Why are the male masters runners so muscular?

I turn 50 next month and have run since I was 16. I reserve the right to still PR!

None of my PRs are representative of my ability at my best, due to making my breakthrough training alone in college (not allowed try to walk on) and not having raced then, at least at standard distances. My tempo runs at my best are minutes better than my official PRs. Any hope for a decent set of PRs was put down by a two year bout with chronic fatigue syndrome (or overtraining syndrome). After recovering from that, I didn't apply myself in training at all to get to 32:0x 10K or sub-16 5K, just lots of easy running. My marathon PR of 2:54 in my first was on all slow jogging training, 10-11 min/mile, and probably 20 minutes slower than if I had actually trained, besides being probably 30 minutes slower than I probably could have done in training when I was at my best. So don't be surprised to see a 2:3X marathon from me in my early 50s when I was only 2:54 at 42.

I think it's possible my body still has a sub-32 in it if I actually go all in and had a training plan and goals.

the original post was about masters being muscular in the recent world indoor champs. I raced in these and won gold in the 1500m. My times in my 40's are quicker than the US u14 record. so i am better than every u14 you have every had. Big whoops for me.

I am not muscular neither were a lot of the other competitors but in a 800 or 1500 when you tense up and sprint even i look reasonably toned.

I dont know anyone who is on performance enhancing drugs but then i doubt they would talk about it openly anyway,

Regards getting faster as you age....yep no chance. you get slower. i am fast now but i was much faster back in my teens.

recovery is the key reason. you take longer to recover between sessions and have to reduce other sessions mileage and intensity to cope with the fast speed sessions.

Some people will get faster than when they were a teenager...but thats probably because they take training more seriously now or the training is more structured than in high school.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Powerful Master wrote:

I am faster now than I was in my teens. I have never been at the level of an exceptional teen. Ever. But that's not the point. The point is how I am progressing through life.

I am currently at a level of what you would consider a useful one but I don't even train for the 4 and 8 anymore. Not sure why you are riding those so hard. I'm more into Spartan type stuff that caters more to old man strength.

I missed your post on the time. Not really focusing TOO much on your raging responses. It's not a reading issue.

Still on about "old man strength" - as though that is greater than a young man's strength. You surely like to kid yourself. So what, in your case, is "old"?

Pushing 50. Hard.

This is probably the best post so far. I also race the masters 800 and most of the top guys would fall into the skinny greyhound body type. However, everyone I've asked does some lifting, although I haven't asked everyone or Allie.

Muscularity is much more common in masters 100/200m sprinters, although there are some overweight masters who continue to excel based on sheer talent. My body type is more muscular sprinter than greyhound type, but that's primarily because I lift 5 days a week.

The science says that from age 50 you can expect to lose 1.5%-5.0% of your strength each year. Each year. It is an acceleration of a process that began more gradually in your thirties. In ten years time you will be between 15%-50% weaker than you are now.

I am not advocating that you give up - not at all - but to recognise that time and age will visit you increasingly, as it does for all of us. I know this as someone, who, at 65, has continued to try to maintain strength and fitness - and to continue to be active in sports - while recognising I cannot be what I was even five years ago, let alone my now distant youth. As we age, our goal posts have to change with the years.

Powerful Master wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Still on about "old man strength" - as though that is greater than a young man's strength. You surely like to kid yourself. So what, in your case, is "old"?

Pushing 50. Hard.

The science says that from age 50 you can expect to lose 1.5%-5.0% of your strength each year. Each year. It is an acceleration of a process that began more gradually in your thirties. In ten years time you will be between 15%-50% weaker than you are now.

I am not advocating that you give up - not at all - but to recognise that time and age will visit you increasingly, as it does for all of us. I know this as someone, who, at 65, has continued to try to maintain strength and fitness - and to continue to be active in sports - while recognising I cannot be what I was even five years ago, let alone my now distant youth. As we age, our goal posts have to change with the years.

I have seen some beefier masters guys on the road racing scene who have made me scratch my head and wonder.

Some of it I can attribute to those guys having a natural propensity to carrying slightly more muscle than most distance runners. Some of it I can attribute to those guys deciding that lifting would be a core part of their training.

But the two guys that I am thinking of in particular are running times that well exceed their age graded equivalent times as open athletes, despite having run on their college track teams. There is one guy who I don't think ever broke 15:00 as a collegiate, but is now running age graded times that equate to 14:10. He looks like a rower or a javelin thrower, not a 5000m guy. Another guy was a 14:50 guy who is running 14:20 equivalent times. That one seems more in line, but after having talked to the guy, I have reason to suspect (but do not know) that he's not pristine. Especially because his coach is very shady (to say the least).

I would venture to say that those who go to the world masters champs are probably going to test clean. Either because they are in fact clean, or because they know that they are subject to testing at that meet so they time their cycles to avoid being radioactive at the meet itself.

But by and large, road racing at the masters level is the wild west. I won male masters at Chicago one year, finished in the money and won my age group another year and ended up on the podium at Boston another year, and there was absolutely no testing going on for guys finishing 80th to 100th overall. It is a practical impossibility because of the logistics. The only race where I could have even seen how it would happen would be at Gate River Run because it was the 15k USATF road championship and the top masters runners often get elite bibs. So there, they can see you coming in with an elite bib and decide to randomly grab you. Although why they would have grabbed me as the 30th or 60th place finisher is a mystery to me.

Good comment. It isn't just reduced recovery that makes it harder as we get older. Everything is changing. And aging. Tendons, muscles, cardiovascular capacity, hormone levels - they aren't what they were in our youth. To maintain activity we have to recognise that and manage it. It is unsurprising that some might look for medical and pharmaceutical help to do that.

Smoove wrote:

But by and large, road racing at the masters level is the wild west. I won male masters at Chicago one year, finished in the money and won my age group another year and ended up on the podium at Boston another year, and there was absolutely no testing going on for guys finishing 80th to 100th overall. It is a practical impossibility because of the logistics. The only race where I could have even seen how it would happen would be at Gate River Run because it was the 15k USATF road championship and the top masters runners often get elite bibs. So there, they can see you coming in with an elite bib and decide to randomly grab you. Although why they would have grabbed me as the 30th or 60th place finisher is a mystery to me.

And what is the testing protocol for age-groupers at the big time marathons here in the U.S.? (e.g., Boston, Chicago, NY, etc).

Are all the age-group winners subjected to testing? (e.g., a "65 year old first time Boston qualifier" runs a PR and wins his age group -- is he subjected to testing where USADA could just yank this guy at the finish and demand a sample?).

Is it only members of USATF that are subjected to testing at any race or would that only be a USATF-sanctioned event?

Do master's athlete know what events are actually tested? IOW, is there like a list or something that comes out every year identifying which races/events nationally that would be tested? If there is such a list then, it seems that the runners who are using anti-aging pharmaceuticals/supplements would just avoid these races and run the ones that they are absolutely sure there's no testing.

There are probably tens of thousands of races from 1 mile fun runs up to marathons, plus the all the local all-comers meets, run annually in North America and how many of these are tested? And if very few are even bothered to be tested, then there could many, many middle-agers using anti-aging hormone therapy and OTC anti-aging supplements & products (e.g., DHEA)...and who's going to know?

There are different levels of testing. Out-of-competition testing is fairly limited. In competition testing can be fairly broad.

My read is that any member of the USATF can be tested in competition as the USATSF is a USOC-recognized sport national governing body. And anyone can be tested at a USATF certified event.

See this link (relevant excerpt below):

https://www.usada.org/athletes/antidoping101/#1528987236193-0b469a3a-6f22

USADA is able to test and adjudicate anti-doping rule violations for any athlete who:

•Is a member or a license holder of a United States Olympic Committee (USOC)-recognized sport national governing body (NGB)

•Is participating at an event or competition sanctioned by the USOC or a USOC-recognized sport NGB or participating at an event or competition in the United States sanctioned by an International Olympic Committee-recognized international federation (IF) for sport

USADA may also test and adjudicate athletes who meeting the following criteria.

•Is a foreign athlete who is present in the United States

•Has given his/her consent to testing by USADA or who has submitted a whereabouts filing to USADA or an IF within the previous 12 months and has not given his/her NGB written notice of retirement

•Has been named by the USOC or an NGB to an international team or who is included in the USADA registered testing pool (USADA RTP) or is competing in a qualifying event to represent the USOC or NGB in international competition

•Is a United States athlete or foreign athlete present in the United States who is serving a period of ineligibility on account of an anti-doping rule violation and has not given prior written notice of retirement to the his/her NGB and USADA or the applicable foreign anti-doping agency or foreign sport association

•Is being tested by USADA under authorization from the USOC, an NGB, IF, any NADO, WADA, the International Olympic Committee (IOC), International Paralympic Committee, (IPC), or the organizing committee of any event or competition.

*USADA’s limited resources are focused primarily on top-level athletes, however any athlete competing in a race that falls under an NGB’s jurisdiction or that has a short-term or long-term NGB license can be tested by USADA. USADA believes that all athletes, regardless of competition level, have the right to compete on a clean and level playing field.

Armstronglivs wrote:

The science says that from age 50 you can expect to lose 1.5%-5.0% of your strength each year. Each year. It is an acceleration of a process that began more gradually in your thirties. In ten years time you will be between 15%-50% weaker than you are now.

I am not advocating that you give up - not at all - but to recognise that time and age will visit you increasingly, as it does for all of us. I know this as someone, who, at 65, has continued to try to maintain strength and fitness - and to continue to be active in sports - while recognising I cannot be what I was even five years ago, let alone my now distant youth. As we age, our goal posts have to change with the years.

But I've already "defied" the Science from 30 on. I haven't even started trying to defy strength losses so far. If anything my natural strength has been a hindrance to running really well. Of course everyone gets old but using science as a rule makes you mentally believe that you WILL start decaying at XX rate. It simply is not true for every person.

It comes to down to potential training gains versus natural decay. Ad long as you can find ways to make gains you can offset the latter.

So far so good.

I honestly think it's largely genetic. I owe my old man strength to my mother.

i dont think you are defying the science. just that you are training better than you were when you were in your 30's.

Its hiding the fact that you are not as strong as you should have been in your 30s

nah wrote:

i dont think you are defying the science. just that you are training better than you were when you were in your 30's.

Its hiding the fact that you are not as strong as you should have been in your 30s

I wouldn't call mainly plodding high miles as training better. Certainly I wouldn't think of that as an age defying exercise I for strength retention.

Smoove wrote:

But by and large, road racing at the masters level is the wild west. I won male masters at Chicago one year, finished in the money and won my age group another year and ended up on the podium at Boston another year, and there was absolutely no testing going on for guys finishing 80th to 100th overall. It is a practical impossibility because of the logistics. The only race where I could have even seen how it would happen would be at Gate River Run because it was the 15k USATF road championship and the top masters runners often get elite bibs. So there, they can see you coming in with an elite bib and decide to randomly grab you. Although why they would have grabbed me as the 30th or 60th place finisher is a mystery to me.

Remember Hesch? Though he wasn't a master, I don't think he was ever tested in the 2 yrs he was doping up a storm and running the road scene. I believe he won (i.e. stole) close to 40 Gs in prize money before someone found an empty vial of his and turned him in to USADA. How does a sub-elite run 75 races in 2 yrs, win 40 Gs in prize money...and not get tested? Has things changed with sub-elite roadies or it is same as it ever was?

Risking your health for $20k a year is really pretty sad.

I don't think that most of the top masters are dirty. Just the ones that are better than me! I kid. But I do think that there are plenty of guys out there who are doping and that age groupers are no different that sub elites in that way. In fact, it may be a bit more prevalent with masters runners because it is easy to be prescribed TRT once you cross the masters threshold.

The short cut to the fountain of youth is a powerful attraction. A deal with the Devil.

Smoove wrote:

Risking your health for $20k a year is really pretty sad.

I don't think that most of the top masters are dirty. Just the ones that are better than me! I kid. But I do think that there are plenty of guys out there who are doping and that age groupers are no different that sub elites in that way. In fact, it may be a bit more prevalent with masters runners because it is easy to be prescribed TRT once you cross the masters threshold.

It's pretty bad with master's cyclists & EPO. This article is a sober reality check that not only do the elites/sub-elites use EPO but masters/grandmasters as well. And EPO would be the choice of an endurance athlete over androgens any day (they don't call it rocket fuel for nothing. Lol). And with the power of the internet who knows what sources of EPO they can find out there.