1

votes

can't do same workout at 22 than at 20?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created January 15, 2013 at 7:45 AM

I read someone on a fitness forum say that age 22 they couldn't do they same workout level they could at 20 due to aging.

Is this right? Is there a loss of fitness between 20-22? Does the decline start that early?

531b053b68e92ac509fc1544f88dc103

(1205)

on January 17, 2013
at 02:06 AM

How so? I'm not sure what you mean by that.

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on January 16, 2013
at 01:32 AM

Guess i sparked a riot. I was being literal when i said i am in better shape now vs. 20 years ago. I have a better diet and fitness and can do things physically now that i couldn't then, and am happier and healthier. My point is that the right information, actions and attitude can offset 20 years of aging. 2 years of aging is a drop in the bucket by comparison and the OP shouldn't worry abut hitting a lifetime fitness peak at age 20.

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab

(3536)

on January 16, 2013
at 01:15 AM

Yeah I am 23 and I have aged considerably. At 20 I was on top of the world, now I am bedridden, tired and weak.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 11:50 PM

@ MathGirl72-WHen someone elucidates upon why they have a different view as someone else, it doesn't mean they're getting worked up or angry at the other person. It just means they're explaining their view as thoroughly as possible so there is no confusion. This is just what civilized, communicative people do.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 11:40 PM

WHen someone explains why they have a different view as someone else, it doesn't mean they're getting worked up or are angry at the other person. It just means they're explaining their view as thoroughly as possible so there is no confusion.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on January 15, 2013
at 09:05 PM

Not that I am happy about giving any credence to this post -- The fact is that Phelps and Bolt are freaks of nature. And perhaps freaks can continue to expand their physical aptitude well after the "meaty" part of the curve starts their decline. Not saying I agree with this, but putting out two of the greatest athletes of all time does not refute the point the OP stated.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 08:58 PM

^lol....that is kinda funny there ccorradino.

62fafa8cb15af7c562fa8c270f7b6174

(619)

on January 15, 2013
at 07:23 PM

The irony of being downvoted for 'illogic' by username 'forever young :-D

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 07:12 PM

wow FY: I think..just maybe..you might be overthinking this. I've never taken a formal logic/reasoning course. Luckily I have taken LOTS of science courses so I can apply those concepts. To get all overanalytical on this like you I could point out that meassuring how well someone performs at a sport is a poor proxy for their aptitude for that sport at either given age as technique and skill development along with experience will greatly scew the results. Ok..thats about as far as I'm gonna go with this mental masterbation though :). You can see were it goes from there...

61844af1187e745e09bb394cbd28cf23

(11058)

on January 15, 2013
at 06:54 PM

Upvoted because foreveryoung has his panties all wadded up. Dude, lighten up!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:59 PM

This seems to refute that idea. Also, some of ballet's premier danseurs today only have earned their rank AFTER age 20, and ballet is arguably one of those sports that your at your potential 24/7 from the age of 5-8 until retirement.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:58 PM

This seems to refute that idea. Also, some of ballet's premier danseurs today only have earned their rank AFTER age 20, and ballet is arguably one of those sports that your at your potential 24/7 from the age of 4 until retirement.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:55 PM

Now, take someone like Robby Robinson, who began training in his early teens and today at 70 (in the absence of steroids) is stronger and better at his sport (bodybuilding) today then he was at 20 (on steroids).

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:53 PM

at 20" theory because, despite being great at 20, she probably wasn't meeting her full potential at that age either, as she did suffer from bulimia during the time.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:53 PM

Just because a few people gained fitness from 20-22 (myself included), it does not mean that there is no loss of fitness between 20-22. In order to test this hypothesis, we would have to compare people who were at or near their physical potential as a 20 year old, have them continue eating/training to maximize their potential 20-22 and see if they progressed or regressed. This is hard to do because it is hard to know whether or not someone is "at their best" at a given age. Even with people like Dara Torres (faster at 41 then she was at 20), it's still hard to say this falsifies the "we peak

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:47 PM

I'm not going to, but this person would also experience great utility from a Logic and Reasoning course.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:38 PM

The other relevant scenario would be training/eating perfectly from 4 (or so) to 20, continuing to do so from 20-30, and being better at 30 than they were at 20. IN this case, they would be falsifying the "we peak at 20" theory. In the former, they would be verifying it.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:33 PM

Well, actually that's precisely my point. IF one trains/eats perfectly from age 4-20, they have reached their 20 year old potential. If they keep training perfectly from 20-22 but have regressed, then it is relevant. The scenario you created is still irrelevant.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:28 PM

It's completely relevant and rational being that the OP didn't comment on the training done in the two year regression from 20-22. Perhaps 2 years were spent sitting on their ass and woe and behold could no longer do the same workout as they did at 20! See.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:28 PM

Why aren't you down voting this? It is irrelevant. Or, if it is meant to be relevant, it makes me very happy my parents sent me to private school.

Fd70d71f4f8195c3a098eda4fc817d4f

(8014)

on January 15, 2013
at 04:36 PM

:-) Yep -- we should all be so lucky!! --> "They reach adulthood and stay pretty steady as they age. Their decline is about two weeks long, at the very end of their life, and then they die."

Fd70d71f4f8195c3a098eda4fc817d4f

(8014)

on January 15, 2013
at 04:35 PM

I'm waiting for foreveryoung to rush in here and downvote you... ;-)

7bf306ada57db47547e9da39a415edf6

(11214)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:40 PM

This isn't irrational, it just isn't directly relevant.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:08 PM

This is the same (ir)rationale that formerly obese and nonathletic people use when they say VLC improved their athletic performace. I would counter that actually, working out and losing weight is what improved their athletic performance.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:07 PM

Downvoted because this isn't logical. You would have had to achieved your full potential then and compare it to your full potential now. For the time being I am not giving the benefit of the doubt that you did in fact achieve your full potential at age 20. If you prove otherwise, I will of course remove the downvote.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on January 15, 2013
at 01:00 PM

can someone post the origin of these ridiculous questions? It is fairly well documented that fitness peak is 14. That's why the Chinese cheat in gymnastics every Olympics -- for the purity of the sport!

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on January 15, 2013
at 11:42 AM

3rd post in 2 weeks about rapid aging starting at age 20... LOL.

  • 77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

    asked by

    (78467)
  • Views
    938
  • Last Activity
    1280D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

6 Answers

4
9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

on January 15, 2013
at 12:59 PM

No. I am 43 and in better shape than when I was 23.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:58 PM

This seems to refute that idea. Also, some of ballet's premier danseurs today only have earned their rank AFTER age 20, and ballet is arguably one of those sports that your at your potential 24/7 from the age of 4 until retirement.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:33 PM

Well, actually that's precisely my point. IF one trains/eats perfectly from age 4-20, they have reached their 20 year old potential. If they keep training perfectly from 20-22 but have regressed, then it is relevant. The scenario you created is still irrelevant.

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on January 16, 2013
at 01:32 AM

Guess i sparked a riot. I was being literal when i said i am in better shape now vs. 20 years ago. I have a better diet and fitness and can do things physically now that i couldn't then, and am happier and healthier. My point is that the right information, actions and attitude can offset 20 years of aging. 2 years of aging is a drop in the bucket by comparison and the OP shouldn't worry abut hitting a lifetime fitness peak at age 20.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:53 PM

Just because a few people gained fitness from 20-22 (myself included), it does not mean that there is no loss of fitness between 20-22. In order to test this hypothesis, we would have to compare people who were at or near their physical potential as a 20 year old, have them continue eating/training to maximize their potential 20-22 and see if they progressed or regressed. This is hard to do because it is hard to know whether or not someone is "at their best" at a given age. Even with people like Dara Torres (faster at 41 then she was at 20), it's still hard to say this falsifies the "we peak

61844af1187e745e09bb394cbd28cf23

(11058)

on January 15, 2013
at 06:54 PM

Upvoted because foreveryoung has his panties all wadded up. Dude, lighten up!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 11:50 PM

@ MathGirl72-WHen someone elucidates upon why they have a different view as someone else, it doesn't mean they're getting worked up or angry at the other person. It just means they're explaining their view as thoroughly as possible so there is no confusion. This is just what civilized, communicative people do.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:53 PM

at 20" theory because, despite being great at 20, she probably wasn't meeting her full potential at that age either, as she did suffer from bulimia during the time.

62fafa8cb15af7c562fa8c270f7b6174

(619)

on January 15, 2013
at 07:23 PM

The irony of being downvoted for 'illogic' by username 'forever young :-D

7bf306ada57db47547e9da39a415edf6

(11214)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:40 PM

This isn't irrational, it just isn't directly relevant.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:38 PM

The other relevant scenario would be training/eating perfectly from 4 (or so) to 20, continuing to do so from 20-30, and being better at 30 than they were at 20. IN this case, they would be falsifying the "we peak at 20" theory. In the former, they would be verifying it.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:28 PM

It's completely relevant and rational being that the OP didn't comment on the training done in the two year regression from 20-22. Perhaps 2 years were spent sitting on their ass and woe and behold could no longer do the same workout as they did at 20! See.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:08 PM

This is the same (ir)rationale that formerly obese and nonathletic people use when they say VLC improved their athletic performace. I would counter that actually, working out and losing weight is what improved their athletic performance.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:59 PM

This seems to refute that idea. Also, some of ballet's premier danseurs today only have earned their rank AFTER age 20, and ballet is arguably one of those sports that your at your potential 24/7 from the age of 5-8 until retirement.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:07 PM

Downvoted because this isn't logical. You would have had to achieved your full potential then and compare it to your full potential now. For the time being I am not giving the benefit of the doubt that you did in fact achieve your full potential at age 20. If you prove otherwise, I will of course remove the downvote.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:55 PM

Now, take someone like Robby Robinson, who began training in his early teens and today at 70 (in the absence of steroids) is stronger and better at his sport (bodybuilding) today then he was at 20 (on steroids).

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 07:12 PM

wow FY: I think..just maybe..you might be overthinking this. I've never taken a formal logic/reasoning course. Luckily I have taken LOTS of science courses so I can apply those concepts. To get all overanalytical on this like you I could point out that meassuring how well someone performs at a sport is a poor proxy for their aptitude for that sport at either given age as technique and skill development along with experience will greatly scew the results. Ok..thats about as far as I'm gonna go with this mental masterbation though :). You can see were it goes from there...

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on January 15, 2013
at 08:58 PM

^lol....that is kinda funny there ccorradino.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 11:40 PM

WHen someone explains why they have a different view as someone else, it doesn't mean they're getting worked up or are angry at the other person. It just means they're explaining their view as thoroughly as possible so there is no confusion.

2
Fd70d71f4f8195c3a098eda4fc817d4f

(8014)

on January 15, 2013
at 02:10 PM

Seriously?

Aging between 20 and 22 to the point that you can't do the same workout load? Oy.

Much more likely that if someone was working out intensely at 20 (probably overtraining out the wazoo and not eating or resting properly), the reason they can't keep it up at 22 is that they're BURNT OUT.

Bodies know best. If they've been working too hard for too long, eventually they force us to slow down, whether we want to or not.

Better that you catch it early with a decline in performance, wise up, and take corrective measures than waiting until you're 50 and have destroyed your adrenals and thyroid and can't even get out of bed without help.

0
3a9d5dde5212ccd34b860bb6ed07bbef

on January 15, 2013
at 06:24 PM

Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt are faster in their mid-late 20s than they were when they were 20.

I site these two because they have been training for 1 specific sport throughout their life, and have continued to progress even after 20. I think this is the case for most people who persevere, be it your average gym rat or your weekend warrior.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on January 15, 2013
at 09:05 PM

Not that I am happy about giving any credence to this post -- The fact is that Phelps and Bolt are freaks of nature. And perhaps freaks can continue to expand their physical aptitude well after the "meaty" part of the curve starts their decline. Not saying I agree with this, but putting out two of the greatest athletes of all time does not refute the point the OP stated.

0
7bf306ada57db47547e9da39a415edf6

(11214)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:53 PM

Fitness forum foolishness.
If any of us actually knew this person and started looking at his lifestyle, we'd probably be able to spot big non-gym related no-nos. Is he sleeping right? Is he partying too much? Is he eating right? Did he recently have an illness- perhaps one requiring medication?

Age isn't even on the map. Indeed, much of aging in our modern culture is slow decline created by the Standard American Everything. If you are a good little boy, go to your doctor, and suffer the four prescriptions and their interactions, the diet and exercise advice, and make it to your cubicle everyday- well you willdecline in what we now consider the normal manner.

But wild animals don't. They reach adulthood and stay pretty steady as they age. Their decline is about two weeks long, at the very end of their life, and then they die.

Fd70d71f4f8195c3a098eda4fc817d4f

(8014)

on January 15, 2013
at 04:36 PM

:-) Yep -- we should all be so lucky!! --> "They reach adulthood and stay pretty steady as they age. Their decline is about two weeks long, at the very end of their life, and then they die."

0
F6b28b8f67467af0337a0381a6857f4f

(203)

on January 15, 2013
at 07:47 AM

no... athletes typically don't peak physically until their mid-late 20s depending on the sport.

-1
531b053b68e92ac509fc1544f88dc103

(1205)

on January 15, 2013
at 03:26 PM

I am 33 and in tremendous shape lifting weights and sprinting 5 days a week. In my early 20s, a cardiologist actually diagnosed me as "sedentary" because I couldn't finish the treadmill stress test. I couldn't even walk up the stairs without losing my breath, yet I wasn't fat. I plan on joining cross-fit later this year to take my athletic edge up another notch.

Fd70d71f4f8195c3a098eda4fc817d4f

(8014)

on January 15, 2013
at 04:35 PM

I'm waiting for foreveryoung to rush in here and downvote you... ;-)

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:28 PM

Why aren't you down voting this? It is irrelevant. Or, if it is meant to be relevant, it makes me very happy my parents sent me to private school.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 15, 2013
at 05:47 PM

I'm not going to, but this person would also experience great utility from a Logic and Reasoning course.

531b053b68e92ac509fc1544f88dc103

(1205)

on January 17, 2013
at 02:06 AM

How so? I'm not sure what you mean by that.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!