Which is easier to increase, strength or endurance?

No one can only run 1 mile. He has a pacing issue.

jdkdkk wrote:

No one can only run 1 mile. He has a pacing issue.

Use can use whatever distance you like.

subfive wrote:

Two men were randomly selected from a large group of 25 yo men who all weigh 170 lbs and are 70" tall and have no history of working out. Man A will try to improve his benchpress lift. Man B will try to increase the distance he can run.

After one month which man will show the greatest improvement as a percentage of their initial performance?

Let's say man A could only benchpress 115 lbs and man B could only run 1 mile.

In these test would the increase in lbs represent an increase in strength and will the increase in distance represent an increase in endurance? Are these test equally valid test for strength and endurance?

Obviously, using your definitions, it's far easier to increase endurance than strength and far more of an increase in endurance than strength is possible.

Your average completely untrained man with the potential to become a world-class marathoner will probably not be able to run one mile under 4:55 the 1st time out; with training he can increase his endurance by over 2600%. The average man with the ability to squat 1000lbs+ may well be able to squat 300-400lbs (or more) on his first attempt, but training will only allow him to improve by 200-350% or so...

subfive wrote:

Two men were randomly selected from a large group of 25 yo men who all weigh 170 lbs and are 70" tall and have no history of working out. Man A will try to improve his benchpress lift. Man B will try to increase the distance he can run in 12 minutes.

After one month which man will show the greatest improvement as a percentage of their initial performance?

Let's say man A could only benchpress 115 lbs and man B could only run 1 mile in 12 minutes.

In these test would the increase in lbs represent an increase in strength and will the increase in distance represent an increase in endurance? Are these test equally valid test for strength and endurance?

/fixed

115 increase to 215? Two 45lb plates in a month?

1 mile increase to 1.5 miles? 12 minute pace to 8 minute pace?

% increase would be .78 (bench) to .50 (run)

Bench press wins in one month.

sloinnorcal wrote:

115 increase to 215? Two 45lb plates in a month?

1 mile increase to 1.5 miles? 12 minute pace to 8 minute pace?

% increase would be .78 (bench) to .50 (run)

Bench press wins in one month.

That is suppose to be 205lb.

I see that you changed my original post by adding a time limit of 12 minutes for the run. I agree that is a better way to test endurance. It's more comparible to the benchpress test.

You'll get a more valid measure of endurance. Few if anyone could double their performance in either test.

I think the bench press guy will improve more than the guy doing a 12 minute run. If it were a 30 minute run or 60 minute, the running guy might improve more because endurance is exponentially more important. When you run more, not only can you run a mile faster, but you can run 3 miles at a closer pace to your mile time.

Interesting question but change the start point to your average competitive runner who reads this stuff.

LetsRunner is a 17 minute 5k guy who has been running for 4 years. He can run a 10k in 35, a mile in 5 flat and a quarter in 58.46 He runs 40mpw. He does his Jack Daniels training using a vDot of 60.

So what is ezr for LetsRunner improving to a 16 flat 5k or a 55 flat 400 ?

Would added endurance training get him to 16 ? Would this also lower his 400 ?

Could LetsRunner add more short hill repeats and get to 55 flat? Would this also lower his 5k?

btw I have no idea;)