How is Max King so muscular?

Photos make him look much bigger than he really is. He is @5'6" and weighs @135. Utlra running is a bit more forgiving on height and weight than mid-d to the marathon because ultras are more about being able to refuel on the run and being durable than being able to hold a sub 5 min pace or drop a 54 sec 400 in the last lap.

He's been ridiculously muscular for a long time, since college at least. I went to Cornell and he was the first person I saw on the track team with his shirt off, it was beyond intimidating. All I could think was, holy shit, college running is a different world, this guy could take a bullet and still beat me in a 5k.

He also competes in obstacle racing.

He is muscular but he is no Frank Bozanich

http://www.scottmasonphoto.com/Vintage-Running/Brattleboro-National-5ok/i-tRPTn9h/1/L/Copy%20of%20brattleboro%2050k%201980-10-L.jpg

S88 wrote:

Who?

Max King burst on to the running scene as a 23 yr old by crushing the competition at the Old Mill Harvest 5k in 15:12.

Turning his sights to the snow the following year, Max took 5th place at the National 10k snowshoe. Championships.

In 2005 the track called again and Max made the hometown fans proud as he steepled his way to an 8:42 win at historic Hayward Field.

The following year saw Max not only run a 1:03:07 half marathon, but represent the United States of America at the World xc Championships.

2008 was highlighted by this versatile runner taking the top place at the Southern Oregon Turkey Trot. Not quite as impressive was his 13:54 indoor 5k, his win at the Xterra trail running national championships, or his domination of the Siskiyou Outback Trail Run.

After 2008, little was heard until he exploded back on to the national scene after transforming into the best obstacle racer in the world.

this is funny. well done.

Old Mill Harvest 5K will never see another like him.

hey wrote:

First of all, major props to Max King for holding a 6:14 average pace of 100k. Truly incredible.

But how is he so muscular? I looked up some photos of him and the size of his biceps and quadriceps are tremendous for someone who can run like he does. I know I'm predisposed to think distance runners all should be frail little ghosts because of what the world's elite look like, but what is this guy on? Do ultra guys build more muscle than marathon guys?

He does have a little bit of muscle, but not much.

I remember Frank from Lake Waramaug. Best quads.

Muscle definition does not equal "big muscles"...if he's really 5"6 135lb...that's not muscular

Alan

he's defined not remotely muscular. 2 different things. if you stood him next to andy vernon or solinsky he would be dwarfed

not much muscle??? he looks like a bodybuilder compared to:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzDxHIhCAAAY0Sn.jpg:large

and probably both 5'6" or so, right?

True most pro runners his height are closer to 120. Its all genetics.

Alan

He is pretty darn defined...

Anyone here stay pretty competitive while being really defined as well? I lost a lot of definition by running higher mileage with no lifting. Looking to get back at it, but losing confidence I can do it. I'm sick of looking toooo skinny.

It is typically hard to stay cut up while doing a lot of long distance running because to adapt to slow running the body requires fat and so it will tend to store far around the stomach due to the high cortisol response and lower testosterone response to long slow running. Sprints, intervals, moderate to heavy weight lifting have a much higher testosterone response and lower cortisol response....thus easier to lose fat and get cut

Alan

runningart2004 wrote:

It is typically hard to stay cut up while doing a lot of long distance running because to adapt to slow running the body requires fat and so it will tend to store far around the stomach due to the high cortisol response and lower testosterone response to long slow running.

Complete and utter BS. For someone who supposedly knows his $hit about fitness, nutrition, training, lifting, etc, and often you appear to know a bit, you fairly regularly come up with the something like the above nonsense, making you lose all credibility. You are regurgitating the Cult_Fit_Paleo_Clown "skinny fat" claim and running with it, looking foolish in the process.

Do you want me to list, oh, I don't know, maybe a 10,000 pics of various distance runners, or other distance athletes (cyclists, swimmers, triathletes, etc) who had absolutely no difficulty "doing a lot of distance running (or cycling, or swimming, etc)" and "staying cut" ?? I could easily do it, and you know it, thus disproving what you wrote. Fact.

You don't "need fat (in the diet)" to adapt to slow running, anymore than one needs fat for other activities. one does need to become better at burning fat, but this occurs with lots of aerobic training regardless of diet. The best distance runners in the world are emaciated skeletons with ZERO body fat on their midsections.

Oh, and there is a PLENTY high cortisol response from sprints, lifting, etc. Yes, there might be more of T response too, but certainly a high cortisol response (and cortisol ain't all bad, by the way).

There are just as many "soft midsection" amateur, untalented, weekend X-fitters, weightlifters, football players, etc, as there are amateur, weekend warrior, untalented joggers.

Your statement is based on a myth, not science.

I, unfortunately, have a graduate degree in biochemistry. Unfortunate because it often makes reading letsrun feeling a bit like punching myself in the head. The total lack of basic understanding is incredible. Anyway, I can't be bothered to correct anyone; it's a total waste of time, you can't change the mind of the willfully blind or those who simply lack the ability to understand. Anyway, I won't do it, but I enjoy it when someone else will take the time to call out the crap.

In some fairness to Alan, who is incorrect, he's doing what mass media does, confusing cortisol's effect on increasing visceral fat with subcutaneous fat. Subcutaneous fat is what you will see on people who "are not cut", it jiggles etc. Excess intra-abdominal fat is by no means healthy, but it is not something anybody is going to be able to "pinch", unless they have first sliced open that persons abdominal cavity.

What are you talking about? I see little to no definition.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/sports/for-the-love-of-speed

EPO is my middle name wrote:

What are you talking about? I see little to no definition.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/sports/for-the-love-of-speed

post of the day