How fast is the average athlete that puts in 70+ miles a week?

This is pretty interesting. In high school I ran 51.8, 2:01 and 4:38 off of probably no more than 40 mpw during track season (class of 2011). Got down to 50.3, 1:56 and 4:06 1500 in college. Recently ran a 2:44 marathon debut in November off of 3.5 months of running after returning from a 2.5 month injury hiatus. Didn’t go past 65 mpw, but this makes me wonder what I could run 26.2 in with appropriate mileage and an actual buildup.

I don't know what the OP meant, but we are talking about two different things.

#1 The 50th percentile among people who actually run 70 mpw.

#2 The 50th percentile among the general population.

The average talent of group #1 is so much higher than the average talent of group #2. The poster who wrote 20/42 is probably thinking about group #2, while most other posters are thinking about group #1.

BTW, I don't know if half of the general population can sustain 70mpw without getting injured. So the "median" guy in group #2 might need some above average durability even if his running talent is average.

For how long? If it is for a year or two, it will go like this:

2:12

4:50

16:50

34:57

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Talent beats training wrote:

The average marathon runner does 70MPW and runs 4 hours so I was pretty generous.

No chance. I bet the average one 35 mpw and yes runs around 4 hours. They have a few weeks over 40 when their long run is a huge percentage of that. Otherwise 6 mile runs 4x a week plus long run. Some run 3:15 on that, others 5:15.

So true. I used to be that guy running 3:15 and telling myself I ran 40mpw. In reality I'd run 30-35 with f'ing 16-18mile long runs (!) and then 4 or 5 weeks out from my "thon" I'd start running 20 or 22 mile long runs and hit 40-45mpw maybe hitting a 50 in there. Yeah, you can lie to yourself so easily. I joined an actual competitive club and had to completely recalibrate what mileage (and workouts) meant. Then started running a legitimate 65-70mpw. After a couple years and at 50 or so years old that translated into 2:28, 5:16, 17:54, 37:27 (and 2:52 marathon). Slow on this forum, yes, but satisfying process to get to that point from where I was.

70ish miles/week should get the average runner (under 40 & maybe they don't have the best running genes) to:

2:05-2:20

4:35-4:59

15:59-17:30

33:00-36:00

1:14-1:19

2:36-2:59

Everybody is different. If you have talent, you might run under these times on a lot less. If you're someone who loves to run but wasn't able to run something fast on limited training then, with 70mpw, you might find yourself anywhere in ranges like this.

FightFor15 wrote:

70ish miles/week should get the average runner (under 40 & maybe they don't have the best running genes) to:

2:05-2:20

4:35-4:59

15:59-17:30

33:00-36:00

1:14-1:19

2:36-2:59

Everybody is different. If you have talent, you might run under these times on a lot less. If you're someone who loves to run but wasn't able to run something fast on limited training then, with 70mpw, you might find yourself anywhere in ranges like this.

This seems like the most realistic estimate so far. The "average athlete" does not run 70+ mpw, but if they did, I think that they would fall into these ranges. Heck, the average athlete doesn't run 55+ mpw, but could probably get into these ranges if they did.

2:15

4:50

16:30

34:00

These are slow times for most 70mpw guys (and I'll just assume we are limiting this to guys), but we have a lot of 30+ year olds still running 70mpw) who can no longer run a sub 5:00 mile, but can still run a 34ish 10k.

Then you have lots of HS runners who can break 5:00, but can't break 34:00.

Average 20-30 year old should be faster.

FightFor15 wrote:

70ish miles/week should get the average runner (under 40 & maybe they don't have the best running genes) to:

2:05-2:20

4:35-4:59

15:59-17:30

33:00-36:00

1:14-1:19

2:36-2:59

Everybody is different. If you have talent, you might run under these times on a lot less. If you're someone who loves to run but wasn't able to run something fast on limited training then, with 70mpw, you might find yourself anywhere in ranges like this.

in my 40's and I usually run 35-50 miles a week or so, but have creeped close to ~65-70 for 6-8 weeks at a time on occasion.

My times went from:

5k: ~18:30/19 down to ~17:30

10k: ~38/39 down to ~36:15

Half: ~1:25 down to ~1:22

at 80-100 miles I think I was closer to 16:30/35:00/1:18 shape, but was mostly doing cc and shorter stuff at the time (4:48 mile/28:20 8k).

I think it makes a huge difference how long you are able to maintain it for. I still have dreams of breaking 17/35/1:20 if I can get to 70+ miles and maintain for ~6 months

My neighbor runs 90MPW at 9 minute pace. She is 52 years old and she completes about 4 marathons per year. You would be surprised at how many retirees run 70-90MPW.

It depends on the sport and what average athlete really means. If we're talking world-class soccer players on average, then on one end we have guys like Messi and Ronaldo who would threaten 1:47 800m and 28-minute 10k off several years of 70 mpw (assuming they don't get hurt). On the other, goal keepers like Casillas may have a hard time breaking even 2:00 and 33 even if they put in a decade of dedicated training.

The average times of everyone who runs 70MPW. That is why it is so much slower than many of you believe. There are walker/runners going 20 minute pace and there are runners going 15 minute pace who put in 100 mile weeks. They bring the average up pretty quickly.

Talent beats training wrote:

The average marathon runner does 70MPW and runs 4 hours so I was pretty generous.

The average marathoner runs 20 to 30 miles a week. 70+ is college students top high schoolers and a small collective of elites and sub elites. Very few are doing 70+ recreationally. An average Male marathoner running that much is probably a sub 2:40.

David46 wrote:

No way, the average runner does not have the speed to run 1:57 or 4:24 off of any mileage

hah - the average runner doesn't approach 70 mi per week either. He's closer than the 20 min 5k response, but I do think those guesses are a touch fast.

All of these guesses are inherently assuming a gender and age though - maybe the 20 min guy is right if the runner is in his 60s /shrug.

KAV wrote:

Talent beats training wrote:

Male

2:30

5:40

20

42

If that's your personal experience you'd better do some other sport.....

Depends on age. I would say if you are 55 years old, those are okay. Any older, pretty good. A lot younger - choose another sport.

I also think that if you took the entire male population aged 16-65, and had them run an average of 70 mpw for one year, a tiny percentage could do it, and an even smaller percentage would do it. Less than 10% could, less than 5% would. You have good genes and good form if you can do it.

I'm 47 and have developed a massive appreciation just for being able to run 50-70 mpw on amazing trails, year after year. I try to run fast, but there is no way I'm going to hurt myself and jeopardize a few more decades of running to shave a couple minutes off my 5K time. I don't want my grandkids saying "Oh great, grandpa is in his easy chair, talking about his 5K times again." I want them to say "Slow down grandpa!" as they struggle to keep up.

krispy kremlin._._._._ wrote:

70 mpw for, say, 8-12 consistent months without injury and with 2 workouts per week (one fast, one higher volume) for an averagely-talented runner under 40yo should be:

1:57

4:24

15:59

32:59

Consistent mileage, over time, can turn an average runner into an above average runner with the right mentality.

Yes you are right on with this. I would say though that it isn't average talent to run these times and the age would be under 30

Without looking at previous responses, and as a post collegiate I'd say

2:06

4:45

16:30

34:00

Probably about 19:00 5k, 42:00 10k, 1:30 HM, 3:10 M?

Data from 2300 recreational runners, mileage graph adjusted for age and BMI. Figure 1c.

https://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13102-016-0052-y/figures/1

The above average wrote:

800?

1600?

5K?

10K?

70 miles per week is overkill for the 800 and you'll likely get slower since you can only fit in a very small percentage of high intensity 800-specific mileage in such a large weekly volume...Most of your mileage will be on the longer slower than 800-meter race pace end....

Probably overkill for the 1600 as well but I'd guess that makes running that much should have no problem running in the 4:20's on average, for the under 30 crowd. Women should be at 4:50 at a bare minimum. This is assuming they're training specifically to race a 1600.

Beyond the 1600 it just gets too difficult to predict. The range of potential times varies a lot more. For some 70 may be enough to get under 15, for others, just another to get under 20....

First time poster. You all are out are very out of touch with reality. Go to Strava and look at the people in the Running Distance Challenge. At this point in the month, that's what, a little greater than 200K? It might take like 60 clicks to get to those people (~3000th place in that challenge). Look at the times they are running and their 10K/5K/Mile Strava PB's. Its a lot slower than you think.

Yes I realize not everyone posts on strava and also don't have their PR's on it, but average people do.

Stats right now

#3001 (F - Slovakia)

1K - 3:22

1Mile - 5:33

5K - 18:33

10K - 38:44

#3002 (M - Hove)

1K - 3:29

1Mile - 6:06

5K - 19:46

10K - 40:09

#3003 (M - Jakarta)

1K - 3:45

1Mile - 6:13

5K - 20:59

10K - 43:56

#3004 (M - USA )

1K - 3:00

1Mile - 4:59

5K - 15:41

10K - 35:08

#3005 (M - Limburg)

1K - 2:11 -- Doesn't make sense with below

1Mile - 3:43 -- Doesn't make sense with below

5K - 21:05

10K - 47:56

https://www.strava.com/challenges/May-2020-run-distance-challenge