60 yr old doper nailed

SoCal Pete wrote:

pistol peet wrote:

So, maybe you can explain to us why you (at 55) can still run the times of your 30's? And don't give us some crap like " I don't train like an idiot".

Well, of course, right off the bat, I didn't run much during my 30s. I ran for 4 months at age 34, just before my 35th birthday, managing a 3:52 1500 and a 14:49 5000. And then I started up again at age 39, although I was almost 41 before I was fit enough to race. In my 20s, I trained on and off (on a year, off a year to smoke, drink and drug--all this is pretty well established, both in interviews and in my second book), managing a 1:52 800, a 3:48 1500, and a 30:05 road 10K during my "on" periods. I also ran several XC course records during "on" periods.

At 55, I ran 15:42.13 for 5000, and 26:28 for 8K--not exactly the times of my youth ... or even of my 40s, when I ran 14:34 at age 46 and 14:45 at age 49.

As for how I run those times: Yes, I don't train like an idiot. Or race like one. I guess you think that mocking that answer ahead of time as "crap" somehow negates it. You're wrong. Not only did I write a column for 5 years for Running Times explaining correct training, but I then wrote an entire book--Build Your Running Body--on it, currently available in your local bookstore. When I'm able to string long periods of smart training together, I run well. When age or career gets in the way (I haven't trained for a couple months now, while I work on my next book), I don't.

I've also spent years--not figuratively, but literally--during the past 16 years doing rehab for the injuries one incurs as an older runner. I took almost an entire year off from age 53-1/2 to age 54-1/2 to rehab an Achilles insertion injury that had limited my training for 6 years (i.e., I took a year off from running, with up to 2 hours/day-5 days/week of rehab exercises), then spent another year getting back into good enough shape to run that 15:42. That time didn't just leap out of nowhere. It took two years to earn it--a time, by the way, almost a minute slower than what I ran in my late 40s--and then three weeks later, my hip went "ping," and my season was over.

Look, I get that you're just trying to get a rise out of me with your post. But whether you're a troll or a running peer who legitimately wonders how some old guys put up good times, I think it's important--in this age of unrepentant doping and shameless lying--to put out a legitimate formula: Genetic luck. Smart training.Smart racing. Perseverance. And a running community that's a joy to be a part of (I'm talking about my club, most of my running peers, and even a few of the posters on this website).

As for the actual topic of this thread: I'm thrilled the doper got caught. Catching an old doper doesn't inhibit catching younger ones. An unwillingness to deal honestly with the doping problem is what has kept the sport so dirty on the open level. I just hate seeing the dirt creep into the master's level.

P.S.--I don't blame ANYONE who secretly suspects this is a load of hooey, and that my actual training simply consists of making my ass a pin cushion for testosterone and EPO injections. Seriously, why should anybody trust anyone anymore in this sport? I don't. And maybe that's the saddest thing of all....

I am experienced wrote:

pistol peet wrote:

So, maybe you can explain to us why you (at 55) can still run the times of your 30's? And don't give us some crap like " I don't train like an idiot".

I'm a bit older and fair amount slower than SoCal Pete, but my picture is in his book. I think he's clean.

I ran ca. 32+/- for 10K for about a decade (25-34 to be more precise) but fell off rapidly after that with injury and work, and starting a family so by my late 30s I was only doing 35s. Got healthy for a couple years and got into 34 shape (and sub 4:40 mile) for a couple years as an entry level masters. Blew up for about 3-4 years with more injury but worked my way back at 46, and ran 36:50, 35:20, 35:30 in successive years. Eked out a 35:45 at 51. Was hanging in there with more injuries but comebacks through my 50s and stabilized at mid-high 36s through 58. Diagnosed pre-diabetic and high cholesterol last year, so rather than take statins I radically changed my diet. 35:43 this year (age grade 90, way way ahead of my best as a young runner). I've slowed, but at a slower rate than the charts or many of my peers.

No drugs. Good diet. Less stress in my life than in my late 30s, early 40s. And a training system that works for me.

I think drugs are out there in the masters ranks, but not as rampant as some ignorant fools here expound.

Heil USADA! wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

^This. All propaganda...

Absolutely. Here's the thing: USADA must continue to keep the doping busts coming to prove that they are effective and making strides against the war on drugs. They're either unable to catch the more sophisticated cheaters or when they catch them, they twist themselves into knots to accept BS stories about kissing and tainted meat so the elite stars can continue to compete and to bring in advertising dollars and international medals. (and break 800m records too!)

So if you let the stars off the hook, what can you do? Why bust the old folks of course! No one gives a crap about them, in fact masters athletics is a royal pain in the butt to USATF as it produces no advertising dollars, there is no public interest outside the friends and family (ever go to a masters meet? Maybe 3 dozen people in the stands!), and there's no future of the sport in people that are growing old! No prize money either. No endorsement contracts. They certainly are not future Olympians, LOL.

So give a 60 year old guy a 4 year suspension. Wow. Making an impact, USADA. Cleaning up our sport. In the meantime elite drug use is rampant in our sport - we just are unable to catch it. Like roaches scattering when the light is turned on.

Masters track wonders why its participation numbers are falling off the cliff while the National Senior Games is booming. It's drug testing! Who the hell wants to take your needed (but banned) meds and then risk being tested with public humiliation and finger-pointing? It's ridiculous.

SoCal Pete wrote:

pistol peet wrote:

So, maybe you can explain to us why you (at 55) can still run the times of your 30's? And don't give us some crap like " I don't train like an idiot".

Well, of course, right off the bat, I didn't run much during my 30s. I ran for 4 months at age 34, just before my 35th birthday, managing a 3:52 1500 and a 14:49 5000. And then I started up again at age 39, although I was almost 41 before I was fit enough to race. In my 20s, I trained on and off (on a year, off a year to smoke, drink and drug--all this is pretty well established, both in interviews and in my second book), managing a 1:52 800, a 3:48 1500, and a 30:05 road 10K during my "on" periods. I also ran several XC course records during "on" periods.

At 55, I ran 15:42.13 for 5000, and 26:28 for 8K--not exactly the times of my youth ... or even of my 40s, when I ran 14:34 at age 46 and 14:45 at age 49.

As for how I run those times: Yes, I don't train like an idiot. Or race like one. I guess you think that mocking that answer ahead of time as "crap" somehow negates it. You're wrong. Not only did I write a column for 5 years for Running Times explaining correct training, but I then wrote an entire book--Build Your Running Body--on it, currently available in your local bookstore. When I'm able to string long periods of smart training together, I run well. When age or career gets in the way (I haven't trained for a couple months now, while I work on my next book), I don't.

I've also spent years--not figuratively, but literally--during the past 16 years doing rehab for the injuries one incurs as an older runner. I took almost an entire year off from age 53-1/2 to age 54-1/2 to rehab an Achilles insertion injury that had limited my training for 6 years (i.e., I took a year off from running, with up to 2 hours/day-5 days/week of rehab exercises), then spent another year getting back into good enough shape to run that 15:42. That time didn't just leap out of nowhere. It took two years to earn it--a time, by the way, almost a minute slower than what I ran in my late 40s--and then three weeks later, my hip went "ping," and my season was over.

Look, I get that you're just trying to get a rise out of me with your post. But whether you're a troll or a running peer who legitimately wonders how some old guys put up good times, I think it's important--in this age of unrepentant doping and shameless lying--to put out a legitimate formula: Genetic luck. Smart training.Smart racing. Perseverance. And a running community that's a joy to be a part of (I'm talking about my club, most of my running peers, and even a few of the posters on this website).

As for the actual topic of this thread: I'm thrilled the doper got caught. Catching an old doper doesn't inhibit catching younger ones. An unwillingness to deal honestly with the doping problem is what has kept the sport so dirty on the open level. I just hate seeing the dirt creep into the master's level.

P.S.--I don't blame ANYONE who secretly suspects this is a load of hooey, and that my actual training simply consists of making my ass a pin cushion for testosterone and EPO injections. Seriously, why should anybody trust anyone anymore in this sport? I don't. And maybe that's the saddest thing of all....

victimless crime? wrote:

SoCal Pete wrote:

Well, of course, right off the bat, I didn't run much during my 30s. I ran for 4 months at age 34, just before my 35th birthday, managing a 3:52 1500 and a 14:49 5000. And then I started up again at age 39, although I was almost 41 before I was fit enough to race. In my 20s, I trained on and off (on a year, off a year to smoke, drink and drug--all this is pretty well established, both in interviews and in my second book), managing a 1:52 800, a 3:48 1500, and a 30:05 road 10K during my "on" periods. I also ran several XC course records during "on" periods.

At 55, I ran 15:42.13 for 5000, and 26:28 for 8K--not exactly the times of my youth ... or even of my 40s, when I ran 14:34 at age 46 and 14:45 at age 49.

As for how I run those times: Yes, I don't train like an idiot. Or race like one. I guess you think that mocking that answer ahead of time as "crap" somehow negates it. You're wrong. Not only did I write a column for 5 years for Running Times explaining correct training, but I then wrote an entire book--Build Your Running Body--on it, currently available in your local bookstore. When I'm able to string long periods of smart training together, I run well. When age or career gets in the way (I haven't trained for a couple months now, while I work on my next book), I don't.

I've also spent years--not figuratively, but literally--during the past 16 years doing rehab for the injuries one incurs as an older runner. I took almost an entire year off from age 53-1/2 to age 54-1/2 to rehab an Achilles insertion injury that had limited my training for 6 years (i.e., I took a year off from running, with up to 2 hours/day-5 days/week of rehab exercises), then spent another year getting back into good enough shape to run that 15:42. That time didn't just leap out of nowhere. It took two years to earn it--a time, by the way, almost a minute slower than what I ran in my late 40s--and then three weeks later, my hip went "ping," and my season was over.

Look, I get that you're just trying to get a rise out of me with your post. But whether you're a troll or a running peer who legitimately wonders how some old guys put up good times, I think it's important--in this age of unrepentant doping and shameless lying--to put out a legitimate formula: Genetic luck. Smart training.Smart racing. Perseverance. And a running community that's a joy to be a part of (I'm talking about my club, most of my running peers, and even a few of the posters on this website).

As for the actual topic of this thread: I'm thrilled the doper got caught. Catching an old doper doesn't inhibit catching younger ones. An unwillingness to deal honestly with the doping problem is what has kept the sport so dirty on the open level. I just hate seeing the dirt creep into the master's level.

P.S.--I don't blame ANYONE who secretly suspects this is a load of hooey, and that my actual training simply consists of making my ass a pin cushion for testosterone and EPO injections. Seriously, why should anybody trust anyone anymore in this sport? I don't. And maybe that's the saddest thing of all....

So you have some ingenious training methods that only YOU could come up with and discover---despite over a century of the sport. BTY, thanks for listing your best times at age 46 and 49 (14:34, 14:45); coming very near to the times of your 20's and 30's. You have, previously, published your own list of criteria for when you think masters runners are cheating/doping. I think you just implicated yourself.