Co-workers had a mile time trial yesterday. Results were surprising.

I'm saying that there are a lot more physically active people out there than you think, even though only a small fraction of the general population runs (5-10%?). Even the guys who look obese may be carrying a lot more muscle than fat.

The winning time was 5:18 and not sub 5 because none of the guys in my office trained with the intention of maximizing their performance in a mile race. Not a single person besides me had ever run more than 25 MPW in their lives.

You're married to a supermodel, too, right? Have your own jet, own multinational companies, were a D1 champion, etc.?

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9751695

Most of my office is comprised of 250 pound women who can't walk 1 set of stairs.

josh1988 wrote:

This didn't happen.

I could believe it happened, assuming he works at REI or Brooks or some place that would attract more fitness oriented employees. That is what he is declining to comment on.

Not as far as I know, since participation was never mandatory, whether explicitly stated or implied. Prize money was a token amount, like a $10 Starbucks or In-n-out gift card. Participation rates varied and were as low as 30-35% for the batting cage challenge, so there wasn't any big pressure for employees to join in. Almost no one participated in all 7 or so of the challenges we've had over the past 3 years.

Many of my friends worked in places with some kind of employee wellness program, and one of them even had an unofficial weight loss contest. The contest was held again the following years, so I'm guessing that nobody complained.

This may be rare or non-existent at large corporations (places like Google may be an exception), but I doubt it's that unusual among startups, smaller firms, and family owned businesses. Heck, even one of my buddies who works for a public agency had an agency-sponsored golf event after work (participation was obviously optional).

of all the things that have never happened, this is definitely one of them

Yeah, "the median time was around 6:15-6:20."

So you're telling me that at a US business, in California, the carrot of a $20 card for burgers made unsuspecting people rise from their cubicles to battle on a track, where one dude who runs ran a low-5, and they dug deep calling on pickup basketball game fitness from five years ago to run a 6:15 and no burgers?

Right.

FFF wrote:

You're married to a supermodel, too, right? Have your own jet, own multinational companies, were a D1 champion, etc.?

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9751695

Have none of the above, and the 5:18 guy was the only one in the whole office who ran a 5:20 1600 or better. IIRC, second place was 5:29, so he would probably have hit the 1600 mark at 5:27.

Office Manager wrote:

Most of my office is comprised of 250 pound women who can't walk 1 set of stairs.

What planet do you live on? I can think of maybe two clients/customers that we've had in the past few years who were anywhere near that weight, and both of them were well over 6' tall.

To give you a general sense for the actual shape most people in offices who actually run races, i.e. those in better than average shape for the offices, check out the Buffalo version of the JP Morgan Corporate Challenge, which is a 3.5M (5.63 km) race. Out of nearly 9,000 competitors, only 272 averaged 7:00/M (24:30) or better (best was sub 18).

So, just 3% could run 7 minute pace, which is roughly comparable to a 6:13 mile (62 IAAF points, equivalent to a 21:30 5k; 6 flat mile is 106 IAAF points, equivalent to a 20:44 5k) or better.

https://www.jpmorganchasecc.com/results/search.php?city_id=7

https://www.friidrett.no/globalassets/stevner/elitestevner/iaaf-scoring-tables-of-athletics---outdoor.pdf

Conclusion: your office either does not exist or is way above the norm.

Amazing. My local running club does a miler track meet every year. Your median was about the same as my local track club median for males in that age group. In a statistical sense, it's highly unlikely that a median track mile time for a random office building would be the same as a local runners club.

LMAO4SURE wrote:

Yeah, "the median time was around 6:15-6:20."

So you're telling me that at a US business, in California, the carrot of a $20 card for burgers made unsuspecting people rise from their cubicles to battle on a track, where one dude who runs ran a low-5, and they dug deep calling on pickup basketball game fitness from five years ago to run a 6:15 and no burgers?

Right.

First of all, I don't know how hard they were trying. It's certainly possible that the 6:15 guy was actually capable of a sub 6 if he tried hard.

Secondly, almost every one of them were motivated more by bragging rights, fitness, or simple curiosity about their limits than the $20 prize. If that weren't the case, the 5:18 guy would have taken it easy once he knew that he was going to win.

They didn't play pickup basketball 5 years ago. They're currently active (as in now, not many years ago), whether it's basketball, backpacking, cycling, or some other activity.

I've never been to Boulder, CO, but I'm guessing your office is probably located around there.

Never mind, I can't read. OP said his office is located in southern California.

He probably works for a gym.

zxcvzxcv wrote:

To give you a general sense for the actual shape most people in offices who actually run races, i.e. those in better than average shape for the offices, check out the Buffalo version of the JP Morgan Corporate Challenge, which is a 3.5M (5.63 km) race. Out of nearly 9,000 competitors, only 272 averaged 7:00/M (24:30) or better (best was sub 18).

So, just 3% could run 7 minute pace, which is roughly comparable to a 6:13 mile (62 IAAF points, equivalent to a 21:30 5k; 6 flat mile is 106 IAAF points, equivalent to a 20:44 5k) or better.

https://www.jpmorganchasecc.com/results/search.php?city_id=7https://www.friidrett.no/globalassets/stevner/elitestevner/iaaf-scoring-tables-of-athletics---outdoor.pdf

Conclusion: your office either does not exist or is way above the norm.

None of them were hardcore runners, and the IAAF tables assume that you've trained to reach your potential for all events. It's far easier for an undertrained person to run a 6 flat mile than a 20:44 5K even though both times have the same number of points.

In middle school, I did 5-10 MPW and ran a 5:57 mile. I could not run a sub 21 3 mile at that time, let alone a 20:44 5K. And I ended up being better at the 5K than the mile by my early 20s.

Did not win wrote:

First of all, I don't know how hard they were trying. It's certainly possible that the 6:15 guy was actually capable of a sub 6 if he tried hard.

Secondly, almost every one of them were motivated more by bragging rights, fitness, or simple curiosity about their limits than the $20 prize. If that weren't the case, the 5:18 guy would have taken it easy once he knew that he was going to win.

They didn't play pickup basketball 5 years ago. They're currently active (as in now, not many years ago), whether it's basketball, backpacking, cycling, or some other activity.

OP - what type of business do you work in? How big of office? General age range? Give us some context other than "SoCal."

I work for a small school in a VERY active area with 60 employees - half millennials 24-38ish, half Gen-x and a few boomers, 45-65. I guarantee we would not be close to those numbers and these are people who are far more active than a normal American subset. A handful under 6 and then big fall off.

Civil servant, Federal Government.

Oh that makes sense. He's in the fvcking FBI.

zxcvzxcv wrote:

Out of nearly 9,000 competitors, only 272 averaged 7:00/M (24:30) or better (best was sub 18).

So, just 3% could run 7 minute pace.

Remove all of the females and the men aged 40+, and that percentage is going to shoot up.

And then you need to take into account what I mentioned earlier. It's far easier for an undertrained person to run a fast mile than it is for that same person to run the equivalent 5K time.