I hate to say it, but I'm technically a boomer (born in 1964, the last official year of the Baby Boom).
I'd never really run, except more than a couple of minutes at a time on a treadmill. But I bought my own treadmill, walked a lot, ran my first mile on 2/1/09, worked up to 5K by 5/1/09 or so. So I managed to run a real 5K race on 5/16/09 in 34:12 - not too shabby, I hear. And it was not really challenging at that, so I'm going to sign up for two more upcoming 5Ks.
My main question, that I couldn't really find addressed in browsing the forums' subject lines for over an hour, is: Given my age and late start, should I shoot for speed or distance? That is, should I shoot for, say, winning a 5K in my age group when I'm 50, or just finishing a marathon at that age. Or both?
It'd certainly be cool to win a short race, with a small field, someday; but on the other hand it'd also be cool to run an ultramarathon at 60 or something. I certainly like running so far, and I'm not really pushing myself hard yet. I just need to figure out what my long-haul orientation should be. Maybe it depends on what I'm "built for", but I don't know what that might be either.
Thanks for any input!