Was his name Paul McMullen?
Was his name Paul McMullen?
Some people have natural talent.
A guy in my office who is about 5'10-5'11 and was then 45 years old and around 195-200 pounds (I think he's heavier now) ran a 1:13 ten mile a couple years back. He probably looked about the same as your guy -- a gut but not obese.
I went to school with a guy who is no more than 5' 10" he weighed 125 when we ran in HS. He now weighs more like 230 and like your guy is not all muscle. He would describe himself like your guy, he runs a couple miles a couple times a week. He ran into another guy we ran with who is more like 5' 8" who is also over 200 pounds but he claims he hasn't run a step since HS but his job is not behind a desk. Like you they ended up at a track running a mile. They both ran 6:1X even though running 40 miles per week and only weighing 155 at 5' 6" I can't break 5:40. We are all in our 50s.
My brother-in-law did this at work. He was a stud in high school (his dad was a college football player).. he was all-state in the 800/1600/XC. Went to college, but partied too hard and had a propensity to gain weight and managed a 1:55. He was probably 5'11, 165lbs in high school, GQ model. This is a guy that ran 1:55/4:20 as a 17-year old.
Anyway, now he's 5'11 225 lbs and goes up to 240lbs, is an exec making $300k right near 40, he got challenged he couldn't run under 2:30 for 800m by an upstart at work. I seriously doubted he could do it since he wasn't running but he is a hell of an athlete. Long story short, he runs 2:18.6, almost died, but it was pretty amazing. He was seriously so red in the face and so in pain, but he pushed himself pretty awesome.
Kudos to big guys everywhere with talent.
On the flip side, there are plenty of former "talents" who are barely able to run when they let themselves go a bit. As an example, a guy I ran with in high school was about 6'-2", 140lb, ran 9:38 for 3200, now at 47 weighs about 220lb, said he did a little running for a month or so and jumped into a 5K and could only run 24:xx.
I did the same thing with a guy I used to work for. He was all American defensive back in the SWAC and fancied himself to be the gifted athlete. He was early 40s at the time and would go to the gym now and then and run a few miles on the weekend. We did the mile challenge. He ran 6:40something. I thought he was going to go into cardiac arrest after the run. He was limping at work the next day. I would say most males in their mid 40s who have some athletic talent and do some exercise can run a mile under 7 min in an all out effort. 6:17 is above average and shows real running talent. But any sedentary middle age guy who is 30-40 lbs overweight would probably run a mile in somewhere between 8:XX and DNF.
Yes!!! Yay for old fat white guys!!
Lord knows, they need the love
I used his mile in the McMilllan race converter to get 21:49 for this guys 5K equivalent.
Then used the weight /age graded calculator to get his open 5k equivalent of
17:21. So he is the equivalent of a 25 year old slim male running that on low but quality miles. Not a big deal.
http://www.running2win.com/calculator/WeightAgeGradingCalculator.asp
Short track.
There was a case of a WA state athlete 20 years ago, who ran one of the top three times in the country for the 1600 (well under 4:10), got injured his first season in college, dropped and never came back. The consensus of those that saw him a few years later was that he put on close to 100 lbs, none of it muscle. I'll bet he could still waddle out a time like that.
Of course there's the old Henry Rono story of being 20 lbs overweight, heavy drinker, and still winning races less than 10 seconds off his world record in the 5000.
I'm 44, used to run - not anymore. I walk a few times a week, and very rarely lace up my trainers for anything faster. 25 years ago I ran 4:24/14:45. These days I weigh 200# and sport a shapely 'dad bod', complete with a small "belly". I still can (and have) run a sub 6 mile, gut and all. I'm not surprised at his 6:17. Probably more 'old fat' guys that can manage that than you think.
Honestly not that hard if he runs even a little bit, even with totally sub optimal training.
When I was in my 20s, I took an entire YEAR off of exercise. I got my mile time down to 6:40 by running ONE MILE A WEEK for like four weeks. Literally, the only exercise I did was go run a 1 mile time trial once a week, for about a month.
I've always had a theory that the first day running is always the easiest because your body is fresh and able to run well. My evidence that every time I've been injured for extended periods of time 6 weeks+ I am able to come back the first day fully healthy and blast the run faster than I can run normally. My injury schedule consists of McDonald's and zero cross training.
Maybe this is just evidence that natural talent beats hard work?
Old not fat wrote:
Drop him down to 170 and he runs around 5:17; then put him into a decent training program and maybe he gets 4:30. Decent talent but not off the charts.
At 38 I was running maybe 10 miles/week, but not overweight. Ran 5:16 right off the bat by myself. It took four more years to get down to 4:40. Never improved on that. At 44 I ran 2:05 for 800, marginally better. At least at 60 I can still break 6:00.
5:17 at 38 is pretty damn good! The guy with the "belly" did a great run at 6:17! Very impressive and not that easy.
6:17 is probably quite slow compared to what he ran in college if he was as good as he says he was. He probably has good genetics, strength, and endurance even if he does look out of shape. A few years ago I saw a guy who appeared to be maybe in his late 40s and had a belly run under 19 min for a 5k - I couldn't believe it as he certainly didn't look fit to me
Am I the only one who's impressed? Clearly he has some talent, and if he shed 30-50 lbs in a safe and gradual way that included a healthy diet with lots of high mileage intermixed with speed work, I would venture to say he would be quite good.
If I were you, I would pep talk and encourage your friend to take up running more seriously. Lose the gut, lift weights, run high mileage, do track speed work.
Next time, test his sprints to have a fuller picture of his abilities.
A friend of mine is 47 and a former Cat 1 cyclist. Huge aerobic engine and pain tolerance, but as of last winter had a definite beer gut. He definitely had a gut when he ran 3:47 a year ago for a slow-course marathon. I started coaching him, and he was running three times/week, 25 miles, plus bike commute of about 50 miles/week. . He still had a gut when he entered a local urban 5K and beat 8000 runners to get third overall in high-18's. It was hilarious seeing the local skinny runner dudes coming up to him "Who the hell are you??" By summer he had slimmed down and ran 5:15 for a mile.
I ran a 20:42 5k w/ a belly lol
What is the point of the thread?
I guess it's this: The writer has contempt for people who run slow. I guess 'cause he is such a superior human being?