Modern Drunkard wrote:
Height: 6'0"
Weight: 152
10K: 35:35
Volume: 80 km
I think you need to account for age in your formula. Fifteen years ago (23 years old vs 37 years old), I was significantly faster at the same weight and mileage. That said, your formula does seem to work well for middle-aged recreational runners. It was within 20 seconds (35:15 vs 35:35) for a recent race I ran.
2.5 years late
Ehso wrote:
2.5 years late
Ha! I didn't even look at the date of the original post. I just saw it on the first page and figured it was current.
Even though an old thread, this is great data.... It can be used to create a power to weight ratio chart for runners, as it would be more impressive a 6' guy 200lb cracking 40 vs a guy same height at 159kb.
Me:
160lb
6'
35 years
38:20
70mpw
5 ft 9 inches
145lbs
37:16
30 yrs old -
Avg 65 miles per week
at the time
5' 8''
138 lbs
32 yrs
35:29
45 mpw
6' 0.5"
135 lbs
15.5 years
36:06
60mpw for 6 months serious training
after a year of about 25 mpw, not serious training
Yeah, old thread but it is interesting. Perhaps most for us hobby joggers out there.
6'1"
153 lbs
36 years old
38:47
Averaged about 40 mpw for the 2-3 months leading up to the race
6'1"
145lbs
35:48
18yo at the time
35-40mpw
6’
164 lbs
21 yo
34:34
63 mpw
Time= 1902 + BMI + Age (-2) + MPW KM's (X2)
Correct?
Bumpy
Your formula:
statistics nerd wrote:10K time in sec=1902+19,5BMI+0,10Age-2,43Weekly training volume (in km).is clearly based on a weak dataset, if it shows age having such a low weight. The math says a ten year difference in age corresponds to a 1 s difference in 10k time.
5'10"
158 lbs
37 years old
36:25
50-60 mpw
statistics nerd wrote:
10K time in sec=1902+19,5BMI+0,10Age-2,43Weekly training volume (in km).
That formula puts me at a 35:29. I used the mileage average for the past 4 weeks which include by far my 2 longest weeks ever, so it's not like I've been training at that volume for a while.
Gonna test that theory this weekend. I think I can go under that. My garmin thinks I'm in 33:00 shape but I think it's a bit optimistic hehe current PR is 36:30 but the course might've been a few meters short. PR on a certified course is a 37:3x 10k split from a HM.
Will report back here on sunday with (hopefully) my data and updated PR.
From my college days:
5 ft 11 inches
142 pounds (average)
22 years old
96 km per week (average)
= 2057.02 seconds
= 34:17
Not too far off! I ran 35:05 in a slower, strategic race, in 85 degree heat.
DietBacon wrote:
statistics nerd wrote:
10K time in sec=1902+19,5BMI+0,10Age-2,43Weekly training volume (in km).
That formula puts me at a 35:29. I used the mileage average for the past 4 weeks which include by far my 2 longest weeks ever, so it's not like I've been training at that volume for a while.
Gonna test that theory this weekend. I think I can go under that. My garmin thinks I'm in 33:00 shape but I think it's a bit optimistic hehe current PR is 36:30 but the course might've been a few meters short. PR on a certified course is a 37:3x 10k split from a HM.
Will report back here on sunday with (hopefully) my data and updated PR.
Could you please decipher the formula?
formula checker wrote:
Your formula:
statistics nerd wrote:10K time in sec=1902+19,5BMI+0,10Age-2,43Weekly training volume (in km).
is clearly based on a weak dataset, if it shows age having such a low weight. The math says a ten year difference in age corresponds to a 1 s difference in 10k time.
A year is a second tho? No?
OK
185cm
74kg
Age 43
38:52 (10k split as part of a 15km run, which was done in just under 59 minutes (big flame out in last 2kms on undulations)
65-70 km a week
First 'beat my age' for 10K at 38, hopefully stay healthy enough to keep doing that here on in.
Turd Boomerang wrote:
From my college days:
5 ft 11 inches
142 pounds (average)
22 years old
96 km per week (average)
= 2057.02 seconds
= 34:17
Not too far off! I ran 35:05 in a slower, strategic race, in 85 degree heat.
I get you at 35:30! How do you translate the formula?