Age and genetic giftings
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2015-05-06 7:28 AM |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: Age and genetic giftings When I was 17 and in Army basic training, no matter how hard I worked, I was never gonna be competitive with natural born athletes. I worked hard and I thought I was awesome to finish the 2 mile PT test in 16 minutes! But there were guys doing it in 11 minutes. But I think as we get older, 'natural talent' plays less and less of a role. My guess is, in the 55 - 60 age bracket, the guy who trains and works the hardest/smartest could be competitive....regarless of his lack of natural talent. This is just a theory.....what say you? |
|
2015-05-06 7:55 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
1660 | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Genetics still matter a huge amount at age 55-60, but as of right now, I'd still agree with you for the most part that since a lot of the uber-fast genetically gifted folks are doing other sports having accomplished what they wanted to, they're not competing. (Like M21 AG collegiate athletes.)
For sure, about 20 years ago, in my parents generation, it was pretty normal for adults to consider themselves 'over the hill' completely for sports at age 35, or even age 30. That bar has been raised to at least 50 now, and I suspect in a decade, it'll be 55-60 as people continue to stay active longer. |
2015-05-06 8:01 AM in reply to: 0 |
Veteran 629 Grapevine, TX | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings I think genetics plays a role at every level. In my opinion, what's probably happening in the older age groups is that many of the genetically gifted that did have a racing career have now retired, either burnt out or satiated, which allows people like me to sometimes shine in a local triathlon. Edited by FranzZemen 2015-05-06 8:02 AM |
2015-05-06 8:31 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Originally posted by Rogillio When I was 17 and in Army basic training, no matter how hard I worked, I was never gonna be competitive with natural born athletes. I worked hard and I thought I was awesome to finish the 2 mile PT test in 16 minutes! But there were guys doing it in 11 minutes. But I think as we get older, 'natural talent' plays less and less of a role. My guess is, in the 55 - 60 age bracket, the guy who trains and works the hardest/smartest could be competitive....regarless of his lack of natural talent. This is just a theory.....what say you? At what level ? At 70.3 and IM distance, nope, it's not just being smart. The guys winning those AGs are carrying fitness forward. Genetics is a way over simplified term. You have a genetic predisposition to VO2max, to economy, to putting on weight, to high blood pressure, to injury, to muscle loss...... Yes, being smart can go a long long way Last year at IMMT you had to go low 10h to get a Kona spot. You had to go 11:15ish in the 60-65 AG. trust me, 11h15 at 60 is damn impressive. You cannot train like a 40 year old. |
2015-05-06 9:00 AM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Originally posted by marcag At what level ? At 70.3 and IM distance, nope, it's not just being smart. The guys winning those AGs are carrying fitness forward. Genetics is a way over simplified term. You have a genetic predisposition to VO2max, to economy, to putting on weight, to high blood pressure, to injury, to muscle loss...... Yes, being smart can go a long long way Last year at IMMT you had to go low 10h to get a Kona spot. You had to go 11:15ish in the 60-65 AG. trust me, 11h15 at 60 is damn impressive. You cannot train like a 40 year old. Agreed; also, another factor that is often overlooked is the genetics not only defines your ceiling, it also defines your floor. There are people who can jump off the couch and run 5:30/km. Someone else may have to train for years to get to that point; it's not that this person is training hard enough/smart enough (in many cases) it is just that they don't have the same endurance talent as the first person. Further, this is a discussion that always goes off the rails because those with great genes feel their hard work is being discounted and those without great genes feel that those with those talents are dismissing their lack of talent as unimportant and they just need to work harder. The bottom line is that genetics vs hard work is a false dichotomy; performance is a function of both. Shane |
2015-05-06 9:01 AM in reply to: 0 |
Expert 2373 Floriduh | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings As a geneticist I believe genetics plays a role in your life until the point at which you die. Can better/smarter training surpass untrained genetic predisposition? Sure. But can training make up for a lack of predisposition? Unlikely. This===> The bottom line is that genetics vs hard work is a false dichotomy; performance is a function of both. Edited by Oysterboy 2015-05-06 9:02 AM |
|
2015-05-06 9:47 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Coach Shane said it all! Around here 50-70 is becoming very competitive. We were discussing this not long ago on a local FB tri page. One of the top ranked local seniors (just turned 65) may have to end his tri career due to deteriorating knee issues, but the discussion of genetics came up. In his example he's always been a gifted athlete, HS, College (running) and later in life in the 90's took up triathlons. The cream of the crop will always rise to the top but there is less of them and not many take up the sport in their senior years. This year I turned 50 and locally at the big sprint race that always brings at the best competition from central FL I'll be blessed if I can get in the top 10 again even with last years PR time. What does become important is rest/recovery. I can hold the same intensity of years past but cannot keep up the day in and day out aspects. If I have to take some time off so be it and then I can hit the training again as needed. |
2015-05-06 9:55 AM in reply to: Donto |
928 | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Yes to what Shane and the others have said. In addition: Lots of people in their 40s like to scan results of the 60+ age groups and think, "All I have to do is get older and then I'll have better chance of being competitive!" There are a few flaws in that argument: 1) People forget that those that can continue to compete into their 60s and 70s already have genetics on their side. 2) "Competitive" is relative-- there are less people competing in those age categories, so in some races it may seem "easier" to place. 3) Triathlon is growing hugely, and much of the early growth is showing in the 40s and 50s age groups. But that will just mean that more people will be entering the 60s and 70s age groups than ever before. |
2015-05-06 10:21 AM in reply to: jennifer_runs |
Member 1748 Exton, PA | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Originally posted by jennifer_runs 1) People forget that those that can continue to compete into their 60s and 70s already have genetics on their side. What???Why??? That's a hell of an assumption. Many fat people sitting in their living room at age 40 would say you are genetically gifted to stay thin and be able to compete in triathlons, is this true? To be able to compete in your 60' and 70's is for the most part just life choices. |
2015-05-06 10:30 AM in reply to: mike761 |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Ok, so much for my theory! I guess I will be BOP till I die! LOL That's ok. I've never been motivated by the prospect of beating someone else. |
2015-05-06 11:49 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: Age and genetic giftings Originally posted by Rogillio Ok, so much for my theory! I guess I will be BOP till I die! LOL That's ok. I've never been motivated by the prospect of beating someone else. You're forgetting attrition - keep training consistently and smart while others quit and/or get injured. Shane |
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|