Discussion: 82

is about what I would have predicted but I do wonder why you are so far off your previous best given the amount of training you have managed to do without obvious problems in the last couple of years.
Do you know why you are so far off the pace?
Do you have any plans to do anything about it?

I wonder too. All of my significant PBs were set in 1996-97 and I'd fallen, in general, 2-3% outside them by 2001 before my major layoff in 2001-03 (where I essentially went 18 months without much in the way of meaningful training). From restarting a reasonable level of training in autumn 2003, I then got back to a certain level about 8-10% outside what I was capable of at my peak by around October 2003 - and have stayed there ever since. At first I attributed my lack of further progress to further interruptions (especially in 2004-05), but I've now gone for a 3 1/2 year stretch with no significant interruptions except for a 2-week break (for scheduled elbow surgery) at a time when I would have been taking it easy anyway, and I'm still stalled.

The obvious conclusion from this is that I never fully recovered from the 2001-03 break, but why? It's been a mystery to me for a long time. Any suggestions as to what to do about it are also welcome.

Well I'm certainly no expert, your current form is not far off my all time bests, but you seem to have been stalled for too long so I'll try to get the ideas started. Maybe someone with more of a clue than me will then chip in with something useful.

First thoughts:
Maybe something changed soon after 97 but the decline was only slow until the prolonged layoff in 2001-03. Can you think of any significant changes in training, lifestyle, diet etc around that time?

How is your training now different to what it was in 95-97?

I'd say it pretty simple. Your best form was not only about 11 years ago, it was also about 11kg's ago.
I have exactly the same problem....

Are all those donuts catching up with you grant?

I can make a couple suggestions, most of them age related.
1. You are asking a lot to expect to do a 50 minute run at Mt Alexander and then back up with a 1/2 marathon PB the next day. One of the unfortunate parts about aging is the change in recovery times.
2. The volume of recent training, and the taper,. Again has your taper requirement changed? You need to look back at what training you were doing back then and what you have just done and compare.
3. The extended layoff may have had a significant impact. You can often maintain a high level of performance, but once you have an extended layoff you never quiet regain that same level.
4. The very fact of your PBs were 11 years ago. I have a poster which reads "The older I get the better I was". At some point in time you cease to get faster. That point in time is different for everybody. Perhaps your best years are really behind you. (Not wanting to sound too rude about it). People are a bit like wine, some continue to improve when past 35, while others have been going downhill since early 20s, but at some point they all cease to improve with age and it is downhill from there on.

Grant's got a point, although it's more like 3 kilos than 11 (I did balloon rather spectacularly in 2002, as some of you will remember).

As far as training is concerned, there's not an enormous difference between now and 1998 - total amount in hours/week and intensity mix is about the same with the major change being replacing one slow recovery run with two slow recovery swims. My bike commutes (which I don't log as training) have become longer as a result of moving further out of town, but it's hard to imagine that being a negative.

One would also expect to have declined a bit from one's peak by 37, but 8-10% seems a large amount, given the number of endurance athletes who are still near their peaks in their mid 30s. The post-2002 step change is the most intriguing aspect here.

It's also true that I didn't do myself real favours by doing the half off Mount Alexander, but at least that's comparing like with like because I haven't tried to peak for too many other road races either - indeed, backing up with two races in successive days is a situation we need to get used to as orienteers because we have to do it so often in our sport (and it's something that I've struggled with in recent years, although not so much this year). Changes in recovery times are certainly a valid point; it's tempting to think one can bounce back very quickly (especially when you're someone whose 10k PB to this day was run four weeks after a marathon), but perhaps that hope has collided with reality.

My times dropped by 10% or so in my early 40s and I put it down to getting older and being less motivated to train. I did get some back when I lost about 12 kg a couple of years ago which is around 13% of blubber I did not have to carry around and the times went down by around 10% - so stay off those donuts!

I wonder about whether your volume of training as you got serious somehow wiped all the fast twitch fibers out of your body. It could be something to do with your odd physiology. Given you once ran a 2:36 marathon it's a mystery to me.

A risky strategy at your age, but you could try something dramatic - cutting your volume right back and trying to train like an 800 or 1500m runner for a while. 3 hard session a week - aerobic intervals, anerobic intervals, tempo runs. Ensure you are well rested for the speed sessions. Maybe just the 1 long run/week. Cap your weekly maximum at 5 hours or 65kms. You won't lose much endurance with your base. You might get injured of course.

Glad you got under your initially hoped for time.

I'm with Eric on the suggestion of a radical change in training. But, a lot depends what you want to do. If you'd like to get your 10k - half times back down then I think you could have a go with a different routine. (although i guess you're balancing this with how much you enjoy your present way of doing things).

The thing is I reckon you have to set aside 18 months to see if it is working, really plan it out, and believe it might work.
I seem to remember from previous discussions you have played with different training but not found it suiting you. However, getting your body to adapt to something is the aim of much training, and I guess your body doesnt feel the need to adapt to your regular routine.

You might need to challenge yourself with the aim of devising a new long-term plan, and challenge yourself to stick to it, and then just see what happens. At least now if you do it you can compare to 05-08, rather than just with 96-97.