World Champion David Oliver: 27 minutes in NYC 5k road race.

It was a funny runny.

This forum has an extremely distorted viewpoint of what a fast 5k is. Most people on the planet could never hope to sniff 20 minutes for a 5k even with proper training.

Sprinters just cannot do distance. It's just not in their genetic make-up. Their muscles are super fast twitch, capable of amazing amounts of power for a few seconds and then nothing. Similarly how distance runners just cannot sprint start. There's no power there to explode out the blocks.

It's like when those debates come up about soccer players doing distance etc. They're great athletes but they're sprinters designed for short, explosive bursts of effort for 5-15 seconds and that's it. 27 mins is really bad but I guess most top level 100m guys would be equally as bad. They'd probably be better of actually taking walking breaks, Galloway style!

Can't do distance! wrote:

Sprinters just cannot do distance. It's just not in their genetic make-up. Their muscles are super fast twitch, capable of amazing amounts of power for a few seconds and then nothing. Similarly how distance runners just cannot sprint start. There's no power there to explode out the blocks.

It's like when those debates come up about soccer players doing distance etc. They're great athletes but they're sprinters designed for short, explosive bursts of effort for 5-15 seconds and that's it. 27 mins is really bad but I guess most top level 100m guys would be equally as bad. They'd probably be better of actually taking walking breaks, Galloway style!

I think it has more to do with training. Their training has almost no aerobic component to it at all. In fact, doing any sort of aerobic work after winter training would be counter-productive, bodies can only handle so much work load and any aerobic running they do would take away from their core sprint training. Because of this, I wouldn't expect their 5ks to be much different than your average "gym rat" that only ever does weight lifting. Some of them might have a moderate baseline aerobic capacity and run a 19 or 20 minute 5k. Others would be like David Oliver here, running 27 minutes for a 5k.

To accuse soccer players of being in the same boat is ridiculous though. Obviously soccer players make some attempt to work on aerobic capacity. They are of course "multi sprint" athletes, and to be able to recover on the field during a game, they would have to have some moderate aerobic capacity. Again, any effort put into building aerobic capacity is time not spent working on soccer skills or explosive power, but their balancing act is a little different and they definitely do work on some aerobic ability. I'd think the worst runners out of a group of pro level soccer players should still be able to run 22 or 23 minutes or so for a 5k and I would bet some could run in the 15s off of soccer training.

In high school, we had a kid come out to cross country from soccer. He didn't do the summer of running and just jumped in off of soccer training about a week before our first meet. In that first meet he ran sub 18. If a 16 year old can run sub 18 off of soccer and no specific running training, I'm sure there are some random pros who can run faster. By the end of that season he was sub 17. That was his only year running cross country, he said it interfered with soccer too much.

But I bet his finishing kick was awesome!

Well the dude didn't do any training, I'm sure, but that's just a bad time. I know plenty of fast people (44/45 400 guys, 21 200 guys) who would (or would have) run about 20 with no training, some significantly faster. I ran less than 2 seconds slower than Oliver's HH PR and haven't run over 20 since maybe middle school.

The pinheads criticising him here are talking like he's peaked his season around this fun run and 27 minutes was the best he could come up with.

He's had a jog around a charity run, nothing more, nothing less. He could probably do a bit quicker but it was a fun, charity thing, so he had a jog round.

Get some perspective.

David the welfare suck received an $100,000 appearance fee for the hobby jog and cheated NYFD, FDNY, and NYPD out of overtime pay.

Of course he could've gone faster if he actually raced it. I'm sure he did it more of a "fun run". Saying that, Bolt has already said that he doesn't think he's capable of even beating your average hobby jogger in a 10k (~41-42 minutes).

Kinda and Kinda wrote:

Of course he could've gone faster if he actually raced it. I'm sure he did it more of a "fun run". Saying that, Bolt has already said that he doesn't think he's capable of even beating your average hobby jogger in a 10k (~41-42 minutes).

I don't think Bekele would do a very good shot putt either. What a miserable excuse for an athlete.

Roger Black, UK's best 400 guy ever, trained for and ran London in 3:45 a few years after sprint retirement. This is probably indicative of the potential of fast-twitch guys at longer distance. It is equivalent to a 22-high 5K. I would guess Roger could run 21 for 5k at that point.

Many people would think this but this is not the case. What allows an athlete to kick at the end of a race is not his basic speed but his aerobic power that allows him to use what speed he has. If Runner 1 can only run a 30 second 200, but can run a 30 second 200 at the end of a race, he will always out kick his teammate who can run a 22 200 who can only muster 65% of his top speed at the end.

Runner A: Can't break 60 for 400, has 800 PR of 2:14. Mile PR of 5:00, 2 mile of 10:50. Runs 50mpw

Runner B: 53.5 second 400, 800 PR of 2:05, Mile of 5:00, 2 mile of 11:10. 35mpw

If these two were neck and neck at the end of a mile race that is not absurdly slow, I'd take runner A every time.

kimani wrote:

Well the dude didn't do any training, I'm sure, but that's just a bad time. I know plenty of fast people (44/45 400 guys, 21 200 guys) who would (or would have) run about 20 with no training, some significantly faster. I ran less than 2 seconds slower than Oliver's HH PR and haven't run over 20 since maybe middle school.

1) David Oliver isn't a 200/400 runner. He is a 60/100 runner.

2) 2 seconds slower than David Oliver makes you a completely different type of runner. For example, Coe or El G is 2 seconds slower than Bolt over 100m. Do you expect Bolt to have a similar 5k time as them?

3) You were not less than 2 seconds slower than David Oliver in the 100 hh everytime you ran under 20.

4) it was probably just an easy fun run

all you old, illiterate people know about is distance running, critiquing others when you can't hope to fathom what they do.

http://ca.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/201268/_634-1.oly.DavidOliver.mh.070212.jpg

^ More muscle mass than 10 of you lets runners combined. 27 minutes with that body and basically no training above (200-400metres)* (my guess) isn't bad. It's a fun road race.

Educate yourselves instead of preaching stupidity.

-V2

what is wrong with the people on this thread?

Oliver was jogging but he is an extreme fast twitch/muscular guy. Why would you expect him to be trained for running, say, six or seven minute miles? Athleticism is highly specific--explosive athletes go very, very fast for short distances, and that is a physiological match. They are not suited for long distances. Long distance runners cannot do that and cannot understand why it is not absolutely simple to race a 5k at 5 or 6 minutes a mile.

Ben L Wrong wrote:

David Oliver ‏@doliversub13

First 5K run today in NYC w/ #RunWithHart and #NikeRunClub 27min. Distance running is nuts!! Sticking to sprints LOL

--------------------

Why sprinters are so bad in distance events? many obese people are in sub 27 shape. Heck, 27 minutes is as bad as a 5-hour marathon effort.

And many people here thinks that Usain Bolt could run a sub 18 5k.

You are a joke!

27 minutes is not bad at all for an untrained 220 pound pure sprinter. Btw, please show me an obese people who is sub 27 shape and I bet David is laughing all the way to the bank with his $2000 plus appearance fee.

Point of comparison: most distance elites couldn't break 12 in the 100, which is a time that might score a point or two at the local HS dual meet.

That's pretty impressive for a big guy with no aerobic training

[quote]runnerdnerd wrote:

I think it has more to do with training.

You are wrong. There is not one person who was genetically gifted to become a world class sprinter who has any kind of talent for distance running. For the most part, 600 meters is the top of their range. A few great 400m guys could also run a world class 800m (but none of these guys were world class 100m or 200m guys).

Usain Bolt or Justin Gatlin could train for 3 years but neither would even be able to break 7 minute miles for a 5k.