Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

running vs biking vs age
Quote | Reply
Interesting data of what I have seen and been saying forever. As folks get older, their running stops.

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: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow, 1) I thought everyone rode/ran in Australia.

2) only 60/1000 in my AG run. I thought 55-64 is the new 45.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Crickey, mate. It looks like their knees can't take it any more.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [summitt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
summitt wrote:
Wow, 1) I thought everyone rode/ran in Australia.

2) only 60/1000 in my AG run. I thought 55-64 is the new 45.

Not for running. Just look at the run results by age at Nationals. These are the best but so so few could run fast.

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: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
not surprising, perception at least is that as you get older running is too tough on the body due to the impact. some evidence suggests that load bearing exercise is more important for older people...
anyway, cycling is the new golf so old runners switch to the bike to network while saving their knackered knees

not to mention that running is something younger people do as an easy way to get/keep fit. older people forget about that but can be inclined to get into cycling now that they can maybe afford a good bike
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yep, just check virtually any running event vs a cycling event. i suspect for the woman its even more of a discrepancy.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Runguy wrote:
yep, just check virtually any running event vs a cycling event. i suspect for the woman its even more of a discrepancy.

Yep, women tend to slow down, stop, much younger than males for whatever reason. Maybe they are smarter? :)

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: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This study proves nothing about competitive running vs competitive cycling.

The problem with the study is this- what constitutes "cycling"?
Does going for a 15 mile ride at 10 mph, once or twice a month, count count as "cycling"?
I am pretty sure this study is counting this as "cycling".


Does hiking, going for a stroll, messing around with the stair master (or treadmill) count as "running/jogging"?
I am pretty sure the study does not count this.
Last edited by: dirtymangos: Sep 1, 15 13:57
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Running is the 1 of the best things to do thats what we evolved to do, only until you adapt to our unhealthy western culture and posture adapts to it, then you start getting injurys and the 1st reaction someone has is "im getting old its part of the process" not true
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hello h20fun and All,



Keep running .... even when you are 100 years old.

http://espn.go.com/...inishes-toronto-race


"TORONTO -- A 100-year-old runner became the oldest person to complete a full-distance marathon when he finished the race in Toronto on Sunday.
Fauja Singh earned a spot in the Guiness World Book of Records for his accomplishment.

It took Singh more than eight hours to cross the finish line -- more than six hours after Kenya's Kenneth Mungara won the event for the fourth straight year -- and he was the last competitor to complete the course. But his time wasn't nearly as remarkable as the accomplishment."


As shown in your red and blue graphic ..... keep running as you get older and you will kick ass.

(Easier said than done)

.

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [SamYO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SamYO wrote:
Running is the 1 of the best things to do thats what we evolved to do, only until you adapt to our unhealthy western culture and posture adapts to it, then you start getting injurys and the 1st reaction someone has is "im getting old its part of the process" not true

I race with lots of very top racers who are friends. Most of these were VERY fast when they were younger. Now they are all frustrated since they can no longer fun "fast".
They get real upset when I pass them on the run since I am a no body. I am just lucky.

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: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What I think is interesting is that the relationship between "recreation," "semi- competitive sport" and "competitive sport" is not always related.

Take cycling in Tucson:
There are at least 100,000 "recreational cyclists".
Yet there are probably no more than 300 "semi-competive" cyclists and less than 150 "competitive cyclists"

Vs running/jogging:
There are probably 100,000 joggers/runners
There are probably 20,000 that are "semi-competive" and there are probably only 200 that are "competitive."

There are way more "semi-competitive" runners today than there were 30 years a go.
Yet the 150th place finisher at the boston marathon is much slower today.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [dirtymangos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dirtymangos wrote:
What I think is interesting is that the relationship between "recreation," "semi- competitive sport" and "competitive sport" is not always related.

Take cycling in Tucson:
There are at least 100,000 "recreational cyclists".
Yet there are probably no more than 300 "semi-competive" cyclists and less than 150 "competitive cyclists"

Vs running/jogging:
There are probably 100,000 joggers/runners
There are probably 20,000 that are "semi-competive" and there are probably only 200 that are "competitive."

There are way more "semi-competitive" runners today than there were 30 years a go.
Yet the 150th place finisher at the boston marathon is much slower today.

True, I read this. I wonder why folks are slower?

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: running vs biking vs age [dirtymangos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My observation is that aging not only effects ones body but it also often effects ones motivation.

Both of my parents are in their seventies. They both seem to complain a lot about there deteriorating athletic performance.
But the volume, intensity, frequency and logical coherence of their efforts have also declined.


My father is the most ridiculous.
Father (72) says- "10 years ago I could easily hold sub-7 minute pace for half marathon. " (Almost true)
"Now I can barely run sub-9 for a 5k."
Response- "Well of course you are going to get slower. But 10 years ago you were running 45 miles/wk. Now you are doing 9. 10 years ago you did intervals, tempo runs. Now you just do whatever you feel like."
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [dirtymangos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dirtymangos wrote:
My observation is that aging not only effects ones body but it also often effects ones motivation.

Both of my parents are in their seventies. They both seem to complain a lot about there deteriorating athletic performance.
But the volume, intensity, frequency and logical coherence of their efforts have also declined.


My father is the most ridiculous.
Father (72) says- "10 years ago I could easily hold sub-7 minute pace for half marathon. " (Almost true)
"Now I can barely run sub-9 for a 5k."
Response- "Well of course you are going to get slower. But 10 years ago you were running 45 miles/wk. Now you are doing 9. 10 years ago you did intervals, tempo runs. Now you just do whatever you feel like."
So what I'm reading here is that if your father increased his mile/wk to 45 his time would return to the times of 10yrs ago. I'm dubious. I think motivation is the wrong term, maybe perspective.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [dirtymangos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dirtymangos wrote:
My observation is that aging not only effects ones body but it also often effects ones motivation.

Both of my parents are in their seventies. They both seem to complain a lot about there deteriorating athletic performance.
But the volume, intensity, frequency and logical coherence of their efforts have also declined.


My father is the most ridiculous.
Father (72) says- "10 years ago I could easily hold sub-7 minute pace for half marathon. " (Almost true)
"Now I can barely run sub-9 for a 5k."
Response- "Well of course you are going to get slower. But 10 years ago you were running 45 miles/wk. Now you are doing 9. 10 years ago you did intervals, tempo runs. Now you just do whatever you feel like."

From older folks I talk to, plus folks around my age, for most, it is nothing about motivation. It is just the fact when one gets older, things do not work like they used to, or recover the same.
So you need more recover time between efforts which means you cannot do as much, which makes you slower, etc. My motivation has not changed, but what I can do now is not what I could do in my 40's.
And I expect what I can do now in my 50's will not be what I can do in my 60's, even though I sure will want to.

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: running vs biking vs age [dirtymangos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dirtymangos wrote:
My observation is that aging not only effects ones body but it also often effects ones motivation.

Both of my parents are in their seventies. They both seem to complain a lot about there deteriorating athletic performance.
But the volume, intensity, frequency and logical coherence of their efforts have also declined.


My father is the most ridiculous.
Father (72) says- "10 years ago I could easily hold sub-7 minute pace for half marathon. " (Almost true)
"Now I can barely run sub-9 for a 5k."
Response- "Well of course you are going to get slower. But 10 years ago you were running 45 miles/wk. Now you are doing 9. 10 years ago you did intervals, tempo runs. Now you just do whatever you feel like."
Hey. Leave him alone. He is 72. He can do whatever he feels like.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
so apparently I run like a teenager

“Bloom wherever you are planted"
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm a competitive 45 year old runner. I've ran most of my life. I happen to ride a fair amount too - about 20k total the last three years, often due to running injuries. I dabble in bike races but don't really ride the bike with an intensity beyond hammering on group rides. I often contemplate being done running and switch to the bike for the simple release of chasing times/places and so forth. I know about where I should be in running world and spend time training to hit that small window. I spend so much time and energy simply trying to hit that very small target. There is no mystery, for me running is just that, it is what it is. The bike though, it is very liberating. With biking I don't have the running baggage telling me what I should be running within x seconds. It is still exciting to think about what might be or to see how well I can improve...rather than trying to slow how much I decline.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm 59, been racing since the mid 80's and still will race as many as a dozen+ sprints in a season. I can absolutely concur with the fall off in run speed. The bulk of my training time has shifted to the pool year round, then biking (indoor and outdoor ). My running mileage has dropped significantly, mainly as a means of injury avoidance. Achilles, calf, PF issues all had been becoming more common and while my weight has stayed steady over the years, I'm a bigger guy at 6'1" and 185 and the pounding was taking a toll.

Competitively, I can still be successful in local races with the reduced running, but it's when you go up against a larger (or national) field where you can see that running still matters. The best guys can still run and, if you can hang on to it, it's a heckuva weapon as you get older.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Interesting data of what I have seen and been saying forever. As folks get older, their running stops."

Yep, we'll all stop....why because we are dead!
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree with your overall conclusion but I suspect the huge offset in running and cycling in the 18-24 is as much a product of the system/how the pole was taken as a factor of age. The very low number of participants in the 15-17 bracket (yes I realize the brackets are not all the same size which makes the comparisons a bit squirrelly) suggests the numbers aren't including student participating and sports at school. The big boom in running from 15-17 through to the 25-34 group, relative to cycling, likely reflects the migration of these school age athletes into clubs/national memberships where they are then counted. I suspect if school sports were included in this figure the running participation numbers would actually drop steadily throughout the entire age range reflecting a decay from the peak school competition age.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've been a "Front of the MOP" triathlete for 35 years. It does irritate me sometimes that I get smoked by many younger athletes... particularly when I fall into the "I used to be able to S-B-R circles around that guy" trap. My 5-10 hours/week of training has kept me in the game at all distances over the years. My final event of 2015 is in 25 days. Its looking like I'm going to successfully piece "the puzzle" back together this year... healthy and bringing everything to a peak. My S-B-R workouts feel as good as my Training Peaks CTL looks! Taper, race, recover, and start to build for a successful 2016. Maybe a long open water swim, or a double-century in the Rockies. Definately will hang with the other "old guys" at the local running races and sprint tris. While I dream of conquring the "Pikes Peak Ascent", I'll probably never be cazy enough to sign-up... but with a really serious training year and a lot of luck, I BELIEVE that an IM personal best is still possible. Hmmmm. I am an athlete, thats an important part of my identity... and I'm aging successfully.
Quote Reply
Re: running vs biking vs age [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
dirtymangos wrote:
My observation is that aging not only effects ones body but it also often effects ones motivation.

Both of my parents are in their seventies. They both seem to complain a lot about there deteriorating athletic performance.
But the volume, intensity, frequency and logical coherence of their efforts have also declined.

My father is the most ridiculous.
Father (72) says- "10 years ago I could easily hold sub-7 minute pace for half marathon. " (Almost true)
"Now I can barely run sub-9 for a 5k."
Response- "Well of course you are going to get slower. But 10 years ago you were running 45 miles/wk. Now you are doing 9. 10 years ago you did intervals, tempo runs. Now you just do whatever you feel like."


From older folks I talk to, plus folks around my age, for most, it is nothing about motivation. It is just the fact when one gets older, things do not work like they used to, or recover the same.
So you need more recover time between efforts which means you cannot do as much, which makes you slower, etc. My motivation has not changed, but what I can do now is not what I could do in my 40's.
And I expect what I can do now in my 50's will not be what I can do in my 60's, even though I sure will want to.


I think it has everything to do with motivation and life circumstances. Take a minute to think about your life path vs that of other 'folks'. You seem to have had kids early in life, raised a family and was laid off work in your early 50's. You now have ample free time and motivation to do something that you didn't do as a young person. You train as much as most pro athletes and have the flexibility to basically do what you want.

What about other folks? Many have different work arrangements and kids much later in life. My dad kept racing until his early 50's and then lost the spark to keep going. Life gets in the way and other priorities take over. Or people races when they were younger and don't feel the motivation to keep going past their 40's, 50's.

The latter is a much more common scenario. It takes a lot of time and effort to keep racing and training as you get older. Most folks aren't interested in keeping that going for 50years.

I know several people your age that still train seriously on the track and run some blistering times. They seem to manage just fine, but they are very motivated. Of course people get slower as they age, but the massive dropoff in race participation and results in the older categories is much more about life circumstances and motivation than it is about any physical reality of aging.
Last edited by: Jctriguy: Sep 2, 15 5:39
Quote Reply