How hard would it be? Granted the individual is not overweight, fairly athletic and strong. Is it impossible for most people to go sub 50 in the quarter even if they train years for it?
How hard would it be? Granted the individual is not overweight, fairly athletic and strong. Is it impossible for most people to go sub 50 in the quarter even if they train years for it?
tricky todd wrote:
How hard would it be? Granted the individual is not overweight, fairly athletic and strong. Is it impossible for most people to go sub 50 in the quarter even if they train years for it?
Yes, impossible for most people.
Utterly impossible for the average man to come even close.
Smooth Daddy wrote:
Utterly impossible for the average man to come even close.
Are you guys being serious? I really can't tell.
I did it in high school and I'm far from elite. Never even ran in college. I was one of the fastest on my high school team though.
I guess if you have the fast twitch fibers of a mud turtle it might be impossible.
Old guy34 wrote:
Are you guys being serious? I really can't tell.
I did it in high school and I'm far from elite. Never even ran in college. I was one of the fastest on my high school team though.
I guess if you have the fast twitch fibers of a mud turtle it might be impossible.
There's a long way between average and elite. The ability to run 50.0 requires the speed to run well under 12 seconds, and probably not slower than 11.5 or so for 100m. I put the average male around 13.0 for 100m with little room for improvement.
Old guy34 wrote:
Smooth Daddy wrote:Utterly impossible for the average man to come even close.
Are you guys being serious? I really can't tell.
I did it in high school and I'm far from elite. Never even ran in college. I was one of the fastest on my high school team though.
I guess if you have the fast twitch fibers of a mud turtle it might be impossible.
Really, so pretty much everyone does it where you're from? No, of course not.
Smooth Daddy wrote:
Old guy34 wrote:Are you guys being serious? I really can't tell.
I did it in high school and I'm far from elite. Never even ran in college. I was one of the fastest on my high school team though.
I guess if you have the fast twitch fibers of a mud turtle it might be impossible.
There's a long way between average and elite. The ability to run 50.0 requires the speed to run well under 12 seconds, and probably not slower than 11.5 or so for 100m. I put the average male around 13.0 for 100m with little room for improvement.
This ^^
Athletic.net has 1510 sub 50 400 runners last year out of 75,255 400 times, and the sample size is large enough that we can reasonably assume roughly 2% of high schoolers with recorded 400m times are sub 50 (margin of error probably +/- .5%).
I'd assume close to 95% of adult men are incapable of training to run sub 50.
HurdleMVP wrote:
Athletic.net has 1510 sub 50 400 runners last year out of 75,255 400 times, and the sample size is large enough that we can reasonably assume roughly 2% of high schoolers with recorded 400m times are sub 50 (margin of error probably +/- .5%).
I'd assume close to 95% of adult men are incapable of training to run sub 50.
I think that's reasonable. In addition, places that don't get on athletic.net are LESS LIKELY to have a large number of sub 50 runners.
I don't know guys. If 1500 high schoolers are doing it, what about 22 year old with college coaching and strength training? I know most people don't get that kind of training, but surely a lot (50%?) Could break 50 with those resources.
I just don't see myself as a special runner, but did it as a senior in hs. Yeah it was hard, but our training was a joke compared to college programs
Dummy Devronica wrote:
HurdleMVP wrote:Athletic.net has 1510 sub 50 400 runners last year out of 75,255 400 times, and the sample size is large enough that we can reasonably assume roughly 2% of high schoolers with recorded 400m times are sub 50 (margin of error probably +/- .5%).
I'd assume close to 95% of adult men are incapable of training to run sub 50.
I think that's reasonable. In addition, places that don't get on athletic.net are LESS LIKELY to have a large number of sub 50 runners.
No way it's reasonable. Less than 1% of adult men are capable of sub 50. Keep in mind that the sample size of 75,255 is made up not just of runners, but runners who cared enough to run the 400. And even then barely 2% managed sub 50. Factor in the non sprint runners, field event participants, non athletic types etc and you're well under 1%
No more than 5% can run sub 60
Old guy34 wrote:
I don't know guys. If 1500 high schoolers are doing it, what about 22 year old with college coaching and strength training? I know most people don't get that kind of training, but surely a lot (50%?) Could break 50 with those resources.
I just don't see myself as a special runner, but did it as a senior in hs. Yeah it was hard, but our training was a joke compared to college programs
Keep in mind that 1500 high schoolers running sub 50 is so minuscule compared to the 75000 high schoolers running the 400 every season. While it's possible that you didn't win much if you were in a competitive league, do consider that as a sub 50 guy, you were better than 98 out of every 100 high school quartermilers.
College runners are also a very self selecting group--these are kids that have usually run track for a few years prior and have displayed some degree of talent. Upwards of 95% of guys ages 18 - 25 could not make it through a week of workouts at any collegiate track program producing sub 50 quarter milers.
HurdleMVP wrote:
Old guy34 wrote:I don't know guys. If 1500 high schoolers are doing it, what about 22 year old with college coaching and strength training? I know most people don't get that kind of training, but surely a lot (50%?) Could break 50 with those resources.
I just don't see myself as a special runner, but did it as a senior in hs. Yeah it was hard, but our training was a joke compared to college programs
Keep in mind that 1500 high schoolers running sub 50 is so minuscule compared to the 75000 high schoolers running the 400 every season. While it's possible that you didn't win much if you were in a competitive league, do consider that as a sub 50 guy, you were better than 98 out of every 100 high school quartermilers.
College runners are also a very self selecting group--these are kids that have usually run track for a few years prior and have displayed some degree of talent. Upwards of 95% of guys ages 18 - 25 could not make it through a week of workouts at any collegiate track program producing sub 50 quarter milers.
Maybe it was better than I thought. I didn't even make it out of regional to state so I didn't think it was that hot. What about all the soccer. Basketball, football, lacrosse kids who are athletes? I bet some of them could do it too with the right training, especially as 20 year old men. It's not just track runners with speed.
Excellent point. Just sampling track athletes does not give the a complete or even the best sample of athletic potential for # of sub 50 one-lappers out there. Including football and soccer athletes who don't run track would increase the # by significant factor.
Dummy Devronica wrote:
Old guy34 wrote:Are you guys being serious? I really can't tell.
I did it in high school and I'm far from elite. Never even ran in college. I was one of the fastest on my high school team though.
I guess if you have the fast twitch fibers of a mud turtle it might be impossible.
Really, so pretty much everyone does it where you're from? No, of course not.
Lol 3 guys (including me) have done it at my school, and in our conference there must be about 2 or 3 from each school that can break 50 as well, it is fairly common
Any woman who can break 50 seconds is a legitimate Olympic medal contender. In other words, there are very few of them. Joe Median has nowhere near the running ability of the top women at any distance. Not even close.
powerofreason wrote:
Any woman who can break 50 seconds is a legitimate Olympic medal contender. In other words, there are very few of them. Joe Median has nowhere near the running ability of the top women at any distance. Not even close.
Ok, not everyone can do it. But comparing to women isn't a great arguement. It's what good, not great, high school boys can do. If a reasonably athletic man in his prime got coached by Clyde Hart for years, they could break 50.
Old guy34 wrote:
powerofreason wrote:Any woman who can break 50 seconds is a legitimate Olympic medal contender. In other words, there are very few of them. Joe Median has nowhere near the running ability of the top women at any distance. Not even close.
Ok, not everyone can do it. But comparing to women isn't a great arguement. It's what good, not great, high school boys can do. If a reasonably athletic man in his prime got coached by Clyde Hart for years, they could break 50.
so if a fit man did the Clyde Hart program for 2 years he would have a chance at running sub 50?
tricky todd wrote:
How hard would it be? Granted the individual is not overweight, fairly athletic and strong. Is it impossible for most people to go sub 50 in the quarter even if they train years for it?
For a sub 50 you have to be a big state final level sprinter. Not too many of those walking the streets. sub 1 minute it's decent conditioning with decent but not really sprinter speed(for a man). Sub 50 is high school sprinter speed with excellent conditioning.
wp07 wrote:
Old guy34 wrote:Ok, not everyone can do it. But comparing to women isn't a great arguement. It's what good, not great, high school boys can do. If a reasonably athletic man in his prime got coached by Clyde Hart for years, they could break 50.
so if a fit man did the Clyde Hart program for 2 years he would have a chance at running sub 50?
That's what I think. Work on speed and speed endurance. If you dedicate yourself to it, I think you'd be surprised at how many could do it.
Even some of the xc guys could run 51-52 sec without specific training.
But think how many people are going to train and push themselves for years to run a 50 400m?It's not like you get anything for doing it.