Mates fitness question.

Home Forum Bike Forum Mates fitness question.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Mates fitness question.
  • Premier Icon jimmy

    28 vs 48 says it all, I reckon.

    That’s kind of from experience, only in that my effortless pace of 15 years ago is much faster than what I can manage these days with training.

    Premier Icon Drac

    Age has very little to do with it. B does a lot of ‘training’ which is the most important factor.


    the answer is maybe, it really depends on what A and B do with the time they do have. If B is training and being very organised about there riding then there isn’t much hope for A. But if B is just doing junk miles then A has a chance if they use their riding time in a structured way.

    So, mate A is 48 & has been riding for…well, ever really, but only does a decent ride about once a week, sometimes less. He’s built like a racing snake though & can climb like a mountain goat. He has what I’d say, a decent amount of inherant fitness. However he’s also very competitive (but doesn’t enter any comps) & is narked that he can’t keep up with mate B, who is 28 & trains a lot, he does a 23 mile commute on a road bike about 3 times a week, runs 5 miles on a lunchtime & goes to the gym most nights after work (by bike). He’s also into all this healthy eating stuff. Mate A has never even seen a gym but eats fairly healthily.
    Question is, do you think mate A can be as ‘fit’ as mate B without doing more training than mate B?
    After watching the two of them the other day I reckon mate A isn’t that far behind mate B anyway.

    I’m not even in the equation BTW.

    I think Drac could be right. Although I don’t think A would have to do a massive amount of ‘training’ to be up there with B. A is more determined than B I think. Another thing is that A has a wife & a homelife, plus other interests but B hasn’t & lives with Ma & Pa so can dedicate more time to himself.
    Steve is A, & Gaz is B BTW. 😀

    Premier Icon mmannerr

    At some point B will suffer an injury or will burn out and will regain fitness again.

    (I’m closer to A now but have been more like B in the past. Still trying to recover fitness after couple of injuries )

    b r

    Well I’m 48 and most who I ride with are far (+10 years) younger than me, and I’m fitter than pretty much all except one of them.

    But, I’m as fit as I’ll ever be, whereas if they knuckled down they could be fitter.

    Also one advantage I believe that you do get though with age is a greater capacity for ‘mental’ toughness – so even at the same fitness level you ‘seem’ to be fitter.

    Sounds like a lot of sense up to now. B (Gaz) hasn’t yet had an injury (he will though, & I reckon it’ll be spectacular, he thinks he’s invincible) Steve has had a few offs but still has ‘mental toughness’.
    I’m just a big fat old wuss who’s last up, & down everything, with a grin on my face. 😛


    the one behind will be trying more than the on in front

    Depends. I’d say Mate A would stand a good chance if the comparison was going to be based on endurance, less so if it’s going to be an out and out speed test over an hour or two.

    As much as we all like to kid ourselves I think age does have ‘something’ to do with it. Our potential for athletic performance decreases after we reach a physical peak, without looking it up I don’t know at what age this is considered to be but a guess based on athletes performances tends to suggest that it’s gonna be around your early 30’s. Bit longer for some endurance sports bit less for some more explosive sports (this is just a fag packet calculation, i’m not going to get all google on it ).

    The trick is in recognising that this is athletic potential not actual ability that decreases and very, very few people are working at anything close to 100% of their potential and thats where the hope for us older fellas lies. A 28 year old fella working at 40% of his athletic potential could well get beat by someone 20 years older that running at 70 or 80% of theirs.

    Mate B sound like he’s operating at a greater percentage of his potential than mate A, so Mate A has scope to improve by doing more focussed training and working on the areas in which he is weakest. It might not be enough to beat Mate B but it sounds like there is scope to at least close the gap.

    Sorry, all this percentage of mate A vs percentage of mate B makes this read like a GCSE maths question! I hope what I was trying to say is understandable.


    Bit of a tricky question with a lot of variables. Some of it is genetic- if you’re a lean, tough mo fo, you’ll punch well above your age weight. If you’re a 20 something couch potato just getting back into it, you’ll see older guys leave you for dust day in day out.
    Most of it is applying yourself and focussing on tangible results. It’s easy to ‘ride a lot’ and plateau.
    Do a few events and you’ll soon realise its a ‘how long is a piece of string’ question. Fat blokes, older blokes and younger ones will all teach you a lesson or two 😉


    I’m faster now than I was 10 years ago (just hit 40 this year)
    Taken my 10k (running) PB from 39:52 to 37:33. Which also means I’m ahead of plenty of people younger than me.
    The difference? Training 6 days a week, eating v healthily, barely drinking, lots of sleep and stretching…
    With focus I don’t think age necessarily means you have to be slower, although I appreciate I’m not comparing like with like – my lifestyle 10 years ago was not really that healthy!

    MW, that’s very understandable, I know what you mean anyway! But all Steve (A) will do is a load of spinning on his spinny bike. He’s still a better rider than Gaz (B) though in that he can descend faster & climb techy stuff better.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

The topic ‘Mates fitness question.’ is closed to new replies.