Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto
Quote | Reply
Hello All,

https://www.runnersworld.com/...sub-3-hour-marathon/

In April, Dykes, now 70, ran 2:57:43 at the Rotterdam Marathon. And on October 21 in Toronto, Dykes finished in 2:55:17, improving by 2 minutes and coming within 30 seconds of Whitlock’s seemingly insurmountable mark.

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Truly amazing. He may get the age group record, but he’s 70, Whitlock was 73 when he got the record. I can’t see him doing it in 3 years. So Whitlock will likely still hold some kind of record for the oldest person at that time.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I saw that along with the 70 year old woman who went something like high 3;20's I think?? And keep in mind that Joan Benoit who set the WR, which is still a fast time by todays standards, never stopped running competitively, is running 3 teens at 62 now, and this lady just started running late in life??

I hate myself for this, but the first thing I think when I see these old guys/gals doing what seems to be impossible times, is that they must be frequenting the anti aging clinic down the street. And many will ask, why do I even care? I care because I want to "really" know if this is what a natural human being can do, and that is the high bar. I dont want to see what the unlimited body builder can do, no holds barred so to speak, because that is not what I'm doing, or allowed to do. I want to know what the bar is for real, then reach for it. I'm sick and tired of reaching for bars that are in the sky, and not grounded on either side.

So I just dont know what to think about this incredible time, I wish I did know though. They are testing all kinds of guys in their 30's/40's and 50's in cycling and triathlon and popping them left and right.Are we tho think runners or other aging athletes are any different in mindsets? And keep in mind that using drugs past 70 is such a huge advantage, well it is hard to even explain it to someone. What do you think about your peers there nealhe, just the outliers doing their thing??
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hello monty and All,

Good question ....

My grandmother told me at a young age ... "Neal ...... People are no damn good! ..... And don't you forget it!"

And while there is some truth in that ... I like to start in a different place.

monty writes in part: "What do you think about your peers there nealhe, just the outliers doing their thing?? "


Possibly not ..... and anybody at any age doing something at the extreme of the normal distribution is going to be suspect these days ... and to protect their achievement need to do what is reqired to insure it is regarded as legitimate .... including testing for drugs and other illegal modifications and insuring accurate measurments.

I post some to those efforts as inspiration to everyone .... myself included .... to know that it is possible to still make good efforts across the aging spectrum ..... as noted elsewhere Slowtwitch is aging ....
we all need to keep on keeping on ....

Anything is possible .....

Innocent until proven guilty ....

Drug test the pointy end .....

In God we trust .... all others bring data ......

And while a bit Pollyanna and naive on my part .... I work at having a 'fresh eye'.

We need to enjoy this window of time we live in .... rate of change seems to be accelerating ....

I support diligent testing for drugs and other human modifications outside the rules and go my happy way .... life is short ..... especially from my viewpoint.



https://www.news.com.au/...b6fae53abaaa326e61c2

Excerpt:


"THE late Stephen Hawking believed advances in genetic science would lead to a future generation of superhumans that could ultimately destroy the rest of humanity.

In newly published writings, Dr Hawking suggested an elite class of physically and intellectually powerful humans could arise from rich people choosing to edit their DNA and manipulating their children’s genetic makeup.

“I am sure that during this century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression,” he wrote.

“Laws will probably be passed against genetic engineering with humans. But some people won’t be able to resist the temptation to improve human characteristics, such as memory, resistance to disease and length of life.”

The renowned theoretical physicist, who died in March this year, made the grim prediction in a collection of essays and articles recently published by the UK’s Sunday Times, prior to the release of a book containing a collection of writings by Dr Hawking.

Those without the means will become relegated to a sub-class of “unimproved humans,” he suggests in Brief Answers To The Big Questions due out this week. The wealthy who have power and access could tweak their genome to boost strength, memory and disease resistance.

This two-tier system of humans, Dr Hawking predicted, could have grave social consequences.

“Once such superhumans appear, there will be significant political problems with unimproved humans, who won’t be able to compete,” he wrote. “Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant. Instead, there will be a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate."
======================

It is worth noting that Dr. Hawkings predictions are not something new for Spaceship Earth.

Wiki:

"Neanderthals were a separate species from modern humans, and became extinct (because of climate change or interaction with modern humans) and were replaced by modern humans moving into their habitat between 45,000 and 40,000 years ago."


What do you think?

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't blame you for wondering about drugs! If it helps set your mind at ease any, I have passed two drug tests in the past year and a half - one of which was a very rare unannounced visit.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great to have you here! Outstanding running. Get your interview clothes ready....
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gdykes wrote:
I don't blame you for wondering about drugs! If it helps set your mind at ease any, I have passed two drug tests in the past year and a half - one of which was a very rare unannounced visit.

well, you just never know who turns out to be a slowtwitcher. ;-)

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's amazing.... I think I'll go for run today
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nealhe wrote:
Hello monty and All,

Good question ....

My grandmother told me at a young age ... "Neal ...... People are no damn good! ..... And don't you forget it!"

And while there is some truth in that ... I like to start in a different place.

monty writes in part: "What do you think about your peers there nealhe, just the outliers doing their thing?? "


Possibly not ..... and anybody at any age doing something at the extreme of the normal distribution is going to be suspect these days ... and to protect their achievement need to do what is reqired to insure it is regarded as legitimate .... including testing for drugs and other illegal modifications and insuring accurate measurments.

I post some to those efforts as inspiration to everyone .... myself included .... to know that it is possible to still make good efforts across the aging spectrum ..... as noted elsewhere Slowtwitch is aging ....
we all need to keep on keeping on ....

Anything is possible .....

Innocent until proven guilty ....

Drug test the pointy end .....

In God we trust .... all others bring data ......

And while a bit Pollyanna and naive on my part .... I work at having a 'fresh eye'.

We need to enjoy this window of time we live in .... rate of change seems to be accelerating ....

I support diligent testing for drugs and other human modifications outside the rules and go my happy way .... life is short ..... especially from my viewpoint.



https://www.news.com.au/...b6fae53abaaa326e61c2

Excerpt:


"THE late Stephen Hawking believed advances in genetic science would lead to a future generation of superhumans that could ultimately destroy the rest of humanity.

In newly published writings, Dr Hawking suggested an elite class of physically and intellectually powerful humans could arise from rich people choosing to edit their DNA and manipulating their children’s genetic makeup.

“I am sure that during this century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence and instincts such as aggression,” he wrote.

“Laws will probably be passed against genetic engineering with humans. But some people won’t be able to resist the temptation to improve human characteristics, such as memory, resistance to disease and length of life.”

The renowned theoretical physicist, who died in March this year, made the grim prediction in a collection of essays and articles recently published by the UK’s Sunday Times, prior to the release of a book containing a collection of writings by Dr Hawking.

Those without the means will become relegated to a sub-class of “unimproved humans,” he suggests in Brief Answers To The Big Questions due out this week. The wealthy who have power and access could tweak their genome to boost strength, memory and disease resistance.

This two-tier system of humans, Dr Hawking predicted, could have grave social consequences.

“Once such superhumans appear, there will be significant political problems with unimproved humans, who won’t be able to compete,” he wrote. “Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant. Instead, there will be a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate."
======================

It is worth noting that Dr. Hawkings predictions are not something new for Spaceship Earth.

Wiki:

"Neanderthals were a separate species from modern humans, and became extinct (because of climate change or interaction with modern humans) and were replaced by modern humans moving into their habitat between 45,000 and 40,000 years ago."


What do you think?


I think we cannot science ourselves out of these kinds of predicaments.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't blame you for wondering about drugs! If it helps set your mind at ease any, I have passed two drug tests in the past year and a half - one of which was a very rare unannounced visit. //

Thanks! That does put my mind at ease, I had wrongly assumed that the 70+ crowd in running was not being tested. And getting an out of competition test just says that running is serious about their records. Very nice run, and thanks for setting that bar in a solid place. You seem to have some pretty incredible recuperative powers, do you have a plan and a race where you think you might get that record? As you know (and the rest of us 60+) each year is not like aging a year in your 20's or 30's, they are noticeable, and you know what you lose each of those single years...


Great job and thanks for coming on here, I hope you didnt take offense and that you stay here and keep us informed on your progress. We have quite a community here that is very interested in running, even though we are a triathlon community at heart.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Neanderthals were a separate species from modern humans, and became extinct (because of climate change or interaction with modern humans) and were replaced by modern humans moving into their habitat between 45,000 and 40,000 years ago."


What do you think? //

I think that Hawking lived plenty long enough to know that we figured out what happened to the Neanderthals, we interbred with them and pushed their DNA down to the bottom of ours. Of course there are many other things that lead to their demise as a separate race/species, but they did not become extinct, in the respect that some of there stuff is still walking around in most of us today.


As for the superhuman, no doubt that a lot of that is going on already in labs around the world. Not sure I buy his eventual take over theory, but it is as good a guess as any at this point. Might they not be also superior in compassion as well as intellect and body, and lead the people to a happier, more stable existence?
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gdykes wrote:
I don't blame you for wondering about drugs! If it helps set your mind at ease any, I have passed two drug tests in the past year and a half - one of which was a very rare unannounced visit.

Thank you for replying, Gene. Congratulations on your performance(s).

If so inclined, could you give us a rundown of your running history. Did you run in college? What are your lifetime PR's in the 5K, 10K, HM and marathon?

I didn't see in any of the articles where you indicated how many miles a week you're averaging in your build

Do you think those Nike Vaporfly shoes make a diff?

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi monty,

If asked what my running superpower is, I usually answer that it's my ability to recover quickly. I think nothing of racing week after week. In a few weeks I'm going to run a 50K trail race on Saturday and the California International Marathon on Sunday. I'm going to really test that theory next year when I run a 100-miler in early February and then a 200-miler two and a half weeks later.

I know what you mean by older runners losing fitness each and every year, but I'm thrilled it hasn't happened to me yet! Since my first marathon at age 58, I've gotten faster in each of the succeeding 12 years. All my PR's (except for that pesky 5K) have been set in the last year. I'm still hoping that I can keep improving yet another year or two.

I do have a plan to make another record attempt within a year, but I'm going to keep it a secret!

And everybody asks when I'm going to start doing triathlons! "A man has to know his limitations!" You guys are so awesome being able to train and perform in three different sports. All I can think about when riding a bike is that I'd rather be running. All I can think about when swimming is that I hope I don't drown.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [stringcheese] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And congratulations on your numerous first place finishes in recent triathlons!

I did run in college, and that's why I'm a good runner today. I stunk up the joint so badly, it was firmly entrenched in my mind that I was a mediocre runner at best, so I concentrated on sports I was much better at, like golf and bowling. When I ran my first adult race at age 57, I didn't have my legs destroyed by a lifetime of competition.

All my PR's, distances from 1500 meters to 200 miles (except 5K), were set in the last year.

5K: 19:01 (five years ago)
10K: 39:02 (this past spring)
Half: 1:26:34 (this summer, but I've gone faster in practice, and I expect to set a new PR in November)
Full: 2:55:17 (last weekend)

I probably average about 50 miles per week. A few more building up to a marathon and a lot less during recovery weeks.

Those Nike shoes are a marvel. Definitely worth a few minutes in a marathon. Are they worth it just to better your PR by a bit? Probably not. But when you are chasing records like I am, they are money well spent.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gdykes wrote:
And congratulations on your numerous first place finishes in recent triathlons!

I did run in college, and that's why I'm a good runner today. I stunk up the joint so badly, it was firmly entrenched in my mind that I was a mediocre runner at best, so I concentrated on sports I was much better at, like golf and bowling. When I ran my first adult race at age 57, I didn't have my legs destroyed by a lifetime of competition.

All my PR's, distances from 1500 meters to 200 miles (except 5K), were set in the last year.

5K: 19:01 (five years ago)
10K: 39:02 (this past spring)
Half: 1:26:34 (this summer, but I've gone faster in practice, and I expect to set a new PR in November)
Full: 2:55:17 (last weekend)

I probably average about 50 miles per week. A few more building up to a marathon and a lot less during recovery weeks.

Those Nike shoes are a marvel. Definitely worth a few minutes in a marathon. Are they worth it just to better your PR by a bit? Probably not. But when you are chasing records like I am, they are money well spent.

Your story is the most amazing I've ever read: ZERO aerobic sports (NO, golf does NOT count, not compared to running or swimming) for 35 yrs then all of a sudden you take up running again and you're setting records. TOTALLY AMAZING!!!

It is also amazing you can run 2:55 (6:41) off of a 39 min 10K (about 6:17/mi); 24 sec/mi is an incredibly low slowdown rate over 20 more miles.


"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [ericmulk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah, I get confused about what some of my PR paces are because they are so close together! I guess it just goes to show that speed is the first thing to suffer as you get older. That 10K PR was a new national age group record by over a minute! Thanks to Ed Whitlock, however, I don't think I have a shot at any world records shorter than a marathon. He was best known for his marathon records, but it's his shorter distance records that are totally out of reach! Man, he was fast!

I guess I left you with a bit of a mis-impression. I did jog all through my adult years, just for the fun of it, but I was never in racing shape, and it never occurred to me to run races.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gdykes wrote:
Yeah, I get confused about what some of my PR paces are because they are so close together! I guess it just goes to show that speed is the first thing to suffer as you get older. That 10K PR was a new national age group record by over a minute! Thanks to Ed Whitlock, however, I don't think I have a shot at any world records shorter than a marathon. He was best known for his marathon records, but it's his shorter distance records that are totally out of reach! Man, he was fast!

I guess I left you with a bit of a mis-impression. I did jog all through my adult years, just for the fun of it, but I was never in racing shape, and it never occurred to me to run races.



Ah, now this makes more sense, thanks for the clarification!!!!


"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [ericmulk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 he's setting records for his age range... 70 years group

I remember matt brick sayng he was the fat kid through school and university, never did any sports, then he jogged to lose weight and then went on to win the kiwi ironman and World duathlon championships. Same with Paula Newby fraser... A self professed couch potato that was never athletic growing up, 5he jogged to lose weight and then.... We know the rest... Goat


ericmulk wrote:
gdykes wrote:
And congratulations on your numerous first place finishes in recent triathlons!

I did run in college, and that's why I'm a good runner today. I stunk up the joint so badly, it was firmly entrenched in my mind that I was a mediocre runner at best, so I concentrated on sports I was much better at, like golf and bowling. When I ran my first adult race at age 57, I didn't have my legs destroyed by a lifetime of competition.

All my PR's, distances from 1500 meters to 200 miles (except 5K), were set in the last year.

5K: 19:01 (five years ago)
10K: 39:02 (this past spring)
Half: 1:26:34 (this summer, but I've gone faster in practice, and I expect to set a new PR in November)
Full: 2:55:17 (last weekend)

I probably average about 50 miles per week. A few more building up to a marathon and a lot less during recovery weeks.

Those Nike shoes are a marvel. Definitely worth a few minutes in a marathon. Are they worth it just to better your PR by a bit? Probably not. But when you are chasing records like I am, they are money well spent.

Your story is the most amazing I've ever read: ZERO aerobic sports (NO, golf does NOT count, not compared to running or swimming) for 35 yrs then all of a sudden you take up running again and you're setting records. TOTALLY AMAZING!!!

It is also amazing you can run 2:55 (6:41) off of a 39 min 10K (about 6:17/mi); 24 sec/mi is an incredibly low slowdown rate over 20 more miles.
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [gdykes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the response, Gene.

I have nothing to add except ride this wave for as long as you can. It sounds like you and your coach have a good handle on what keeps you healthy and motivated.

Good luck with your health. Good luck with your training.

It will be fun following your future racing.

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [lacticturkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Same with Paula Newby fraser... A self professed couch potato that was never athletic growing up, //

Where did you hear this? She was a very good swimmer as a kid. I think exceptional for her country. And I think she also went on to be a very good dancer(ballet maybe?) in her later youth, so hardly a couch potato. I met here right at the very beginning of her start in triathlon, she moved to San Diego pretty much right away after she realized this might be the sport for her. She was very lean and tiny back then too, so not really sure where you are getting this information..
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [lacticturkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
he's setting records for his age range... 70 years group... I remember matt brick sayng he was the fat kid through school and university, never did any sports, then he jogged to lose weight and then went on to win the kiwi ironman and World duathlon championships. Same with Paula Newby fraser... A self professed couch potato that was never athletic growing up, 5he jogged to lose weight and then.... We know the rest... Goat

Right, I can understand how a Matt Brick can happen as he was still young, e.g. 20-something when he started "jogging to lose weight" but what I was getting at was that it appeared that he stopped running at age 22, took up golf and bowling, then came back at age 57 and became fast for his AG after 35 yrs off. This is the scenario I would have a hard time believing but Gene clarified that he did "jog regularly" during those 35 yrs so he wasn't coming back completely cold after 35 yrs off.

Also, I think Monty is right about PNF; I met her and Mark Allen at a race in Nashville back around 1995. I asked them both about their swim background and PNF said she grew up a swimmer in Zimbabwe. Allen said he swam AAU growing up, which was the predecessor org to US Swimming and now USA Swimming. Further, I asked Mark what he though he could do for a 1000 yd (900 scm) if going hard; he replied around 10:20, which is 1:02/100 yd or about 1:08/100 scm. So he was pretty quick in the water. :)


"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [ericmulk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PNF was a nationaly ranked swimmer in South Africa as a child, and she won her 1st IM World Championship in 1986, at 24 years old (young). Hard to imagine any pudgy, non athletic years in there :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IntenseOne wrote:
PNF was a nationaly ranked swimmer in South Africa as a child, and she won her 1st IM World Championship in 1986, at 24 years old (young). Hard to imagine any pudgy, non athletic years in there :-)

Very true, maybe a month or two in there to recover from swimming and then start in on triathlon. :)


"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sorry, I thought I heard her saying it in an if-I-can-you-can-too interview... This history makes much more sense

So much for 20 years of inspiration. Now I'm wondering if she won a kona on prerace meal of delivery pizzas and a tray of brownies?

monty wrote:
Same with Paula Newby fraser... A self professed couch potato that was never athletic growing up, //

Where did you hear this? She was a very good swimmer as a kid. I think exceptional for her country. And I think she also went on to be a very good dancer(ballet maybe?) in her later youth, so hardly a couch potato. I met here right at the very beginning of her start in triathlon, she moved to San Diego pretty much right away after she realized this might be the sport for her. She was very lean and tiny back then too, so not really sure where you are getting this information..
Quote Reply
Re: Gene Dykes 70 2:55:17 at Toronto [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hey monty, et al. not sure if anyone here will remember me ... i was very active in the ST forums for 5 or 6 years until a few years back, mostly under my old user name "dawhead" (and I still do 100/100 some years).

Just wanted to underline/underscore Gene's explanations and declamations about drug use and his performance, even though he's done a great job himself already. My wife has been one of Gene's main running partners for over 10 years (stretching back to before he considered himself a "serious, competitive runner"). I run with him from time to time. He lives about a quarter mile from us. We've watched his progress over the last 5 years in particular, after he started working with a coach.

When viewed from a distance it can seem nothing short of miraculous, but when you see the level of dedication Gene has brought to his training and racing, not to mention the volume, and you watch it year over year, the last thing you'd wonder about was whether he was using PEDs. He is a truly committed runner, and has also built up his training in a way that is very unusual for runners of any age, as he has noted in his replies here and articles elsewhere. THREE 200 mile trail races in a year combined with blazing fast 5km times? Gene knows how and when to run slow in ways that seem to maximise his ability to run fast.

Fun fact (perhaps): just before Gene "got serious" about running, he injured his hamstring fairly badly by trying to keep with up with me on a sprint (I'm more than 15 years younger than him). I felt very guilty about it, and it took him months to recover. The last few years? It's been me, the younger runner, who gets injured when an excess of hubris convinces me to think I can go out on of Gene's fast training days. Hip ligament pulls, calf sprains, you name it. Gene? He just keeps running.
Quote Reply

Prev Next