How much money would the average person pay to be in 15 minute 5k and 32 minute 10k shape with minimal training?

I wouldn't pay anything. The whole point of the sport is DOING the sport and accomplishing something. In any case, 32:00 for a 10K isn't that difficult to achieve. A 5K in 15:00 is a bit more impressive, but not worth paying for or getting paid for.

3cd3 wrote:

uTI wrote:

They would have the physique of a 32 min guy as well.

This would, of course, vary by person, some people would rather be overweight than "scrawny", some people would pay tons, and some would pay money in theory but in actuality they wouldn't appreciate being at 32 min 10k runner because they didn't put in the work, so it would be meaningless.

Go ahead and discus this.

-uTI

People would spend money on the physique if they were overweight. No one would spend a red cent on the running fitness.

I don't know. As a 15min 5k gal you would be national class. I could see paying for that. And of course a lot of gals (well other than the lack of cleavage) would like that type of body.

Among guys only the obese would be interested.

I would pay a lot. If I could do a 15 minute 5k but only muster a 32 minute 10k, then that would mean my 800 would be off the charts.

I'm in that shape now and although you would think 45-mi week is minimal training, i do maximize my training by nailing my efforts. I work hard when I run, so minimal time commitment, perhaps, but maximal effort since I don't train for more time during the week.

The average person would pay a lot to trade their out of shape body for the fitness of a 15:00 guy. Even if running isn't 'cool' it's still healthier than their beer belly and would fix A LOT of health issues better than any medicine they're taking.

I would pay ~$1k or so

Eight bucks.

Math fail wrote:

runthecountry wrote:

For guys, a 15 minute flat 5k time in high school would probably get you scholarship money at a lot of schools. Particularly since the combination of 15 minutes and 32 minutes for a 10k means a mile time of around 4:10 or so.

Additionally, a 15/32 minute 5k/10k runner is probably not too scrawny, considering how weak the 10k is, relatively speaking.

A 4:10 mile does not equate to a 15-minute 5K or 32-minute 10K. 15-flat is 31-low for 10K, and a low-4:20 mile.

The physique of a 32-minute 10K guy (this thread was not about women who run that fast) is fit enough to interest a lot of women at first glance, probably bigger, more muscular and looks better, but this is not fast enough to be elite, so I would pay a sum of zero cents since I ran this in the day.

When did I say a 15 minute 5k and 32 minute 10k each individually equal a 4:10 mile? I didn't - the combination of the two (stronger 5k as you pointed out), AND in the context of high schoolers - likely equals a 4:10 mile. In the inverse situation, if someone could run a 15 minute 5k and 30:45 10k, I might estimate they were good for a 4:26 mile.

Tree fitty

uTI wrote:

They would have the physique of a 32 min guy as well.

This would, of course, vary by person, some people would rather be overweight than "scrawny", some people would pay tons, and some would pay money in theory but in actuality they wouldn't appreciate being at 32 min 10k runner because they didn't put in the work, so it would be meaningless.

Go ahead and discus this.

-uTI

Assumptions:

- I could wake up tomorrow and be running 15:00-15:30 and 32:00 again.

- I would remain healthy enough for at least 6-12 months to enjoy training and running at that level.

- Performance achieved via non-doping methods. I just wake up and feel young, fast, and lightweight.

Given the above, I would be willing to pay at least $10,000-$15,000, if not more. I suspect many of those who cannot understand why someone would be willing to pay to run fast are still young. Getting old and slow really sucks. It has been around 16 years since I last set a PR or ran at that level.

Being able to do an easy 10 miler at 6:30 pace again would be awesome . I agree w above poster

Define average. For instance, what age, what weight, what height, what gender, what income range, what cholesterol level, etc, etc, etc?

You left this wide open with no definition. Average is meaningless. None of the people on LRC are average so we can't even fathom what an average person might do. Go post on Runner's World.

You get 0/10 due to lack of specificity. You are a dipshit. Run away and never return to LRC. You are a waste of pixels and O2..

no one is going to pay you to run a very slow 15 5k and 32 10k.

what they want is sub27 10k and sub13 5k performances.

too many can run into your time

so shut up and sit by the pool.

The average person doesn't want to look like skinny distance runner. The average person would aspire to be more like a cross fit body.

Why did I start this moronic thread?????

If it would mean I was running and walking pain free, no limits, I'd pay everything I have and more.

I'm in my 30s running 22 minute 5ks off 12 mines a week. I ran sub 4 in my twenties, well under 15 and 32 in college. It was a good part of my life, but I wouldn't pay to bring it back. Time to move on and focus on other things.

The average person could give a rats ass and wouldn't pay a dime. You could make it 14 and 30 minutes and they still wouldn't care. Now a runner with pr's of 17 and 35 minutes might pay a handsome sum for those times if they could afford it.

I ran those times and spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on shoes, training camps, skiving off work, traveling and so on to get there

Seeing as how the majority of these replies are saying they would prefer working for their success, and that 15/32 aren't super times, a better question would be "how much would the average runner pay to have elite genetics (let's qualify 'elite' as capable of 14/29 PRs) ". This then leaves the success still up to the athlete, but they know they have the potential to be superb.

Myself, I'd pay a few thousand for that.