The percentage decline seems significantly greater in the running sections, to me. And I suspect that the attrition rate among competitive runners is greater, because of their greater susceptibility to joint and connective tissue damage.

But I'm not here to argue about the merits of cycling vs running. The message is clear - if you keep healthy, and keep training, you can continue to perform at a surprisingly high level well into old age. In my own case I aim to go under the hour for 40k aged 60. I'm reinforced in my belief that I can do it by the knowledge that there are 80 year-olds in the UK who are faster than that. Inspirational, really.

I am 62 and have been riding well over 30 years and being retired now I average 100 to 140 miles a week depending on how I really fee.l some rides are great otherr rides aren't. I try to listen to my body and what it is telling me which usually works, however lately I can do the miles , but I just don't have the speed like I use too. Could be over training which is what I believe it is or due to age and other factors I am starting to slow down. I really can't put my finger on it but as long as I am riding or doing some form of a workout it is all good imho.

Very appropriate topic for all ages and thanks to OP.

These studies appear consistent with others I've read except those didn't go much beyond 55 or 60. About 10% loss per decade seems consistent though.

1% loss per year can be met or overcome with work. What good news that is.

Being 69 and having riden road bike just shy of 3 years, have seen big improvements each year -- certainly much more than aging decrements.

All in all a most valuable thread and thanks to all contributors.

You might be interested in this study of age related performance fall off for various sports. The good news is that cyclists seem to hold up better or longer than other athletes. Of coue, your mileage may vary.

Really interesting, thanks.

I've been a member of a road club for 25 years and it seems for many of the faster, longer distance riders performance drops off after about age 65. Many times this is due to medical issues, heart, etc.
I know several riders around 65 who now do climbing centuries, fast club rides, etc. A couple of these guys are among the faster riders on some rides.

If you count the time I spent in the womb I am 70. This is what I know. I cannot train with the same intensity as I did at 40 or 50. I cannot achieve the same heart rate and so go anaerobic sooner. That in itself reduces the intensity that I can achieve. I recover slower and need more rest days so cannot do the volume that I could at 40 or 50. Even 60. But, I still have those moments when it just seems to flow. Those moments make it worth it. Then, there are those rare times when I get to say, "70 year old passing on the left".

From personal experience I don't think I'm quite as fast but I actually think I might have more endurance and can do more longer rides...........or it just might be more stubbornness or persistence to overcome the discomfort in longer rides. Or it could just be I'm more knowledgeable and ride smarter. AS an engineer I should have some statistics to better support the theories. I guess there might be some stats from RAAM but those might not be large enough sample size and it is certainly a different caliber of athlete.

When I was doing a lot of training I read the book "Cycling Past 50", by Joe Friel. In the first chapter he lists several factors that decline between 20 and 50 years old, and claims that vigorous, high intensity riding will quite nearly erase those declines.

Friel's, "Cycling Past 50", should be in every riders library, its one of the first books I purchased when I came back to riding in 2008. Its money very well spent.

Bill

My clubmate David Jones was the first official over 60 finisher of RAAM, then the first over 65. I'm going to ask him if he is going to try to be the first over 70, it's not too far off now.
A big part of RAAM is sleep deprivation, something I cannot deal with.

Oh, he's an engineer, too.

I started cycling later in life and my performance actually got better better. I'm in my 9th year now and I have gotten faster. Sometimes I have to ask myself why do I keep beating myself up, but I keep doing it and I do gain more speed.

Yep, this relative gain is what drives many. The potential for self-improvement is there for virtually anybody. That said, don't expect to ever win the Tour de France

BTW: The oldest guy to ever win the Tour was 36. It would be nice to see that broken but the odds are nil that it will be a 50+ guy

OP here - You Nailed It, Big Aura! And also provided data confirming the relative greater decrease of running compared to cycling.

My question was prompted by youngsters blasting by me when I ride. How does my 15 mph compare to his 20 mph? (I realize I am revealing my shallowness! Sobeit.)

This is my extraction from the chart:

For anyone curious about the last column, I had already computed this (speed in cell above * [1.0 - change]) before I realized I could easily compute their actual speed. I left my arbitrary column in because my original point of reference was how 20 MPH drops off. Maybe others do also. FWIW, I can change "20.0" to any number.
(Sorry I don't know how to have the image show in-line)

This has been a great thread! I found this calculator for converting your best running times from when you were "young" to any given age after that. I think it would give you an idea for biking as well, although it sounds like overall the decline will be less for biking:

All other running

I still haven't peaked yet, although I was almost 50 when I started. Not to be snarky, but how does it really help to look back 30 years to see what might have been, if only I'd been training then? Or is it all just academic (which I'm down with, if that's the interest).

In my case, I knew what I could do 30 years ago. When I "restarted" this last Feb, I wanted to get an idea of what performance I might be able to get to now that I'm 60. The good news is that I don't think I've peaked yet either. Room for improvement over at least the next few years possibly.

Ah, that makes sense. If nothing else you can set an informed goal, where I'm just guessing.

Though I've biked all my life, in 2011 I got serious again. That summer I trained and rode my first Century. Three years later I havent peaked or shown signs of slowing down. With diligent, thoughtful training I will gain 1.5mph avg each year over a course among my collection. This year I built a faster, lighter bike so the gain was a bit more. One of these years that gain rate will plateau and I will fight against it with everything I have. This year I will turn 57.

Having this data is good input. Suggest we really don't want "data" as much as "knowledge." Define knowledge as what we individually do and can achieve. Data points only provide what others have done which may or may not be correlative with what each of us can do.

So our genetics, diet, eating habits, exercise and work ethic etc will dictate what we actually achieve. This means not a crime if we do less than others and maybe no surprise if we exceed what others do.

Believe there may not be enough data for those over 60, leaving us thirsty for knowledge!

Yep, data can show us the reality of where we are, but not necessarily where we are headed.

When desire is strong, good things happen.

Agree fully. The other problem with "data" is it can also become a fence, meaning we look at what others have done and think that's as good as we can do. Thus some interpret the data as a limit of what can be achieved when in reality it could be a milestone to be passed.

Many can go beyond what others have done with OldsCool's strong desire and some other factors!

There it is!

While I fully agree that continuous improvement is a laudable aim and it is good for the mind and the body to try to perform as well as we can for as long as we can, there is no getting away from the fact that performance eventually degrades with age for all of us, albeit at different rates for individuals.


Yes, there can be periods of improvement over the (relatively) short-term in older-age due to a variety of reasons such as training, technique, will-power, taking something more seriously in older-age etc., but the reality is that the direction of the performance graph is steadily downhill - possibly with a number of blips depending on the individual.


I think the data given in this thread for running, cycling and swimming does help to answer the op's questions.


I know this may come over as negative but I really don't mean it to. In my view it is ultimately futile to try and compare current performance to that of ourselves decades ago but we should always try to be that bit better than we were yesterday. I do, even though I don't always succeed.


Those blips can be very satisfying.