Fifty Plus (50+) - For those who think they are still 20 years old

Interesting article in the WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204047504574384973660445730.html

I'm 56, and I ride harder, longer, and faster than I ever have, and continue to improve every year. Slow down? Maybe for top level professional athletes, but how many on this forum are? I read somewhere that the typical cyclist can continue to improve until age 63-64. Hammer on!

"After 50, Avid Athletes Find That to Stay Healthy, They Must Let Go of the Need to Win"

No problem for me. As Muddy Waters sang, "you can't lose what you never had".

There is a lot of truth in that article. I've never been one of the fast guys in any age group, but I used to suffer to the max to keep up with them. I've let that go for the most part. It's not because I've lost that competitive drive but it was causing a lot of stress in my life and I was getting sick more. I still ride hard at times but I pick my spots and I monitor how often though I'd have to move to the flatlands if I wasn't allowed to get my HR over 120.

"After 50, Avid Athletes Find That to Stay Healthy, They Must Let Go of the Need to Win"

No problem for me. As Muddy Waters sang, "you can't lose what you never had".

That is my situation, as well. I was not racing material when I was 20, although I was and still am a pretty decent hill climber. I have lost much of my long distance endurance, but I think that is simply because I have not had time for century length rides in many years, and I could probably rebuild that with training.

I'm 56, and I ride harder, longer, and faster than I ever have, and continue to improve every year. Slow down? Maybe for top level professional athletes, but how many on this forum are? I read somewhere that the typical cyclist can continue to improve until age 63-64. Hammer on!

A mere youngster:) I'm still improving at 69, but I don't try to compete with 30-year-olds!

One of the members of our group will be 80 this year. She rides, hikes, walks, swims, and does yoga --- at her own pace. She tends to hang at the back of the pack during group rides, but hey, she's out there doing something that a very small % of the population can do. She can ride to the beach and back the next day, almost 100 miles round-trip. She told me this morning that she is stronger than she was in about 1980 when she "was in great shape".

I agree with the article's claims that over-exertion breaks down the body and lowers the immune system, damages joints (over-use syndrome), and causes mental burn-out -- even depression.

All things in moderation.

I agree with the article's claims that over-exertion breaks down the body and lowers the immune system, damages joints (over-use syndrome), and causes mental burn-out -- even depression.

QUOTE]

Agreed, At any age, not just over 50.

I'm 56, and I ride harder, longer, and faster than I ever have, and continue to improve every year. Slow down? Maybe for top level professional athletes, but how many on this forum are? I read somewhere that the typical cyclist can continue to improve until age 63-64. Hammer on!

67 here and still improving.

I reached a point this summer where it felt like every ride was a training ride; every ride had some sort of goal. That attitude darn near made me an EX-cyclist.

Lately I'm back to riding for the fun of it, though trying to put in longer rides rather than faster. Goo thing about cycling is the variety of rides and it's easy on the joints.

Good article Artmo! Thanks...

I reached a point this summer where it felt like every ride was a training ride; every ride had some sort of goal. That attitude darn near made me an EX-cyclist....

I'm beginning to show the very early signs of burn-out; at that stage, it's good to examine what's most important. Working full time with 2 hours/day spent commuting, and trying to fit in a ride after work while everyone else is in a hurry to get home and the sun is low in their eyes is not my idea of a fun bike ride. The frenzy of trying to fit it in with an early bedtime so that I can keep my legs fit for long weekend rides.... and getting not much done around the house or yard on the weekends after the group rides.... is causing us to take a closer look at how much time I realistically can devote weekly to riding while I'm still working ---- and trying to balance that with adequate riding time to maintain and improve fitness on a realistic level and still participate in some of the group rides.

I've experienced burn-out in other areas, twice, and it's a looooooooong road back that takes many months, perhaps years.

Be 70 in 2 months. I am slowing down - but I have a lot of other stuff going on in my life - some pretty stressful.

My bicycling, swimming, walking, weight lifting and stretching is to relieve stress and to maintain fitness.

I have to be careful not to let my desire to maintain fitness become an additional stress!

I'm only 57 and want to ride until I can't swing my leg over the top tube. ;) I just go with the flow and that varies from ride to ride. If it 'feels right' I will hammer after I am warmed up. As long as you keep riding you are improving. My goal is to avoid burnout by keeping it fun. Riding is an escape. :thumb:

"After 50, Avid Athletes Find That to Stay Healthy, They Must Let Go of the Need to Win"

No problem for me. As Muddy Waters sang, "you can't lose what you never had".

:roflmao2: Oh, man now I got to clean the coffee off my keyboard. Don't know why this hit the funny bone so hard this morning, but it did. This describes my cycling life to a fault. As I like to say, "I was never very fast and always will be." My competitive juices flow more toward my professional work. I do not want to detract from or denigrate the experience of those 50+ who like to compete on the bike; it's simply not me. I tend to think that any time I'm able to go for a ride, I've already won. Going faster or longer for me isn't about anything other than the experience of speed and more time in the saddle. That said, there is some good advice in the article for those who train beyond their body's ability to accommodate the stress (good advice at any age, I might add).

It takes me longer to recover from a ride and I now like to take a nap afterwards but not right away. It depends. Sometimes its just 20 minutes. Sometimes longer. It does wonders. Wake up feeling refreshed.

I also make sure the immune system doesn't break down by getting proper nutrition. Lots of anti oxidants in the form of my own smoothie concoction. That's one thing the energy supplement business is not doing. They do the carbohydrates, the protein, the electrolytes, but not the anti oxidants. I figure the older riders really need the anti oxidants more than the younger riders.

Thanks for the article. It's very timely for me as I've been pondering this issue for the last several days. I'm 62 and always ride alone, unless it is a public ride suuch as a Century. I attempted to do an easy 50 miler last weekend, but ended up being the 7th rider to cross the line out of about 75. Obviously my pace didn't match my intentions. I'll also add that it took me the better part of 2 days to recover. that sucks!
Regardless, I am always driving myself to do better, go faster, etc. Unfortunately, the results don't match the ambition. For some reason, I keep comparing myself to all riders regardless of there age. If I see someone ahead, I have to pass. If someone passes me, I go into manic depression.
I really need to adjust my attitude. Somehow I need better alignment of my goals and my capabilities or I will never be satisfied.

Here is a different viewpoint.
There are many articles and advisers to tell you not to exercise too much. It amuses me.
Over 50% of Americans are overweight. Many are obese. Many can hardly walk.
My wife and I just returned from a 3 day bike tour. We stayed in a motel near a casino in Wisconsin. The amount of grossly obese people in the Breakfast room was depressing to see.
OTOH the bike trails were nearly empty. Less then 10 bikers in 50 miles on one day and less on the other days.
Americans need to exercise more, much more, not less. They need no encouragement to take it easy. They are very good in finding their own reasons.
I agree that there are some very few people overdoing it. They are not the problem.
Why is it that all the overweight people need constant stroking that they are doing the right thing? They are not.

You seem to have missed the point of the article, Will. It was directed at long time athletes who tend to overdo it as they age, not at obese people who don't exercise.

One of the things I like about randonneuring is that it stresses being self sufficient while doing non-competitive riding at your own pace. You get to chat with friends at the start of a ride, after the ride, and during control stops when they may show up either before or after you at a particular control, and there isn't much pressure to blow yourself completely up trying to stay with a group or hold a certain speed. Indeed, when it comes to long distance riding, picking a pace you can maintain to successfully complete that many miles is of major importance.

You seem to have missed the point of the article, Will. It was directed at long time athletes who tend to overdo it as they age, not at obese people who don't exercise.
One of the things I like about randonneuring is that it stresses being self sufficient while doing non-competitive riding at your own pace. You get to chat with friends at the start of a ride, after the ride, and during control stops when they may show up either before of after you at a particular control, and there isn't much pressure to blow yourself completely up trying to stay with a group. Indeed, when it comes to long distance riding, picking a pace you can maintain to successfully complete that many miles is of major importance.

Respectfully , I disagree.
Perhaps my brain works differently.
I look at that article in search of an issue. The very few athletes who overdo it as they age may be a problem. Could be. Certainly does not apply to this crowd in the 50+ as far as I can see.
I suspect that the OP was not addressing that but a not so subtle hint that some of us are pushing harder then the OP thinks reasonable.
My reply is meant to say that we have a much bigger problem with lack of exercise in the general population then the few excesses.
I would like to see the fireworks if there is an article describing declining cycling activity due to obesity.;)

I reached a point this summer where it felt like every ride had some sort of goal.

That's why there's pie. :thumb:

Here is a different viewpoint.
There are many articles and advisers to tell you not to exercise too much. It amuses me.
Over 50% of Americans are overweight. Many are obese. Many can hardly walk.
My wife and I just returned from a 3 day bike tour. We stayed in a motel near a casino in Wisconsin. The amount of grossly obese people in the Breakfast room was depressing to see.
OTOH the bike trails were nearly empty. Less then 10 bikers in 50 miles on one day and less on the other days.
Americans need to exercise more, much more, not less. They need no encouragement to take it easy. They are very good in finding their own reasons.
I agree that there are some very few people overdoing it. They are not the problem.
Why is it that all the overweight people need constant stroking that they are doing the right thing? They are not.

Here in the U.S., 20-30 lbs. overweight is the new standard.

I know a few friends that risk over-use, but 99% of the people I know are not sufficiently active.

I have been lucky enough to begin a solid pattern or exercise, and I'm not going to cut back without a fight :p . Like most of us, I don't have the time or personality that would lead to overuse. I would hate to think about cutting back or slowing down, maybe when I'm seventy.

I have no plans to "act my age", I have never understood the concept.

Michael

Certainly does not apply to this crowd in the 50+ as far as I can see.


No, this group is laid back enough that the few people who come here with the potential for this problem either end up leaving for a more competitive oriented forum or stay and preach to the rest of us about how this article isn't the real problem.

Here is a different viewpoint.
There are many articles and advisers to tell you not to exercise too much. It amuses me.
Over 50% of Americans are overweight. Many are obese. Many can hardly walk.
My wife and I just returned from a 3 day bike tour. We stayed in a motel near a casino in Wisconsin. The amount of grossly obese people in the Breakfast room was depressing to see.
OTOH the bike trails were nearly empty. Less then 10 bikers in 50 miles on one day and less on the other days.
Americans need to exercise more, much more, not less. They need no encouragement to take it easy. They are very good in finding their own reasons.
I agree that there are some very few people overdoing it. They are not the problem.
Why is it that all the overweight people need constant stroking that they are doing the right thing? They are not.

Two questions for you to consider, the first following a short introduction:

1. Men in three Matsigenka villages in southeastern Peru were shown six drawings of women that differed only in body weight and waist size. The men chose a drawing for each of these categories: healthiest, most attractive, and best potential spouse. The overwhelming winner in every category was the drawing of the heaviest woman with the thickest waist. Why might the Matsigenka men perceive heaviness as attractive?

2. What is the difference between overweight and being obese? Can a person be overweight and be healthy?

The strength of your response has me wondering if there isn't some body image prejudice taking place. I might be completely off base, and if so, my apologies.

My motto is: "Medio tutissimus ibis" - loosely, "always take the middle path."

I have suspected what the article says. My body has told me to take it easy on the training, so my results have been declining since my 40's. My personal bests were in my early 40's, and my training since then has just been enough to stay competitive in my age group. My last real success was winning my age group at the Huntsman World Seniors Games in 2005 (but I was 55 in the 55-59 age group). I found that I was just not enjoying the training anymore, and I was getting too stressed prior to the competition. Alternatively, I was enjoying doing recreational rides on the tandem and on the fixed gear bike way more than racing.

However, competition does give you goals to train for, and events to look forward to. Thus, I have in my plans to ride the 2011 Paris-Brest-Paris on my fixed gear track bike (with brakes!). I've never ridden this event because the amount of distance training required would have been counterproductive to the track racing I was doing at the time, but now I figure that one must add this event to one's palmares in order to be a truly compleat cyclist.

One thing I have noticed is that guys on bikes (and a few females too) tend to be extremely competitive in casual situations. Usually when I'm commuting to work - and I normally ride at a reasonably brisk pace, maybe 30 kmh on the flats spinning 42x16 fixed - I'll get passed by some dude out to prove something. I usually can't help just slotting in behind him, getting a tow. The guys that seem to be the most aggressive at trying to "prove something" are the guys with grey hair, who obviously (by looking at their pedaling style) have never raced formally. I just relax in their slipstream and try to figure out just why I don't like these guys. Could be because when I was a young bike racer learning the craft, I'd go to races and watch the Veterans (as they were called at that time) parading around the course with very little effort, very pleased with themselves, and I called it "pretend racing," so I never developed any respect for them. The exception was at the track, where the top guys were older, like Jack Disney, and they truly were fast, and they had important knowledge to pass on. Today it's totally different, ya gotta be a Cat 2 racer if you want to finish anywhere near the top of a Masters race, and I feel my body telling me that those days are past, and that I should take the middle path...

Luis

I know a few friends that risk over-use, but 99% of the people I know are not sufficiently active.

I have been lucky enough to begin a solid pattern or exercise, and I'm not going to cut back without a fight :p . Like most of us, I don't have the time or personality that would lead to overuse. I would hate to think about cutting back or slowing down, maybe when I'm seventy.

I have no plans to "act my age", I have never understood the concept.

Michael

Goodness

I will be 70 in 2 months.

Tell me what to do!!:)

Goodness

I will be 70 in 2 months.

Tell me what to do!!:)

:roflmao2:

My Mamma always told me to be respectful with my elders :innocent: .

:roflmao2:

My Mamma always told me to be respectful with my elders :innocent: .

Your mama was SMART!!

If I could just convince my kids!

Hopefully we could all agree that the level of exertion we experience is a personal thing.......and its OKAY to ride slow if that is your thing, its OKAY to ride fast if that is your thing and its OKAY to try and continue to improve if that is your thing. We should not have to justify why we ride slow or fast, or short miles or long miles because we all have our own reasons and we should all respect that.

Regardless of how we ride, what is very important is we ride at the level that motivates us, and keeps us riding and exercising. I think I'd take my chances of overexercising versus not exercising at all????

My biggest concern from the article is how would you know if you had an aorta issue and needed to throttle back if you didn't do an echo or heart cath?????????

Hopefully we could all agree that the level of exertion we experience is a personal thing.......and its OKAY to ride slow if that is your thing, its OKAY to ride fast if that is your thing and its OKAY to try and continue to improve if that is your thing. We should not have to justify why we ride slow or fast, or short miles or long miles because we all have our own reasons and we should all respect that.

+1
Rereading the article, it doesn't seem to really apply to many, if any, of the posters on this forum. While it raises some interesting ideas, it is mostly anecdotal with very little documentation to support its points.

Goodness

I will be 70 in 2 months.

Tell me what to do!!:)

Seventies is the new fifties!

Michael

Here is a different viewpoint.
There are many articles and advisers to tell you not to exercise too much. It amuses me.
Over 50% of Americans are overweight. Many are obese. Many can hardly walk.
My wife and I just returned from a 3 day bike tour. We stayed in a motel near a casino in Wisconsin. The amount of grossly obese people in the Breakfast room was depressing to see.
OTOH the bike trails were nearly empty. Less then 10 bikers in 50 miles on one day and less on the other days.
Americans need to exercise more, much more, not less. They need no encouragement to take it easy. They are very good in finding their own reasons.
I agree that there are some very few people overdoing it. They are not the problem.
Why is it that all the overweight people need constant stroking that they are doing the right thing? They are not.

This is true. I work in a factory with a copious number of men who look as though they are in the ninth month of pregnancy. They show intense displeasure for those of us who stay fit by either bicycling running or the weight room. Those of us who do stay fit are always hearing about how we are either overdoing it, or living dangerously or miserable because exercise is misery. Right!?

This is true. I work in a factory with a copious number of men who look as though they are in the ninth month of pregnancy. They show intense displeasure for those of us who stay fit by either bicycling running or the weight room. Those of us who do stay fit are always hearing about how we are either overdoing it, or living dangerously or miserable because exercise is misery. Right!?

And I thought I was the only one on this sub forum thinking this.:thumb:

Two questions for you to consider, the first following a short introduction:

1. Men in three Matsigenka villages in southeastern Peru were shown six drawings of women that differed only in body weight and waist size. The men chose a drawing for each of these categories: healthiest, most attractive, and best potential spouse. The overwhelming winner in every category was the drawing of the heaviest woman with the thickest waist. Why might the Matsigenka men perceive heaviness as attractive?

2. What is the difference between overweight and being obese? Can a person be overweight and be healthy?

The strength of your response has me wondering if there isn't some body image prejudice taking place. I might be completely off base, and if so, my apologies.

Overweight As defined by BMI is questionable because Athletes are often overweight. So the answer to your comment is YES. You can be overweight and very healthy.
Obese As we observe people who are in a wheelchair due to excess weight, or need assistance to walk because their legs can not support their weight (not from accidents). People who are restricted in ordinary activities because of weight. These people scare me because I lost several dear friends due to obesity. One had so much fat pressing on her heart that she got internal bleeding and died from it not very nicely. We are talking here 250# and up. Middle aged people.
I am very aware of cultural bias. That may be OK for that culture. How long do they live and how do they live?
I think we may read much more on this in years to come as the cost of obesity will hit everyone.

Two questions for you to consider, the first following a short introduction:

1. Men in three Matsigenka villages in southeastern Peru were shown six drawings of women that differed only in body weight and waist size. The men chose a drawing for each of these categories: healthiest, most attractive, and best potential spouse. The overwhelming winner in every category was the drawing of the heaviest woman with the thickest waist. Why might the Matsigenka men perceive heaviness as attractive?

2. What is the difference between overweight and being obese? Can a person be overweight and be healthy?

The strength of your response has me wondering if there isn't some body image prejudice taking place. I might be completely off base, and if so, my apologies.

I must be dense, but I don't get how to use 1 above. What if we applied this methodology back to our own society? Clearly, modern western men would pick the women with anorexia nervosa.

There is also no science to be found in the OP's referenced article.

Did anyone feel good reading it? Good on you. :)

I must be dense, but I don't get how to use 1 above. What if we applied this methodology back to our own society? Clearly, modern western men would pick the women with anorexia nervous.

What is considered healthy in most modern western cultures is, in large part, determined by a value placed on characteristics rooted in longevity and an idealized view of functional ability. Not that these are necessarily bad things. They are not, however, universal. For example, there are many in the "disability" community who get highly annoyed with the main culture's tendency to treat disability as illness. I attended a meeting last month and overheard a woman say to another, "I'm not sick. I'm in a wheel chair because I can't walk."

In other cultures quality of life doesn't necessarily include longevity. There are other factors deemed as or more important. To some extent this is true in pockets of western culture. Not all modern western men would pick women who were extremely thin. Some would argue that the fascination with thin is a result of the media using images of people who have body sizes and shapes unrealistic for even those with high levels of fitness and nutrition. It was the handful of comments about weight in the threads that made we wonder if there wasn't some cultural bias in body image driving some of the responses. Will Dehne, however, clarified his response.

As a clyde, I tire of people assuming that I'm not healthy/fit, and somehow inferior to those who meet the media view of healthy/fit. My blood pressure, cholesterol and other blood work, are all very good. I can ride centuries and bench press 40 pounds more than my own body weight. I exercise, on average, 12 to 15 hours per week, work a full time job and teach two graduate courses as an adjunct faculty member, maintain my own home with garden and a bit over an acre of land. The fact is my physician displays his own bias when he says to me, "You're as fit as a man 20 years younger and 20 pounds lighter."

And, yes, there is little "science" in the article. I didn't read it and get the impression that this was the intent. Rather, I thought the intent was to point out that not all fitness can best be achieved or maintained via the competitive, more, faster, longer is better mind set. There may be times in one's life where less is better. I don't think this is necessarily age related though. Perhaps the mistake made in the article was framing the entire article with the title "Older, Better, Slower", reinforcing a negative view of aging in which health and functioning suffers. While the writer clearly had a medical issue (aneurysm in aortic root) this is something that could and does happen to younger people too. If we want to use the "little science" argument to discredit the useful (IMHO) stuff in the article, perhaps we should also point out that there is little science behind our belief that competition is a good thing. And, it is clear that a large part of what was driving the writer was competition. It seems to me that part of what he learned was that you can have things that increase your quality of life without having to be so competitive about it. This has little to do with age.

NOS88 went to some trouble explaining his point of view. There is nothing I disagree with. I have friends with weight above comfort level for them. They are my friends regardless of weight.
I wonder if readers of this forum are aware of the book and concept "Positive Addiction"?
That book changed my life at age 45.
Here is a link to a short review of that book and a short excerpt:

1.It is something noncompetitive that you choose to do and you can devote an hour (approximately) a day to it.
2.It is possible for you to do it easily and it doesn’t take a great deal of mental effort to do it well.
3.You can do it alone or rarely with others but it does not depend upon others to do it.
4.You believe that it has some value (physical, mental, or spiritual) for you.
5.You believe that if you persist at it you will improve, but this is completely subjective—you need to be the only one who measures that improvement.
6.The activity must have the quality that you can do it without criticizing yourself. If you can’t accept yourself during this time the activity will not be addicting. This is why it is so important that the activity can be done alone.

http://www.justinowings.com/b/reading.php?blog=6&title=positive-addiction-by-william-glasser&disp=single&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

I am only 20 years old. Unfortunately, my body is almost 50 and frequently reminds me of the fact. :thumb:

When I was 20, I worked with a crew that was in their 50s and 60s. I was fortunate enough to quickly learn from them on what to do and not to do at 20.

In a way, I still think like I'm still 20.

I wonder if readers of this forum are aware of the book and concept "Positive Addiction"?

I actually had the opportunity to attend a seminar Glasser did shortly after he published this book. He has since moved into some other areas too. He's one psychiatrist that's been interesting to follow as his thoughts and ideas mature.

I'm 56, and I ride harder, longer, and faster than I ever have, and continue to improve every year. Slow down? Maybe for top level professional athletes, but how many on this forum are? I read somewhere that the typical cyclist can continue to improve until age 63-64. Hammer on!

Good, that means I've got a few more to go before I peak. Just had my best year, by far. I completed my fastest ride, 42 miles at 19.5 MPH and my longest ride, 100 miles at 18.9 MPH, this year. I don't really feel like slowing down.

What is considered healthy in most modern western cultures is, in large part, determined by a value placed on characteristics rooted in longevity and an idealized view of functional ability. Not that these are necessarily bad things. They are not, however, universal. For example, there are many in the "disability" community who get highly annoyed with the main culture's tendency to treat disability as illness. I attended a meeting last month and overheard a woman say to another, "I'm not sick. I'm in a wheel chair because I can't walk."

In other cultures quality of life doesn't necessarily include longevity. There are other factors deemed as or more important. To some extent this is true in pockets of western culture. Not all modern western men would pick women who were extremely thin. Some would argue that the fascination with thin is a result of the media using images of people who have body sizes and shapes unrealistic for even those with high levels of fitness and nutrition. It was the handful of comments about weight in the threads that made we wonder if there wasn't some cultural bias in body image driving some of the responses. Will Dehne, however, clarified his response.

As a clyde, I tire of people assuming that I'm not healthy/fit, and somehow inferior to those who meet the media view of healthy/fit. My blood pressure, cholesterol and other blood work, are all very good. I can ride centuries and bench press 40 pounds more than my own body weight. I exercise, on average, 12 to 15 hours per week, work a full time job and teach two graduate courses as an adjunct faculty member, maintain my own home with garden and a bit over an acre of land. The fact is my physician displays his own bias when he says to me, "You're as fit as a man 20 years younger and 20 pounds lighter."

And, yes, there is little "science" in the article. I didn't read it and get the impression that this was the intent. Rather, I thought the intent was to point out that not all fitness can best be achieved or maintained via the competitive, more, faster, longer is better mind set. There may be times in one's life where less is better. I don't think this is necessarily age related though. Perhaps the mistake made in the article was framing the entire article with the title "Older, Better, Slower", reinforcing a negative view of aging in which health and functioning suffers. While the writer clearly had a medical issue (aneurysm in aortic root) this is something that could and does happen to younger people too. If we want to use the "little science" argument to discredit the useful (IMHO) stuff in the article, perhaps we should also point out that there is little science behind our belief that competition is a good thing. And, it is clear that a large part of what was driving the writer was competition. It seems to me that part of what he learned was that you can have things that increase your quality of life without having to be so competitive about it. This has little to do with age.

Thank you for this very nice explanation. I appreciate the time you took on it and understand better what you were saying.

May I say that there is scientific evidence, from evolutionary theory, that competition is a driving force in our lives...Whether it is a "good thing" is a value judgment.

Thank you for this very nice explanation. I appreciate the time you took on it and understand better what you were saying.

May I say that there is scientific evidence, from evolutionary theory, that competition is a driving force in our lives...Whether it is a "good thing" is a value judgment.

Yep, it sure is! :thumb: But remember you can't say that theory is evidence. Rather, evidence supports theory.

HI,
My 2 cents are this, Many people try to compete when they don't feel good they ingore, the flu like symptoms they are feeling and just do it.
I ve read many runners articles most sudden deaths occur because someone may be coming sick and ignore the symptoms.
So for me if I don't feel good I usally take a Day or two off.
Better to rest above ground than in the ground.:eek:
Doug

I'm 52, and I feel I ride better then I did when I was in my 20's and 30's. I'm 5"11" and weigh 162. I've been riding my fixie since 2000. (Uh, before anyone asks, the answer is yes, I have brakes on both wheels. I leave the illegal, and irresponsible, brakeless stuff for the 20-somethings. It's the darndest thing, but I get asked about this a lot, for some odd reason.)

I refuse to use a cycle computer, so I don't track miles, averages, or any of it. Never saw any need to. I was given a computer some years back, as an xmas stocking stuffer. I think it's in my sock drawer somewhere, still in the box. I know I'm not immune to the passage of time. I suppose that someday, I might lower my gear ratio, or even resort to the freewheel side of my flip-flop hub. (and those upcoming, Sturmey Archer S3X hubs are very tempting! ) My primary care doc seems to think I'm fine. He's also a cyclist. Keeps his bike in the office, so I know I'm in friendly territory.

That was in interesting article, thanks for posting.

Good, that means I've got a few more to go before I peak. Just had my best year, by far. I completed my fastest ride, 42 miles at 19.5 MPH and my longest ride, 100 miles at 18.9 MPH, this year. I don't really feel like slowing down.

I wonder if you have a similar experience to mine since we cycle at about the same speed.
I am 68 this year and have increased my speed every year for at least 10 years. However I noticed the increases were much more due to new tricks I learned rather then strength or fitness.
Getting a Trek Madone was a big step.
Training to go long distances on Aerobars and or Drops was another.
Learning and applying smart Nutrition was really big.
Balancing Cadence and Heart Rate was a milestone.
Interval Training made a significant difference.
Using the Trainer effectively made me much faster on the road.
Weight reduction was important.

The article was silly. Unless you're Michael Jordan. His HOF speech is available on youtube. Talk about not aging gracefully....

Yep, it sure is! :thumb: But remember you can't say that theory is evidence. Rather, evidence supports theory.

I have a feeling this would take a longer conversation...

The article is well founded for runners as according to surveys some 65% are injured in any given year irrespective of age. Running is in the dark ages technique wise and only now is that beginning to change ( http://www.amazon.com/Run-Life-Anti-Aging-Anti-Injury-Super-Fitness/dp/1602393443/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253277269&sr=8-1 ). They pound them selves to destruction needlessly and sacrifice speed in the process.

For low impact sports like cycling, training hard even competition has positive attributes that far outweigh the negatives. If you are too conscious of your age, you'll accelerate the ageing process. Thinking your still 20 is not a bad strategy as long as you are knowledgeable of the modern techniques to ride/train and understand the physiology of ageing.

I'm 70 and I'm doing wonderfully. I run my heart rate way up there (hit my measured max periodically) and constantly push my envelope. So far the pay-off is phenomenal especially compared to my lower activity-level friends. And, counter to the article, I like to compete against myself.

I also jog and weight train. The weight training is absolutely necessary to age well. Something most runners and cyclists avoid. But that is slowly changing as well. Cross-training is another imperative.

Al