I would bet my house that this guy is on something. It might be Salazar gray and not against the rules, but it's something.
I would bet my house that this guy is on something. It might be Salazar gray and not against the rules, but it's something.
Could he be taking testosterone for other reasons? Believe me (I'm 60) your body doesn't respond the way it used to in certain situations. I'm VERY healthy and there are times when I wish I could be 30, you, you know what I mean.
I can't imagine what it's like for the guys my age (and 15 years younger) who haven't taken care of themselves like I did.
runn wrote:
Could he be taking testosterone for other reasons? Believe me (I'm 60) your body doesn't respond the way it used to in certain situations. I'm VERY healthy and there are times when I wish I could be 30, you, you know what I mean.
I can't imagine what it's like for the guys my age (and 15 years younger) who haven't taken care of themselves like I did.
Well, as you know, there are drugs for every occasion.
zxcvzxcv wrote:
At age 50, the issue is not lack of testosterone; it is lack of health. If you can stay healthy and get the training in, you're plenty young enough to run fast.
So you have never used testosterone then. Lack of testosterone = lack of health. The studies are pretty clear on this. Getting the training in is what comes easy when you're on testosterone. I hope the guy this thread about is not on testosterone if this is about a record though.
testo wrote:
Testosterone is a mighty thing. If you are over 45 I suggested you try it. It will change your life.
This is 100% a true statement. Doesn't mean the guy who this thread about is using it, but what you said is true.
I have no idea about anything, but I also heard he is a woman.
Armstronglivs wrote:
He may be a nice guy. I'll take your word for it. But in sports you can't guarantee anything.
Fair enough, but it's not just that he's a nice guy. He's ethical. His performances do not indicate drug use. He was always a great runner, he gave it up, returned, and is now slower but still great. He's never had unexplainable jumps in performance of anything. Just because he ran a fast time doesn't mean that he's on drugs. There is no reason to suggest that he is.
Jayordon wrote:
Just because he ran a fast time doesn't mean that he's on drugs. There is no reason to suggest that he is.
Except that he ran 4:01.7 1500m three years ago and hasn't raced since because of constantly fighting injuries. Most guys would be going way backwards in fitness at his age and that kind of injury plagued training. Yet here we are talking about a guy getting faster.
4:19 sounds dirty wrote:
I would bet my house that this guy is on something. It might be Salazar gray and not against the rules, but it's something.
+1000
4:19 @ 50 is not 100% clean
Anyone know Barton’s mile PR in his prime ?
Hounddogharrier wrote:
Anyone know Barton’s mile PR in his prime ?
This is from Weber State's website when he was inducted into their Hall of Fame Mostly for his performance in the steeplechase but he also ran the mile;
"(A)t the Big Sky Championships in the mile and went on to compete at the NCAA's. In 1991, he finished second in the mile at the conference meet with a time of 4:04.97, which was the second fastest time in conference history at the time."
It doesn't say this was his PR, but indicates some decent speed and hard work in his youth. There are number of crazy videos of this guy racing in his mid to late 40s. He leaves nothing on the track during a race - clearly he goes all out. He is an inspiration to many including me a Grand Master runner who is just trying to get to the WMA national level age grade of 80%. By the way I am doing by no "T" 50+ mile weeks and lots of hard work, and probably 1/10 of Barton's genetic talent.
Serious go to youtube and search Brad Barton mile - crazy stuff - this guy is for real....
Full link:
https://weberstatesports.com/news/2015/3/18/209968037.aspxWow...you're pretty knowledgeable with age-related performance decline -- a lot of what you say makes sense.
4:04.9 to 4:19 in 28 years. Hard to believe.
4:19 sounds dirty wrote:
I would bet my house that this guy is on something. It might be Salazar gray and not against the rules, but it's something.
You may lose your house on that bet - lol! Except for the time he took off from competing, this horse has be a great runner for over a decade and was excellent in his college days.
He gives it 100% check out this youtube video when he was - watch all the way to the end - those last seconds show someone who is not afraid to race all out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNPPOo7Z4Uc&t=80sNo, formerly elite guys haven’t just now started to run masters track and go after age group records. There have always been a handful who didn’t let life (kids, job, burn out, weight gain, chronic injuries) stop them when they hit their mid to late 30’s. But the big difference now is how easy it is to get a prescription to dial your testosterone, thyroid, and everything else up to offset the aging process. Not saying the guy is guilty, only that there are plenty of nice guys getting nailed all the time in Masters sports and it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
The posters expressing righteous indignation that how dare we question a significant outlier performance don’t advance the conversation at all. If I was this guy and I ran 4:19 clean, I’d get a comprehensive blood test and post the results for all to see... but lacking that, I certainly wouldn’t be surprised to see doubts raised. He can thank all the previous dopers who professed their innocence for that.
Hounddogharrier wrote:
4:04.9 to 4:19 in 28 years. Hard to believe.
Not really I can see it as believable - Although he competed the mile, he focused on the steeplechase. I think it may just a matter of genetic talent and a matter of degrees...
He was AND is hugely talented. It is only about 2% off of his then age grade time at 48 (five years ago).
Now in NO WAY am I comparing myself to his guy, but he is an inspiration and motivator to some of us old folks - I ran a somewhat sluggish 4:45 at age 23 (no laughing please - I was not a miler-more of a 10k/half marathon guy), but ran it to qualify and have my department pay my way to the International Police Games where I finished 9th in the mile, but 3rd in the half marathon the next morning). I was still running 5:03 at 41 - so :17 slowdown in 18 years. Now at age 62 I am training my butt off to get to 5:45ish which is about the same age graded equivalent as a 4:45.
A 1:00 performance goal difference in 39 years is not the same as his 15 seconds in 28 years, but I was never fast and hopefully you get my general drift.
I think he is the real deal and IS clean (I read that the two years after graduating from Weber State he spent two year as a Mormon missionary in Northern California- if he is still practicing that may indicate a pretty 'clean' lifestyle) . Also he laid off running and competing for a number of years which like Ed Whitlock ( who btw beat me at in a 10k in Canada when he was world class at 62 and I was merely 38!) may have saved his legs and some general wear and tear.
testo wrote:
Testosterone is a mighty thing. If you are over 45 I suggested you try it. It will change your life.
EZ10Miler wrote:
I don't like to see claims like that being made without cause. It's a cop out and fairly slanderous.
Honestly I could load up on test. epo and gasoline and not get to 4:19.
This guy was an All American, so it's not like he's some hack that suddenly started running fast. Unless he's popped for a substance, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.
I 100 percent agree with you. Posters who continue to do that should be banned from the web site.
Armstronglivs wrote:
He may be a nice guy. I'll take your word for it. But in sports you can't guarantee anything.
We can guarantee that you're an insufferable troll.
Not exactly true ... wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
He may be a nice guy. I'll take your word for it. But in sports you can't guarantee anything.
We can guarantee that you're an insufferable troll.
And that you can't find a counter argument.
Hounddogharrier wrote:
4:04.9 to 4:19 in 28 years. Hard to believe.
As I said above, I would have expected him to be closer to 3.50/55 in his prime. Not 4.05.