How fast were your parents?

dontflushwhileyousit wrote:

My dad did track in high school. He ran just under 6 minutes for the mile. My mom couldn't run 400 meters in 6 minutes. I ran 4:18. There goes the genetics theory.

And you all did the same amount of training?

The Waitress wrote:

Avante wrote:

There is a certain body/physique more speed friendly than others. We find that type of body/physique in abundance in those with roots to western Africa. Yes it is about genetics.

Blacks from western Africa do possess unique physical characteristics more suited for athlectic events that require speed, quickness, agility than those not from that region of the world.

Yes I kno... "well what about...

Valery Borzov

Pietro Mennea

Hal Davis

Bobby Morrow

Slim Frenchy

Wes Welker

....what about them? For every Valery Borzov there are a ton of Bob Hayes, Jimmy Hines, Tommie Smith..etc etc etc etc etc.

TCU has had six black sub10.00 sprinters among their alumni, Asia-O, the white world-1.

Don't forget those speedy Samoans.

Sprinting is a about muscle and power. Muscle and power are about training. A group's dominance indicates nothing about whether there is a genetic basis for their success. There may or may not be, but simply because their occurrence is higher means nothing.

And I'm 6'1" and 160 lbs, big for an elite runner. But I could totally gain another 160lbs of muscle and win the worlds strongest man competition. Hell I should go for it one appearance there would top all the air time I have had on ESPN 2 for the entirety of my running career.

I guess that's why those strongmen don't decide to lose 170lbs and break 4 in the mile. And I thought it had something to do with genetics. SILLY ME!

What are you talking about,

What are you talking about? If you want to improve your 40 yd dash time, then that's entirely possible. Do you think it's not?

Clue me in,

Clue ME in. Stop skipping my posts, I want your fail troll opinion it is so important to me!

Why would a strongman want to lose 170 lbs to run a sub 4 mile? And what part of your point are you saying is impossible? Gaining muscle or gaining strength?

Clue me in wrote:

Sprinting is a about muscle and power. Muscle and power are about training. A group's dominance indicates nothing about whether there is a genetic basis for their success. There may or may not be, but simply because their occurrence is higher means nothing.

So it's impossible to be born with a larger muscle mass than the "average" person? My roommate and I lift together all the time, and he is much stronger than I am. If we do the same training why is he stronger?

How could anyone who trains in high school under the same coach (i.e same training and workouts) ever be better than any one of their teammates if genetics doesn't play -any- role in their ability? Let's try to ignore all other contributing factors otherwise this thought experiment won't work as intended.

Concerned Citizen wrote:

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/genetics.html

What in that article supports your argument. Did you read it? It supports my argument much more than it supports yours (if at all).

I've seen maybe three people list any times for their parents.

Dad: 51.low in high school on a rectangular cinder track wearing what looked like 1 inch nails in his shoes in early 60s. Later in life mid-late 30s, he started running in the late 1970s. He ran low 17s 5k, a sub 30 once for 5 mi, low 36s 10k, 56-mid for 15k, about 61 for 10 mi iirc, 2:53 marathon. I can still remember in high school when I could finally outrun the old man. It was a big damn deal for me. Now, he's almost 70, and he's definitely more fit for his age than I am for mine.

Mom: Didn't run until she started running with dad in early-mid 1980s, so close to 40 yrs old. Well, not with him, but according to her "it was join him or divorce him!" so she had to figure out what the hell he was doing. Turned out she was a heck of an age-group runner and still is at almost 70. I don't remember all her times, but I remember when she broke 20 for a 5k she was about to explode with pride. So was my dad. It was really cool to see them both so happy over accomplishing a goal like that. It was some summer 5k in Jacksonville, and I was standing with my brother and sister near the finish line to cheer our parents in. Dad finished and ran back to cheer her on through the chute...he was going nuts. I think she was 19:52 or something like that. What makes that pretty impressive to me is she was over 40 when she did it. The family went out for a nice dinner that night to celebrate.

Archimedes wrote:

So it's impossible to be born with a larger muscle mass than the "average" person? My roommate and I lift together all the time, and he is much stronger than I am. If we do the same training why is he stronger?

How could anyone who trains in high school under the same coach (i.e same training and workouts) ever be better than any one of their teammates if genetics doesn't play -any- role in their ability? Let's try to ignore all other contributing factors otherwise this thought experiment won't work as intended.

I didn't say I was impossible for people to be born with different muscle characteristics.

You and your roommate lift together all the time. Ok. Do you lift together ALL the time. Do you eat the exact same meals. Do you have the exact same sleep schedule. Do you have the exact same activities throughout the day? Do you wear the same shoes? Do you drink the same amount of water? Did you guys have the exact same athletic background and capabilities before you started lifting together? Is this really hard for you to see?

High school? No one at all does the same training. No one starts at the exact same level as each other. Some people are actually running harder or easier than others so even within a workout they aren't gettin the same workout. No ones book bag weighs the same or is worn for the same amount of time throughout the day. Everyone walks different distances throughout he day. Everyone has a different diet and sleep habits at home. Even identical twins don't perform exactly the same and they usually have way more similar upbringing than anyone else.

Getting better is as much about training as it is recovering. This is another big reason why people perform so differently in high school and college.

Al Gardiner wrote:

Novo wrote:

Dad was a 49 second 400m runner... Mom isn't athletic

Ive ran 2:29 in the marathon at 20 years old

"I've RUN 2:29 in the marathon..."

The question was about foot speed, not mental acumen.

Dad: Sub 4:00, Sub 13:20

Mom: Not a runner

Me: Sub 4:10, Sub 14:30.

Son of a Guy wrote:

Dad: Sub 4:00, Sub 13:20

Mom: Not a runner

Me: Sub 4:10, Sub 14:30.

You have some tough family records to chase!

WHo is your dad? :-)

Al Gardiner wrote:

Novo wrote:

Dad was a 49 second 400m runner... Mom isn't athletic

Ive ran 2:29 in the marathon at 20 years old

"I've RUN 2:29 in the marathon..."

Hey you guys should race- you are evenly matched in the marathon!

Clue me in wrote:

Concerned Citizen wrote:http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/genetics.html

What in that article supports your argument. Did you read it? It supports my argument much more than it supports yours (if at all).

"For events where physique is important, such as long distance cycling, marathon running, power lifting, and body building, genetics is obviously important." I guess the author reached a different conclusion than you did.

You are either completely delusional or a troll; I will not respond to any more or your posts.

Neither of my parents ran when they were young

Mother: Ran a sub 4 hour marathon at 64

Father: More of a bicyclist, ran a 10k in 54 min at 65

Me: Ran a 2:25 marathon

Concerned Citizen wrote:

You are either completely delusional or a troll; I will not respond to any more or your posts.

You are correct, he is a troll. He is using faulty logic to aggravate people. People should not respond to him.

Concerned Citizen wrote:

Clue me in wrote:

What in that article supports your argument. Did you read it? It supports my argument much more than it supports yours (if at all).

"For events where physique is important, such as long distance cycling, marathon running, power lifting, and body building, genetics is obviously important." I guess the author reached a different conclusion than you did.

You are either completely delusional or a troll; I will not respond to any more or your posts.

No, it's quite the opposite. YOU have no reading comprehension or critical thinking abilities. That quote by itself is completely unsubstantiated and baseless. Using the word "obviously" in a scientific paper is a big red flag.

As it stands, it is solely an opinion. How do you not understand that? Does he even provide any evidence to go along with that quote? Have you ever done scientific research?

asdfe wrote:

Concerned Citizen wrote:

You are either completely delusional or a troll; I will not respond to any more or your posts.

You are correct, he is a troll. He is using faulty logic to aggravate people. People should not respond to him.

Definitely not a troll. Where exactly has my logic been faulty? My points are entirely based on facts. Yours has not been.