Kevin Castille set a M 45-49 age group world record in the 10K on the roads today

And I trust hat you have done so in a clean way, but you have to recognize that you are an outlier, right?

And you'll notice that I've not accused any particular person of anything specific. Accusations that can be tied to someone, without a factual basis for those accusations, is an act of internet cowardice. But I have no issues with saying that certain patterns will raise red flags for me without tying them to a particular runner. To ignore people getting better than their talent would have suggested possible, and to see those same guys get more muscular and leaner over time, would be burying your head in the sand. Having doubts and questions is okay.

Coyote Montane wrote:

Smoove wrote:

I hear you, but I am not questioning these guys because they are faster than me; I am questioning them because they are relatively faster than their younger selves by a considerable amount, when their younger selves were in a prime position to excel.

I've gotten "relatively faster" by maintaining the same speed for 12-15 years and have done that by dialing into my training and over the past for the past year and a half really improving nutrition.

BS

If you sucked as a 31 year old and ran 36:00 for 10K but maintained the same speed for 15 years, you'd be winning your age group in all local races as a 46 year old. Is that the case? Tell us more about it.

I think this is true. Even though I'm only 45, I occasionally check out the 50+ board to see what's going on and Coyote is a well known regular there. Pretty sure all of those guys know his actual identity and that he wouldn't get away with making that up.

Smoove wrote:

I think this is true. Even though I'm only 45, I occasionally check out the 50+ board to see what's going on and Coyote is a well known regular there. Pretty sure all of those guys know his actual identity and that he wouldn't get away with making that up.

Yeah...he's a big shot over on that 50+ board, along with several other super fast cats.

I can use myself as an example. I trained my butt off in college, was injured frequently, but had many months of good training in there, 80-90 mile weeks. But no matter what I did, I couldn't get under 15 min for 5000m. I killed myself and was tougher than many teammates who could go under 15 min on half the mileage. I even kept training for years after college but still plateaued at 15:10. I started training seriously again in my 40's, got up to 60-65 miles a week and some good fartleks and mile repeats and was able to break 16 min for 5000m at age 46. I never doped or anything like that. I weighed about 15 lbs more than I did in college too.

So why could I not go faster when young, despite tens of thousands of miles of training and trying, but could still run in the 15's for 5000m as an old fart? I dunno. Maybe the fire was still there from failure in my youth.

hashtagselfie wrote:

Most of these people are also pretty active on social media, posting all sorts of crap about their hobby. Those are the same ones that are walking up to the clinic for their TRT treatment. Vanity, it's amazing.

And you are the exact athlete about whom I would have questions.

Note: I would have questions. I would NOT anonymously smear you on a public message board, but would wonder how this played out.

Upon asking those questions, I'd hear about a guy who was chronically injured in college and didn't put together stretches of good training for longer than months at a time but who later was able to put together a longer stint of consistent training. That would provide some explanation.

But, unfortunately, with the state of the sport, I expect that many people do actually have questions about athletes with your performance profile, even if some such athletes are clean. And that is part of why the cheating is so insidious: the anomalies like you and Coyote who are clean end up being viewed through a lens of skepticism.

And i hope my response doesn't offend you. I'm just trying to be honest about the kind of profiles that raise questions for me. You have to have a thick skin on this board - anonymous posters like "too hot" have questioned whether my performances were legit as well. None of that bothers me because I know I'm clean and close scrutiny would bear that out. In fact, my approach has the goal of trying to find good explanations for good performances.

But if we are going to have an honest concersation about doping in masters running, we have to be asking these questions.

Pond Scum wrote:

Coyote Montane wrote:

I've gotten "relatively faster" by maintaining the same speed for 12-15 years and have done that by dialing into my training and over the past for the past year and a half really improving nutrition.

BS

If you sucked as a 31 year old and ran 36:00 for 10K but maintained the same speed for 15 years, you'd be winning your age group in all local races as a 46 year old. Is that the case? Tell us more about it.

"relatively" do you know what that means? Absolutely, is what you describe. Relatively is age graded.

Here's an explanation of relative times, age graded I did low 80 in college (using old scores), mid 80s post college and masters to about about 47 or 48 (as long as I was healthy, slower if injured--you know that happens sometimes to people), high 80s from 50 into late 50s, and the past year or so been running up to low 90s. That's in relative terms.

As an open runner my 10K PR was 31:45. And for absolute comparisons so it's more understandable, in my late 40s and early 50s I was running 35-36 for 10K, and have been able to maintain that into my late 50s. Hope that make more sense now. I know I know a 36 sucks but it's the best I can do.

I said 36 sucks for a 31 year old - I should have said 36 is not a great time. 36 is an awesome time for someone over 55 (the big slide). You posted that you maintained the SAME speed over 12-15 years. Sounds like it was a misunderstanding. Happy Turkey Trots to all.

And ya’ll know why Smoove has posted like 20 times on this thread right? Because he’s insecure. He likes to boast about being one of the top masters runners in the country and he’s not even in the same league as Castille.

Charlie wrote:

Cheaters have little or low conscientiousness. My conscientiousness is really high so achieving a racing goal using illegal or even questionable methods would ring hollow. I would be really worried and ashamed of myself.

Age group dopers/cheaters tarnish everyone. That is what really sucks.

Here I am 61 and wanting/trying to make a big jump in age graded best of 89-90 to 94-95.

I had little training prior to turning 40 . Trained well for a few years , injuries other stuff with a comeback efforts over the last 16 years. But now I have the desire and time to have another go at it. So if I do get this done I will be the only one who knows how clean I am and that sucks.

What kind of sanctimonious nonsense is this? If an old fart who starts on TRT and if he competes, obtains a RCTUE, how can that be cheating? And what about caffeine, a scientifically proven performance enhancer, that's competely legal to use? Or creatine....a legal supplement that can improve performance.

And there's a new study that just came out showing that the pain killer med Tramadol apparently has some performance enhancing effects. Tramadol is not banned by WADA (watch list currently) and is reportedly widely used/abused by pro cyclists. So, there's a lot of performance enchancing substances out there not banned by WADA that no one's whining about - just the TRT issue. How stupid & sanctimonious!

too hot wrote:

And ya’ll know why Smoove has posted like 20 times on this thread right? Because he’s insecure. He likes to boast about being one of the top masters runners in the country and he’s not even in the same league as Castille.

Oh c'mon man!....cut Smoove some slack. I enjoy reading his posts, they're long winded at times, and I might not agree with everything, but he does brings up some good points on a wide variety of topics. I think you're just jealous that you can't post as good as him. ?

Smoove wrote:

And i hope my response doesn't offend you. I'm just trying to be honest about the kind of profiles that raise questions for me. You have to have a thick skin on this board - anonymous posters like "too hot" have questioned whether my performances were legit as well. None of that bothers me because I know I'm clean and close scrutiny would bear that out. In fact, my approach has the goal of trying to find good explanations for good performances.

But if we are going to have an honest concersation about doping in masters running, we have to be asking these questions.

Yup. And this is an example of what doping costs us. I can't be inspired by other performances, because I can't trust them. It would be wonderful to be able to trust.

And, to echo Smoove, I had a major breakthrough at the age of 42-43 this spring, setting major PRs in every distance from the mile (6 seconds off) to the half (90 seconds off). [keep in mind that I started running in my mid-30s, so not quite the same as if I was breaking collegiate PRs]

If I was someone else, I'd be pointing a finger at myself. Because it looks really suspicious.

That's another reason I wish there was more testing - it protects the innocent.

"Long winded"?!?!?!?

Well, let me explain the many reasons why that isn't fair . . .

Oops, never mind.

If you're going to post frequently, don't be so sensitive. FWIW, I think your posts are more appreciated on 50+ masters training forum.

Likewise have a good Thanksgiving y'all.

And per Castille, wow more power to him and I'll believe his times are clean until proven otherwise. I do think they should have some random testing at championships races. It's not That expensive (how much does a single test cost?), and selecting 1-2 form men's and women's might be enough of a deterrent.

Coyote Montane wrote:

Likewise have a good Thanksgiving y'all.

And per Castille, wow more power to him and I'll believe his times are clean until proven otherwise. I do think they should have some random testing at championships races. It's not That expensive (how much does a single test cost?), and selecting 1-2 form men's and women's might be enough of a deterrent.

"How much does a single test cost?" A lot & time comsuming from what I've heard. You want testing with amateurs when USADA is always complaining that they need more money for the elites? Some of the elites aren't even being tested on a regulary basis. USADA needs to get it's house in order with the elites where big-time sponsorship and prize money is at stake.