How long before you start to slow down?

dna_leri

Many of us started running later in life or came back to running after a long break. In my case the break was over 20 years and I am now almost 5 years back running. So far I have improved every year, but I am starting to wonder when this will stop.

If I had kept running for the last 25 years, I sure I would be noticing the slow down by now. Eventually everyone stops improving but I guess it depends on your age, how many years you have been running, injury history and other factors like how hard you want to push yourself. With other people who have been running for longer than me, I have seen injury be the determining factor where you get one injury too many and when/if you come back after it you just can not reach the same levels of training and performance as before.

What have other people here found, have you reached the top of the hill yet, or are you already over it?

RandyMann

dna_leri wrote: »

Many of us started running later in life or came back to running after a long break. In my case the break was over 20 years and I am now almost 5 years back running. So far I have improved every year, but I am starting to wonder when this will stop.

If I had kept running for the last 25 years, I sure I would be noticing the slow down by now. Eventually everyone stops improving but I guess it depends on your age, how many years you have been running, injury history and other factors like how hard you want to push yourself. With other people who have been running for longer than me, I have seen injury be the determining factor where you get one injury too many and when/if you come back after it you just can not reach the same levels of training and performance as before.

What have other people here found, have you reached the top of the hill yet, or are you already over it?

As a matter of interest, what sort of running did you do 25 years ago, what was your main event?
Interesting to know that you have kept improving over the past 5 years, it gives me hope too.
I am guessing with myself that because I never did athletics when I was younger, there is a bonus that there are no running related injuries in my legs from years ago and they are relatively fresh with comparatively low mileage in them. I do expect the improvements will be dimished considerably over the next couple of seasons compared to what I did in my first season.

dna_leri

RandyMann wrote: »

As a matter of interest, what sort of running did you do 25 years ago, what was your main event?
Interesting to know that you have kept improving over the past 5 years, it gives me hope too.
I am guessing with myself that because I never did athletics when I was younger, there is a bonus that there are no running related injuries in my legs from years ago and they are relatively fresh with comparatively low mileage in them. I do expect the improvements will be dimished considerably over the next couple of seasons compared to what I did in my first season.

I ran 200/400m as a teenager - nationals finalist but no better, though I know now I did not really train properly. I started as a long jumper, progressing to 100, then 200/400 and had started moving up to 800's but it took me a bit longer than I planned!

I am expecting to start slowing down in the next year or two but I think the secret is to avoid injury - I just don't know the secret for doing that yet. I have also changed events a bit over the last few years so I am hoping that will prolong my improvement window.

TFBubendorfer

I started running at the age of 34. 8 years later I don't expect to get much faster, but right now all my PBs are still within reach.

In fact, I plateaued about 2 years ago and thought that was it, but getting a coach for a while put me up another notch. I'm still aiming for new PBs next year.

In another fact, a friend of mine ran his fastest marathon in his early 50s. That's definitely unusual, but it gives hope to a lot of us.

oldrunner

There is no doubt that age is a major factor in slowing you down. All of the world best times for masters get worse year by year.
I've seen this in my own case. This year I've been carrying injuries so not the best comparison but nonetheless, there's been a gradual decline in my best time in my best event (800m).
However - and it's a big factor - it's very individual. You may be a long way off your peak. Last year, I set my Masters PB for the mile and this year I had my fastest Masters 5 miles road race (I'm now 52).
I try to judge my performance and decline in two ways - what percentage of my best senior times am I running and how do I rate relative to age world bests - have a look at http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/racepaces/agtimes

robinph

It was mostly likely on here that I picked it up, but I have a theory in my head that you would continue improving for around 8 years or so before you reach where you "should" be in terms of age. So that obviously doesn't apply to kids or people starting running in the early 20's and I'd expect it to be somewhat different if you only start running age 60 as the age decline will more than likely be coming down quicker than any improvements due to the previous years of training.

tunguska

dna_leri wrote: »

Many of us started running later in life or came back to running after a long break. In my case the break was over 20 years and I am now almost 5 years back running. So far I have improved every year, but I am starting to wonder when this will stop.

Why even think about it though? Why not just look upon yourself as an athlete not a number. Age is something that man has created, and you can buy into it or not. Granted most people do buy into it but thats simply because people just accept the world as its been handed down to them without question. I know guys who constantly bitch about their age(and these are lads who are only in their 30s). Without being consciously aware of it they've put a cap on what they can do. I dont know how many times I've heard stuff like "I've reached my limit, its all downhill from here" Its very depressing and defeatist. Yes you gotta be realistic but theres more pessimism about than realism. The way I look at it is you should judge things by how you feel and thats being aware of the subliminal programming that goes on via society at large. Dont passively allow yourself to be told that because a certain number has been asigned to you that you have to act accordingly.
If you were born on an island where there were no clocks and people just didnt bother counting sunrises/sunsets, you'd have no idea what "40" or "50" was. I've seen people turn 40 and fall apart(in sport and in regular life). And thats just society getting into their heads telling them how they should feel and act. Its all a matter of perception. Why not just forgot about the numbers and judge things by how you feel? Theres chronological age and theres biological age. Big difference between the two.

robinph

No idea about palm trees and how often they produce coconuts, but on said desert island you'd certainly be aware of how often the tree would bear fruit or other similar things. Age/ time is not an imaginary concept.

Although I do get what you mean about not setting yourself arbitrary limits based on what someone says a particularly aged old bloke should be capable of doing.

I think I heard or read that on average a person should run the same marathon time at 64 as he or she could at 19. And that while the peak for long distance running is the mid to late 20s, thereafter the decline is so gradual as to be negligible for most, except when measured over years or decades as opposed to year on year.

oldrunner

tunguska wrote: »

Age is something that man has created, and you can buy into it or not.

Sadly, this is pure B*llcks - I wish it wasn't. I might agree with some of your other sentiments about putting mental restrictions on ourselves but the ageing process and the impact of entropy are absolute physical phenomena not mental constructs.

Visit http://www.world-masters-athletics.org/records/outdoor-men to see how every single world best disimproves in five year age brackets. Here's a sample:

Men Outdoor Marathon

(Last update: 10 June 2012)Age groupMarkNameCountryAgeMeet DateMeet Location M 352:03:59Haile GebrselassieETH3528.09.08Berlin M 402:08:46Andres EspinosaMEX
28.09.03Berlin M 452:15:51Kjell-Erik StahlSWE4529.09.91Berlin M 502:19:29Titus MamaboloRSA
20.07.91Durban M 552:25:56Piet van AlphenNED5519.04.86Rotterdam M 602:36:30Yoshihisa HosakaJPN6001.02.09Beppu City M 652:41:57Derek TurnbullNZL6512.04.92London M 702:54:48Ed WhitlockCAN7326.09.04Toronto M 753:04:54Ed WhitlockCAN7615.04.07Rotterdam M 803:15:54Ed WhitlockCAN8016.10.11Toronto M 854:34:55Robert HormanAUS8604.07.04Gold Coast
and
Men Outdoor 1 Mile

(Last update: 10 June 2012)Age groupMarkNameCountryAgeMeet DateMeet Location M 353:51.38Bernand LagatUSA3606.08.11London M 404:01.62Vyacheslav ShavuninRUS4021.08.10Joensuu M 454:16.09Tony YoungUSA4631.05.08Gresham M 504:27.9Nolan ShaheedUSA5012.02.00
M 554:35.04Keith BatemanAUS5518.12.10Sydney M 604:51.85Tony McManusNZL6207.01.12Timaru M 654:56.4Derek TurnbullNZL6529.02.92
M 705:19.75Joop RüterNED7011.07.03Rotterdam M 755:41.80Ed WhitlockCAN7528.07.06Windsor M 807:09.60Joseph KingUSA8202.08.08Eugene M 858:04.7Josef GaliaGER8704.09.85
M 9010:30.9Peter BrownbillAUS9018.06.08Melbourne M 9514:48.2Herb KirkUSA9506.10.90

rom

Haile Gebrselassie and Bernand Lagat who are boards regulars would be very disappointed in the above but the majority of people here would be very happy to be achieving the M65 times above at any age.

However the drop in times between M90 and M95 is significant for the Mile

ThePiedPiper

The M80 time for the mile is very soft, in comparison to the marathon time!

My inspiration in sport and many aspects of life, my mother, ran her debut marathon in 4.10. After a 23 year gap where she concentrated on camogie, she ran her second, third and fourth marathons over the space of a couple of years. She managed a 4.29 in Boston aged 65 and was completely fresh after it. I saw her line out for a camogie match a couple of years back and seriously showed up a lot of women 40 years younger than her.

The coach at our club was a 2.22 marathoner 20 odd years ago, but is still comfortably running 2.40 without really putting it all on the line in marathons.

I'm 30 now, and see absolutely no reason why I shouldn't keep improving until at least 45. Of course, there'll be a slowdown, but I'd like to think that in 40 years time, I'll be one of those ol fellas that still manage to whizz by in marathons at sub-3 pace showing us young ones the way.

oldrunner

RunForestRun wrote: »

I'm 30 now, and see absolutely no reason why I shouldn't keep improving until at least 45.

The only way you will run faster at 45 than at 30 is if you aren't really putting in the effort now.

ThePiedPiper

oldrunner wrote: »

The only way you will run faster at 45 than at 30 is if you aren't really putting in the effort now.

I agree with you. I'm not putting in enough consistent effort at the moment. I go from 20 mile ticking over weeks in the off season to 50-60 mile weeks when I'm properly training.

When the kids get a bit older and I get past what is a very busy couple of years with college and career change, I would hope to put a much better effort into year-round running instead of averaging 30 miles a week over the course of the last 2-3 years.

I'd like to believe that more consistent training will lead to improvements up to 40 and then maybe a bit of an evening out.

rom

oldrunner wrote: »

The only way you will run faster at 45 than at 30 is if you aren't really putting in the effort now.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69366638&postcount=1

There are two guys in the club M55/60 and they are going for sub 3:15 in Dublin and going to do 2 long runs and are doing much less mileage and session than before so I don't agree with that. People use age as a crutch.

oldrunner

I've no idea of the relevance of your link to my previous post.

Any individual 55 year old may runner faster than when he/she was younger. They may even improve year on year. However, this only proves that they could have run faster when they were younger. As pointed out by RunForestRun, life often gets in the way - kids, college, careers.

May I ask what age you are?

rom

oldrunner wrote: »

I've no idea of the relevance of your link to my previous post.

Any individual 55 year old may runner faster than when he/she was younger. They may even improve year on year. However, this only proves that they could have run faster when they were younger. As pointed out by RunForestRun, life often gets in the way - kids, college, careers.

May I ask what age you are?

You made reference to that the masters standard was very close to the MS. 2 mins for 10K. That is not a huge difference.

"Any individual 55 year old may runner faster than when he/she was younger. They may even improve year on year. However, this only proves that they could have run faster when they were younger." I agree with this but this is not the topic of the thread.

"As pointed out by RunForestRun, life often gets in the way - kids, college, careers." very valid and I completely understand having all three.

"May I ask what age you are?"
You may but only if you give me your PPS number first

ThePiedPiper

oldrunner wrote: »

May I ask what age you are?

Myself? I'm 30. I've been running for about 7 years and am consistently in the range of 3.00-3.10 marathon shape or 38-40 10k pace. I feel that I could knock 15-20 minutes off that marathon time and maybe 3 minutes off the 10k time but at the moment, I'm not prepared to prioritise training to the extent necessary to reach those goals.

My belief is that the life choices and training constraints are a greater indicator of performance up to the age of 45-50. The ageing process and the slowdown will obviously have an effect, but I think an individual needs to be closer to their optimum training and ultimate performance level in order for the age effect to be greater than the life effect, if that makes sense.

What sorts of changes in performance have you noticed yourself oldrunner? At what point did your race times start falling without training mileage or effort?

oldrunner

RunForestRun wrote: »

What sorts of changes in performance have you noticed yourself oldrunner? At what point did your race times start falling without training mileage or effort?

Some background - I ran in school in first and second year. Then no running until 19. Started in the BHAA at that stage. Made ok progress until 26. I then joined a club and saw very good progress up to 29 focusing on the track. Then kids / career / traveling for work made it harder but kept running until about 35 = mainly BHAA (with a decline in performances because of reduced effort) . Then pretty much stopped until 44 (odd effort to get going). First two years back just for fitness, then got into race series in club and rejoined the club. So, the competitive streak kicked off again and I began running National Masters competitions - XC but mainly track. I have many national masters medals - Gold. Silver Bronze.
I train more frequently and harder now than when I was a senior - particularly in the winter. I put in 6/7 days a week every week - regular sessions, included.
My times are off about 10% from when I was a senior (pretty much across the board). I've slowed down a little year by year in the last three years but some races I've improved - had my fastest masters mile last summer (just under 4:50 - but my Senior best was 4:25) and fastest Raheny 5 this January. I've been carrying injuries since then so not the best year ever.
There is no doubt that everyone's absolute peak ability will decline year on year once you get into the Masters territory. However, a lot of people may never have got the better out of themselves so could keep improving through more or more effective training. At some point, the two will counteract each other and there is a limit.

Itziger

Here's my case study.

Did some cross country in Early years of Secondary - who didn't? I wasn't bad, got 4th one year in Munster Schools. I think that was my best result. Gave up at 15 or 16. Did practically nothing for 25 years. Very odd bit of indoor football or game of tennis.

Came back at 42. All half marathons have been pbs (from 1.36 to current 1.26). 10 k times have improved as well. Right now I'm on 38.26.

Both marathon efforts have been painful experiences with cramps in calves and hamstrings. First was 3.32 and second was 3.25. Hoping to better that in October this year. I am also quite intrigued as to when the improvement will stop. Age does come into the equation, it has to. But, as with the OP, I'm a runner who was restarting at level 0 so there was really only one direction I could go in for a few years. I train about 4 or 5 days a week.

The training is a mixture of structured and unstructured (!). I suppose if I got really serious, say I could cut out the wine and the white bread/butter, and upped the training then who knows. I think it would be near impossible to put an age on when you hit the plateau as each person will have a different life story and style that helps or hinders their improvement.

I do like the idea of trying to forget the number on the birth cert though. From 45 to 46 my half times improved by 7 seconds over two races. Then a few weeks after the 47th birthday I went and improved that by 95 seconds. Maybe over the coming years I can knock another minute or so off. Also, as someone above said, I want to be still running in twenty years time.

Doubt I'll be still improving by then, but hey!....

BeepBeep67

It definitely has an impact, I'm a good example of someone who ran for 3.5 yrs up to age 17, 3 years up to age 30 and now back running 4yrs aged 45. So in theory the same natural ability, but 10+ yrs between my running lives.
I ran as a juvenile and ran 15:48 for 5k off a specific training program under the guidance of the club coach. Came back to running aged 28 and ran 16:16 off pretty unstructured training, just hammering every club session and racing hard and often. I'm 45 now and have never has trained as hard or with as much thought and I'm killing myself to hit 17:40.
8% decline between 30 and 45.

dna_leri

Itziger / BeepBeep67 - How much longer do you think you will continue improving? Do you think you are levellling off yet?


To Tunguska's point about why even think about it, probably because it's part of the human condition and aging is inevitable. However thinking about it is not the same as giving in to it and while aging is predictable (I will get one year older every year), slowing down is not.

I am still seeing good improvements in the last 18 months and want to continue which why I started this thread. By thinking about it you also have a chance to influence it. I am also interested to see how others handle it and what strategies you have to keep improving.

At some point we all reach our peak. For those who train consistently, through their teens and twenties they will probably start to slow down in their thirties. For those that have not trained consistently it will be later and less predictable.

Of course, everyone is different and there are plenty of exceptions out there. Sometimes the exceptions are due to training smarter, seeing the signs of slowing down and working with them, not against them.

For me what seems to be working is making the hard days harder and the easy days easier; taking longer recoveries after races; and changing my event focus (longer, shorter, hilly, track etc).

DogSlySmile

I dont really mind how slow I get with age. As long as I can still get around the mountains no bother I'll be a happy happy man

Hero

Karpaty

Recently read the book "Born To Run" by Christopher McDougall citing a research done by University of Utah biologist Dr. Dennis Bramble, here's a short exempt:

"When analysing age group times, Bramble had found that runners start getting faster at age 19 and that the trend continues until they peak at age 27. He also observed that times begin to decline after age 27 and that the decline is modest but steady until age 64 when they have returned to their times as a 19-year-old."

Simply incredible results! Btw, highly recommend the book

rom

Karpaty wrote: »

Recently read the book "Born To Run" by Christopher McDougall citing a research done by University of Utah biologist Dr. Dennis Bramble, here's a short exempt:

"When analysing age group times, Bramble had found that runners start getting faster at age 19 and that the trend continues until they peak at age 27. He also observed that times begin to decline after age 27 and that the decline is modest but steady until age 64 when they have returned to their times as a 19-year-old."

Simply incredible results! Btw, highly recommend the book

An entertaining read that incapsulates why some of us love to run but it is not accurate or factual in many parts. If you like that you may like What I Talk About When I Talk About Running both which are available as audio books too. For example if you take any world junior record at 18/19 then you are going to get no one at age 64 being able to equal that by a long way over any distance.

corny

Some solace for the elderly.;)

Can't remember where i read it but sedentary people see a much greater drop off in aerobic capability. Think it was a runners aerobic capacity declines at about one third the rate of a sedentary person.

BeepBeep67

dna_leri wrote: »

Itziger / BeepBeep67 - How much longer do you think you will continue improving? Do you think you are levellling off yet?

I'm planning to continue improving as a Master which I regard as my current baseline, but don't think I'll hit my PB track times as a Juv. I'm a minute off my 3k PB, 36 secs off my mile and 19 secs off my 800.
This year has been a tough year so far and a step back in all reality, however I've learnt a lot about my body's limits and I'll still get another 2k+ miles on the clock hopefully, so I need to listen to my body more and be more flexible with my schedules. Also I don't have to look too far in Wicklow to see what can achieved as an older athlete, Martin Francis and Mick Byrne to name but 2 and it's harder to get an M45 place in the Wicklow F4L than it is in the Streets of Galway , so I'll be kept on my toes.
I think I can continue to improve my 1 mile to 5k times over the next 2-3 years and can improve my HM + distances for longer.

ocnoc

DogSlySmile wrote: »

Hero

Understatement.