RAAM: Serious Problems

A link Trans America Bike Race (TABR) sent to me by a friend the other day triggered this post. 

The first thing I did when I went to the TABR website was to look at their route.  In detail.  The second thing I did was to follow a link to Bikepacking.net, a website for bicyclists using off-road routes for longer distance bicycling and camping. 

What was I looking for? 

• Did TABR find a route that was less dangerous (cars, trucks) than the RAAM route?
• Did TABR find a way for entrants to avoid spending tens of thousands of dollars?
• Is everybody doing TABR `white?'

You should go to the links above and get answers to questions you may have.   I'm still drilling down to get my answers.

--------------------

I don't have many real friends now (my choice) so I'm not risking much in this domain by addressing the `RAAM' question. 

As well, I'm an easy target for those objecting to my statements because:

• I did not finish my own Race Across the West (RAW) attempt in 2010 (Not Finishing RAW),
• I was a real pain in the ass to the RAAM folks when I was a RAAM Official in 2012 (My Experience as a RAAM Official - 2012),
• as the Crew Chief for a RAAM solo racer in 2013 I pulled her out of the race after her crew vehicle was back ended by a driver who was texting (RAAM 2013: Close Call) (She ultimately - without me - reentered the race and finished.) 

My objections and criticisms can be dismissed by some as `sour grapes.'  Or, as one hubris-disabled sot referred to me by saying: "There are `champs.'  And then there are `chumps.'"

--------------------

• The RAAM route is meticulously researched and selected.  But it has many conspicuous and oft-cited problems.  I do not know why RAAM management has not accepted suggested reasonable safe alternates to current dangerous routes.  Meticulous research, lacking good decision-making, results in bad outcomes.  Bad outcomes, over and over again ... why?

• When I articulated my concern about route safety to one of the key RAAM executives I was accused of "undermining a sport we are trying desperately to grow."  My unstated response was: "It's a profit-making BUSINESS that you are trying desperately to grow!"

• Several years ago the legal ownership of RAAM changed from that of a non-profit to a privately held for-profit entity.  I think that is a real problem.  The temptation to `grow' the event may lead to decisions that place the interests (safety, safety, safety) of participants at risk. 

• Agreed that RAAM raises money for charity.  But participating in RAAM as a racer can exceed $100,000.  Less for solo racers and (much) more for teams.  Why spend $70,000 to participate in RAAM only to raise $70,000 for a charity? 

• So many white people!  Yes, there is international representation at RAAM.  And, perhaps my objection is not so much the issue of race, but that of `class.'  (There was a phrase we used to point out the irony that the University of Chicago is situated and bordered on four sides by poverty, crime and ghettoes:  "White and black.  Shoulder to shoulder.  Against the poor!")

--------------------

I have a problem.  I find meaning and expression in endurance bicycling.  But I'm a `road' cyclist.  Sharing the roads with motorized vehicles is inherently dangerous (i.e., you can get killed a lot :) ). 

I'm going to give off-road `bikepacking' type activities more study. 

Who Am I to Judge?

But we all do it.  `Judge,' that is.  We decide (explicitly or implicitly) what is `worthy.' 

Joe Friel's latest (9/27/13) blog post (Aging: An Excuse) approaches from a physiological, data driven, perspective something that I've been saying for years: Many of us use getting older to justify laziness. 

Now THAT is a `judgmental' statement. 

I didn't choose my profession: psychology.  Focusing on what is going on in the minds of other people is not something I choose to do.  I can't NOT do it.  It's like water seeking the lowest point.  You don't see water hesitate to flow once it is free to do so.  It's an implacable law of nature.  I call this invasion into people's motivation and mind my `talent.'  Because I certainly didn't choose to `learn' it.  I have no choice.  My `head' just goes there.

I have deployed my `invasion' force toward my own behavior.  And it has been a godsend for me.  I'm impatient with most people (unless I'm paid not to be).  I `reverse engineer' from their accomplishments, deficiencies, etc, what it took to `get there.' 

The other day somebody said "Oh, I'm too old to learn about that (a minor computer thing)."  I exploded with frustration: "Well, hell.  Why don't you just dig a hole and bury yourself right now!" 

Many of my contemporaries whine (different from complaining: 2013  ; 2010 ).  They have worked hard to be out of shape, fearful of the morning, avoidant of challenge, essentially numb to themselves and the world from head to toe.  I call it `passive suicide.'  Waiting to die.  It takes real effort to stay bored and afraid all day long. 

So, again, what the frig does this have to do with `Training?!'

First, I used running and cycling to wear myself out so that I didn't have to sit in a chair shaking and trembling with `existential' fear and tension.

Then I worked insane hours in an effort to distract myself from deciding what was worth it.  "I can't leave Chicago and wander from this to that because a) I'd be irresponsible, b) I'd not be productive, c) I'd be just like (pick a name)."  

Sex and ego were the penultimate distraction, causing me to be dead from the neck up for decades. 

When my body started to `lose' shape ("Check your pockets. Did you `lose' it there?") I got frightened.  When folks didn't know I was a `doctor' I felt an urgency to set them straight about my top-dog status.  When I passed a mirror and saw my father I began to lose hope that I was `different.'

Training is an anvil and I use my body as the hammer.  The outcome is `performance.' 

These days the battleground is between the conscious knowledge of the difference between `riding the bike for long hours and distances' and `a structured plan of training that includes intervals, tempo, rest and goals.' 

I resist the hard stuff because a) it's physically uncomfortable (if not actually painful), b) I `predict' poor performance and how I judge myself for it (thereby energetically engaging in the self-fulfilling cycle), c) it requires me to set priorities.

Priorities.  When I'm tired from training I decide not to do things with my wife that she would enjoy.  I don't like to disappoint my wife.  So I train less.  I exaggerate her disappointment and don't place a demand on her to be responsible for making a fulfilling life without my being there all the time.  (Of course, THAT is a bullshit pretext to avoid the consequences of 'resisting the hard stuff.')

Priorities.  Being neat and clean, being completely on top of finances, getting all obsessed with house maintenance, appearance, etc.  It's `good' to have these things in my life.  But the extra 80% effort I make to get that last 20% of perfection is just plain mental illness.  It's nuts.  I'm trying to push the river back upstream. 

Training to fulfill the potential I have can be accomplished without abusing or neglecting other domains in my life.  In other words, manufacturing in my mind `catastrophic' consequences is a conscious decision I make.  Even if it has emotional and psychological origin. 

Who am I to judge?  Well, me.  I AM the judge!

Joe Friel: A Pillar of Sport and Fitness Excellence

I've had a love-hate experience with the work of Joe Friel for years.  But I don't know of any sport and fitness professional who covers so much ground (intellectually speaking) with such focus and legitimate authority. 

Here's Joe's recent blog post.  You can find more of his work here:  Joe Friel's Blog

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joe Friel's Blog

---

Aging: What’s Happening to My Muscles? Posted: 18 Sep 2013 11:42 PM PDT Scientists who study aging have been telling us for years that we can expect a loss of muscle mass as we get older. We’re simply destined to lose muscle fibers, especially type II fibers – the fast twitch ones (Deschenes, Iannuzzi-Sucich, Karakelides, Proctor, Short, Wilkes). We are told to expect about a 40% to 50% loss by age 80 (Doherty, Faulkner, Karakelides, Lemmer). Depressing for someone of my advanced age (69). Several more recent studies, however, are now concluding that the changes with aging reported in such research are largely the result of disuse and not as much due to the ravages of age as previously believed (AAgaard, Maharam, Melov). How is it that science is finally coming to this conclusion? By measuring what’s happening with older masters athletes who continue to compete and comparing them with young athletes and with the oldsters’ sedentary age peers. For example, Wroblewski compared athletes aged 40 to 81 in a cross-sectional study and found that although body fat increased with age, quadriceps muscle mass and strength were similar across all ages. All of the subjects, regardless of age, trained four or five times weekly as runners, swimmers, cyclists or triathletes. Use it or lose it. Right? Of course, the confounding element in cross-sectional studies such as this is that the older athletes may have self-selected. In other words, perhaps they didn’t maintain their muscle mass because they were athletes, but rather they were athletes because they maintained their muscle mass. Those who couldn’t maintain muscle mass with age may have quit their sport or never even started such strenuous activities. So the research still leaves us wondering. It could be inevitable that you will eventually lose some muscle, but it may be insignificant for decades if the more recent research is to be accepted at face value. The most common reason given for this happening is a decrease in the body’s production of anabolic (muscle- and tissue-building) hormones such as testosterone, estrogen, growth hormone, and insulin-like growth factor. But then exercise is anabolic also – it may help us hold onto muscle as we get older by slowing the demise of these hormones (Arazi, Kraemer, Cadore). The accompanying pictures of the cross-sectional areas of three people of different ages illustrate this belief (Wroblewski). These MRIs compare the thigh muscles of two male triathletes at ages 40 and 70 with those of a sedentary 74-year-old male. Note the atrophied muscles and surrounding fat on the thighs of the sedentary man and how similar the muscle mass of the two triathletes are regardless of age. Is this what we can expect? These pictures made the rounds on the internet about a year ago and lend support to the idea that remaining active through strenuous exercise may well be the best thing you can do to hang on to your muscle mass as you age. One of the authors of this study believes that aging accounts for only about 30% of the decline in athletes (Wright), whereas most cross-sectional studies of sedentary older people place 50% to 70% – or more – of the blame on age alone. Could exercise keep your muscles young? A couple of recent, unique studies from the University of Western Ontario lend support to the “use it or lose it” concept (Power, Power). The researchers counted the number of motor units in both young and old subjects. A motor unit is a group of muscle fibers activated by a single nerve in the spine. With aging (or is it disuse?) those nerves die and their associated muscle fibers atrophy. And so we lose muscle size, strength and power. This has been known for quite a long time with aging rats. But how about with people? The initial Power’s study done in 2010 was the first to examine this phenomenon in humans. Basically, the researchers found that we’re quite similar to rats in this respect. Runners in their 60s had about the same number of motor units in their tibialis anterior (a shin muscle) as runners in their 20s. But when they counted the motor units in sedentary but healthy people also in their 60s the scientists discovered the inactive older folks had 35% fewer motor units than the same-age runners. Essentially, the old runners had young leg muscles. The Canadian researchers logically wondered if this finding meant that all the muscle motor units in an aging runner’s body were maintained, or just the running-related motor units? So in a similar follow-up study they counted motor units in the biceps brachii (upper arm) of aging runners, young runners and aging sedentary. They found that the older runners had about 48% fewer motor units than the young runners and about the same as the older sedentary. Apparently, exercise does not maintain muscles unless they are strenuously trained. So there is now little doubt – use it or lose it. Right? But, again, could this result could be the consequence of who the subjects were? After all, it was a cross-sectional study. The subjects may have self-selected. People who maintained their motor units may have continued to compete into old age while those who didn’t maintain them dropped out of sport at a much younger age. I wish we could take a look at some longitudinal studies of aging to see if these results hold true when athletes are followed for several years. Unfortunately, such research is lacking. So it still comes down to opinion. Mine is that the existing research is probably accurate and that while aging has some affect on muscles mass, the greater cause of the decline is more than likely lack of use – an increasingly sedentary lifestyle as we get older. I see this even in master athletes. The older they become, the less strenuous their training. In the next post I’ll take a look at sport science’s somewhat depressing view of aerobic capacity (VO2max) and aging. Then we’ll move on to what I think the solutions may be for maintaining (or even improving) muscle mass, VO2max and performance as we get older. I know some won’t like my conclusions. Everyone is entitled to an opinion when we have little in the way of data.

Paleo Diet

I got the book Joe Friel recommended ("Paleo Diet for Athletes").  Cover to cover. 

Though it was written by a university academic it reads like one of those advertisements from Hammer products: "wow," "amazing," "you'll improve your times, lose weight, develop a following of groupies, get rich, dance better, fart less, your hair will grow back, and people will say you remind them of Brad Pitt."

Paleo means `cave man.' 

You're supposed to eat meat, fish and vegetables.  All of it fresh, if not actually trying to eat you back while you eat it. 

You're supposed to avoid milk and grains.  You're supposed to drink fluids only when you're thirsty. 
--

• Cave men typically didn't live long enough to develop heart disease.  They checked out in their 20's.  So, it's true that they didn't die from age related diseases.
• As we age our sense of thirst isn't as reliable as when we were cave man `eligible.'  Almost all folks over 50 are chronically, even if mildly, dehydrated. 
• I will not allow my food bill to double.  Fresh meat?  Fresh fish?  Organic vegetables? 
• The meat-producing industry does massive harm to land and ecologies.
• I'm supposed to buy frequently (fresh!) and local.  (Right.  I'll just rearrange my houseboy's schedule during the week so that he chauffeurs me less and shops more discriminatingly).
• The author has 30 or 40 `recipes' for me to cook up.  My houseboy can't cook for crap.  That means I'd have to add a chef to my payroll.  I wouldn't trust them.  I'd probably find them both smokin' on the veranda when they're supposed to laboring away, perfecting my mortal `temple.'
• The author laments the fact that our species became agrarian, no longer hunters and gatherers.  He blames climate change for this tragedy, suggesting an asteroid caused it.  He would prefer, instead, that we died off in our 30's, never developed science, writing, art (oops!  bone necklaces and pictographs are art), culture.
• The author (and others) reports amazing data regarding improved biometrics, i.e., cholesterol, triglycerides, and countless other things.  I don't have the training, education or knowledge to dispute, let alone comment on, much of the detail.  So, I got tired of saying "Mmm. Uh-huh" after each 20 page dollop of chemistry lesson. 
• My family has always had a problem with cholesterol.  I take a small, inexpensive statin drug and it has made a miraculous difference. 
• It makes no sense for me to "get in the river and try to push it back upstream."  I mean, I should eat meat all day and then take a statin to reduce cholesterol?!  I DO see the contradiction.

I'm gonna stick with veggies, peanut butter and lots of fluids.  And NOBODY is going to take my glass of two buck chuck from me.

After all, it appears that the time has passed (40+ years ago) when I should be a dead caveman.  Something I'm doing (or not doing) has got to be working.

Here is a link to an interesting YouTube vid on this subject:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RB50h61FQ

It Never Stops. And That's a `Good' Thing.

Over the weekend I did a `ride qua race' (for me, at least) called the Skull Valley Loop Challenge.  The course, road conditions, weather, terrain and number of entrants couldn't be better.  SVLC Route

This was the third SVLC in a row for me.  My times are as follows:

2011:  3:21:00
2012:  2:49:00 Garmin Data - 2012
2013:  3:10:00 Garmin Data - 2013

I was disappointed with my time this year, of course.  On comparison of the Garmin data of 2012 and 2013 a glaring difference became apparent: in '13 my heart rate was much more elevated than in '12. 

Long story made short: if you're going to try to `race' a short course don't train for a long course. 

In 2012 my training was more intense.  I pushed myself for speed on the climbs as well as on the descents. 

In 2013 my training was much less intense.  I did far more long, slow, multi-hour training sessions.
--
In 2012 I allowed myself to coast down the mountain (max of 48 mph) during the first half of the event and then applied intensity and effort to the climbing back up the mountain in the last half of the event. 

In 2013 I pushed myself hard down the mountain (exceeding 53 mph) and didn't have the training-built stamina to maintain the intensity for the climb back up. 

---

The 5 mph addition in 2013 was at the cost of physical capacity to maintain the pace for the race. 

Not complicated.  And had I been paying a 3rd party to structure and supervise my training I would have been corrected and put on a different training track.

I can be properly faulted by not paying for a coach.  But, frankly, I'd rather take this `lesson' than spend my money for a faster, more effective, lesson. 

Lifestyle: as disciplined as I am I'm too stubborn to place my own cycling so central to my everyday priorities.  It's not that I have so many more `honorable' priorities (e.g., family, friends, etc).  I just don't want to be on that treadmill.  I simply prefer to be stubborn and undisciplined in this way. 

---

Going forward.  Next year I'll spend the 8 weeks preceding the SVLC ramping up the intensity level so that I can have more stamina and rationally expect as good or better outcome than my 2012 time. 

It never stops.  And that's a good thing.

Transition to Colder Weather

I live in Arizona so many will scratch their head when I describe my plans for transitioning to `colder' weather.  ("Arizona?  It's always hot there, right?!)

Today is Sept 12th and at 7AM it's 51F and sunny. 

One hundred (blessed) miles southeast and 4,000 feet lower is the obscenity called Phoenix where it is currently 75F with an expected 95F today. 

Down `there,' in the `valley' the cycling season is coming alive. 

Up `here,' in the mountains we're a bit more reality based with four actual, real, seasons.  Snow as early as November, even though most of it melts off in a day or two.

Because we're in the mountains, though, the roads can stay iced in the mountain shady sections during the day.  Cycling requires much more planning and is typically of shorter duration.

Last winter I found myself schlepping the bike south and down to warmer climes to get in some training.  Punched a big hole in my day without much of a return.  I spent many, many hours grinding away on the indoor trainer while looking out the window at snowy mountains.

Not this year. 

Yes, I'll continue to put in hours on indoor equipment.  But I won't be schlepping the bike or threading the weather needle during sunlight just to be on the road.  Instead of `looking out the window at snowy mountains' I'll be on the mountains.

Literally every time I ride I find myself wondering what it must be like to be `up there,' in the woods and on the mountain.  I plan to find out this winter.

Trekking up and over rural mountains, thinking it is going to be a fun hike, is an invitation to calamity.  There are `trails' galore out this way.  But they're not the kind of trails with benches every 2 miles and informative little descriptive signs.  Some trails go untraveled for years.  And they often lead over one mountain, down to a wilderness valley and back up to another mountain that is even more wilderness.

I'm very much engaged in learning as much as I can in advance of a careful, considered winter of hiking and climbing.  If and when I conclude I know what I'm doing I'd like to do some multiday hiking. 

Sleep is a Good Thing

In the run up to this coming Sunday's Skull Valley Loop Challenge my training schedule made last week the `heavy' week for workouts.  And `heavy' it was.  My last workout was yesterday.  So, after doing the 20 Mile Descending Time Trial  my wife and I had a nice brunch and did some local touring of beautiful Arizona.

Returning home around 2pm I was unable to keep from nodding off the minute I sat down for the rest of the day and evening.

Today started the `taper' of light training in advance the Challenge.

I got up later than usual this morning, did some household chores and made a week's worth of my "grim concoction" of vegetables, fruit, protein, wheat germ and lemon concentrate in the VitaMix blender. 

But I kept nodding off.  DEEP nodding off.

I finally gave up the battle and went back to bed and slept for three more hours.

If my body had a brain it would send me a `thank you' gift.

20 Mile Descending Time Trial Result

Completed the test with link below. 

Here are data and thoughts from today's test:

• Top of Iron Springs Rd. to Skull Valley RR track (12.4 miles = 00:21:39);
• SV RR track to Kirkland (6.65 miles = 00:15:43). 
• Total of 19.05 miles in 00:37:22. 
• Same speed for same distance as on Sep 15, '12. 

But 00:03:00 short of my goal for the race next Sunday.

Four possible reasons:

1. no headwind last year but 10+ mph headwind today;
2. 32 minutes of racing to warm up last year but started `cold' this year;
3. racing TT / solo today and not as `motivating' as competing against others last year;
4. I'm not as strong as last year.

Sep 8, 13: 20 Mile Descending TT

Race Experiment: Descending Cum Riding Time

http://ridewithgps.com/routes/3307104

In about one hour my wife will drive me to the top of Iron Springs Road and drop me off. I'll then descend down, at maximum speed, 20.5 miles to Kirkland.

I'm stripping the bike (Bacchetta CA2. blue, carbon fiber) down so that I carry nothing ... no food, water, tools, seatbags, etc. This serves two purposes: ...

a) to assess the descending speed capability of the bike without ballast,

b) to determine the bike handling dynamics of a totally naked bike. A bike with seatbag, water, etc, has variable weight distribution that interferes with air resistance, affects vertical stability at speed, i.e., there is wobble making the bike whippy at high speeds with minor directional forward changes [slight weaving at speed to stay upright, avoid rough road, etc].

I don't expect my maximum speed to exceed 55 mph (which any skilled cyclist - DF or bent) can achieve. But, because of the oversized front chain ring (58t) I'll be able to increase the amount of time/distance I can maintain pedaling (i.e., apply power) at the bottom of descents and beginning of ascents. So, max speed may not be much different but elapsed time between start and finish will certainly be shorter / less.

When I descend so fast that `spinning' generates instability I stop pedaling and become nothing more than a bag of rocks coasting. When I coast less and power pedal more the average speed over distance and time improves.

A Surpising Training Efficiency.

In less than two weeks I'll be racing the Skull Valley Loop Challenge. Here's the Course Map.

Arizona Central Highland terrain (6,000 feet).  Fifty four miles and 4,800 feet of climbing.  To `ride' the SV Loop is a `challenge.'  To race it is several steps beyond a `challenge.' 

Last year I took 32 minutes off my previous best time and came in at 02:49:00.  I was very surprised at doing so well with very little focused training. 

This year my training for the SVLC is now very focused and intense.  Wish me luck.  I'm intending to take another 15 minutes off my PB.  Maybe even sub 02:30:00. 

I don't `race' often.  (I do hold two world racing records: fastest recumbent crossing of Illinois; fastest recumbent crossing of Indiana.  Both in 2009.)

Rather, I've done long distance endurance events.  I've often been the only recumbent to finish such events but never first. 

On Sunday, October 6th, I'll be `converting' the SVLC course from a race to an unsupported ultra endurance event.  Instead of racing one loop I'll be stringing five loops together over twenty-four (24) hours, i.e., 270 miles and 24,140 feet of climbing. 

All but about 7 miles of the `loop' are in remote mountain, forest or ranch land.  When the sun sets vehicle traffic can be literally non-existent.  Critters.  Flat tires.  Accidents.  Very, very dark.  And alone.

Current training for the `race' has included speed work, climbing with 25-30 lbs of extra weight (power to weight ratio) and increased frequency of `hard' training sessions.  So as not to `over train' I've incorporated easy days into the mix.  These `easy' days cover the same mileage and climbing but at a much less intense effort.  That is, instead of being on the road for 3.5 hours I'd put in 6 hours ... just time `in the saddle.' 

The 24 hour ultra endurance event (5 loops) scares me more than the one loop race.  Can I `do' 24,000 consecutive feet of climbing in 24 hours? 

It turns out that my `race' training program is fitting well into my `ultra endurance' training needs. 

In the last week my long, `easy' training sessions left me with lots of energy and little wear and tear.  If I carefully attend to proper pacing on the ultra event I'm very, very confident of finishing five loops in 24 hours.  One month to go. 

Logistics.  Hydration.  Food.  These remain the factors requiring careful planning for the ultra event. 

Joe Friel's Blog: Aging and Performance

Certainly, because of my own age (67) Joe Friel's recent blogs are of intense interest for me.  His latest topic is no disappointment:

http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2013/09/aging-my-performance.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Aging: My Performance Posted: 03 Sep 2013

I’ve got training logs that go back to the 1970s when I first started recording my workouts. My heart rate data started in 1983, power in 1995. I had intended to go back and review all of that before sitting down to write this. But last weekend we flew to Lucca, Italy, where I am now. Preparing to leave is always a hassle. But being gone from my office for two months meant getting a lot done before the trip. I never got around to checking my training records, so much of what follows is based on memory. And it seems the older I get, the better I used to be.

Things appear to be changing this year. I’m not sure if it’s my age that’s behind it, just an aberration, or the inevitable circumstances of a busy life in 2013 with lots of travel. Of course, it could be some combination of all of these – and more. Regardless, it’s disturbing and has me wondering.

By “changing” I mean I’ve become less powerful. And it seems like it happened all of a sudden. In March I tested my Functional Threshold Power (FTP) and it was right where it has been for the last six springs when I first started testing this marker of performance. This was done in Scottsdale, Ariz. where I spend my winters. My summers are in Boulder. My power is always considerably lower in the latter due to the altitude. And sure enough, my FTP was where it always is in the first few weeks after arriving at 5500 feet – down about 8% from Scottsdale where I live at around 1800 feet.
Usually, around a month into my adaptation to the higher altitude about half of the lost watts come back. By the end of the summer when I’m ready to head south to Scottsdale, my FTP in Boulder is about what it was at the lower altitude in March. Then when I get back to the lower altitude I see my peak FTP for the season.

But not this year. Things were different. My FTP in Boulder never rose. It stayed at the -8% decrement all summer. And when I got back to Scottsdale, it didn’t come up – at all. To add to the concerns, my sprint power is the lowest it’s been since I started testing it. Could these changes be the first signs of age catching up with me?

For many years my FTP and sprint have been about the same with only seasonal or environmental (altitude in Boulder, summer heat in Scottsdale) shifts. My power for specific types of workouts, especially intervals and tempo rides (here’s the questionable memory part), has changed very little since 1995. As a 50-something rider I was slightly above average at, for example, time trials and climbing back then. Fifteen years later I’m a much better-than-average senior rider for TTs and hills. I don’t think I improved; my age peers just slowed down more. But now I may be catching up with them, it seems.

Of course, we are all going to have reduced athletic performance in endurance sports as we age. It’s inevitable. But we really don’t expect to see it happen - ever. And when it does, as I seem to be experiencing this year, it’s a bit frightening.

How much of a change should we expect? And when?

There was a great study that came out of Boise State University in 2009 – “Masters Athletes: An Analysis of Running, Swimming and Cycling Performance by Age and Gender” (Ransdell). The problem with most studies on athletes and aging is that they look at broad cross sections of various age categories by gender. That means they are comparing a wide range of abilities – front to back of pack – with motivation having a lot to do with performance. Some people simply aren’t motivated to train. And as the number of participants in endurance sports increases, the percentage of those who could not care less about performance and are only doing it for social reasons is likely to increase. That waters down the data so that we really don’t know what the true impact of age on performance is likely to be.

The authors of the Ransdell study examined only current US and World record holders by age groups in three sports – swimming, running, and cycling. That means we are now able to better understand what happens when motivation to train and compete is taken out of the equation leaving only age and gender as the modifiers of performance.

The following three charts are based on data from this study. While the scientists looked at several event distances within each sport, I’ve selected out only the longest and most common, long-endurance distances – 1500m swim, marathon, and 40k time trial. On the left side of each chart (the X axis) are the times of the records and across the bottom (Y axis) are the age groups. The charts aren’t terribly precise but give us a good look at trends.



Note from these charts that in the age groups from 50-59 there is a slight decrease in performance with it being greatest in swimming (the times get slower as indicated by rising lines). Women’s performances tend to decline even faster than the men’s, especially in running. Swimming shows the least gender-related decline.

These findings are roughly in agreement with other papers that also studied elite age-group athletes. For example, Wright and Perricelli looked at the performances of senior Olympians (50+) in the 2001 National Senior Olympic Games. Both male and female performances declined by about 3 to 4% per year from age 50 to 85, but at a great rate after age 75.

Tanaka and Seals looked at US Masters Swimming Championship results from 1991 to 1995. They found a steady decline in performance until about age 70 when times started declining at an exponential rate. The declines were greater in women than in men.

Many other researchers have found similar rates of decrease in elite master-athlete performances at national championships in swimming (Donato, Fairbrother) and triathlon (Lepers). In the triathlon paper Ironman age group performances declined faster than for those doing Olympic-distance races. I’ll get to the assumed reason why from the authors in an upcoming post here.

So it appears we can expect to slow down significantly some time in our 50s and experience the greatest negative rates of change in our 70s and beyond. (Want to guess what my next birthday will be? Right. 70.) The key questions are, why are these changes taking place and what can be done to slow them? That’s what I’ll take a look at in my next three posts.

References
Donatao AJ, Tench K, Glueck DH, Seals DR, Eskurza I, Tanaka H. 2003. Declines in Physiological Functional Capacity with Age: A Longitudinal Study in Peak Swimming Performance. J Appl Physiol 94(2):764-9.
Fairbrother JT. 2007. Prediction of 1500-m Freestyle Swimming Times for Older Masters All-American Swimmers. Exp Aging Res 33(4):461-71.
Lepers R, Sultana F, Bernard T, Hausswirth C, Brisswalter J. 2010. Age-Related Changes in Triathlon Performances. Int J Sports Med 31(4):251-6.
Ransdell LB, Vener J, Huberty J. 2009. Masters Athletes: An Analysis of Running, Swimming and Cycling Performance by Age and Gender. J Exerc Sci Fit 7(2):S61-S73.
Tanaka H, Seals DR. 1997. Age and Gender Interactions in Physiological Functional Capacity: Insight from Swimming Performance. J Appl Physiol 82(3):846-51.
Wright VY, Perricelli BC. 2008. Age-Related Rates of Decline in Performance Among Elite Senior Athletes. Am J Sports Med 36(3):443-50.

Now This is More Like It

Skull Valley Loop - Clockwise

Training task today: handling of bike on fast descents into crosswind.  Making this more difficult was the fully loaded seat bag with water and tools; top heavy, made things `whippy' at high cadence (114) and speeds in the 45-55 mph range.  A good 8 on 10 pt scale. 

The lessons are: a) work on smoother high cadence pedaling; b) race time there will be no seat bag to whip around.

Thirteen days out from what amounts to the only race I regularly enter: Skull Valley Loop Challenge.  It's short enough (54 miles), demanding and challenging enough (steep descents, long ascents, twisty switchbacks), beautiful enough ... and local. 

This week is the `tough' training week.  Next week is taper and rest in preparation for the race. 

When I put in a `tough' training session it usually takes me about 36 hours to fully recover.  Not doing that this week.  By week's end I'll be on the edge.