Almost all men in their prime can run sub 20 5k, sub 60 400m, and sub 5 min mile

So that I'm not responsible for any older people injuring themselves, I should direct you to Dr. Bookspan's work on proper posture, balance, foot/knee alignment, etc. to prevent injury when doing such speed work. She shows how to ensure all the tendons in your body are properly stretched through proper body alignment in order to prevent common injuries. Pretty much all her advice is available on her website if you look her up.

Sprinting fast is like ice skating, ballet, throwing a football over 60 yards, hitting 90 mph pitching in baseball and throwing a baseball 90 mph. Skills which start from a very young age. Sprinting versus distance running requires brute strength and neuromuscular coordination. Sprinting has to start before high school. I am sure in an average high school in US with 1500 students, twenty-five to fifty are capable of sub-60 400m. That's with long sprint training while in high school. As soon as you mention muscle-twitch fibers, brojos are going to jump in and start quoting Epstein, as if Epstein is a MD or scientist.

EasternWash wrote:

He said CAN not will. I also believe that most men have the capacity to hit those times. The fact is most never will because they are weak, lack the desire, and have to many excuses.

^Bingo, people need to learn how to read. And I agree with you. I have no special genetics, was never the fastest kid in my school. But after 2 years of hard work I ran a 51s 400m in HS. People don't understand what HARD WORK is. If somethings not burning after your workout your not working hard enough.

D2sprinter wrote:

EasternWash wrote:

He said CAN not will. I also believe that most men have the capacity to hit those times. The fact is most never will because they are weak, lack the desire, and have to many excuses.

^Bingo, people need to learn how to read. And I agree with you. I have no special genetics, was never the fastest kid in my school. But after 2 years of hard work I ran a 51s 400m in HS. People don't understand what HARD WORK is. If somethings not burning after your workout your not working hard enough.

Exactly. I don't believe genetics play as big of a role as many people like to claim when they struggle to run fast. People are so adverse to intense workouts where you feel like your lungs are on fire, your heart is jumping from your chest, nausea, and sore legs for the next day or two... most people are not fit and are weak and they have to go through this for months to build the muscle and cardio strength required. If you don't have speed, it really hurts to build that speed. You run for your life every single workout and when you feel like you are ready to die, you add more intervals.

I think all 3 times are unrealistic for a lot of men, regardless of whether they are in their prime. Quite simply because they don't have the natural ability/talent to run at that speed. I would agree that a lot could get closer than people would imagine through hard work and there are also a lot of people out there who have never been close to their peak.

I would predict that if everyone had to train regularly and give up unhealthy food and alcohol etc then almost all men in their prime would be around:

Sub 24 - 5K

Sub 66 - 400m

Sub 5:40 - Mile

Obviously that would require them to be running 4 or 5 times a week, also doing training specific to the above 3 races and eating/drinking the right things for them to reach their 'peak.'

The 400m involves a lot of pain if running flat out and most people just wouldn't be able to handle that type of stress both physically and mentally and a lot wouldn't have the speed anyway.

The sub 5 minute mile seems the most optimistic to me though. Whilst not that talented compared to many frequent runners, I still train regularly and can run 55 secs 400, low 19 for 5K and in my 1st full year of fairly regular track training was only around the 5 minute mark for the mile. Again the stress and fatigue aspect of the race would be too much for most people to handle.

sub 5 mile is the hardest, 5k sub 20 the easiest because this is achievable more easily with lots of training even in one's 50s.

I was never fast (about 13.0 for the 100) but ran 59 when I was 15 years old after about 3 years of not too intense training.

I would also have been able to go sub 20 (ran 10:40 for 3k) but I barely managed sub 5 for the 1500 and would have needed more systematic training and probably another year to go sub 5 for the mile (or ca. 4:38 for 1500). (I quit at 16 for various reasons and only hobbyjogged afterwards.) But a 14-15 year old boy while having the advantage of slight build is not a man in his prime. A fit 18 year old with normal weight should be able do do all three after several years of training. But the 5 min mile is the hardest because it requires more specific training.

made all the op times easy. no track at school no coach either. just did it.

Sub 20 is doable by almost everyone. The only ones who would have trouble will be those who're slow and extremely injury prone.

Sub 60 is doable by the median guy, but that means that 50% won't be able to do it.

Sub 5 is out of reach by almost everyone. Even most of those who've done both the sub 60 and the sub 20 wouldn't be able to get it.

No they can’t. End of story.

These times are blazing fast and untouched to at least 50% of men. Sub 20 seems the easiest so I’d say 75% of men could do that.

Agreed with those who say that sub 5 is the hardest. I've done sub 20 and sub 60 off of half assed training (a few weeks of 15 MPW), but still couldn't break 5 despite years of 40+ MPW, intervals, and good nutrition and sleep.

You need to be able to run about 13.5 in a 100m sprint to run sub 60, believe it or not, this kind of speed this is out the question for a lot of men. I have seen some sporty fit guys struggle to get under 14/15 seconds despite having an active life and being healthy. However, for the men with enough natural speed to break 60 then yes, this time should not be too hard providing you build up the appropriate level lf endurance to do it. Sub 60 is achievable for 20% of men, that is 1 in 5 and still quite a lot. But sorry, most aren’t getting close. 60 seconds is damn fast for someone who isn’t a gifted sprinter, which most aren’t.

5 flat is rare and you will probably need to run both 60/400 and 20/5k in order to make this happen. Mile time is most dependant on vo2 max than the other two benchmarks (you can calculate vo2 max by calculating your maximum power output effort for 6-10 minutes). Running all out for 5 minutes is going to be close/slightly above vo2 max. In order to run a 5 minute mile your vo2 max needs to be around the 56-58 ml/kg range otherwise you just will not have the level of aerobic power needed to run that fast for that long. Science-backed studies show that the average male is around 38-44 ml/kg and that the average benchmark for improvement in vo2 max plateaus at around 15-20% WITH optimal training. A 20% improvement in the median guy (41 ml/kg) would be 49.2 ml/kg fully trained, that is good for a mile around the region of 5:40 and 6:20 so as you can see, absolutely nowhere near sub 5. The study said the outliers improved by 25% so you take the high end of average untrained guys (the ones with more talent) and their untrained max is 44 ml/kg, with a 25% improvement this guy is now able to take in 54 ml of oxygen per kg... STILL not fast enough for sub 5 and would probably be good for around a 5:15, now maybe if this guy had exceptional speed for his level then maybe, just maybe he could sneak under 5 but that would require him to be more sprint based anyway. Based on all of this, I say only about 3-5% of the general male population are breaking 5 if their lives depended on it, even near-the-cream-of-the-crop naturally athletic guys cherry picked from the general population would struggle with this.

And as for sub 20, I would say this is achievable for 50% of males. By far the easiest of the three, by far. Looking at the vo2 max figures, Mr. median would top out at around a 6 minute mile FULLY trained (give or take 30 seconds). This is *just about* fast enough to sneak under 20 minutes for the 5k with some endurance training. Most of the fit males I know on sports teams, in the army, etc can probably run between 21 or 24 minutes for a 5k - or at least that’s where I’d put them. I don’t believe anybody is going to be optimally trained aerobic-wise unless they actually train for a distance, give these guys about a year of hard aerobic training with a little mileage and they would break 20. The 50% of the male population who couldn’t physically break 20 due to vo2 max being too low to do so (and yes, vo2 is is pretty musch the decided in success from 1500 to 5k) then I am guessing the below average males would top out somwhere in the 21-25 minute range.

By “sprinter numbers”, are you talking swim sprinter? Because there really aren’t track “sprinter numbers” for weights. Some guys are total beasts, others barely anything in the weight room.

What interests me is the waterpolo. Toughest sport/athletes in the world, even more so than hockey and even rugby. Imagine rugby with the real risk of death through drowning. Impressive that you were able to hold your own as a swimmer, often swimmers get destroyed. Don’t know what waterpolo level you were at, but I would have guessed you were a 50/100 breast guy, not free.

I was asked to fill in for someone once during a “friendly” relatively-high-level waterpolo match because I was built and could sprint swom decently. Within 1 minute I got into a real fight. Some guy was trying to drown me after kicking me in the nuts hard. While fighting just to get to the surface because he was holding me under and I was out of breath, I grabbed his package and pulled my way up. When I broke the surface he cold-cocked me but it glanced off so I punched back and broke his nose before hauling myself to the wall.

When I was asked wtf I was doing, I explained the situation...and was told that it was just normal waterpolo that I was claiming was out of line. M-F’er. I have played tough rugby and hockey, but have never been in fear for my very life. Are you kidding me? Refs have to keep a close eye on stuff, but underwater shzt happens all the time.

It would help if I wasn’t negatively buoyant, which is partly why waterpolo guys carry some extra lbs...but holy crap. Hats off to you

Sub 20, maybe a good 60% (majority) could.

Less than 10% break 60 and 5.

99% will never run any of these times in their life.

No, no, and no.

I would say that most men could maybe get down to 7:00/mile for a 5k. 20:00-22:00 off of some training. I think you need some mileage and some workouts unless you're talented from the start. If you're not a runner/out of shape, you might 5k at 8:00 pace and can get down to sub-20 after a couple years and then keep progressing after that but it's not just a roll out of bed kind of thing. I agree to some extent that almost everyone *could* do it but it requires some time/energy/effort for most.

I don't even know if I can break 60. I came into running at the longer distances and can run 1:15/2:40. I didn't get introduced to running through the 400/800/mile. I think I've run maybe a 64 at the end of a workout. Probably could go 59 but that one seems less doable. Sub-5 is in the same conversation. Feel like those two are way different from sub-20. A sub-5 means 17:xx for 5k. Sub-60 means sub-2:10 800, 4:30s mile, 16-flat 5k or better. That's getting into the conversation of being a college runner which no not everyone can do in their prime. Not everyone could just get to those times.

Taking out all the repetition, you could have said all that in one sentence. I hope you don’t write for a living.

lmao letsrun wrote:

These times are not fast at all. Humans evolved to run. If there are elite athletes running sub 5 for 26.2 miles, then it would be fair to say most males' quickest mile would be one measly sub 5. I find it difficult to believe somebody can be so genetically inferior as not manage that. Sub 60 is not that fast either. Talent doesn't start playing a part until the low 50s.

I know 90% of you are about to type "I'm in my late 40s and have not managed a sub 5 or sub 60 min 5k after 10 years of hobby jogging!"

Yeah.

Everybody thinks to the 5k or 400m time...what about the sub 60 minute 10 mile..

A race time I am beyond intrigued by, probably more than sub 3..but that's just me..

We have 50 guys on the xc team. We have a 15 year streak of making it to state and have 3 championships during that period. Yet aftér having guys show up 6 days a week fir summer runs, sone guys never get close to 20 minutes and only about 30% of the guys ever break 5 minutes during track. These are not a random 50 guys chosen out of the 750 guys in the HS. So I would say that less than 10% of the population could break 5 minutes regardless of the amount of training.

Best I got was 5:03 wrote:

Agreed with those who say that sub 5 is the hardest. I've done sub 20 and sub 60 off of half assed training (a few weeks of 15 MPW), but still couldn't break 5 despite years of 40+ MPW, intervals, and good nutrition and sleep.

I've also topped out at 5:03, but can fairly routinely break 20 and 60 just in the middle of my regular running schedule (also about 40mpw). I live around 7000 ft, so maybe at sea level I could break 5, but in reality that's just me being optimistic. Count 3 seconds at that speed and that's some distance to make up. I don't really know. Although I've never specifically trained for the mile, but I'm not specifically training for the 400 or 5k either. Those benchmarks OP left seem disproportional.