fisky wrote:
@badass wrote:
still don't see your error?
This thread is hilarious!!!
Hint: ">" means "greater than"
Yeah 100% of people could do what the OP is asking. Not sure why people are talking about sub 8 pace and all that stuff.
fisky wrote:
@badass wrote:
still don't see your error?
This thread is hilarious!!!
Hint: ">" means "greater than"
Yeah 100% of people could do what the OP is asking. Not sure why people are talking about sub 8 pace and all that stuff.
LM wrote:
Yuoe wrote:
Heck, 100 % could run a 10k under 40 minutes.
No. Hell no. At best 30-50% could be trained to do this.
Almost all could do the 40:00 5 miler though, barring legitimate physical or injury issues.
Sub 40 10k I would say would be about 15% of guys that could do that with training,
Sub 40 5 mile I would guess 90-95% of guys could do so
Assuming with a couple years of decent training for both. Thinking 1 year to build up the ability to train, then two years actually training.
15% is way too low even if you count the women.
I am someone who has no athletic talent whatsoever, but with 2 years of training (coincidentally averaging around 60 miles a week), I can still run a 35 high 10k
He asked about running so probably only about 90% because 10% aren’t capable of running.
ScriptedConnection wrote:
LM wrote:
No. Hell no. At best 30-50% could be trained to do this.
Almost all could do the 40:00 5 miler though, barring legitimate physical or injury issues.
Sub 40 10k I would say would be about 15% of guys that could do that with training,
Sub 40 5 mile I would guess 90-95% of guys could do so
Assuming with a couple years of decent training for both. Thinking 1 year to build up the ability to train, then two years actually training.
15% is way too low even if you count the women.
I am someone who has no athletic talent whatsoever, but with 2 years of training (coincidentally averaging around 60 miles a week), I can still run a 35 high 10k
lol ok