What would the world records be without any training?

10.1x/20.x in the srpints with no training whatsoever? Delusional. You are a retard.

Donovan Bailey played basketball before track and still only managed a 11.3x in his first year (as part time track athlete) if I remember correctly. Id' say if Bolt had been a couch potato all his life, as a regular fatty maybe could run 10.9x/22.5x but probably slower.

Humm... Bolt with no training whatsoever... ever, a little overweight, sedentary lifestyle all his life. Lets say he was just 15% slower (that's huge), that would be close to 1,5 seconds slower putting him around 11 flat but I think he would be much slower then just 15%. I think he would run something like 11.5 but proly slower.

OP you mention that the subject would start training when trying to break the "WR", for how long? He would run faster with some training.

you guys on Letsrun have no perception of sprint talent

Bolt running 11.5 off no training? He was running that time at 13 years old if not younger, and yes off no real sprint training.

Ok, i have no idea of sprinting, just put some times out there.

sprinter guy wrote:

you guys on Letsrun have no perception of sprint talent

Bolt running 11.5 off no training? He was running that time at 13 years old if not younger, and yes off no real sprint training.

O rly? Appart from being sprinting and running his whole life prior to that point, yes no "real" training. Dont you think an active kid Bolt could outrun a fat couch-potato Bolt? Please, 13 old kids can outrun pretty much any sedentary adult. Active kid Bolt would kill sedentary fat Bolt in a race.

Lets sprint wrote:

sprinter guy wrote:

you guys on Letsrun have no perception of sprint talent

Bolt running 11.5 off no training? He was running that time at 13 years old if not younger, and yes off no real sprint training.

O rly? Appart from being sprinting and running his whole life prior to that point, yes no "real" training. Dont you think an active kid Bolt could outrun a fat couch-potato Bolt? Please, 13 old kids can outrun pretty much any sedentary adult. Active kid Bolt would kill sedentary fat Bolt in a race.

this thread makes no sense. we are assuming that our no-training-WR holders have not ran or played a sport recreationally a day in their lives prior to setting their WR?

I doubt Bolt was doing 300 intervals and weight sessions as a kid

No way wrote:

There is absolutely no way anyone can run a 6:00 mile off of nothing. No way.

When people say 'nothing' they mean that they've played sports for years, played tag for years, played kick-the-can for years, chased after girls, played football on Thanksgiving, etc... That's all interval training whether people realize it or not.

True. If you want to find people with no training watch the movie Wall-E. Now how fast could those people run... They couldn't. So the record list would look like this with NO training.

100m DNF

200m DNF

400m DNF

...

Marathon DNF

tmp wrote:

Mumbojumbo wrote:

*See record book from 1905*

Most people weren't sedentary in 1905. The record holders at that time may not have been training much, but it still counts as training. Here's Walter George's training (obtained from Noakes's Lore of Running):

By 1882, George ran every morning and afternoon, alternating slow runs of 1 to 2 miles with faster runs of 400 to 1,200 yards and some sprinting. He finished all his long runs with a sustained burst of fast running, and he included one 100-up exercise each day plus occasional walks.

True but we are talking world records today. I'm sure someone not running would have matched the world records of 1905 since training theory was very young.

There is actually a 5000-meter world record list that has a Frenchman named George Touquet-Daunis running a 16:34 in 1897. I assume he did SOME actual training, so perhaps we're wrong in assuming anyway would run any faster than that based on nothing.

tmp wrote:

What would the world records be if everyone in the world had the same lifestyle as a typical sedentary American with an office job? Assume that each individual was sedentary since birth and only became vigorously active when he tries to break the record. Only one attempt per person is allowed for each event. If an event is attempted, that person must remain sedentary for at least another year before trying a different event.

My guesses:

100 - 11.4

400 - 55

mile - 4:53

5K - 16:15

marathon - 2:59

Sigh. I agree with Hank Moody at the end of page 1. Let's bring a modicum of order to this discussion.

You can probably go back to the 1800s for a decent guess. And how about this assumption, a person with an active lifestyle, but no organized sports background. Also assume decent nutrition, closer to today's standards.

100 - 10.6

400 - 49

mile - 4:16 (you have to believe that a Nandi speaking tribesman chasing livestock out on the savanna for 15 or 20 years, say from age 8 on), with an occassional pick up soccer match would have the endurance and speed to run 64 secs for 4 laps.

5K - sub 15 (see above)

marathon - 2:40 (this might be harder to acheive, would probably be a hunter-gatherer of some type or a military scout)

Has anyone here ever gotten to a decent fitness level in their twenties and taken two years off of training and tried to run anything?

It's amazing how much you lose.

Now imagine never doing any training to see what you could do.

I ran 14:55 for a 5K in my mid twenties.

After taking a break for a year or so and then doing a bit of training for a few months, I ran 16:30.

I don't think I could have ever broken 20 minutes if all I did was be active without any distance runs, tempo runs or any intervals ever.

In fact I ran a race in 20 flat when I was thirty. Not all out, but I still had a background to draw on.

Tremendous variation in how much fitness a person can hang onto after taking time off.

It took numerous multi year breaks during my 20s and didn't slip at all in shorter distances. In fact I got faster at 600-800 between 23-25 despite not training in that period, although I was far from sedentary.

I ran for one week when I was 25 and set an 800m PB.

You must have had a lot more talent than me to not need training.

I ran 1:49 for 800m with training but could not touch that with two years off.

You got faster in the 800 with years off. Good job!

SMJO wrote:

Tremendous variation in how much fitness a person can hang onto after taking time off.

It took numerous multi year breaks during my 20s and didn't slip at all in shorter distances. In fact I got faster at 600-800 between 23-25 despite not training in that period, although I was far from sedentary.

I ran for one week when I was 25 and set an 800m PB.

SMJO could you please answer my question. Why do doctors require equipment to see genes, but you can do it with your bare eyes?

* wrote:

You must have had a lot more talent than me to not need training.

I ran 1:49 for 800m with training but could not touch that with two years off.

You got faster in the 800 with years off. Good job!

Not really. I am far slower than you and the years off freshened my dead legs from years of relative plodding.

I don't make huge amounts of progress with training but what I do sticks and doesn't seem to fade much at all with lay-offs.

I only got better with time off in those years where the body is maturing and getting stronger even without specific training. Roughly up to the age of 25 or so.

Even after not running from 25-28 I ran PB's in my first year back although I had several months of training before racing.

My family has late maturing genetics.

The Rocket. wrote:

If you want to find people with no training watch the movie Wall-E. Now how fast could those people run... They couldn't. So the record list would look like this with NO training.

100m DNF

200m DNF

400m DNF

...

Marathon DNF

They may not be able to run, but someone should be able to walk a 100 without training. Even a marathon can be completed with no training given enough time (a month?)

I dont think a "sedentary lifestyle" is the correct wording. I think the better question is, "how fast would world record times be without training or past experience with other sports".

I think they'd be pretty damn slow. The only time people would ever run is if they were trying to catch a bus, running from danger, etc. So basically, the first time anyone would ever run would be in their 'world record attempt'.

100m: 14

200m: 30

400m: 70

800m: 2:40

1600m: 6:40

5000m: 18:30

marathon: impossible. people would pass out before finish line.

I grew up being very active playing baseball, gym, recess,etc. From the time I was 4 until the time I was 15, I ate healthy and was highly active. At age 15 off no training I ran 20:40 5k. I ran until senior year in college and ended college with prs around 1:50,4:10 and 15:30. Then I took 3-4 years off for exception of a 10 min run here and there and stopped exercising completely and put on just under 50 pounds of fat. I did what the "normal" american does and worked 9-5 desk job and ate unhealthy. I could barely maintain 8 min pace for a 5k when I first started running. It took me 12-16 weeks off 20-40 mile weeks just to break 19, granted I was running it with an extra 20 pounds!!! What does "No Training" mean? Unstructured training is still training and fit is still fit regardless of whether it took a structured training regime to get to that point. It also depends on culture. For me 10 years of unstructured training = 20 min 5k. 4 years of being a "normal average" american = 24:00 min 5k. Imagine where I would be if I didn't have a active lifestyle as an adolescent...30? 35 min 5k? Certain cultures breed better athletes because they provide a more wholesome and healthy environment. Africans are so successful because they have a culture that creates a "structure" that trains them to excel in the distances. People in many ways are like plants. Certain plants thrive in certain environments and some dont. The culture or environment that we grow up in is either productive or destructive to certain things/facets of life. World records would differ based on the circumstances or factors that played into it. I can imagine a indian hunter or different people groups that lived in dwelled throughout history in different socio-economical-environmental circumstances. Those 3 factors would highly dictate how fast or slow WR would be. Having said all this I would not be surprised to see fast sprinting / distance records off of no "structured" training. And I will go as far as saying that perhaps even "un structured and even spontaneous" training could under the right circumstances BE more beneficial and produce faster athletes.