I'm certainly not there yet, I'm 25 with 2 years of running, but not much serious training so I almost certainly still have PRs left in me. But for those that don't, what keeps you motivated now? The question is mainly for th...
I always felt that Ed Whitlock was clean and I get similar vibes about Tommy. Here are my reasons.
1) He ran a 2:13 marathon in his prime, in the non-supershoe era. He clearly has talent.
2) He's been very open about his past struggles with alcoholism and newfound sober living the best several years. He may not have ever reached his full potential due to alcohol.
3) He comes across as a very low key, humble guy who does not possess the classic "look at me" narcissistic traits you so often see in the obvious age group cheaters.
4) From interviews it is obvious the guy just loves running and does not seem to be in it for reasons other than that.
5) His appearance gives no indication of PEDs unlike many (not all) typical age group cheaters.
I could very well be wrong and nothing above proves or disproves anything, but I'm going with clean until proven otherwise.
I always felt that Ed Whitlock was clean and I get similar vibes about Tommy. Here are my reasons.
1) He ran a 2:13 marathon in his prime, in the non-supershoe era. He clearly has talent.
2) He's been very open about his past struggles with alcoholism and newfound sober living the best several years. He may not have ever reached his full potential due to alcohol.
3) He comes across as a very low key, humble guy who does not possess the classic "look at me" narcissistic traits you so often see in the obvious age group cheaters.
4) From interviews it is obvious the guy just loves running and does not seem to be in it for reasons other than that.
5) His appearance gives no indication of PEDs unlike many (not all) typical age group cheaters.
I could very well be wrong and nothing above proves or disproves anything, but I'm going with clean until proven otherwise.
With respect, I don't think you really know what aging does to an athlete, and especially by the age of 65. He is only twenty or so minutes slower than his best in his prime. I don't buy it. Whether you think he is a nice guy is irrelevant; dopers don't have horns on their foreheads.
With respect, I don't think you really know what aging does to an athlete, and especially by the age of 65. He is only twenty or so minutes slower than his best in his prime. I don't buy it. Whether you think he is a nice guy is irrelevant; dopers don't have horns on their foreheads.
Without respect, because you deserve none, you don't know that some people age better than you. You are just jealous of other older men's success.
I always felt that Ed Whitlock was clean and I get similar vibes about Tommy. Here are my reasons.
1) He ran a 2:13 marathon in his prime, in the non-supershoe era. He clearly has talent.
2) He's been very open about his past struggles with alcoholism and newfound sober living the best several years. He may not have ever reached his full potential due to alcohol.
3) He comes across as a very low key, humble guy who does not possess the classic "look at me" narcissistic traits you so often see in the obvious age group cheaters.
4) From interviews it is obvious the guy just loves running and does not seem to be in it for reasons other than that.
5) His appearance gives no indication of PEDs unlike many (not all) typical age group cheaters.
I could very well be wrong and nothing above proves or disproves anything, but I'm going with clean until proven otherwise.
No. There is something off here. No one who has raced their entirety (not Shorter; not Rodgers) could sustain this level of racing. Even Ed Whitlock took a long break.
Now look at Tommy's race results all the way back to the millenia:
Also, didn't he have thyroid issues some time ago and was either put on a TUE, or had his pituitary gland removed?
Again, there is far more to this than someone aging well. Just Gene Dykes came to running late. As did most masters (60+) aces. Name one other elite level runner who has been able to hold it together since 1988? Tommy was already an established runner before 1992.
I always felt that Ed Whitlock was clean and I get similar vibes about Tommy. Here are my reasons.
1) He ran a 2:13 marathon in his prime, in the non-supershoe era. He clearly has talent.
2) He's been very open about his past struggles with alcoholism and newfound sober living the best several years. He may not have ever reached his full potential due to alcohol.
3) He comes across as a very low key, humble guy who does not possess the classic "look at me" narcissistic traits you so often see in the obvious age group cheaters.
4) From interviews it is obvious the guy just loves running and does not seem to be in it for reasons other than that.
5) His appearance gives no indication of PEDs unlike many (not all) typical age group cheaters.
I could very well be wrong and nothing above proves or disproves anything, but I'm going with clean until proven otherwise.
No. There is something off here. No one who has raced their entirety (not Shorter; not Rodgers) could sustain this level of racing. Even Ed Whitlock took a long break.
Now look at Tommy's race results all the way back to the millenia:
Also, didn't he have thyroid issues some time ago and was either put on a TUE, or had his pituitary gland removed?
Again, there is far more to this than someone aging well. Just Gene Dykes came to running late. As did most masters (60+) aces. Name one other elite level runner who has been able to hold it together since 1988? Tommy was already an established runner before 1992.
Please.....share............
Martin Fiz of Spain, the 1995 World Champ in the marathon and a 2:08:05 guy, ran a 1:15:26 Half last month at age 61.