Average Joe running 100 mpw; how fast would he get?

non starter wrote:

No such thing as an average joe that can run 100 mpw and not get injured. One of the things separating average from very good is the ability to run high mileage and stay healthy.

Any one without serious disability could run at least 100 mpw. The only ones who cannot are those who have not tried seriously.

So what you are saying is that an average Joe does not have the motivation and commitment to run 100 mpw.

I know a guy who has run 80-90 mpw for almost a decade, sometimes 100+ mpw. His lifetime 5k PR is low-19 (also 3:01 in the marathon) in his late-30.

The average person can’t run 100 miles in one week let alone consecutive weeks.

macdaddy wrote:

minime wrote:

Assume he wont get injured

Well, he would get injured.

99% of people can’t run 100mpw once without getting injured.

99.99999% of people would be injured if they ran 100mpw throughout the year.

Not if they run they're average runs @ 8+mins/mile

Kipchogefan wrote:

i do not believe that anyone seriously training and hitting 100 mpw won't break 17min and 35:30.

Believe it or not, 17 min and 35 min require a modicum of talent.

This is a bunch of crap.

The average Joe cannot run 100 mph and not get injured. Period.

Case in point:

I was way above average. Life long runner. 9:12 for 2 miles in HS. DI college scholarship foot soldier.

Several years after college I ran 2:21:19 in my first marathon off of 60 mph and won.

I had coaches lining up after that telling me if if I just ran 100 mph I could run 2:10.

I lasted two weeks running that much and broke down.

I was also working full time with a demanding job and raising a young family at the time.

The exceptionally talented that can run that fast and handle high mileage without injury will get very fast but they are very few and far between.

It takes a combination of inborn talent, a deep love love for the sport, extreme discipline and the resiliency to handle heavy training over a long period of time without getting injured.

correction:

mpw not mph!

(auto correct)

I started running as a 23 year old out of shape dude, no real athletic background. I was 5'9" 210 and used running to get down to 155. Within 4 years I went from couch to 100 miles in a week and ran a lot of them. I'm 20 years into running now and have averaged over 3k miles a year including years where I avg'd over 80 (those included numerous 100+ weeks).

So maybe I am your case study. My 5k/10k got to 16:59/35:19 and my marathon is 2:39:56.

minime wrote:

Assume he is between 18-35 years. Assume he wont get injured. 2 workouts per week; 1 with short intervals, 1 with longer (threshold/vo2), 1 good long run. After a year on that schedule what would the average person ( not average runner) be able to do on a 5/10k?

I say 18.30/38.15.

Assuming you mean a male and under the unrealistic assumption he won't get injured: Around 16:45, 34:30.

Thanks. This is proper analysis of actual data.

Running 100mpw is a talent in itself. I ran on a nationally ranked D1 team and the number of runners who ran over 100mpw for more than a few weeks a year was maybe 5. The more resilient guys often ran 90, most were in the 70s with occasional higher mileage in off season.

Another experiment is done on a yearly basis with High School runners who compete in the 1500, 1600, mile. Compile all those competitions and it would be a good estimate of what "average" means. It is a lot slower than most people here think. Presumably, these are kids who have trained at least one season (3mo) to compete. There are threads with these statistics from various states.

Way faster .. I am a zero talent .. started running in Jan 2016 worked up to one 100 mile week (most around 70) within one year and ran 17:30.. I did lose like 60lbs in the process

Nutsack McGee wrote:

I get what you are trying to say. You are saying that the average person could run 18:30 if they were able to run a lot despite not even being an average runner.

I still think that the person would end up faster.

There are some big flaws in the logic of this hypothetical scenario though. You are imposing conditions that are exclusive from each other.

1. A person cannot be a below average runner and run 100 mpw.

2. A below average runner or person cannot run 100 mpw and not get injured.

This. Heck, even 50 mpw would be tough to get to for an average joe without getting injured. First, they'd have to lose some weight. I get we are saying this isn't an obese guy, but there are plenty of healthy-looking folks that are 20 lbs fatter than their ideal running weight. Most people can't run 100 mpw consistently without getting injured with a bodyfat % above 17 for men and 25 for women.

Most high school athletes will start at around 25 mpw at the start of their freshman year and then gradually build up their mileage over 4 years to 60 mpw or so by the end, and many get injured doing that, and these are people who chose to run. So going from 0 to 100 mpw, without a several year build-up, seems like a recipe for guaranteed injury.

I got injured from just starting at 25 MPW

The average weekend warrior runs a mile in 7 mins. The average Joe, as to include the masses of sedentary people probably run a mile time of 9+ minutes. Think about the easy pace for someone like that and how much time it would take to run 100 mpw. There is zero chance they're getting running 100 mpw without injury. Even 50 would take some innate talent.

times are different wrote:

The average weekend warrior runs a mile in 7 mins. The average Joe, as to include the masses of sedentary people probably run a mile time of 9+ minutes. Think about the easy pace for someone like that and how much time it would take to run 100 mpw. There is zero chance they're getting running 100 mpw without injury. Even 50 would take some innate talent.

Running well requires good DNA, yet people are in deniable about that

Gavin Newsome wrote:

I started running as a 23 year old out of shape dude, no real athletic background. I was 5'9" 210 and used running to get down to 155. Within 4 years I went from couch to 100 miles in a week and ran a lot of them. I'm 20 years into running now and have averaged over 3k miles a year including years where I avg'd over 80 (those included numerous 100+ weeks).

So maybe I am your case study. My 5k/10k got to 16:59/35:19 and my marathon is 2:39:56.

Being fat or out of shape doesn't mean you lack talent. I know active people who are 6' 130 who can't run a 5k under 30 mins

times are different wrote:

Gavin Newsome wrote:

I started running as a 23 year old out of shape dude, no real athletic background. I was 5'9" 210 and used running to get down to 155. Within 4 years I went from couch to 100 miles in a week and ran a lot of them. I'm 20 years into running now and have averaged over 3k miles a year including years where I avg'd over 80 (those included numerous 100+ weeks).

So maybe I am your case study. My 5k/10k got to 16:59/35:19 and my marathon is 2:39:56.

Being fat or out of shape doesn't mean you lack talent. I know active people who are 6' 130 who can't run a 5k under 30 mins

People like me.

HRE > Rupp wrote:

non starter wrote:

No such thing as an average joe that can run 100 mpw and not get injured. One of the things separating average from very good is the ability to run high mileage and stay healthy.

Any one without serious disability could run at least 100 mpw. The only ones who cannot are those who have not tried seriously.

So what you are saying is that an average Joe does not have the motivation and commitment to run 100 mpw.

This might be true, but it would take at least 2 years of buildup before someone who never trained before could start running 100 mpw without getting plagued with lots of injuries.

The average Joe (even skinny Joe) can't run 2 miles continuously without walking. So you'd need to start with a 10-mile week and go from there. This would be a reasonable progression

Months 1-4: Progressing from jogging & walking (10mpw running) to continuous runs (25mpw).

Months 5-8: 25 mpw, continuous running, to 35mpw, introducing some quality workouts

Months 9-12: 35 mpw to 55 mpw

Year 2: Gradually progress from 55 mpw to 100 mpw

At best you hit 100 mpw in 2 years, assuming no injuries, and no breaks. A quicker progression is asking for injuries. After 4 years of highschool running, most of the best runners don't even make it to 100 mpw until college.

Anyone that can eventually make it to 100mpw while doing sensible workouts will absolutely run faster than 16:30. Plenty of guys did it in the 70s and at that time if you were a 2:30 guy you were basically garbage in the eyes of the running community. It does not take talent to run 50mpw. It only takes someone with half a brain and some semblance of knowledge on how to train for distance running. I know of no people under 40 that run even 70mpw that aren't sub 17. Even some of the guys I know that have hit 100 only do it for 3-5 weeks straight at the most and then continue running 60-70.