Men's Health magazine says that running 1.5 miles in 10 minutes is equivalent to benching 255 lbs?!?

The problem is that you're fat. Lose some weight and benching 1.5 times your body weight will be easier chunky.

You must be extremely weak then. I bench 275 with just 1 year serious lifting, and I was a former college runner. This while my bodyweight was 182. Now I weight about 165 and can still throw up at least 255, and this is without benching seriously in over a year.

Who is typically stronger, a grown man or a grown-ass man?

Oh, yea and I am sure you can power through a 2:20 marathon. Go to the back of the line for lying.

Umm no wrote:

You must be extremely weak then. I bench 275 with just 1 year serious lifting, and I was a former college runner. This while my bodyweight was 182. Now I weight about 165 and can still throw up at least 255, and this is without benching seriously in over a year.

Wrong.

If you have just one short run per week (3 to 5 miles) you will highly likely be able to run 1.5 miles in 10 minutes.

If you have one quick bench workout per week (10-15 minutes), there is no way you are lifting 1.5 times your body weight.

You need to live in the gym to achieve that.

roid muscles wrote:

Wrong.

If you have just one short run per week (3 to 5 miles) you will highly likely be able to run 1.5 miles in 10 minutes.

If you have one quick bench workout per week (10-15 minutes), there is no way you are lifting 1.5 times your body weight.

You need to live in the gym to achieve that.

No.

One run per week will not allow most people to run 6:40 pace for a mile and a half. Won't happen.

Why are you saying 10-15 minutes for bench? Why not an equivalent amount of time as the run? In the time it takes to run 3-5 miles, you could do 3 sets of 10 reps each 4 times a week. That might get you there.

No Way wrote:

roid muscles wrote:

Wrong.

If you have just one short run per week (3 to 5 miles) you will highly likely be able to run 1.5 miles in 10 minutes.

If you have one quick bench workout per week (10-15 minutes), there is no way you are lifting 1.5 times your body weight.

You need to live in the gym to achieve that.

No.

One run per week will not allow most people to run 6:40 pace for a mile and a half. Won't happen.

Why are you saying 10-15 minutes for bench? Why not an equivalent amount of time as the run? In the time it takes to run 3-5 miles, you could do 3 sets of 10 reps each 4 times a week. That might get you there.

I think one good run per week could allow most readers of Men's Health Magazine (generally active adult males 20s to 50s) to run 6:40 pace for such a short time.

I think the 10-15 minutes for bench sounds like a reasonable comparison since it only takes one set of a light 15-20 reps to warm you up in the bench while it takes 10 minutes of running to begin to warm you up.

is this even real? wrote:

A measly 1.5 miles at 6:40 pace? I literally could run that as a 10 year old off of very little training. Surely that should be NO challenge whatsoever for a grown-ass man.

But bench press 255 pounds? Dude. In my prime, I could have perfect nutrition and be trained by the best strength coach in the Nation specifically for powerlifting for 5 years and would still have trouble approaching that mark.

Consider that this might be why you self-selected running over power sports.

niacin plus wrote:

I think the 10-15 minutes for bench sounds like a reasonable comparison since it only takes one set of a light 15-20 reps to warm you up in the bench while it takes 10 minutes of running to begin to warm you up.

How is that in any way relevant? Running 3-5 miles is going to take someone who is capable of running 1.5 miles in 10 minutes between 24 and 40 minutes. Why doesn't the person doing bench press get the same amount of time?

Should be obvious. Its the amount of perceived effort. To me, an intense chest workout that takes 10-15 minutes takes a similar amount of energy out of me as a good 5 mile run.

Now if you want to equate the times, well, then you can have someone run all out on the soccer field for a straight 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure that'll get you to that 6:40 pace for 1.5 miles as well.

I did both in high school, can't do either now.

It depends on one's body type, really. Some folks will have an easier time with one or the other, some folks will respond more quickly to training in one field or the other.

Comparing different disciplines is tricky and mostly they DON'T compare in terms of "easy" or hard." When I think about it, it was a LOT easier for me to run under 50 seconds for a 400m than to run under 6:30 pace in cross. Most of my teammates thought 6:30 was an easy day, but couldn't break 50 no matter what.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that Daniel Komen has the world's best for 1.5 miles. His Two Mile/3k would have taken him through 1.5 at, lets say 5:55? Someone feel free to correct my math, or make the case that El Guerrouj could have finished another lap after his 4:44 2k and run 5:50. So the 1.5 mile for the best ever would probably have been around that 5:50 mark, maybe a touch under.

10 minutes, compared to 5:50 is 58% as fast. (350 seconds / 600 seconds)

World bench press record is either 722# "raw" or 1,102# with a bench shirt. That's an absurd difference, holy crap. But anyway, lets take that raw number. You can either plug in the discussion weight of 255 or take the 1.5x body weight (average weight of an American male is 194.7 per wikipedia, making 1.5x = 292#).

255 compared to 722 = 35%

292 compared to 722 = 40%

255 compared to 1102 = 23%, for comparison

So, in terms of how "close" to the World Record each of these are, it looks like running is harder. Significantly.

Think of it this way... compare that 1.5 mile to a 5k. What's the average finishing time for males in your local 5k? A thread on Letsrun (that I just accidentally closed and can't find again) posted that average male finish time is 28 minutes. That's 14ish minutes per 1.5 miles. Feel free to debate if these people can cut 4 minutes off their pace by dropping half the distance.

I think the Letsrun crowd is just naturally skewed towards thinking that running is easier than it is for normal dudes. Also, I'm SCIENCE! not MATH!, so feel free to call my out on my percents there.

niacin plus wrote:

Should be obvious. Its the amount of perceived effort. To me, an intense chest workout that takes 10-15 minutes takes a similar amount of energy out of me as a good 5 mile run.

Now if you want to equate the times, well, then you can have someone run all out on the soccer field for a straight 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure that'll get you to that 6:40 pace for 1.5 miles as well.

"To me" being the key words. You're not even discussing effort. You can do an easy 15 minute chest workout or a hard one. An easy 5 miles or a hard 5 miles. You're in good running shape and not good bench pressing shape, so obviously that's easier for you. Someone who benches 255 easily would feel that the bench press took way less energy out of him than running 1.5 miles.

Not lying, I have video proof, idiot.

SCIENCE! wrote:

So, in terms of how "close" to the World Record each of these are, it looks like running is harder. Significantly.

So why was I able to run at that "super hard" pace as a 10 year old kid with no real training? Does that mean that there are a bunch of 10 year old kids out there who could just randomly wander into a gym and press out 255 pounds without any preparation?

is this even real? wrote:

SCIENCE! wrote:

So, in terms of how "close" to the World Record each of these are, it looks like running is harder. Significantly.

So why was I able to run at that "super hard" pace as a 10 year old kid with no real training? Does that mean that there are a bunch of 10 year old kids out there who could just randomly wander into a gym and press out 255 pounds without any preparation?

No, but there are men who can.

We ass-men are quite powerful

Running 1.5 miles in 10 minutes = benching 40 lbs.

is this even real? wrote:

So why was I able to run at that "super hard" pace as a 10 year old kid with no real training? Does that mean that there are a bunch of 10 year old kids out there who could just randomly wander into a gym and press out 255 pounds without any preparation?

You can't come up with a reasonable explanation yourself? How about as a 10 yr old, you've got 10 years of experience walking and running with your legs. You may have even played lots of tag or did youth sports. If you had spent that 10 years walking on your hands or doing 500 pushups everyday, then you would probably have been far better at chest strength than running.

No, this isn't a ridiculous possibility. Who is going to run faster - the 10 yr old soccer player or the 10 yr old gymnast? Likewise with benching or pushups.