The 400 is a toughie before 70 (and no pushover after). I just turned 63 and am gunning for hitting it at 65 (PR is 55 at 44). Currently at 67. Work to do.
The 400 is a toughie before 70 (and no pushover after). I just turned 63 and am gunning for hitting it at 65 (PR is 55 at 44). Currently at 67. Work to do.
50+ wrote:
Very Impressive wrote:
Wow!..you're a speedster for your age & gender. What is your running history - elite?, sub-elite?, collegiate?
amkelley will no doubt say she was never a speedster, but did compete in the Olympic marathon trials, and still runs marathons and trains 70 miles a week. Really amazing.
Never a speedster--I never broke 18 minutes for 5K. But in my early 30s I could run at close to top speed for a long time, and I suppose I was "sub-elite" in the marathon--good enough to OTQ, anyway.
My university started its women's track and cross-country team the year I was a sophomore. (Women "couldn't" run long distances back then--I was 26 years old when Joan Benoit won the first women's Olympic marathon.) I joined the team but got injured before ever making it to a meet, quit in frustration and didn't run at all for the rest of college. In retrospect it was a good thing, because I put my nose to the grindstone academically, got a Ph.D. and ended up with a successful and rewarding professional career that I'm still doing at age 61. I doubt I ever could have made any sort of living as a runner, and trying to rely on my body for my livelihood would be really scary.
38:52 at 57 this past July
YMMV wrote:
The 400 is a toughie before 70 (and no pushover after). I just turned 63 and am gunning for hitting it at 65 (PR is 55 at 44). Currently at 67. Work to do.
I can't imagine ever running my age in the 400. Even at my very best in my early 30s I couldn't get close to 70 seconds for 400m.
Runner Mike wrote:
Does that mean I'm a speedster too? I'm a 71 year old male, and my best time this year was 46:48!
I'm faster now than when I was 50 :-)
Good job! At 71, after nearly 60 years of competitive running, I was at your level around 46 on hilly courses.
Now I've turned 80, and focusing on getting under 80 minutes for 15K. Did 1:23 something at the hilly Stockade-athlon in Schenectady. Will try Boilermaker in the summer. I'm at about 54 or less for 10K still (have only done hilly ones so far).
For a 400, though, I imagine I can do under 80 no sweat. Am I wrong? Used to do in the high 50s.
Cool thread.
I ran a 36:XX at 36 (lifetime PB 35:XX at 31), and a 37, 38 and 39 at those ages have only been easier.
I can't see this being hard unless I have serious illness or disability...if the site is still up when I'm old(er), I'll be here posting.
Yes, I agree that the 400 is more difficult, but that’s the point- all of us trying to outdo our younger selves. Many of us will never again approach our personal bests, but things like this and age grading do more for my desire to train than showing up to a local race and winning my age group (because it’s a one (1) deep field.
Couldn't do it until 40 (PR of 36:10 at 34). Have done it every year that I have raced a 10k since then, last year 49+ at 62. I can imagine it staying possible until 85, but beyond 90 could be very difficult. Staying healthy and uninjured the biggest problem. Training to race for 60 minutes doesn't seem so bad, but for 90?
Better challenge is 2 hours plus your your age for running a marathon. But only after you're old enough to drink.
Bad Wigins wrote:
comprehending a 9 minute kilometer pace for a 10k race, instead of laboriously converting the whole thing to miles, doesn't strike me as doable for you.
90 year olds in the USA aren't going to be fluent in the metrics. I'm 55 and don't even know them that well. I'm still wondering why we have had metric distance road races for 40 years but still give out splits every mile.
10K -25 or -24 minutes the past couple years, and have equaled the 2hr plus age marathon challenge. No way on 400 m = Age.
Coyote Montane wrote:
10K -25 or -24 minutes the past couple years
Were you tumbling off a cliff, or riding a bike, or dreaming?
This is a great challenge, and one that I'll keep in mind. At 32, I'm not fast enough to do this yet but hopefully will within 5 years.
30 + 30s * (age - 30) until death starting at age 40. Reasonable enough?
sparky polastry wrote:
30 + 30s * (age - 30) until death starting at age 40. Reasonable enough?
Reasonable for men. Tough for women.
George Gilder wrote:
Coyote Montane wrote:
10K -25 or -24 minutes the past couple years
Were you tumbling off a cliff, or riding a bike, or dreaming?
I guess you are making fun of me. And that’s your prerogative. I ran 37:30 this year at 5K feet, loop course this year. 35:40s at sea level a couple years ago. Not lying. But go ahead. Make fun.
Coyote Montane wrote:
I guess you are making fun of me. And that’s your prerogative. I ran 37:30 this year at 5K feet, loop course this year. 35:40s at sea level a couple years ago. Not lying. But go ahead. Make fun.
George probably didn't realize you are over 60. If you were in your early 50s, your figures would indeed require a bike or a dream. Of course the same for most of us even at 60. Impressive racing on your part, and I'm sure George, at 80, also knows what it's like to outperform his contemporaries. I doubt he would mock you for that.
Are you insane?! wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
Can a 90 year old run a sub 90? If they can still walk unassisted, probably yes.
A 14.5 minute per mile walking pace (for 6.2 miles) does not strike me as that doable for most 90 year olds.
Looks like the record for a 92 year old is 92:26.
Coyote Montane wrote:
George Gilder wrote:
Were you tumbling off a cliff, or riding a bike, or dreaming?
I guess you are making fun of me. And that’s your prerogative. I ran 37:30 this year at 5K feet, loop course this year. 35:40s at sea level a couple years ago. Not lying. But go ahead. Make fun.
Boy...you sure get sensitive & defensive a lot lately. You're always bragging about your great performances but yet refer to yourself as a "hobby jogger" (by LRC's standards) complaining at times that you don't get the recognition you deserve here.
George Gilder wrote:
Runner Mike wrote:
Does that mean I'm a speedster too? I'm a 71 year old male, and my best time this year was 46:48!
I'm faster now than when I was 50 :-)
Good job! At 71, after nearly 60 years of competitive running, I was at your level around 46 on hilly courses.
Now I've turned 80, and focusing on getting under 80 minutes for 15K. Did 1:23 something at the hilly Stockade-athlon in Schenectady. Will try Boilermaker in the summer. I'm at about 54 or less for 10K still (have only done hilly ones so far).
For a 400, though, I imagine I can do under 80 no sweat. Am I wrong? Used to do in the high 50s.
Sub 80 for age 80 would have ranked you 6th in the world this year so that's very good! You should get involved in Masters Track. Indoor Championships are held in March in Baton Rouge and outdoor in Greensboro NC in July.
I had to take nearly a whole year off due to a string of serious injuries and two surgeries in 2019, but if my training progresses, I should be running the 400/800 in the M70 age group at Indoors.