gifts I have with discipline, hard work and good planning. To automatically suggest it simply a matter of either PEDs or genetics denigrates the essence of the sport.
How old are you Smoove? Am I talking to a 40s or 50s guy? It is a matter of genetics when you have 50 year old + guys training & racing like they're in the 20s. Also, PEDs can be a component in the equation. I've had a few guys in my age group (late 50s) over the years tell me what they've been taking (generally T & HGH), and have remarked how their recovery and being able to train harder improved exponentially...who could have imagined? So, PEDs are out there with some middle-agers, but certainly not the majority (at least I don't think so).
I've been running & racing for 30 yrs realitively injury-free until my early 50s when everything fell apart - and I've always cross & strength trained regularly! The fast dudes in my age group are generally wispy thin, have a great biomechanics, and a very low injury history - an indication of very good genetics. Their genetics simply allow them do the high mileage, hard speedwork, LRs, etc., necessary to be fast....no surprises there. 😉
Good luck! It shouldn't be too hard to get back in shape quickly. I didn't run for almost 10 years but kept myself in good knick and within 6 months of running ran 15:54 as a 40 year old. Biggest problem is that you have gained weight which leads to all kinds of issues as far as running efficiency.
I had to give up running at 29 due to 3 foot surgeries that went very bad. I started off running on a hilly circuit of about 10.5k and as the weeks progressed i kept running faster and faster. No intervals just running how i felt. Which I never did enough of back in the day. I was a sub 30 10k 45:30 for 15k and 1:05 1/2 runner but always trained too hard without a coach.
Keep your training simple and do a little cross training if you can to drop the weight and if you aren't hit the gym and lift. Makes a big difference when you get old.
Cheers!
I'm 45. And I do worry about guys who are loading up on T. It's basically standard operating procedure for docs to ask about and offer to test for low T at physicals at this age.
So I get the concern generally and I get that 50 represents another drop off point which I'm yet to experience. But when you are talking about a guy who was truly world class and is now running high 16s, I don't think that's the kind of guy that we should be pointing at.
Instead, ask questions about the guys who weren't breaking 31:00 as open athletes and are somehow running 32:00 flat as masters runners. Those are the guys who make me scratch my head.
To OP,
I don't think age is everything...young runners are always hurt also.
We are to quick to blame age...when the problem is running is abusive.
I'm 41 never ran in college. I was a decent high schoool runner.
I've never gained a ton of weight so I can't relate to that aspect, but I can tell you at 41 it's pretty easy to still run really well I don't have any experience of what it would have been like to be college fit so I am not haunted by those memories. I think the only difference yes I don't have any of the speed I had that long ago but I think anything over five minute mile pace is way more sustainable that ever would've been at that age. Trying to do fast off always gets me hurt so just slowing it down a bit and being realistic I can still knock out some pretty damn good times. Again at only 41 I can't speak for the 50 and 60-year-old's taking PED's or some other silly stuff, I won't judge them because I haven't gotten there yet, but at 41 I don't see any need for any help the only limits are pretty much my own discipline and just staying healthy. The funny thing is that's the college kids I know are always hurt also so I think it's just running I don't think it's age!
Isymfs wrote:
Again at only 41 I can't speak for the 50 and 60-year-old's taking PED's or some other silly stuff, I won't judge them because I haven't gotten there yet, but at 41 I don't see any need for any help the only limits are pretty much my own discipline and just staying healthy
There's a growing trend of testosterone replacement therapy from these emerging Low-T centers cropping up everywhere. They heavily advertise sometimes using retired pro athletes for their push. Middle-agers from weekend gym rats to runners & cyclists are in on the act. A buddy of mine said the Low-T center he went to didn’t even check his levels! He felt the atmosphere was one of "if you've got the dough - you're in the show"...who would have thought? And some of the rich cats are going with expensive HGH from the anti-aging clinics. We live in a world of profit-driven pharmaceutical use...nothing new there.
Smoove wrote:
I am always amazed at how much of a difference some folks have between their college level abilities and their later-in-life abilities. I was talking to a college teammate who was a 3:50 1500 runner who managed to also run 15:1x, despite being an 800/1500 guy. At age 40, despite staying fit with cycling, he couldn't jog at 7:00 pace for any appreciable period of time and couldn't go under 19 for a cross country 5k at our alumni meet.
I honestly wonder how much of it is physical, and how much of it is mental, with the mental part being half a lack of willingness to hurt and half a self-defeating belief that since one is older, they must be slower.
It's probably 10X more physical than you think. I am part of the perfect experiment. I have an identical twin. Both Mid-40s. While he isn't a world beater, he runs in the low 17s and 18s for a 5K. I am 20lbs heavier and can't crack 20 min.
Don't get fooled...weight is everything when you get older, especially when you start getting into those mid-50s. Tendon/ligament degeneration starts to accelerate in your 50s and it's compounded by heavier bodyweight, which is not good for a high-impact actively like running...who would have thought? That's why your faster age-groupers and those with longevity are generally wispy thin and carry little body mass/bulk. A lot of them have similar body types to the late Ed Whitlock...nothing new there.
A beaten man wrote:
There's a growing trend of testosterone replacement therapy from these emerging Low-T centers cropping up everywhere. They heavily advertise sometimes using retired pro athletes for their push. Middle-agers from weekend gym rats to runners & cyclists are in on the act. A buddy of mine said the Low-T center he went to didn’t even check his levels! He felt the atmosphere was one of "if you've got the dough - you're in the show"...who would have thought? And some of the rich cats are going with expensive HGH from the anti-aging clinics. We live in a world of profit-driven pharmaceutical use...nothing new there.
Something similar for women. Treating menopause and "pre-menopause" with HGH and very small doses of testosterone. If you're in a certain income bracket, it's ridiculously easy to get it. Everytime I see a woman start running really fast in her mid to late 40s, I wonder.
Based on conversations with others, I think it's VERY easy for masters runners to rationalize doping. Some people tend to equate doping with EPO, and anything else is fine, especially if you're over 40.
Plus, it's easy to rationalize as "my doctor prescribed it for a health condition" - which is nice, except that a) a doctor's prescription doesn't exempt one from USADA rules (except via TUE), and b) the "health condition" is aging, and managing your body properly as you age is part of competing in the masters division. If you take stuff that makes you feel like you're 20 again, then you should be competing in the 20-24 age group.
Oh, don't get me wrong. I definitely think there is a physical component. When I was in my late 30s and not running a ton, I ran plenty of 17:30s in an effort to race myself back into shape when overweight. But once I got back down near my college weight, I was able to get into the 15: 20s and 15:30 Dash even in my early 40s. But I'm really talking about is those runners who aren't overweight, I have been training consistently, and orange injured. I think some people just think at some point that "I am too old to do this crap anymore."
afdafsdfsd wrote:
Smoove wrote:I am always amazed at how much of a difference some folks have between their college level abilities and their later-in-life abilities. I was talking to a college teammate who was a 3:50 1500 runner who managed to also run 15:1x, despite being an 800/1500 guy. At age 40, despite staying fit with cycling, he couldn't jog at 7:00 pace for any appreciable period of time and couldn't go under 19 for a cross country 5k at our alumni meet.
I honestly wonder how much of it is physical, and how much of it is mental, with the mental part being half a lack of willingness to hurt and half a self-defeating belief that since one is older, they must be slower.
It's probably 10X more physical than you think. I am part of the perfect experiment. I have an identical twin. Both Mid-40s. While he isn't a world beater, he runs in the low 17s and 18s for a 5K. I am 20lbs heavier and can't crack 20 min.
[quote]Smoove wrote:
But I'm really talking about is those runners who aren't overweight, I have been training consistently, and orange injured. I think some people just think at some point that "I am too old to do this crap anymore."
What the heck is "orange injured?" Any different from being blue or green injured? 🤔
Damnit. Siri botched my translation. But for he record, you clearly should have used "black and blue" as the colors when mocking my error.
Smoove wrote:
Oh, don't get me wrong. I definitely think there is a physical component. When I was in my late 30s and not running a ton, I ran plenty of 17:30s in an effort to race myself back into shape when overweight. But once I got back down near my college weight, I was able to get into the 15: 20s and 15:30 Dash even in my early 40s.
But I'm really talking about is those runners who aren't overweight, I have been training consistently, and orange injured. I think some people just think at some point that "I am too old to do this crap anymore."
afdafsdfsd wrote:It's probably 10X more physical than you think. I am part of the perfect experiment. I have an identical twin. Both Mid-40s. While he isn't a world beater, he runs in the low 17s and 18s for a 5K. I am 20lbs heavier and can't crack 20 min.
Read it again. I said it's more than you think. Plus most people in the 40s have other priorities at that age. I know running fast 5Ks aren't the top of the list. Personally, I think it's kinda sad when someone chooses 15:20 5Ks over their family
Those aren't mutually exclusive, as you know.
Last 7 days: 6-6-6-3-5-4-rest day.
Weight:173 high, 169 after a morning run before breakfast.
I plan on a few weeks of these 30-60 min runs.
To lose weight should I progress with intensity? Strides? Tempo? A longer run?
afdafsdfsd wrote:
[quote]Smoove wrote:
Personally, I think it's kinda sad when someone chooses 15:20 5Ks over their family
I've known several runners like that over the years, and sadly they ended up divorced.
Diet will be the primary factor in weight loss. Overall volume of running will be a very, very distant second. Intensity is a third place factor at best (lifting weights would be a bigger weight loss tool than the right running intensity).
Easier said than done when you get into your 50s. For many metabolism goes to crap and you literally have to starve yourself to lose a few precious pounds. Of course, there are those that have great genetics and can stay thin & lean without dieting well into their old age...who would have thought? And usually you can't get prescription weight loss drugs from your doctor unless you're a real tubby...go figure.
darkwave wrote:
A beaten man wrote:There's a growing trend of testosterone replacement therapy from these emerging Low-T centers cropping up everywhere. They heavily advertise sometimes using retired pro athletes for their push. Middle-agers from weekend gym rats to runners & cyclists are in on the act. A buddy of mine said the Low-T center he went to didn’t even check his levels! He felt the atmosphere was one of "if you've got the dough - you're in the show"...who would have thought? And some of the rich cats are going with expensive HGH from the anti-aging clinics. We live in a world of profit-driven pharmaceutical use...nothing new there.
Something similar for women. [B{Treating menopause and "pre-menopause" with HGHand very small doses of testosterone. If you're in a certain income bracket, it's ridiculously easy to get it. Everytime I see a woman start running really fast in her mid to late 40s, I wonder.
Based on conversations with others, I think it's VERY easy for masters runners to rationalize doping. Some people tend to equate doping with EPO, and anything else is fine, especially if you're over 40.
Plus, it's easy to rationalize as "my doctor prescribed it for a health condition" - which is nice, except that a) a doctor's prescription doesn't exempt one from USADA rules (except via TUE), and b) the "health condition" is aging, and managing your body properly as you age is part of competing in the masters division. If you take stuff that makes you feel like you're 20 again, then you should be competing in the 20-24 age group.
Not sure where you're from but it's not a general practice in pre or post menopausal. Estrogen/Progesterone/Testosterone in small amounts is very common in menopausal women, never heard of HGH used as a general hormonal replacement but then again I guess it would explain the women who look more masculine type than your normal fit type. Please don't chastise women who actually go through the "right" channels of healthcare or well being vs trying to get an edge/advantage to their agenda i.e. Competing/Racing.