Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
trismitty wrote:
Some of the fastest bike guys I know are in their 50s. Due to the lessened chance of injury, you can afford more quality bike miles as you age. I wasn't always fast. I started out back to MOP in my 30s. I've become much faster in my mid-40s because I've learned how to train at prescribed intensities. A power meter used properly will produce considerable gains, but training with it the right way means a bit of suffering which many aren't inclined to do. I doubt you'll get much faster on the run as you enter into your 50s and beyond, but you could probably gain some speed on the bike. As it stands now, it sounds like you're getting beaten by the uber bikers. The question is, do you think your running speed will improve to the point that you beat them more than they beat you? My guess is that you could maintain your running speed (which you describe as your strength), but get serious about the bike and see some better results. I'm never the fastest runner, but I'm usually in the top 10-15% and often have a big lead when the run starts. Most of tri buddies who are all faster than me train with this philosophy too. I also find that I run harder (read as scared) when I know fast people are chasing me :).


Agreed.

What I see first hand is a number of guys in the low to mid 50's can still hammer the bike. But, look at the 60 and above, I really have not seen many, if any.

So, for me, my focus is the 60 plus group and what can they do on the swim, bike and run. I use rankings, nationals results, etc to give me the data points.
I also raced Du National at bend, and here are the results.

Male 35-39, top bike 1:03, next guy was a 1:13
Male 45-49 top bike 1:07
Male 50-54 top bike 1:11
Male 55-59 top bike 1:07, second 1:11
Male 60-64 top bike 1:13, second 1:17

So clearly, from this race, they get slower. I was a 1:21 which compared to the 60-64 is not as bad as the 55-59

So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom.

If you cannot get to the starting line healthy, who cares.

When I look at the sprint bike numbers, the same kind of thing. Times just drop big over 60. Just a fact of life for most folks.

At one of the races I did earlier this year, the 5th fastest bike split of the day was a 61 year old.

My godfather, who is a life-long touring rider, did his first triathlon (a reverse sprint) a few years ago at 77. His bike split was faster than anyone's in the next few lower age groups, and his split finally got beat in the 55-59, where he had 3rd fastest...

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
trismitty wrote:
Some of the fastest bike guys I know are in their 50s. Due to the lessened chance of injury, you can afford more quality bike miles as you age. I wasn't always fast. I started out back to MOP in my 30s. I've become much faster in my mid-40s because I've learned how to train at prescribed intensities. A power meter used properly will produce considerable gains, but training with it the right way means a bit of suffering which many aren't inclined to do. I doubt you'll get much faster on the run as you enter into your 50s and beyond, but you could probably gain some speed on the bike. As it stands now, it sounds like you're getting beaten by the uber bikers. The question is, do you think your running speed will improve to the point that you beat them more than they beat you? My guess is that you could maintain your running speed (which you describe as your strength), but get serious about the bike and see some better results. I'm never the fastest runner, but I'm usually in the top 10-15% and often have a big lead when the run starts. Most of tri buddies who are all faster than me train with this philosophy too. I also find that I run harder (read as scared) when I know fast people are chasing me :).


Agreed.

What I see first hand is a number of guys in the low to mid 50's can still hammer the bike. But, look at the 60 and above, I really have not seen many, if any.

So, for me, my focus is the 60 plus group and what can they do on the swim, bike and run. I use rankings, nationals results, etc to give me the data points.
I also raced Du National at bend, and here are the results.

Male 35-39, top bike 1:03, next guy was a 1:13
Male 45-49 top bike 1:07
Male 50-54 top bike 1:11
Male 55-59 top bike 1:07, second 1:11
Male 60-64 top bike 1:13, second 1:17

So clearly, from this race, they get slower. I was a 1:21 which compared to the 60-64 is not as bad as the 55-59

So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom.

If you cannot get to the starting line healthy, who cares.

When I look at the sprint bike numbers, the same kind of thing. Times just drop big over 60. Just a fact of life for most folks.


At one of the races I did earlier this year, the 5th fastest bike split of the day was a 61 year old.

My godfather, who is a life-long touring rider, did his first triathlon (a reverse sprint) a few years ago at 77. His bike split was faster than anyone's in the next few lower age groups, and his split finally got beat in the 55-59, where he had 3rd fastest...

You seem to be missing my point. Yes, you can always find super studs. But when you look at results, like from Nationals, one does not just look at the exception person.

And again, who cares what their splits were, how did they finish? The 77 year old probably was the only one.

So, not sure what your point is. Look at the distribution of bike times per AG per event. They ALL are not riding those one persons studly times.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you have no desire to run more then that's that. I don't want to make you enjoy the sport less. You should do what you like.

But likewise, don't kid yourself. Never exceeding than 30 miles a weeks is deliberately leaving time savings on the table, regardless of what your peers are racing or how long you spend on PowerCranks.

The "chance of injury" from running has very little to do with volume and everything to do with intensity.
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [motoguy128] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
motoguy128 wrote:
1) Most triathletes are not comparatively very good cyclists in terms of both power output and bike handling.
2) Bike fitness build a big overall engine with little risk and lot less fatigue than running. if you want to survive a 2, 4 ,6, 9, or 13+ hour race, you need to be able to sustain energy output for that duration.
3) The easier the bike leg is, the easier the run leg will be.

For myself, my overall performance has always been proportional to my bike fitness. I'm put in big run blocks and overall I went backwards in my triathlon performance.

Points 2 & 3 are pretty much my experience. Re point 1, I come from a bike racing background, and actually love it when the conditions are wet and windy.

For the OP, my racing experience (which isn't that extensive to be honest) be it short or long course is that I come out of the swim mid-pack, work the bike hard, and then generally whoever I exit T2 I usually hold that position to the end of the run. I pass a couple of people and a couple of people pass me. My run is getting better lately though and I've started to pick up a few places in my last few races, but I find that if I don't see an FTP increase in the bike along with a VDOT increase in my running I cannot translate that better running fitness to better race performance off the bike.
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is funny!
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom. .

Dave,

You do realize that at 60+ you will need to be #1 to be top 10%. Most (not all) races do not have 10 60+ guys in them outside of really big races.

I realize you can will an overall race and not get a "score" that makes you AA and you can also come in "way back" and get an AA score, but reality is you need to be in the 10% of your group in the races you do. For you that will mean winning - i.e. being #1.

As for top 20 - probably easy as I think there are only 19 60+ guys racing these days :)
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [B.McMaster] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
B.McMaster wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom. .


Dave,

You do realize that at 60+ you will need to be #1 to be top 10%. Most (not all) races do not have 10 60+ guys in them outside of really big races.

I realize you can will an overall race and not get a "score" that makes you AA and you can also come in "way back" and get an AA score, but reality is you need to be in the 10% of your group in the races you do. For you that will mean winning - i.e. being #1.

As for top 20 - probably easy as I think there are only 19 60+ guys racing these days :)

Where are you getting your numbers?

2015 rankings for 60-64 had 958 guys, ranked

I win most races I enter in my AG. Who cares. I just race against the clock and try to beat as many younger folks as possible. :)

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:


You seem to be missing my point. Yes, you can always find super studs. But when you look at results, like from Nationals, one does not just look at the exception person.

And again, who cares what their splits were, how did they finish? The 77 year old probably was the only one.

So, not sure what your point is. Look at the distribution of bike times per AG per event. They ALL are not riding those one persons studly times.


The 61 year old got 8th overall, beating by a few places the 2nd fastest runner :)

Take a look at the numbers you posted from nationals. What I'm seeing there is that the fastest 55-59 and 60-64 were competitive with the 35-39. And the 1st 35-39, at 10 minutes faster than 2nd, appears to be an exception rather than the rule. Based on this particular example, I'm seeing that at a national level you DON'T necessarily slow down on the bike as you get into your 60s.

Looking at the overall podiums of the races I do, I don't see a big discrepancy between bike and run placings, typically the winners have results like 1st bike/1st run, or 3rd bike/1st run, or 1st bike/2nd run. I don't see overall winners with 57th bike/1st run...

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Last edited by: Warbird: Jul 30, 16 8:17
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Biking is a whole lot more fun than running. Running sucks.

why is this still a thread?

blog
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:


You seem to be missing my point. Yes, you can always find super studs. But when you look at results, like from Nationals, one does not just look at the exception person.

And again, who cares what their splits were, how did they finish? The 77 year old probably was the only one.

So, not sure what your point is. Look at the distribution of bike times per AG per event. They ALL are not riding those one persons studly times.


The 61 year old got 8th overall, beating by a few places the 2nd fastest runner :)

Take a look at the numbers you posted from nationals. What I'm seeing there is that the fastest 55-59 and 60-64 were competitive with the 35-39. And the 1st 35-39, at 10 minutes faster than 2nd, appears to be an exception rather than the rule. Based on this particular example, I'm seeing that at a national level you DON'T necessarily slow down on the bike as you get into your 60s.

Looking at the overall podiums of the races I do, I don't see a big discrepancy between bike and run placings, typically the winners have results like 1st bike/1st run, or 3rd bike/1st run, or 1st bike/2nd run. I don't see overall winners with 57th bike/1st run...

Again, not sure what your point is. If one sucks that bad on the swim, bike or run, they will probably not win their AG. And to win OA, well, I am not worried about that, or are 99.9% of folks racing.

So far the main take away I am getting is many folks get hurt running, so they cannot get in the run volume, and then try to make up for this be getting faster on the bike,
and trying to hold on to the run. Makes sense to me, and I know a number of friends who do this.

What I am finding out for me is for the run, I see to run slow on slow days, and fast on fast days. But on the bike, I have been doing it totally wrong. Too hard on rest days,
and too easy on hard days.

Oh well.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:


You seem to be missing my point. Yes, you can always find super studs. But when you look at results, like from Nationals, one does not just look at the exception person.

And again, who cares what their splits were, how did they finish? The 77 year old probably was the only one.

So, not sure what your point is. Look at the distribution of bike times per AG per event. They ALL are not riding those one persons studly times.


The 61 year old got 8th overall, beating by a few places the 2nd fastest runner :)

Take a look at the numbers you posted from nationals. What I'm seeing there is that the fastest 55-59 and 60-64 were competitive with the 35-39. And the 1st 35-39, at 10 minutes faster than 2nd, appears to be an exception rather than the rule. Based on this particular example, I'm seeing that at a national level you DON'T necessarily slow down on the bike as you get into your 60s.

Looking at the overall podiums of the races I do, I don't see a big discrepancy between bike and run placings, typically the winners have results like 1st bike/1st run, or 3rd bike/1st run, or 1st bike/2nd run. I don't see overall winners with 57th bike/1st run...


Again, not sure what your point is. If one sucks that bad on the swim, bike or run, they will probably not win their AG. And to win OA, well, I am not worried about that, or are 99.9% of folks racing.

So far the main take away I am getting is many folks get hurt running, so they cannot get in the run volume, and then try to make up for this be getting faster on the bike,
and trying to hold on to the run. Makes sense to me, and I know a number of friends who do this.

What I am finding out for me is for the run, I see to run slow on slow days, and fast on fast days. But on the bike, I have been doing it totally wrong. Too hard on rest days,
and too easy on hard days.

Oh well.


What you are also missing is that some people A) are just naturally faster on the bike, just as you are on the run, and/or B) simply aren't capable of getting that fast on the run, whereas they might be able to on the bike. I happen to fall under "B". I would love to run low 6s again, but that simply isn't going to happen. But even as I get older I'm still getting faster on the bike, and on those occasions where I get on the podium, I did it by having some of the fastest swim and bike splits, and having enough of a lead that the faster runners didn't catch me...

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"The more I ran, the more 'talented' I became" - Bob Hodge
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
B.McMaster wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom. .


Dave,

You do realize that at 60+ you will need to be #1 to be top 10%. Most (not all) races do not have 10 60+ guys in them outside of really big races.

I realize you can will an overall race and not get a "score" that makes you AA and you can also come in "way back" and get an AA score, but reality is you need to be in the 10% of your group in the races you do. For you that will mean winning - i.e. being #1.

As for top 20 - probably easy as I think there are only 19 60+ guys racing these days :)


Where are you getting your numbers?

2015 rankings for 60-64 had 958 guys, ranked

I win most races I enter in my AG. Who cares. I just race against the clock and try to beat as many younger folks as possible. :)

Who cares - You care - At least that is what the rest of us are reading from your posts. And when we talk overall, you say you don't care, but then you talk about running by younger guys - very inconsistent.

Which is it? do you care about winning your age group ,winning the race or just beating one of your old times or just beating a few out of shape younger guys?

I was joking about 19 old guys in total, but most races I do have less than 10 60-64 year olds so to be top 10%, you need to win the group. Last 5 races - # of 60-64 - 13, 4, 9, 3, 6. NOT MANY.
Quote Reply
Re: Why does the focus always seem to be on the bike, and not the run? [B.McMaster] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
B.McMaster wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
B.McMaster wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
So, I just do not see that many uber bikers I am not worried about being number 1, never will be. My focus is top 20 ranked. All American. And do the best I feel
I can with my balance of training and being a Mr. Mom. .


Dave,

You do realize that at 60+ you will need to be #1 to be top 10%. Most (not all) races do not have 10 60+ guys in them outside of really big races.

I realize you can will an overall race and not get a "score" that makes you AA and you can also come in "way back" and get an AA score, but reality is you need to be in the 10% of your group in the races you do. For you that will mean winning - i.e. being #1.

As for top 20 - probably easy as I think there are only 19 60+ guys racing these days :)


Where are you getting your numbers?

2015 rankings for 60-64 had 958 guys, ranked

I win most races I enter in my AG. Who cares. I just race against the clock and try to beat as many younger folks as possible. :)


Who cares - You care - At least that is what the rest of us are reading from your posts. And when we talk overall, you say you don't care, but then you talk about running by younger guys - very inconsistent.

Which is it? do you care about winning your age group ,winning the race or just beating one of your old times or just beating a few out of shape younger guys?

I was joking about 19 old guys in total, but most races I do have less than 10 60-64 year olds so to be top 10%, you need to win the group. Last 5 races - # of 60-64 - 13, 4, 9, 3, 6. NOT MANY.

May, you must work for the Clinton race. :)

I said I do not care. I mean it. I love to get motivated to give it my best, so whether it is younger folks, or not being chicked, or our running a EMJ stud, it is all part of the fun.
But on my death bed, will mean nothing, and does not mean nothing in the scope of life.

Again, who cares about 10% at a local race? Why do you keep bringing it up? Races I see in the 60-64 are lucky to have even a few doing them.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply

Prev Next