11s 100m for 37 yr old man. Good or bad?

Not only is your time inaccurate but you (much like ventolin) probably don't even know where the marking lines are for 100m.

Probably a 15 second 100 yards.

interesting thread wrote:

Wrong. He can run on his toes.

No, it is physically impossible for a ~170lb person to run on their toes and not their forefoot. Its probably physically impossible for any person at any weight to run at full effort/speed on their toes and not forefoot.

I'd bet the OP can't even stand on his toes rather than his forefoot, much less run that way, which produces more than 3x one's body weight in impact forces.

Kim Collins trolling LRC AGAIN. Absolute legend this guy. Can't wait for the vid.

liluzzyvert wrote:

If you could actually run sub 11, which I doubt, that would be something very special. Big time genetics for that though.

I'm almost 39, and I can run sub-11 seconds for 100m. But, I already know that's good, even if only for my ego :p Booyah

American Masters 35-39 Outdoor Track & Field Records

pending *

Last updated: 09/01/2017

Men 35-39

Event Performance Name Location Date

100 m 10.3h Ruben Whitney

(35) 1980-Jun-14

9.92 (p) Justin Gatlin *

(35) London, GBR 2017-Aug-05

This doesn't tell me much, other than there are a couple of guys out there that can beat me. Probably, also a few that have hung it all up, but could still come back if they wanted.

Thanks. I seem to have more talent as the distance gets shorter. What distance do you run?

injury prone runner wrote:

5kdream wrote:

Really surprised myself with a hand timed 100 at 11.??. The runkeeper clock did not show the fraction of a second. Ran this in brooks glycerine, so a pretty heavy shoe. Is this a competitive time?

Holy smokes. You have awesome basic speed for a distance runner. I wish that I had that. If you could develop your endurance then I would say that you could run some very solid times at 800m (sub 1 50 ?), 1500m (sub 3 40?) and maybe even the longer distances even at age 37. I don't know what your personal situation is but you will probably need good coaching to develop that sort of endurance while keeping your speed.

Any congrats on that achievement anyways.

Working on it. Thanks for the suggestion.

doing lines wrote:

Not only is your time inaccurate but you (much like ventolin) probably don't even know where the marking lines are for 100m.

Probably a 15 second 100 yards.

I don't think so,12 at worst. My wife hand timed me at 13.4 when I weighed 185-190 last year. Don't be a total Debbie downer, 15 seconds laughable.

Hate to burst your bubble, but you don't drop 2.4 seconds from a 100m race, even if you have lost weight. Let's put you at 12.5 to 12.8. The only way to tell is to jump into an all comers 100m. Try it!

5kdream wrote:

doing lines wrote:

Not only is your time inaccurate but you (much like ventolin) probably don't even know where the marking lines are for 100m.

Probably a 15 second 100 yards.

I don't think so,12 at worst. My wife hand timed me at 13.4 when I weighed 185-190 last year. Don't be a total Debbie downer, 15 seconds laughable.

It was also during my first weeks of running since I was 13 years old.

Whatisthis wrote:

Hate to burst your bubble, but you don't drop 2.4 seconds from a 100m race, even if you have lost weight. Let's put you at 12.5 to 12.8. The only way to tell is to jump into an all comers 100m. Try it!

5kdream wrote:

I don't think so,12 at worst. My wife hand timed me at 13.4 when I weighed 185-190 last year. Don't be a total Debbie downer, 15 seconds laughable.

You're two years older than the guy who just won the world title in the 100m, your age is hardly a factor.

And Kim Collins was running like 9.9-low at 39 (or even 40?) I believe.

Your wife timed you last year. Those were your first weeks of running since you were 13? That's 24 years of...Not Running!!Dude, quit thinking and asking What If and get a reputable person to time you. Even a hand time would be an OK estimate - add approx .3 to your hand time to round up to what FAT may be. Then post it. Either you can shut people up, or you'll be hit with the fat stick of reality.

5kdream wrote:

It was also during my first weeks of running since I was 13 years old.

Whatisthis wrote:

Hate to burst your bubble, but you don't drop 2.4 seconds from a 100m race, even if you have lost weight. Let's put you at 12.5 to 12.8. The only way to tell is to jump into an all comers 100m. Try it!

Yes! I am basically a total noob at running. My focus has been on weight Loss and 5k. I'm hearing you loud and clear. Wife with hand time, no blocks, is the best I can do right now so I will post that tomorrow. I do know the high school track coach from church camp, would it be inappropriate to ask him to help a non student get a good block time?

Some advice wrote:

interesting thread wrote:

Wrong. He can run on his toes.

No, it is physically impossible for a ~170lb person to run on their toes and not their forefoot. Its probably physically impossible for any person at any weight to run at full effort/speed on their toes and not forefoot.

I'd bet the OP can't even stand on his toes rather than his forefoot, much less run that way, which produces more than 3x one's body weight in impact forces.

Wrong.

I can at 180.

Even if it was a 12-13s, it is still a pretty good time for a person that just started running. I know that most LetsRunners can break 11 limping on a single leg, but the average master distance runner struggles to break 14.

Keep working on it!