There’s nothing wrong with running a 20 min 5k, but this is letsrun…pretty much the only place on the internet to discuss high level running, and the level isn’t even that high. I’m a 16 min 5k guy, which is objectively slow relative to elites, but letsrun is effectively the only place to actually discuss running at that level.
Nothing wrong with a 20:44 5k, but starting a thread just to bash people who criticize it is just feeding the trolls. Seems like going out of your way to post this just announces that the trolls got to you when you could be using that time to do something productive
It's not about feeding trolls, it's about stating an objective fact. Some of the trolls are miserable and never run. The mere thought of a 5km terrifies them.
I run everyday and the thought of a 5K terrifies me much more than 10K-HM haha
There’s nothing wrong with running a 20 min 5k, but this is letsrun…pretty much the only place on the internet to discuss high level running, and the level isn’t even that high. I’m a 16 min 5k guy, which is objectively slow relative to elites, but letsrun is effectively the only place to actually discuss running at that level.
So am I, lifetime PR is 16:22 age 19.
The point of the thread is that many posters (trolls, often miserable) criticize
those who produce race results - even a 20:44 which is still decent relative to the entire population. 20:44 is well, well above average.
There’s nothing wrong with running a 20 min 5k, but this is letsrun…pretty much the only place on the internet to discuss high level running, and the level isn’t even that high. I’m a 16 min 5k guy, which is objectively slow relative to elites, but letsrun is effectively the only place to actually discuss running at that level.
So am I, lifetime PR is 16:22 age 19.
The point of the thread is that many posters (trolls, often miserable) criticize
those who produce race results - even a 20:44 which is still decent relative to the entire population. 20:44 is well, well above average.
You aren’t allowed to claim 15 year old prs . That’s fantasy land
If some posters would get off their asses and run a 5km,
they may find more meaning in their lives.
When did you run this? Ive looked back a few weeks and didn’t see it. I assumed it was recent and your not fake bragging about something like a year ago.
There’s nothing wrong with running a 20 min 5k, but this is letsrun…pretty much the only place on the internet to discuss high level running, and the level isn’t even that high. I’m a 16 min 5k guy, which is objectively slow relative to elites, but letsrun is effectively the only place to actually discuss running at that level.
So am I, lifetime PR is 16:22 age 19.
The point of the thread is that many posters (trolls, often miserable) criticize
those who produce race results - even a 20:44 which is still decent relative to the entire population. 20:44 is well, well above average.
We agree that 20:44 is well above average.
However, close to half of the American population is obese and largely sedentary. I am not really a fan of comparing athletic standards to a largely unhealthy population. Just because something is well above average for an entire population doesn't mean that within a sport it is necessarily good. One thing that is different about running in comparison to other sports is the sheer number of people that run. Yet, I think it's very clear that most people are not running competitively. By that I mean, they are just participating. Not being internationally competitive does not mean you are not a competitive runner, I am referring to trying to get faster and improve.
So, while I am all for people getting healthier by going for a jog, I selfishly want more of an emphasis placed on running being a sport, particularly in road races. Moreover, I don't care about someone's running unless they are training 'seriously' (this means different things for different people). If 20:44 is your best effort while training seriously (whatever that means for you), then I applaud you. That being said, I believe that it is pretty much impossible for a healthy middle-aged male (even female) to train seriously for a few years and not break 20 min in the 5k.
There’s nothing wrong with running a 20 min 5k, but this is letsrun…pretty much the only place on the internet to discuss high level running, and the level isn’t even that high. I’m a 16 min 5k guy, which is objectively slow relative to elites, but letsrun is effectively the only place to actually discuss running at that level.
So am I, lifetime PR is 16:22 age 19.
The point of the thread is that many posters (trolls, often miserable) criticize
those who produce race results - even a 20:44 which is still decent relative to the entire population. 20:44 is well, well above average.
LOLs you never broke 16? The best high school girls can do that. That’s like a D3 time for a college freshman. I don’t know WTF you’re trying to fight about, hobby jogger.
I dont know the 2025 NAIA Outdoor Nationals 5000m racewalk was won in 20:43.77 and we all know race walkers aren't athletes. So running a 20:44 is pretty terrible.
20:44 will earn you a nice spot on the back of a jv high school team
It really depends. In some districts where running isn't a big sport it could put you on the varsity team. At my high school we only had one guy on the XC team break 19. Our school was a football school, multiple appearances in the state playoffs and 2 in the championship game. Running wasn't really a big thing. All but maybe 2 people ran XC just to condition for their main sport. Mostly the soccer team. We had maybe 2 true runners on the team and even then cross country was an afterthought for them. No running during the off season.
... the time in title of this thread caught my attention.
IMO a 20:44 is indeed a decent time unless you are 35 or younger and in pretty decent shape and/or genetically blessed.
It may be most productive to just try and do your best. Comparing race results to others is a often futile and unrewarding venture.
My slightly sad but true humble/brag;
In late January 2019 just before COVID shutdown we were on vacation in Florida. I found and ran local race. Certified course with 280 finishers. Age 62. First place overall by 00:11. TBH, I was pretty surprised.
My time? 20:45.1 (AG'd to 16:27 - about what I was able to run on the roads in the early 1980s)
NGL, I was pretty happy with that result.
If someone wants to judge me, I really don't care.
Hoping everyone here has a safe and happy holiday season!
The point of the thread is that many posters (trolls, often miserable) criticize
those who produce race results - even a 20:44 which is still decent relative to the entire population. 20:44 is well, well above average.
We agree that 20:44 is well above average.
However, close to half of the American population is obese and largely sedentary. I am not really a fan of comparing athletic standards to a largely unhealthy population. Just because something is well above average for an entire population doesn't mean that within a sport it is necessarily good. One thing that is different about running in comparison to other sports is the sheer number of people that run. Yet, I think it's very clear that most people are not running competitively. By that I mean, they are just participating. Not being internationally competitive does not mean you are not a competitive runner, I am referring to trying to get faster and improve.
So, while I am all for people getting healthier by going for a jog, I selfishly want more of an emphasis placed on running being a sport, particularly in road races. Moreover, I don't care about someone's running unless they are training 'seriously' (this means different things for different people). If 20:44 is your best effort while training seriously (whatever that means for you), then I applaud you. That being said, I believe that it is pretty much impossible for a healthy middle-aged male (even female) to train seriously for a few years and not break 20 min in the 5k.
This is a good post, and I pretty much agree. There's nothing wrong with being a 20 min 5k runner especially if you never had a competitive sports background, but most decent 14 year old HS boys run that off of zero training as their starting point so it's not going to be considered impressive for those of us who came into the sport within that context.
Lots of middle aged people run over 50 miles per week averaging 9 minutes a mile with a long run from 12 to 20 miles and a weekly track workout. Many of these same people (men or women) can’t break 20 minutes in the 5k, especially if they don’t race in super shoes. Posts like the ones in this thread are unrealistic.