So yeah, that's my PB for 5k -- 18:58.
I'm 6'2, I guess sort of a "muscular build." I put on fat/muscle pretty easily. If I went from say 180 to 160 (and lost the weight in a healthy, progressive manner), how much time could I knock off that?
So yeah, that's my PB for 5k -- 18:58.
I'm 6'2, I guess sort of a "muscular build." I put on fat/muscle pretty easily. If I went from say 180 to 160 (and lost the weight in a healthy, progressive manner), how much time could I knock off that?
5 seconds a pound, or about 1:40. My $0.02.
I weigh 172 and have ran 4:03/14:23...weight is a big factor but not the biggest one.
The size of your balls is the biggest factor. Sure you have to lug them around everywhere but they help you be aggressive enough to get a good time the first 1/3 of the race, give you enough staying power in the the middle 1/3 of the race and enough pain tolerance to gut out the last 1/3 of the race.
providing you don't lose propulsive muscle & just blubber, then you can expect to get down to :
18'58 * (160/180)^1/2 = 17'53
ventolin^2 wrote:
providing you don't lose propulsive muscle & just blubber, then you can expect to get down to :
18'58 * (160/180)^1/2 = 17'53
Wait a minute, where did that formula come from?
A 18:58 5K would be a VDOT 53. After weight loss, the new VDOT would be 180/160*53 = 59. The new 5K time would be 17:17.
I've always read 2.5 secs/kg/km. So if you lost 9kg, that'd be 9*2.5*5 = 1:52 -> ~ 17:10
so the VO2 table 17:17 in same neighbourhood.
6'2" and 180 isn't that big. I've run 17:3x at 5'9.5" and 170lbs. If you have flab, mileage will burn it off, but you may as well keep the muscle.
I agree that 6'2" and 180 isn't that heavy. You should drop to 18:00 with the first 10 pounds of flab, not water or muscle loss. But the next 10 are anyone's guess, could be another minute or could be you slow down to 19:00 again.
Another thought, the older you are the more likely that mileage will not burn off flab. Like Pete Magill used to say:http://petemagill.blogspot.com/2009/02/peter-magill-event-training-5k-road.html before the article was sent to Running Times, you are going to have to diet.
It just depends if you ran that 18:58 off 3 miles a week during your lunch period. IF not then I say 17:30.
Are you asking the right question/don't get excited yet...if you lost 20lbs from "running more" your time would be much faster than if you could just lop off 20lbs right now!!
Lopped I say maybe 18:30-40
2 seconds per pound per mile. So, I'd say 16:45. If you can't run 16:45 at 6'2" 165 there is something wrong. Too little mileage, too much speed work, something. I've broken 16 at 175/6'2" on 45-50 miles a week.
will wrote:
2 seconds per pound per mile. So, I'd say 16:45. If you can't run 16:45 at 6'2" 165 there is something wrong. Too little mileage, too much speed work, something. I've broken 16 at 175/6'2" on 45-50 miles a week.
You can't use a general constant like 2s/lb/mile...otherwise if he drops to 135 like Alan C or Paul Tergat he is running 1'40 per mile faster or about 13:50 counting the point 1. If he hits 125 hes running 13:18!!
There is an exponential relationship until he hits an "elite" weight level for his height!
will wrote:
2 seconds per pound per mile. So, I'd say 16:45. If you can't run 16:45 at 6'2" 165 there is something wrong. Too little mileage, too much speed work, something. I've broken 16 at 175/6'2" on 45-50 miles a week.
Dang, you beat me to it, I agree with this post!!!!
Would you say that this is the same for a man and a woman? 2 sec per pound per mile?
I would think if your training remains the same you wouldn't realistically drop more than 20-25 seconds. It's not like he's overweight folks, and he's already said he's a muscular build, so 20 lbs of fat might not even come off.
VDOT calculator wrote:
ventolin^2 wrote:providing you don't lose propulsive muscle & just blubber, then you can expect to get down to :
18'58 * (160/180)^1/2 = 17'53
Wait a minute, where did that formula come from?
A 18:58 5K would be a VDOT 53. After weight loss, the new VDOT would be 180/160*53 = 59. The new 5K time would be 17:17.
something called physics...