Can any avrage shmo can get to 15 min- 5k

easy weeks wrote:

I've taught couch to 5k programs. In that scenario, I'd say 23:00 would be average. Maybe a little slower.

Of course there would be outliers, but that's not what we're talking about. I respect your opinion, but I think you are overestimating the distance running abilities of the average person.

Overestimating for the average young male doing 4-6 years of serious training being able to do 16:30, or the average sedentary person doing a 3 month program and running 21:00?

I'll readily admit that 21:00+ figure for the couch to 5k program was a wild estimate. I was just trying to draw the distinction between what I think the OP meant for training and results vs what the person I was quoting was saying. Not really a population I work with outside of giving general progression advice now and then, so if you've worked with people on that type of thing I'd certainly defer to your opinion.

4 to 6 yrs for a possible 16:xx 5k damn

Absolutely not. I have had above average performances in 100m ( < 10.9) but will never, ever achieve a sub-16, or even sub-17, minute 5k. I am fully aware of this lack of capability and there is no amount of training I could do to achieve this.

Womack wrote:

Do you think that with the right training and diet etc, be it long as needed, any average shmo that doesn't have any special physical problems, can get to 15 minutes for 5K?

No. tons of college kids work their ass off and don't get close to 15.

If by 15 minute 5k you mean 15:xx, then yes I do believe that anyone trained correctly could achieve that. if you mean sub 15 that might be pushing it. Depends what age they're starting at.

No way! I've been coaching for over a decade now & I rarely have a male athlete who can break 17:59. (My Top 7 hover around 18:30-18:59.) We're a small rural school. (I use Vigil's Program with my athletes.) And, a sub-18 will make you All-State at the Championship Race.

On the girls side, I rarely have a girl who can break 19:59 or even 20:30. (My sub 19:59 girl was multiple State Champion.) Sub 20:59 will make a girl All-State.

Any average shmo? No way. But you already know this.

Absolutely. ,15:xx does not require any talent. It may take several years, but anyone can get there if they actually train.

5000 m 14:54.98 Courtney Babcock 30 August 2003 World Championships France Paris, France [31]

5 km (road) 15:16 Emilie Mondor 24 October 2004 Carlsbad 5000 United States Carlsbad, U. s.

There is NOT ONE SINGLE " ELITE " Canadian female that can run that.

U. S. females on the track:

1.14:42.64; Molly Huddle, Monaco 07/18/14

2.14:44.76; Molly Huddle, Bruxelles 08/27/10

3.14:44.80; Shalane Flanagan, Walnut 04/13/07

4.14:45.20; Shalane Flanagan, Saint-Denis 07/08/11

5.14:45.35; Regina Jacobs, Sacramento 07/21/00

6.14:46.80; Shalane Flanagan, Stockholm 07/29/11

7.14:48.68; Shannon Rowbury, Monaco 07/18/14

8.14:49.08; Shalane Flanagan, Eugene 07/03/10

9.14:49.68; Shalane Flanagan, Eugene 06/03/11

10.14:51.62; Deena Kastor, Stockholm 08/01/00

11.14:51.75; Shalane Flanagan, Indianapolis 06/22/07

12.14:51.84; Molly Huddle, Saint-Denis 07/16/10

13.14:52.21; Deena Kastor, Stockholm 08/07/07

14.14:52.49; Regina Jacobs, Brunswick 07/04/98

15.14:54.29; Jennifer Rhines, Oslo 06/06/08

16.14:55.02; Kara Goucher, Berlin 09/16/07

17.14:55.18; Jennifer Rhines, Bruxelles 08/25/06

18.14:55.74; Lisa Uhl, Saint-Denis 07/16/10

19.14:55.90; Molly Huddle, Roma 06/05/14

So out of 160,000,000 American women how many of them can break 15:00 on the track in 2017?

3 to 5?

How many can run sub 15:00 on the road?

How many doped-to-the gills Russian women can run sub 15 on the road?

You guys have to cut the OP some slack - based on this thread and his responses on another thread deriding "sit and kick" runners, I'd wager he's infatuated with Without Limits and thinks that "talent is a myth".

Every LRC runs a 15 min 5k on their easy days so...

Young Jeezy wrote:

Absolutely. ,15:xx does not require any talent. It may take several years, but anyone can get there if they actually train.

If they actually take the train.

It's tough to do it if you're injured or unhealthy during your prime years. You can train very hard in your 40s to get under 16 at least, but everything has to go right with the access to races in the right weather at the right time of the year without getting sick or hurt.

To everyone whining about body types not allowing them to do it... are you kidding me? Yeah, no f*ckin sh*t, a fatty isn't going to run 15 flat in the 5k.

But I think that anyone who starts training at 14 (high school freshman) can eventually run it. Bringing up women's times... ok well there's this thing that men possess call the Y chromosome. If you take a kid and put him on ACTUAL mileage through high school (we're talking get up to 65-70 in the summer before senior year) he should be running at least 10:15 in the two mile. I mean anyone. No one is IMMUNE to aerobic training, capillaries WILL grow, efficiency WILL improve, and times WILL drop.

To all the kids "working their ass*s off" who can't break 15 in college, they either: did not do ample mileage in high school to prepare themselves, cannot get there due to frequent injury, or (most often) not training correctly. If you get to that 70mpw in HS, there's no reason you don't get to 90-100mpw in college. Stay healthy, have even a decent training plan, don't be a b*tch, and you'll run 15 flat.

D3 schools are full of runners with the right body type and a good training plan, yet many of them don't break 15. It definitely requires some degree of talent/genetics.

These types of threads pop up every so often. It proves how out of touch with reality this message board really is. No average guy can run a 15:00 5k, it takes a combination of talent and hard work. Neither talent, nor hard work is really quantifiable, so the ratios of talent and hard work will differ greatly from person to person. Make no mistake though, to run back-to-back-to-back sub 4:50 miles takes talent. No question about it.

I understand that everyone wants to believe that their sub-15 5k was the result of years (months?) of hard work, and talent had nothing to do with it, but it's so blatantly incorrect.

pablo wrote:

I understand that everyone wants to believe that their sub-15 5k was the result of years (months?) of hard work, and talent had nothing to do with it, but it's so blatantly incorrect.

I don't really get this. I'm more proud of my talent than my hard work. I guess that just makes me even more of an a$shole :)