New here.. just gonna jump in.
I don't think you have to be skinny to be fast. I'm not skinny and I'm not too bad... but I think like a lot of you were saying, it definitely doesn't hurt.
I think if I dropped like 15 lbs I would be a helluva lot better. Most of the girls who beat me are quite a bit skinnier.
typical letsrunner. wrote:
no, I am this fast because I train really hard.
Anyone faster than me is just more talented.
LOL, so true.
Generally anyone faster than I am is more talented, generally anyone slower than I am hasn't worked as hard or has some disability. This is literally the thinking of anyone from 22:00 to 13:30 5Ks.
What does running 5k have to do with being fast? If you're fast, you'll run a real man's event like the 800. And you can weigh 180 pounds and rule the 800.
crazy raisin wrote:
typical letsrunner. wrote:no, I am this fast because I train really hard.
Anyone faster than me is just more talented.
LOL, so true.
Generally anyone faster than I am is more talented, generally anyone slower than I am hasn't worked as hard or has some disability. This is literally the thinking of anyone from 22:00 to 13:30 5Ks.
If you are under, I don't know, 16 minutes or so, and have ever spent much time doing more than 100 MPW, it's probably largely true that the people faster than you are more talented.
hussskies wrote:
Lol you aren't talented being a male and running 16's. I'm a girl and my PR is 15.50, an no, I am not skinny
Pretty ignorant comment. There are 16:XX 5K and a 1:53 800m guys out there. They have no talent, right?
I've gotten skinnier as I've gotten faster. I've been skinnier and slower than I am now. I think weight loss is a function of training which can reenforce. your speed. But being skinny doesn't default your speed to speed + n.
Of course being a skinny person doesn't mean you are also fast. However, whom do you think people would bet on if you asked who would win 800m onwards for two random guys one being 5'11" & 200 pounds and the other is 5'11" & 150 pounds?. Up to a certain low but healthy weight, you become a very efficient runner because you are not carrying unnecessary weight!
Rather than ccomplicating the situation and asking whether the chicken came before the egg or vice versa, why not add a 10pound weight next time you ran and see what happens to your speed. I think what is confusing some people is how you can keep losing weight and keep gaining speed. Of course this is ridiculous because at a certain point depending on your built you will become stagnant or recede if your legs start to weaken. Most world-caliber runners are at that perfect weight/build ratio.
Hey, I'm 207 pounds and you are NOT faster than me!
1/10Either you're fake, or a massive try hard. any girl breaking 16 is a total social freak/ugly/coddled tryhard.
hussskies wrote:
Lol you aren't talented being a male and running 16's. I'm a girl and my PR is 15.50, an no, I am not skinny
Not too long ago I could run 15:07 with a BMI of about 23 (5'9", 155). I'd say that's pretty heavy. Not fat, but I'm just not a slender person.
Would I have been faster if I had a 'slighter' build? Hard to say. I always felt that being a little bigger made me more 'powerful' somehow. And I had a really good kick. But am I kidding myself, and if I had 10 lbs less bulk could I have been a 14:30 guy?
(FWIW, I am now out of college and have put on probably almost 10 lbs, so obviously I am much slower now, probably ~16mid, but part of that is because I'm not really 'training' any more.)
Agree that everyone has his/her own ideal weight for racing, and speaking for myself, skinnier equals faster up to a point (admittedly it's been a long time since I was on the other side of that point).
That being said, Haile Gebrselassie weighs in at 113 pounds...