Why do most US male High School XC runners plateau around 16:30 for 5K

That’s the shape of the talent bell curve?

Might just be the popularity of the sport.

If we look at the current 5000m U18 rankings, and I know this isnt exactly comparable bc track is much faster, theyre dominated by Kenya and Japan, with a little bit of Uganda. This makes sense bc distance running is a big deal in all these countries.

The fact that its not even commonplace to have our HS athletes run 5000m on the track.. distance running is just not that big in the US.

hobbyjogger 924216 wrote:

That’s the shape of the talent bell curve?

This is the answer. Take the level of talent common among kids who are already good at running, give them the amount of training that's usually possible in the context of the U.S. school system, and you end up with a lot of guys running PRs around 16:30. That's not a bad result at all for someone who enjoys running, doing medium-well in some races, and having a normal life in high school.

Cause that is how fast 445ish milers run for 5k off moderate mileages....

fkkfkfkfkf wrote:

Cause that is how fast 445ish milers run for 5k off moderate mileages....

This, and the bell curve already mentioned.

Want to be faster? You have to run 10 mile days, but there's no guarantee you'll be that fast. You will not be that fast without 10 mile days, however.

FFF wrote:

fkkfkfkfkf wrote:

Cause that is how fast 445ish milers run for 5k off moderate mileages....

This, and the bell curve already mentioned.

Want to be faster? You have to run 10 mile days, but there's no guarantee you'll be that fast. You will not be that fast without 10 mile days, however.

Yeah somewhere around 445 is the sweet spot for kids on good teams who are running 40-50mpw. If those kids ran 60-70mpw they would probably be 440/1600 runners. I am sure with better training more of these kids could get down to 430/1520s. That is what the regional powers do. Instead of those 4:50/17 min kids running 35-40mpw, they run the kids 50-60mpw and turn them into 4:40/1600 min. You get 5 kids like that and you have a solid team. Get a couple outliers running 425/1530 and you get national class contender. Get enough kids out(and it helps being a school with 2k students instead of 1k) and you do slightly better. Or get a genetically gifted family with 5 kids in a 4 year span....

Your 1600/5k equivalence seem off from what I've seen of high schoolers. Usually 4:15/15:30 4:20/15:45 4:25/16:00 4:30/16:15 etc

not so sweet 16 wrote:

It seems most decent high school programs have the bulk of their top kids plateau around 16:30 for an XC 5k. Some might dip down to 16 flat, high 15s every once in a while, but for the most part they all bounce around 16:30 range.

Seems like a pretty mediocre number to have everyone stuck at. What's the cause of the nationwide plateau?

Lol mediocre number, please. Come on a journey with me, back to PE class. 7-8 minute miles all around, you’re lapping people with your 5:20. Now everyone’s finished, but you’re still chugging through mile 2, you’ve sped up a bit, 10:35. By the third mile the class is blown away, it’s 16:37 at the finish, descending splits the whole time. You are a god to these people, squarely in the top .0001% of runners worldwide. But you don’t care what my response is because this is letsrun, nobody is actually good at this sport because a performance can be picked apart in a million ways, and you are trying to start an argument.

A lot of good takes here. Relating to the track, your average C-tier talented runner usually peaks around 4:40 and is lucky to get under. That usually flips around to 16:30-17:45 depending on their commitment to XC. The B-tier guys are the ones who usually peak around 4:25, they end up being your 16:00-17:00 guys in XC. A-tier guys are sub 4:20 and really range during XC, but the best are usually running 15:30 or better.

fkkfkfkfkf wrote:

Cause that is how fast 445ish milers run for 5k off moderate mileages....

16:30 for a cross-country 5k seems to be a significantly better time than 4:45 for a mile. I graduated from high school in the early 1990s and I think we ran maybe 25 miles per week if you include the warm up and cool down, although we did a lot of intervals. I ran around the equivalent of a 16:30 5k, but my 1600m best time the following spring was about 4:30. I thought that my 4:30 1600m time was far superior to my 16:30 5k cross-country time.

I have no idea what I could have run if we had been running 50 miles per week or whatever kids run now in high school.

OozmaKappa wrote:

Might just be the popularity of the sport.

If we look at the current 5000m U18 rankings, and I know this isnt exactly comparable bc track is much faster, theyre dominated by Kenya and Japan, with a little bit of Uganda. This makes sense bc distance running is a big deal in all these countries.

The fact that its not even commonplace to have our HS athletes run 5000m on the track.. distance running is just not that big in the US.

you have a problem with 5000m vs 5k cross...and to the OP 16:30 is like 5:23 a mile average. as others have said this seems to be around 4:40-45 mile runners. when i was in HS (colorado so the altitude conversion has to be considered), most state champs where 15:45-16:00 and they were 4:20s in track. i didnt matter 1A-5A all the leaders at the state meet came through the first mile around 4:50-55

which according to one pace calculator

4:50 mile will give you a 16:04 and 5:10 average pace, so as you can see the guys hitting 15:45 ran negative the last miles and the lesser talent or mileage guys died off.

funny is how colleges didnt care about 15:45-16:00 guys in colorado cause those arent that fast compared to top guys from low elevation. denvers altitude would give you 15:45 at sea level, but i think that is off, especially considering 30-45 miles a week kids. my senior year the best kid on my team ran 16:09 at state and then ran 15:30 at the midwest regional for footlocker, and he was one of those 30-40 miles a week no summer training kids.

so what we can infer is grass/uneven ground etc drops a kids mile pace up to 20 seconds per mile. thats 30 seconds total, so i would say most kids running 16:30 off small mileage would hit 15:30 if they did 5ks during outdoor track

so the 16:00 guys would be 15:00, and the 15:40s to 14:40s

now look at this, 55th on the list is 14:40

Why do most world class runners plateau around 13 minutes?

If being a “god” in PE class at 16:37 (strangely specific) is your idea of accomplishment, great. Most serious runners don’t give a sh!t how they stack up against a PE class.

It’s mediocre. It’s also where most American high schoolers top out.

Maybe you are on to something. Maybe it’s an expectation thing. 16:30 might be enough to feel like you’re pretty good. So, many stop there, rather than put in the type of work that it takes to get really good.

1630 is not slow wrote:

fkkfkfkfkf wrote:

Cause that is how fast 445ish milers run for 5k off moderate mileages....

16:30 for a cross-country 5k seems to be a significantly better time than 4:45 for a mile. I graduated from high school in the early 1990s and I think we ran maybe 25 miles per week if you include the warm up and cool down, although we did a lot of intervals. I ran around the equivalent of a 16:30 5k, but my 1600m best time the following spring was about 4:30. I thought that my 4:30 1600m time was far superior to my 16:30 5k cross-country time.

I have no idea what I could have run if we had been running 50 miles per week or whatever kids run now in high school.

Exactly. I was an 800 guy (and nothing special) with a 445ish 1600 and no way could I have run 16:30.

Edfewfdcs wrote:

1630 is not slow wrote:

16:30 for a cross-country 5k seems to be a significantly better time than 4:45 for a mile. I graduated from high school in the early 1990s and I think we ran maybe 25 miles per week if you include the warm up and cool down, although we did a lot of intervals. I ran around the equivalent of a 16:30 5k, but my 1600m best time the following spring was about 4:30. I thought that my 4:30 1600m time was far superior to my 16:30 5k cross-country time.

I have no idea what I could have run if we had been running 50 miles per week or whatever kids run now in high school.

Exactly. I was an 800 guy (and nothing special) with a 445ish 1600 and no way could I have run 16:30.

And I was a 4:40 guy running 1545. The less you train the worse you are as distances go up. My numbers are pretty good for the low mileage programs (35-40mpw), conservative for the higher mileage(50-60), and optimistic for the people that don't train.

As it goes I'm an 18-year-old "Highschooler" (I'm from the UK so in sixth form), with a 5k of 16:11, most of my friends probably could get to this point, however, they're middle distance and would like a mid 16 personal best, but they don't want to do the training to get there. Even those that do focus on Long Distances either arent that talented (the unfortunate part of running) or get injured when they attempt the higher mileage.

Just to clarify I'm not saying you have to be especially talented to reach that specific mark of 16:30 however some people just don't react as well to training as others :(

Personally id like to get a lot faster and I'm still taking fair chunks of time off my personal best every couple of months, however, I expect life to get in the way, as I've started working early morning and joining the Army soon. Best of luck to anyone tho :)

High schoolers also don’t run many 5ks on the track so their 5k pbs are relatively slower then what they are actually capable of.

Take a 4:30 guy from high school, they probably could easily run 15:40s on the track, but the furthest event in most states is the 2 mile, baring going to a national meet they won’t run a 5k on the track so their pb will be from some random XC course which is almost always significantly slower then the track. I knew sub 4:20 guys from the northeast with prs in the 15:50s that could easily go 14:5X on the track if they wanted.

My friend went from 16:25 to 15:45 just by running it on the track instead of the xc course

as somebody mentioned, it's a bell curve thing. to run 16:30 on a fast course, you probably need a kid with something like 58-60 400 speed. 4:50 in the mile. These are solid but not exceptional runners. Well trained, this is where they are going to end up.

In my area, courses are hilly, muddy: slow. That 16:30 runner is more typically a 17:10 type runner. Except for that one time during that season they go to a hard packed course with only a few small rolling hills.