Can an 18 year old male that can barely break 20 mins in the 5k ever make it to the Olympic marathon trials?

I predict the next Olympic Trials standards will be tougher. One of the only reasons the 2020 standards were 2:19 was because USATF based the standards off of the 2016 Games and before the IAAF set the standards for 2020.

This isn’t impossible. Say you have a runner who is new to the sport. They are otherwise athletically gifted though and are a diamond in the rough of sorts when it comes to running. If they truly committed to it they could absolutely get down to a sub 2:19 marathon in 10-16 years, which would put them at 28-34 years old when they get the standard.

Juice Springsteen wrote:

This isn’t impossible. Say you have a runner who is new to the sport. They are otherwise athletically gifted though and are a diamond in the rough of sorts when it comes to running. If they truly committed to it they could absolutely get down to a sub 2:19 marathon in 10-16 years, which would put them at 28-34 years old when they get the standard.

For this thread to make sense, the assumption needs to be that our theoretical runner ran on the XC and track teams for at least a couple of years. If there is a caveat that he never ran a step before his race, it's a meaningless debate.

Yea touché, if that is the case then yea they would have no shot.

Coming back from many years of injury and no running, I ran 20:30 after five months of 1-3 miles per day, no real workouts, and I was 35 or so at the time. I was still able to run 6:02/M for a marathon ten or eleven years later, and some of my races predicted more like 2:34 or better. If I could do that at that age, I would expect that someone who started xc late in hs, maybe was overweight, and still ran mid 20 that year, could lose weight, walk on somewhere in college, and eventually qualify.

Check back after you run 5:20 pace for a marathon.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Juice Springsteen wrote:

This isn’t impossible. Say you have a runner who is new to the sport. They are otherwise athletically gifted though and are a diamond in the rough of sorts when it comes to running. If they truly committed to it they could absolutely get down to a sub 2:19 marathon in 10-16 years, which would put them at 28-34 years old when they get the standard.

For this thread to make sense, the assumption needs to be that our theoretical runner ran on the XC and track teams for at least a couple of years. If there is a caveat that he never ran a step before his race, it's a meaningless debate.

How come you didn't comment on Tyler Andrews? He's not theoretical. He ran in high school going from 20:30 to 18:30 fall of his senior year at 17. I don't know if he was any faster at 18 because it looks like he didn't race as a freshman at Tufts until he was 21. By the quality standard of eventually making the OT marathon, 18:30 is barely breaking 20. He has run 2:15:52 now.

"I really started to care about running as a HS senior in 2007. I’d been on the team up to that point but had never once run out of season (we had no track at my HS) and had never broken 20’30 for 5K."

Obviously not every barely 20 minute 5K 18-year old has the ability to make it to the Olympic marathon trials. But the question wasn't can "any", it was can "an 18 year year old...", so one example is enough to say yes.

I googled his name and there are zero details about his HS running other than he ran 20:30 and then 18:30 in XC and never competed in track.

I would want to see what his training was in HS before I concede an 18:30 guy could qualify for the trials.

nomadiclife wrote:

Regardless of whether it's possible or not it's hilarious to see how many truly bitter souls lurk these forums. The language of a person's response to an innocent question reveals much...

Couldn't agree more. Nothing more pathetic than people telling someone that it is impossible to do something; especially when that something has been done several times (see the names earlier in the thread).

How sad...negativity is a self-fulfilling prophecy!

oldmanbythesea wrote:

I predict the next Olympic Trials standards will be tougher. One of the only reasons the 2020 standards were 2:19 was because USATF based the standards off of the 2016 Games and before the IAAF set the standards for 2020.

The women's standard will be a lot tougher. The men's might stay the same. It used to be 2:21!

Rhodium Nights wrote:

nomadiclife wrote:

Regardless of whether it's possible or not it's hilarious to see how many truly bitter souls lurk these forums. The language of a person's response to an innocent question reveals much...

Couldn't agree more. Nothing more pathetic than people telling someone that it is impossible to do something; especially when that something has been done several times (see the names earlier in the thread).

How sad...negativity is a self-fulfilling prophecy!

"Several" times? The only example was Tyler Andrews. Although there was mention of Andrews not training seriously until late in college, he ran 15:10 as Sophomore. How did he improve from 18:30 to 15:10 while not training seriously?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I googled his name and there are zero details about his HS running other than he ran 20:30 and then 18:30 in XC and never competed in track.

I would want to see what his training was in HS before I concede an 18:30 guy could qualify for the trials.

We can take from what he said in the interview that he wasn't a beginner as a senior, it sounds like he ran from the beginning of high school. I know training at a lot of high schools suck, but that wasn't focused on trying to improve, but he also didn't get kicked off the team.

Are you saying that high school cross country running doesn't count as training unless it meets your standards now? Most people don't run to their potentials in high school because the coaching and training often isn't that good or people aren't that motivated.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Rhodium Nights wrote:

Couldn't agree more. Nothing more pathetic than people telling someone that it is impossible to do something; especially when that something has been done several times (see the names earlier in the thread).

How sad...negativity is a self-fulfilling prophecy!

"Several" times? The only example was Tyler Andrews. Although there was mention of Andrews not training seriously until late in college, he ran 15:10 as Sophomore. How did he improve from 18:30 to 15:10 while not training seriously?

Tyler Andrews was born in May 1990. He was a senior in high school 2007-2008. According to athletic.net, he was a sophomore in college in 2012, so that's age 21 and 22 for the indoor and outdoor track season.

Good troll.

The correct answer to this hypothetical is yes, in one of two cicrumstances:

1.) OP is significantly overweight. Always possible that a big aerobic engine is in there somewhere

2.) OP has never trained. The caveat here is that upon training, the OP has got to be under 17 minutes within the first year, at a minimum. Those who suggest a "12-16 year plan" with steady progression delusional. If this were the case, why stop there? Another 6 years and he would be a 2:12 guy! He would find out quickly, based on the reaction the training, if his genetic ceiling contained even the possibility of becoming 2:19 marathoner. 99% chance it isn't, but worth giving it a year or two to see.

If OP has done any sort of a training block in his lifetime, the answer is, unfortunately, no. However, hitting the OTQ isn't the only reason to pursue the running dream. There are many specific and ancillary benefits to seeing how far you can take the sport.

If OP doesn't fit into

zzzz wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

"Several" times? The only example was Tyler Andrews. Although there was mention of Andrews not training seriously until late in college, he ran 15:10 as Sophomore. How did he improve from 18:30 to 15:10 while not training seriously?

Tyler Andrews was born in May 1990. He was a senior in high school 2007-2008. According to athletic.net, he was a sophomore in college in 2012, so that's age 21 and 22 for the indoor and outdoor track season.

There's still more to the story. Like I said, I would want to see what his training was like in HS.

These types of threads are irritating in that because distance running involves conditioning, some posters believe it is the one sport that doesn't require much talent. The truth is that the ability to run 5K well, relative to top end speed, is genetic and ten years of training won't change that.

From a competitive distance perspective, 20:00 really sucks and it's not possible to move up by about 5 levels of talent, just by running 10 years.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

zzzz wrote:

Tyler Andrews was born in May 1990. He was a senior in high school 2007-2008. According to athletic.net, he was a sophomore in college in 2012, so that's age 21 and 22 for the indoor and outdoor track season.

There's still more to the story. Like I said, I would want to see what his training was like in HS.

These types of threads are irritating in that because distance running involves conditioning, some posters believe it is the one sport that doesn't require much talent. The truth is that the ability to run 5K well, relative to top end speed, is genetic and ten years of training won't change that.

From a competitive distance perspective, 20:00 really sucks and it's not possible to move up by about 5 levels of talent, just by running 10 years.

I'm not arguing Tyler Andrews has no talent. His later achievements indicate lots of talent. I'm saying that you can't look at a time like 20:00 and saying that indicates no talent when you don't know what is behind that, even if they ran four years in high school. If someone is kind of a slacker (not saying Andrews specifically, not knowing him) on a mediocre cross country team that gets by without really trying, like a lot of people I've seen on high school teams, that could hide a lot talent. If that person actually finds some desire to do well later, that something else.

Consider that many (maybe most) high schools rarely have a sub-5:00 guy, where there is no culture of running well and poor coaching, and you see that it's easy to have entire teams that are mediocre and effectively slackers. Yet it's likely that people with running talent went through those teams.

I think we're are saying the same thing. The guy that doesn't run during the off-season, but attends all the practices for at least 2-3 years and still only runs 20:00, is never going to run 2:20.

Just wear the pogo sticks that are now called "running shoes," then yes, he could make it in a few years.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I think we're are saying the same thing. The guy that doesn't run during the off-season, but attends all the practices for at least 2-3 years and still only runs 20:00, is never going to run 2:20.

We aren't saying the same thing unless you screwed up your last sentence. From his interview, Tyler Andrews probably did run 3-4 years in high school, didn't run in the off season (so only cross country since they didn't have track), only 20:30 before his senior year, and 18:30 his senior year, yet did run 2:15:52.

Here's his actual high school team, with data it seems only after 2013. Only 8 guys under 5:00 mile equivalent in the past 8 seasons. In 2019, their top 1500 guys ran 4:27, 4:33, 4:45 (=4:48, 4:55, 5:08 miles). And look at the four girls 1500 in 2019: 5:58, 6:29, 7:12, 9:32 (=6:27, 7:12, 7:47, 10:18 miles). It's easy to see the culture of running at the school being one of no one actually trying to run fast. If you aren't really trying and have the talent of Tyler Andrews, you could run 20:30 before your senior year and still run 2:15:52 later.