With optimized training, can most men break 13 seconds in the 100 meter dash?

I saw that video. Mo had a really bad start and it was a wet track. I'd reckon he'd get mid 12 seconds under ideal conditions, and low 12s to high 11s with a bit of training and slow twitch to fast twitch conversion. It doesn't matter though since he will never train for sprints. Also distance training tires your body out.

Might be true, but then Mo is a 1 in a million+ athlete. Having the genetics to run 3:28 1500m has to have some advantages over the average Joe even at 100m.

one in a million slow twitch. plenty of people on my high school track team (and a few girls) could beat him in the 100m, whereas nobody could keep close to him for anything above 400m.

No, not even close. This would be a much more interesting question at 15 seconds. The US obesity rate is close to 40%, so like half the population would need to focus on dropping that weight first and just getting acclimated with exercising.

i'm talking about people at their genetic potential. Like everything is perfect and they cannot possibly go faster.

Also, almost half the US population is over 40. Once you get much past that, the ability to sprint and jump falls off precipitously.

yes if we assume that they're around 20 years old and not overweight. i have to assume that even many people who are unathletic and walk around in their PE class could do it too if they put the time in to do some drills, gym, and sprint workouts

Then why specify 2 years? Nobody can reach their genetic potential after only 2 years of 'optimized training'.

If you stood on any street corner in the USA stopping guys and asking the question......what was your 100 meters PR, wouldn't take long to get a 100m in under 13 seconds is rare, the vast majority of men can't do it.

Very few humans can run a 100m, total lack of speed endurance, so after about 50m it will be a struggle to sprint the final 50.

Reading this thread I hope you have help coping with your autism.

No you don’t, nobody reaches their genetic potential in two years training.

Selection bias. Look it up.

You're leaving out the hundreds of boys at your high school that are so unathletic they don't participate in sports.

I was going to say .... your previous post, in which you mentioned the sub-56 100 free went by with no comments (this might not be meaningful to most runners), but this is *good*! Now, with this post, it makes more sense - with the earlier one, I thought you were a runner who got on the swim team with little background and swam that fast, which would be amazing! But those 6 years of hard training paid off in swimming. I started swimming as an adult (for triathlon after years of running), and it's clear that what you achieved in swimming 100 is more than I ever will. I don't know enough about track sprinting to have an opinion on this but I can say that, training to run marathons as an adult, I did a 400m time trial with my friend one day and ran 56 (age 31) - which was 7 seconds faster than I'd run as a 17 year-old who was very fit from paying handball but had never before raced on a track and was entered in the 400 event by my dorm mates ... so, my sense is that, however much speed at distances shorter than that may be genetically determined, putting in the work over the course of a few years should help you improve in running 400m. Good luck!

You do realize... Usain Bolt runs faster than your given time (10.5 seconds)... by 1 second? The average male sprints at 15.1 mph. That's a 15 second 100 meter. I don't think the average american male can sprint 13 off the couch... I can do that as a seasons track runner... not a sprinter, but a runner, and I am faster than a lot of people.

I might be a bit late, but I am a 17 year old ex-track runner. Not that I'm not an athlete, I just didn't do track this year... too busy in the springtime. But I digress, I am a distance runner and did run the 2023 cross country season. As an out of shape person (right now, getting back into shape outside of track by running and doing other things like weight lifts, but still out of shape) I can run 100m in a solid 13.1 seconds, meaning I clear a 17 mph average. I can make top speeds of 17.5-18.5, right now. Out of shape. Without training, and I'm not even a track sprinter, or never was. Always have done 1 and 2 mile races.

Now, does this make me fast? Yes. Well above the average person. If you are clearing this without much training, you are a very impressive physical specimen (at least in my 17 year old athlete's opinion). Now, in terms of being a track sprinter... no. You are the run-of-the mill JV runner. At least where I'm from. Does that mean you're slow? No. You are pretty fast, naturally. If you trained, I bet you could probably reach 19 or 20 mph, and average 18 for a 11 meter. But, what do I know, these are simply speculations. Also note, that I am naturally above average in my speed. I have long legs and am 5'11.5. Plus, long distance training and wrestling might contribute to my higher than average speed. But hell, train and see for yourself. Test out your theory, and good luck I guess.

That’s the average guy on your “track team” who already has some running ability, not the average guy in general. A lot of people out there are obese and can barely run 100m. Would be above 13seconds for sure.

I don't know what the so-called average man can or cannot sprint. I know if a man has a top speed of 15.1 miles per hour, he is not sprinting 15.0 100m. In order to sprint 15.0 100m, one needs high 16.xx m.p.h. to 17.xx m.p.h. top end speed. Reminder, no one is sprinting fast first (15 to 20)m. Most men off the couch who sprint 100m will deaccelerate significantly, final 25m.

I did end up running a 13.6 in a race at a recreational meet, so i believe 18-19 top end would be reasonable estimate. But I did have the fastest start out of those "slow" people and then end up getting caught