If everyone were forced to run for all four years in high school, what would the times be?

who knows? wrote:

If every high school freshman were randomly assigned to either the 100 or the 5K and forced to focus on only that event, what would the times be? My guesses:

100m male (all FAT times):

50th percentile: 13.0

90th percentile: 11.9

99th percentile: 10.9

100m female:

50th percentile: 14.1

90th percentile: 13.0

99th percentile: 12.0

5K male (on a rubberized track, not a cross country course):

50th percentile: 18:30

90th percentile: 17:00

99th percentile: 15:45

5K female:

50th percentile: 20:45

90th percentile: 18:30

99th percentile: 17:15

Sprints would be close to the same. The fastest football players would still be the fastest sprinters.

Mid d would see a lot more athletes hitting the current times, perhaps surpassing.

Distance would improve the most. ---Regardless what some LRCers may believe, distance running simply doesn't attract the most talented pool of athletes. At least in the US. Truth.

I ran 4:14 for the mile as a soph and 4:09 As a junior (not sure which is more eye popping) and I always firmly believed and still to this day believe there were random kids on campus who could kick my butt if they didn’t join gangs or didn’t play soccer and put the effort into running distance.

I don’t have enough information to judge for all of America but one high school in my city requires sport participation and you can definitely tell the real athletes who are doing it for passion/love of the sport/competitive spirit versus the students who are simply trying to fulfill the requirement. Running is mental, and it’s impossible to do well without the desire to succeed.

Lots of good runners are already in other sports and don’t care about running, so they wouldn’t try very hard.

Your times are way too fast. Median for boys 5k will be closer to 24 to 25 minutes... at best.

LR posters are tone deaf when it comes to estimating the potential of your average human. Most people dont have the genetics or drive and will never sniff a sub 20 5k. You have no idea how much your genetics factor in to make you people good runners compared everyone else.

And yes, an 18 minute 5k is unusual and good. That would be the 90th to 99th percentile.

Interestingly, England had compulsory cross-country for years. They dropped it in (I think) the 80's and look at them now.

For us- we would see more, faster runners and we would have a much healthier population.

Seriously, I would like to see Phys Ed class composed of more running/jogging/walking and plyos, yoga type stuff.

My daughter was often given the option to participate in PE or run. She used to run 4 miles on the track when the other kids were playing football or baseball, horseshoes, etc- games that don't contribute to fitness.

Lots of good runners are already in other sports and don’t care about running, so they wouldn’t try very hard.

And, in my school we had an all league soccer player in 9th grade switch to XC and make Nike Nationals as a senior and run sub 4:10 in the mile.

100m male:

50th percentile: 14.0

90th percentile: 12.0

HS record: 9.98

5K male:

50th percentile: 22:30

90th percentile: 17:00

HS record: 13:20

Unmotivated kids who ran only because they were forced to would drag down the median time by a lot.

We have to remember that these times are for seniors only, but I still don't see the middle senior on my team running something like 18:30. We had a lot of guys who ran all four years but just didn't focus on the sport and then plenty of people who did care, but just couldn't get that fast. You're also making a silly assumption that people who never might have played on a sports team are going to suddenly perform according to a normal statistic because they joined a sport, but the reality is they are probably going to be skewed far worse because sports inclined people are already the people doing sports and running on teams. I think the numbers will be way worse than the OP thinks, but the OP is correct that many people would be discovered who might not have otherwise been. Only a fraction of people run for their sport in high school.

My school didn't have a football team and cross country was actually the largest sport by participation, but we were an anomaly.

who knows? wrote:

If every high school freshman were randomly assigned to either the 100 or the 5K and forced to focus on only that event, what would the times be?

The median times are going to be ugly. Imagine a buff, fast-twitch football type dude being forced to train for the 5K and dreading every run longer than a quarter mile. I'll be surprised if he breaks 24. The skinny, uncoordinated guy might be better in the 100 than the football guy is in the 5K, though. 99th percentile would be faster than today since you'll find previously undiscovered talent. With that said:

100 men:

Median - 14 flat

99th percentile - 11 flat

5K men:

Median - 23:00

99th percentile - 15:00

Women's times will be about 12% slower.

Shoebacca wrote:

My school didn't have a football team and cross country was actually the largest sport by participation, but we were an anomaly.

What were the median 5k times at your school?

Low end of the spectrum (1st thru 50th percentile) would be what improves for the distance events the most. The kids who normally wouldn't be doing anything but now are forced to actually move and log miles. They would see an improvement from terribly bad/slow (25+ or DNF for 5k) to just plain bad and slow (actually finishing or going from 30min to 22min, stuff like that). So the 50th, 90th, 99th that you have below wouldn't change much...

Remember seeing that slogan on runner's T-shirts-"Our sport is your sport's punishment." We runners love our sport. Many others, the majority, hate running. I don't think that you can "make" someone run. If the passion is not there or appears then running can be a very cruel sport, especially the hard workouts that one needs to achieve success. Some runners start off not liking the sport at all and then grow to love it. They might not like training, but they may love to race. Mandatory track is not the answer!

Calling Alan wrote:

Your times are way too fast. Median for boys 5k will be closer to 24 to 25 minutes... at best.

LR posters are tone deaf when it comes to estimating the potential of your average human. Most people dont have the genetics or drive and will never sniff a sub 20 5k. You have no idea how much your genetics factor in to make you people good runners compared everyone else.

And yes, an 18 minute 5k is unusual and good. That would be the 90th to 99th percentile.

This 100%. I took 10 years off running from junior year in high school until I was 28 years old. During that 11 years I smoked a pack a day, smoke weed daily and drank lots of beer and did no exercise. 4 months after I started running again and quit smoking I ran 18:05 5k 2 months later a 17:10 5k a year later 16:06 5k.

I know plenty of guys who have been running for years and can't get under 18 minutes, and these are guys who love to run.

Forcing kids to run would result in piss poor times, but motivating them to run would yield much better results. Promise them a fully paid off house and a million bucks upon graduation if they run fast, and the median times would be in the low 12s for the 100 and low 17s for the 5k. The 99th percentile would be something like 10.7 and 14:30.

Soulless wrote:

Forcing kids to run would result in piss poor times, but motivating them to run would yield much better results. Promise them a fully paid off house and a million bucks upon graduation if they run fast, and the median times would be in the low 12s for the 100 and low 17s for the 5k. The 99th percentile would be something like 10.7 and 14:30.

You can't teach speed. I couldn't have broken 12.5 in HS even if the reward for doing so was a mansion and free hookers for the rest of my life.

The 5K, on the other hand, is a lot more trainable. Do consistent high mileage, clean up your diet, turn on that altitude tent, and grit out those last few laps on your intervals and races.

There are tons of sprinters who can run within 20% of the 100m WR with no training. There are few, if any, distance runners who can do the same for the 5K WR.

Everyone is focused on the athletes, but what about the coaches? Will the distance guys have enough mileage, or will they just be running intervals every day of the week? How many of the sprinters' coaches will know much about sprinting form and block starts?

And while we're on that, what about the facilities? Will kids have access to an indoor track in winter, or will their workouts consist of shoveling snow from lane 1? Will the sprinters have to compete with the football players for access to the weight room?

In an ideal world, the median sprinter will be running 12 flat, and the median distance runner will be running in the high 16s. But realistically, the times will be something like 13.3 for the 100 and 19:30 for the 5K.

Coach J46 wrote:

Mandatory track is not the answer!

It is the answer to the nation's obesity problem. For every pound that you're overweight, you have to run 1 mile a week. Exemptions will be given if your body fat percentage is below 12 percent.

America will get the 5k WR again within a decade of implementing this program. Life expectancy will soar to 85.

100m male

25 - 16.0

50 - 14.5

75 - 13.0

99 - 12.0

5k male

25 - 24:00

50 - 20:45

75 - 18:30

99 - 16:59

100m female

25 - 17.5

50 - 15.5

75 - 13.5

99 - 12.7

5k female

25 - 26:00

50 - 23:00

75 - 20:30

99 - 18:30