Can a 50-year old run sub-2:30? Of course. If he had 2:20 talent in his prime.
But then you have to account for the extra weight. He's carrying AT LEAST 15 lbs that he doesn't need to. Use the (pretty accurate) 2-second/mile rule of thumb, and you're talking about a guy who could theoretically run 2:07 in his prime, if he were at an appropriate racing weight for a pro.
Is it possible he's just a 2:07 talent who got into running really late and chose to stay huge while doing so? I suppose....
90% of posters on this forum are absolutely obsessed with tearing people down. There's an absurd amount of trolling and negativity on this site.
Friend, you picked the wrong thread to complain on.
I would agree if we were criticizing some 17-year-old high school girl. But this dude is some super sketchy former crackhead who mysteriously become a jacked champion masters runner.
Friend, you picked the wrong thread to complain on.
I would agree if we were criticizing some 17-year-old high school girl. But this dude is some super sketchy former crackhead who mysteriously become a jacked champion masters runner.
It's literally every thread. Every single elite runner in history has been accused of doping on this forum. Hell, an old dude wants to run 140 miles a week and posts a thread about it. Ridicule.
Can a 50-year old run sub-2:30? Of course. If he had 2:20 talent in his prime.
But then you have to account for the extra weight. He's carrying AT LEAST 15 lbs that he doesn't need to. Use the (pretty accurate) 2-second/mile rule of thumb, and you're talking about a guy who could theoretically run 2:07 in his prime, if he were at an appropriate racing weight for a pro.
Is it possible he's just a 2:07 talent who got into running really late and chose to stay huge while doing so? I suppose....
I don't think that applies here. The rule of thumb is for excess flab, not additional muscle mass. For any given individual, the optimum mix might involve higher weight with more muscle mass. Carrying additional muscle mass than a typical runner also seems to be a winning physiological strategy for older runners, at least in several cases we've seen.
That's not to say that PEDs aren't involved, but I don't think the extra weight is quite the factor that it would be in a younger runner.
Friend, you picked the wrong thread to complain on.
I would agree if we were criticizing some 17-year-old high school girl. But this dude is some super sketchy former crackhead who mysteriously become a jacked champion masters runner.
It's literally every thread. Every single elite runner in history has been accused of doping on this forum. Hell, an old dude wants to run 140 miles a week and posts a thread about it. Ridicule.
You probably weren't around when Ed Whitlock posted here years ago. No one even made a breath in the direction of a drug accusation in his case.
The fact that this guy can show up and race with impunity at all the major road races shows just how flawed the system is.
Yes. But then you have Kenyans being allowed to race everywhere with race organizers turning an obvious blind eye to the endemic doping going on in that country.
The brojos should make him an offer like they did for Rossi.
Ask him if he will agree to random drug testing for one year, funded by the brojos and conducted by an independent lab. If after a certain period of time (e.g. 1 year) he is still running age grade equivalents to what he is running now and passing drug tests, then pay him $100K.
Remember Flyod Landis? Lost 20 min one day then came back the next day to drop the field and win by 20min. What happened in between? Testosterone.
Unless you're running multi stage races, you could take your T after every hard workout and then bounce back like young stallion the next day. Drop it during the taper (no benefit at that time) and this will never show up in a drug test.
An Rx for T is fairly easy to get in the US, EPO is more difficult.
Can a 50-year old run sub-2:30? Of course. If he had 2:20 talent in his prime.
But then you have to account for the extra weight. He's carrying AT LEAST 15 lbs that he doesn't need to. Use the (pretty accurate) 2-second/mile rule of thumb, and you're talking about a guy who could theoretically run 2:07 in his prime, if he were at an appropriate racing weight for a pro.
Is it possible he's just a 2:07 talent who got into running really late and chose to stay huge while doing so? I suppose....
I don't think that applies here. The rule of thumb is for excess flab, not additional muscle mass. For any given individual, the optimum mix might involve higher weight with more muscle mass. Carrying additional muscle mass than a typical runner also seems to be a winning physiological strategy for older runners, at least in several cases we've seen.
That's not to say that PEDs aren't involved, but I don't think the extra weight is quite the factor that it would be in a younger runner.
Yes I agree on the extra muscle weight vs extra flab. Just look at the times elite triathletes are running now at the end of an Ironman distance: below 2:40 has become the elite standard, and many of these athletes are carrying extra muscle.
I don't think that applies here. The rule of thumb is for excess flab, not additional muscle mass. For any given individual, the optimum mix might involve higher weight with more muscle mass. Carrying additional muscle mass than a typical runner also seems to be a winning physiological strategy for older runners, at least in several cases we've seen.
That's not to say that PEDs aren't involved, but I don't think the extra weight is quite the factor that it would be in a younger runner.
Yes I agree on the extra muscle weight vs extra flab. Just look at the times elite triathletes are running now at the end of an Ironman distance: below 2:40 has become the elite standard, and many of these athletes are carrying extra muscle.
Flab and muscle are very different from a health perspective, but not when it comes to physics. Mass is mass, and extra muscle slows you down just as much as extra flab.
To be sure, there's a point at which one has lost so much functional muscle that it adversely affects one's running, but that's a non-issue for pretty much any runner who doesn't have an eating disorder.
As for triathletes, I think if anything that proves the point. These guys are world class, professional endurance athletes, but as pure runners, they're basically good amateurs. I don't follow the sport super closely, but I doubt there are many long course pros who could qualify for the Olympic Trials in the marathon. (There are probably more Olympic triathletes who could, just because that discipline favors true runners.)
Rideout's times are excellent, but they are not so off the charts that you have to presume he is doping. 50 year old Wayne Spies ran 2:27 at a fairly warm Houston marathon this year. WR is 2:19. And if you age grade, Rideout is probably a long ways away from Ed Whitlock. Also, Rideout did a lot of tris as he was getting his marathon times down (if you are going to run a fast marathon after 50, you are going to have to cross train like a madman) and has a solid foundation from boxing. He is no couch to 5k guy and has been coached by Fraioli.
But I have seen a lot of very talented and dedicated masters runners have their legs turn to stone as they approach 50. Also, the 50+ guys who have been able to run in the low 2:30 to sub 2:30 range have almost all been guys with a pro running pedigree. And, yeah. They guy is jacked and has a bit of a PR operation.