That time would make you one of the top women in the country in your age group.
That time would make you one of the top women in the country in your age group.
To be honest, kind of slow. Better than average though.
Foggy wrote:
How's 16:38 for an age 53 man?
Iowa800 wrote:
48 year old wrote:
Most 40plus people don't run. So is average for a runner?
This^
Now respectable for the LRC hobby jogger crowd (not necessarily age group podium times which would be classified as excellent)
40s-19:XX
50s=20:XX
60=22:XX
70s=2?:XX
80s: Finishing
Agree except the last category: 80s- not dead. ;)
Well this is BS. I’m 47 years old. 6’2” & about 200 lbs.
There’s no way I’m even making 25 mins.
Neil74 wrote:
Well this is BS. I’m 47 years old. 6’2” & about 200 lbs.
There’s no way I’m even making 25 mins.
But what are youn doing on this website?
it's all relative wrote:
Age grade tables give you the following for a 40-year old man:
60% (Local class): 22:45
70% (Regional class): 19:30
80% (National class): 17:04
90% (World class): 15:10
Here is your table updated with the 2020 Factors:
60% (Local class): 22:33
70% (Regional class): 19:20
80% (National class): 16:55
90% (World class): 14:17
http://howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/mldrroad20.htmlit's all about the AGE GRADE wrote:
it's all relative wrote:
Age grade tables give you the following for a 40-year old man:
60% (Local class): 22:45
70% (Regional class): 19:30
80% (National class): 17:04
90% (World class): 15:10
Here is your table updated with the 2020 Factors:
60% (Local class): 22:33
70% (Regional class): 19:20
80% (National class): 16:55
90% (World class): 14:17
http://howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/mldrroad20.html
Not sure what I did, but there is an error in the above table.
Here is a comparison of the 2010 Factors versus the 2020 Factors, over various race distances, for a 40-yr old male:
2010 Performance Factors
.....................................5k............10k............Half.........Marathon
60% (Local class): .....22:45.......47:22.......1:42:48.........3:33:20
70% (Regional class): 19:30.......40:36.......1:28:07.........3:02:51
80% (National class): 17:04.......35:31.......1:17:06.........2:40:00
90% (World class): ....15:10.......31:34.......1:08:32.........2:22:13
2020 Performance Factors
.....................................5k............10k............Half.........Marathon
60% (Local class): .....22:33.......45:40.......1:39:43.........3:29:07
70% (Regional class): 19:20.......39:09.......1:25:29.........2:59:14
80% (National class): 16:55.......34:15.......1:14:48.........2:36:50
90% (World class): ....15:02.......30:27.......1:06:29.........2:19:24
(You might want to double-check these numbers.)
To the OP, 20:15 is frankly not good for a 40 or even 50 year old. Are/Were you a smoker? Do you have another chronic lung disease such as cystic fibrosis or pulmonary fibrosis? If so, you did not mention this is the post, but that would make more sense. I would say that your time is respectable for those conditions, but unfortunately, tables with averages for those conditions are hard to come by.
For someone without a severe chronic lung disease or supplemental oxygen dependence, "respectable" time for the 5k at age 40 would be in the 13-14:30 range. Hope this helps.
Truck Stop Guy wrote:
To the OP, 20:15 is frankly not good for a 40 or even 50 year old. Are/Were you a smoker? Do you have another chronic lung disease such as cystic fibrosis or pulmonary fibrosis? If so, you did not mention this is the post, but that would make more sense. I would say that your time is respectable for those conditions, but unfortunately, tables with averages for those conditions are hard to come by.
For someone without a severe chronic lung disease or supplemental oxygen dependence, "respectable" time for the 5k at age 40 would be in the 13-14:30 range. Hope this helps.
This post is 9 years old. The OP might be dead by now.
I suppose that is true, especially if he had a chronic lung disease, but I think he mentioned only being in his early 40's, so it's very likely he's still alive. I wonder if he has improved his time since then, or if his disease has progressed.
This is such crap. Running at that speed is not "average", its absurd. IMO 20:15 is not just respectable, it's damn good.
14 min is easily achievable. I agree with the other posters in this thread that you would need about 4-5 months of dedicated training, but it's definitely possible for most men in their 40's (who don't have any lung diseases or smoking issues)
I think the rest of you are just slow. Stop complaining
Age 45. I’d say sub 19 is great. it’s not the speed or mileage that’s an issue, it’s the nagging injuries and inability to recover as well as we did in our 20’s
A respectable 5K time is 25-35 minutes.
A respectable parkrun time is probably 25-30 minutes.
10K and up is where most people fall apart, so a respectable 10K time would be 50 minutes to 1 hour.
it's all relative wrote:
Depends who you hang out with.
Age grade tables give you the following for a 40-year old man:
60% (Local class): 22:45
70% (Regional class): 19:30
80% (National class): 17:04
90% (World class): 15:10
Yeah, for the general masses, I think your sub 20 = "respectable" is reasonable.
This is the best way to figure- Age Grading.
But your first line is key. A few years ago (I was 61) I was coming off an injury, running 10-15 mpw real easy. I jumped in a small 5K and ran in the 22's. The people thought I was a God. How could someone my age run so fast!! Ummmm, I really didn't think I ran fast.
Neil74 wrote:
Well this is BS. I’m 47 years old. 6’2” & about 200 lbs.
There’s no way I’m even making 25 mins.
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
Here’s my take on respectability of times for 40’s guys. If you’re a father to some young kids, husband, busy with your full time career, I fully respect your sub 20. It’s hard to strike enough balance to train with all of those other life commitments.
A single guy with no kids is going to need a sub 18 to get the same level of respect from me. No reason that guy can’t get in 50mpw+ consistently without cutting other corners in life.
Circumstances matter at that age wrote:
Here’s my take on respectability of times for 40’s guys. If you’re a father to some young kids, husband, busy with your full time career, I fully respect your sub 20. It’s hard to strike enough balance to train with all of those other life commitments.
A single guy with no kids is going to need a sub 18 to get the same level of respect from me. No reason that guy can’t get in 50mpw+ consistently without cutting other corners in life.
Increasing mileage doesn't always make you faster.
Some of the replies on this thread are crazy!
The average man or woman is quite slow.
For an over 40 guy, I'd say anything around or under 22 minutes is respectable.
People are slow, unfit, fat unfortunately. 50 years ago a lot more jobs were manual and as daft as it sounds housework also kept a lot of people fit. There weren't the same labour saving devices. I bet if you took some average people from back then and had the run a 5k they'd be a lot faster than the same kind of average group from 2023.