I am a somewhat serious runner and I started to not only compare myself to the World Records as in I can do 70% of the WR for 400m but also to the age groups. It is fascinating that I cannot beat any under 70 record at all although I am very fit compared to the general population. So while old age is definitely a decline the achievable levels are still quite impressive. World records for 60 year old men are so good they might as well be the real WR for me
> A 95-year-old former dentist has set a new world record for his age group in the 200-meter indoor sprint, knocking a massive 2.4 seconds off the previous record…
EDIT: Well that's embarrassing... I didn't see the video the first time I checked on my phone, but looking again there are a few videos in plain sight. Mea culpa.
Just to be precise, while his feat is incredible, you can't really make this correlation with the WR in 200m (any age), and even less use the absolute difference. The main reason is that the pool of people able to participate is way smaller as age increases.
Also, you are using outdoor times as a reference (the best time for indoor 200m is 19.92, Frankie Fredericks). Frankie Fredericks is the only person that ran 200m indoors under 20 seconds.
And I am extremely impressed by the feat that this man just did; most people would be happy to just reach 95; and those that do reach 95, being able to walk.
Well done for this guy, but the headline seems somewhat redundant.
Only someone who is older than 95 can break the record for the 95 and over age group. Ie that's like saying '2-legged man broke an Olympic record for X'.