What's a winning time for a local 10k near you?

I got 6th of 400 with a time of 40:45 a few years ago. Hah.

There are probably a couple of dozen guys in the 40+ range who get into that range each year in the US. That's an impressive time.

reality czech wrote:

The problem is most 10Ks are usually associated with another race and end up as the less-competitive alternative. In the local 5K/10Ks, maybe one fast guy runs the 10K (winning in the 36's) and the rest run the 5K (winning in the 16's). In the big local and regional races, the HM is most competitive and the 10K is the afterthought. Local HM (~700 runners) won in 1:10-15, with 36-something winning the 10K and maybe 3 guys breaking 40. In the bigger regional race, with 7000 runners in the HM and people flying in to win in 1:06, there are 6000 runners in the 10K. Winning times in the 33's, and 36 might get you on the podium + prize money.

In 1983, I ran a ton of 10K races. I recall running 36:31 and not even sniffing awards. Today, I can rarely find one and that time would definitely make awards for the reason you mentioned.

Clean or PEDs?

MaineTrain wrote:

It's usually won in like mid 28s or low 29s. Small southern Maine race held every August.

NOt small or typical or in any other way emblematic of other races run in said locale.

To add to the discussion at a recent 10k (probably the biggest of my region):

- Winner in sub 30

- a bit more than 200 runners under 40 (so 10% of the runner; which seems quite high)

For the bigger races about 34, I think the lowest I've seen is 33. For other races I've seen as slow as 40 minutes win before

Just checked races local to me (North East England) so far for October and there have been 8 I could find results for:

32:29

33:10

33:16

33:56

34:44

35:28

36:06

37:42 (only 25 runners so not really a race)

usually around 37-38.

Oklahoma sucks at running