No. Next.
No. Next.
If you are looking to acquire currency, trying to become a pro runner at 31 is probably one of the least efficient possible ways of doing so. Seriously just learn to code or flip houses or go to dental school or something. If you insist on trying to monetize running, try blogging and writing about it - make up some niche feat to achieve and throw in a compelling backstory with some adversity you overcame or whatever; possibly you could generate some revenue that way if you are lucky and charismatic etc.
I believe it would be very hard to get to a 1:05 half. To reach the goals, it would require that most of your physical and mental energy would have to be focused on running. Personal relationships and career would likely suffer. I would focus on shorter races (5k and 10k) and see how you progress. If you can get to a 14:20 and 29:40 then start thinking about a 1:05 half. At 31 your window is very short to reach your goals.
I’d do another 12 weeks at 130km or even a bit less and race/time trial again. If you improve by another 5-10mins there might be something there.
opinions like onions wrote:
Any one can go Pro in running as long as you have the right sponsors.. times have nothing to do with it just look at Justin Gallegos' contract.. hell, you might not even need an agent.. however if you want to hang with professionals and be in the mix with the elite that get pampered to practice running, this is where the disconnect is.
If you have to ask, chances are it's not going to happen for you.. but hell, crazier things have happened. Hope you have a rich family for expenses. Save those receipts lol.
I don't really worry about monetization per se. I currently live and work in Beijing, China, where the running level is overall much lower than what can be seen in the West. There are, and will be opportunities to make business out of this, no doubt about it.
But since I am pretty new to running, I was more interested in understanding what running level one can eventually reach considering the age factor and initial performance.
In that regard, your answers have been very enlightening. Many thanks to you all!
Going to say that no, you can't become a pro.
Pretty good for someone who has only been running for a year, but in as little as 4 more years, age will be a factor, even though you haven't been running long. Maybe keep running and see how you can do over age 40, but making money as a runner based on your running? No.
I agree with taking some good time ( like a year) to work on your top end speed and the shorter distances.
Also what’s the pro handball scene like?
Age wise it’s hard to quantify running peak and when it’s too late as some people are very early bloomers to very late. I’d would say motivation plays a much bigger role for distance running than age. Your explosive athleticism is likely past its prime but endurance could be good for 10 more years.
The coolest Gal in Running. Priscilla Welch smoked a pack a day started running at 35, kicked A and made the olympics at 39
Juice Springsteen wrote:
Also what’s the pro handball scene like?
I played in D2 with Ajaccio’s back then (I’m originally from Corsica). It’s physically tough, and financially even tougher. In that regard, it is very similar to running where only the best of the best can make a decent living out of it.
Assuming you are a female, yes.
Unfortunately not a chance.
Skill sports you could be a pro at any age, but not distance running. You could still become a faster runner maybe equivalent to decent college level, but not top college level.
Give it a try. I also started running late and ran well after couple years of decent training, unfortunately life did not give me more time to keep improving, but it was very fun. You will get amazed how much you can improve in several years of uninterrupted training. I think it takes at least 6-7 years to get at your potential if not injuries.
Your best bet to become a pro is to go the trailrunning route. You are faster and younger than a lot of paid trailrunners.
I believe you can run well even in your early 40’s.
My story is similar but unfortunately stopped very soon. I grew up in Mex in a small town, so never had an opportunity to do any sports growing up I lived a very sedentary life till my late 20’s when I moved to the U.S. I took up running cuz I couldn’t do anything I couldn’t work I was just very bored taking ESL classes. I never ran in my life so I started jogging 15 min every few days, months later I was jogging 3-4 days a week less than a year later I started looking up in internet how to train. I remember I felt like a decent athlete but I had not idea how fast weekend warriors were. The first time I saw a competitive race was in Dana Point CA, I believe Fernando Cabada won the 10k like in 29 low, I was shocked by those times. Master runners were winning the open 5k, with unbelievable times, 40 something y/o studs going sub 15. I dreamed to one day get like 17 min 5k guy. Well I started training on my own at around 30 y/o but my training was very simple I had no idea how to train so I was running only like 30 mi per week and ran like high 17. A year later I met an elite athlete at Carlsbad and months later he started giving me some advice and helping me with workouts.
My mileage increased to maybe 35-40 mi per week but we’ll structure weeks with longer long runs, back then like 13-14km. After 3-4 mo of training I ran 16:44, then 16:30’s, 16:20’s same season.
Next season I ran 15:50 and 4:30 mi debut all this with 35-40 mile weeks and only 9-10 mi long runs.
After that I was not able to train due to study, kids, work. I had a full time job and 2 kids so I used to train at 4:30-5 am 5-6 days per week.
I also ran few HM I believe 1:13 high was my best and like 33 high 10k. I broke 16 3 times, ran 4:30, then again 4:34 mi after two year set back and 4-5 mo of serious training. After that I’ve been a hobby jogger. Now I’m 40 I jog 1-2 times per week, here and there try to run hard but I'm far from my prime. A month ago ran a solo 5k in 19:30, two weeks ago 1 mi in 5:23 also on my own. Not too bad for years of inactivity, overweight and a very busy life.
So to be honest you can’t become a Pro, but you can still run fast in your late 30’s even early 40’s if you can training wisely. 30’s-40’s a lot different than teens and early 20’s.
Best of Luck...
With him being a professional handball player I can’t imagine he’s slow twitch, I’ll bet his mile would be way better than his other PR’s. OP definitely try a mile and see what you get. Speed is a coveted thing in distance running, it will tell you what your potential is more than the info you’ve given.
Impala31 wrote:
Hi, sorry to disappoint you but you can't become a pro.
Even if you are quite new to running, 130km per week is already a lot and a guy with potential to be pro would already easily be sub 30'.
Maybe you can reach 65' HM but it will be hard, it is already a very good level. It is easy to improve at the beginning but it becomes harder and harder after. Try sub 1h10 first.
If you have done 33 and 1h13 alone (I guess there was no real race) you are already in sub33 shape and ~1h12
To be fair, he said that he just reached that mileage level. We also know nothing of the rest of his training. Maybe his training plan is just a bunch of slow easy runs.
Anyway, I agree it seems highly unlikely, but I would want more details before staking the reputation of this anonymous username that I'll probably stop using soon on a prediction.
First it depends on ideal racing distance
Second it depends on how many of your genes are tuned on to that distance. The more genes, the faster you will be fully developed. It doesn't take many years if you are lucky and put in the work before you will reach your ceiling.
If you don't turn pro you can still be an age grouper. You can only run for so many years before your tendons in the achilles will get worse. That's why few who run since childhood will become good age groupers
nobutyeah wrote:
With him being a professional handball player I can’t imagine he’s slow twitch, I’ll bet his mile would be way better than his other PR’s. OP definitely try a mile and see what you get. Speed is a coveted thing in distance running, it will tell you what your potential is more than the info you’ve given.
Following your advices, I had a quick speed test this morning on a flat road (no turn). Here is what I measured with a footpod + GPS:
- 200M = 26/27 secs
- 400M = 55/56 secs
Besides, I have never been a sprinter, I don't believe I'd get under 15secs on a 100M track.
flampis wrote:
[quote]nobutyeah wrote:
Besides, I have never been a sprinter, I don't believe I'd get under 15secs on a 100M track.
Update: I was a little under 15sec at the 100m mark on the 200m test ^__^'
If you are at 55 secs on 400m, how can you not be able to run 100m under 15 sec? (you did it consecutively 4 times)