15:30 would be close to the best road time for a 40-49 year old male. So it's highly unrealistic to say that any average 40+ yr. old should be able to break 15:30. I'm 45 and have run a few 5k's. I'm happy to run it sub 25 minutes. My goal is 20 minutes in a few months. 15:30 would be flying.
sub 24 is respectable for an average Joe that does some exercise, a bit of jogging, lifting whatever, but not a runner that trains for running. It would not say it is a respectable time for an under 50yo male runner.
Around 40yo you are still at like 80% of your prime for distance running, maybe even higher (Kipchoge is 38). 40 vs 49 makes quite a big difference but still. I would say sub 20 is respectable. Sub 18 is quite good.
To be honest, kind of slow. Better than average though.
Foggy wrote:
How's 16:38 for an age 53 man?
You are absurd. 16:38 for a 53 old man is very impressive. I broke 16 when I was 45, and now that I’m 50 breaking 17 just doesn’t seem to be happening.
I finish top 3 in my age group in most 5k's, winning occasionally, and I run anywhere from 19:30 to 21 at 40 years old. I live in the biggest city in my state, so the races I do typically are in my city or the suburbs directly surrounding it and have a few hundred people up to a 1,500 or so in them. The fastest masters in my area run high 17's, low 18's. There are a couple in my state who can run in the 16's, but they are on the other side of the state and don't really race around here. With that said, I'd say the very best, who will almost always compete to win their masters age group, will run under 18. The very good, but not the best, runners, who will always compete to place top 3 in their age group, will run under 20 or just slightly over. The pretty good runners, who will occasionally place in their age group but just as often won't, will run under 7 pace (so around 21:40 or so).