Cathy loves to run 13 wrote:
To run a sub 3 mile you'd have to run each lap under a minute. Well 45 seconds actually. I think if kids start training from a very young age then it could be achievable.
The 400 WR is 41 so it is possible but you need lots and lots of training
You are most definitely the most annoyong troll on here. Wouldn’t surprise me if this is Jamin, I don’t know any other poster with the capacity to be this annoying. ?
HubyJugy wrote:
Worst case scenario: Let’s say someone (who is in shape) has no running talent. No talent as in a very low natural vo2 max, low lactate threshold and poor speed. Also, poor trainablity/adaptability to training.But let’s say they are very motivated and very durable so they don’t get injured, what times could they run (800, 1600, 3200, 5k, etc) with 4 years of consistent, smart and hard training?
In my opinion, someone with no talent who works hard can get down to 4:40 maybe 4:30 for the mile and 16:20ish for the 3 mile.
I think you are massively over-rating what "no talent" would translate to. I wasn't a superstar, but was able to win my area x-country, and to run for the county (English equivalent of state) as a high-schooler. That was with less than optimal training. In my teens, I would be in the top third in a national x-country championship.
So, I'm going to suggest that although light-years from elite, I had a pretty reasonably degree of natural talent - at that stage pretty undeveloped. I carried on for training and racing from then until now. I wasn't a high-mileage runner, but did train with a running club (in England until I moved to the US in my late 30s) and trained regularly and hard, with plenty of opportunity for competition.
With that, I got down to 4:20 for a mile - either side I was 1:57.5 for 800m and 8:45 for 3000m - so that was about right.
My point is, if I was lucky enough to be a reasonable high-school runner and win area races in a pretty much untrained state, and ended up with a 4:20 mile, the I think that 4:30 for some one with all those negatives you mention is going to be totally impossible. The "no speed" alone is going to rule them out of the kind of 400/800m speed needed to run a 4:30 mile. That's especially so, as you've said that they have poor adaptability to training, so the four years of consistent, smart and hard training isn't going to improve them, so they are stuck with the basic speed.
Within most of your limitations, the best chance of respectability would a guy who had a ton of slow twitch going long.
I think that your original guy is going to be lucky to break 6 minutes for a mile, which I think is still quicker than asked for in fitness tests for police or most military.
No running talent = incapable of running a single step. Anyone reaching that threshold (able to run a single step) has some running talent and it is just a question of how much.
I'd say I probably have only a minimal amount of talent and am currently working pretty hard to get a 70% age group rating at age 56 - going by that standard that would equate to somewhere in the 18's for a 5K.
This post was removed.
Average men, healthy weight and training in their prime for a few years would get 5;20/19:30 with hard work. The corresponding measure for women would be about 6:40/23:45.
Am I the only one being realistic here? wrote:
Average men, healthy weight and training in their prime for a few years would get 5;20/19:30 with hard work. The corresponding measure for women would be about 6:40/23:45.
No way!...where did you come up with this? ? We're are talking about "average men and women" here. 19:30/5:20& 23:45/6:40 are very fast for the average person without the right body type and genetics for running (5:20 is insane for the average person -- do you know anything about excercise physiology?).
Injuries would be the biggest factor and these average people would need to be doing decent mileage and some regular, consistent speed work to run those kind of times. With the type of training needed to run that fast, the injury risk factor goes up significantly for average people vs a more benevolent fitness/recreational type running program.
You've got to have all the right stuff; exceptional biomechanics, low body weight, great genetics against injuries to be able to train and race consistently without debilitating injuries. Running is a whole different ballgame than doing non-weightbearing endurance activites like cycling, swimming, rowing, etc.
High-impact activities like distance running can spell high-impact disaster for those without the good genetics!
Those times are not crazy for anybody putting in some real hard work. I don’t believe 2-3 hours of exercise a week would injure the average person if they were healthy. Genetics and injury prevention matter but that might be a problem that stops them running in their 40s, not your teens and early 20s.
Yes...those are crazy times for an average male with "no running talent" (as characterized by the OP in his title). You're either dreaming or you just don't have an understanding of exercise physiology. Keep in the mind here we're talking about average people with "no running talent." The average male right now weighs a hefty 195 lbs!
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/average-weight-american-men-15-pounds-20-years/story?id=41100782
"Researchers from the CDC found that the average weight of U.S. men over the age of 20 has increased to 195.7 pounds, according to data from 2011 to 2014. The former average, 180.7 pounds, was based on data from 1988-1994. The heights of both men and women remained about the same."
Running talent = a person who has the right body type, exceptional biomechanics, great running economy, low-injury propensity, etc., to be able to do the necessary hard training (high mileage, speed work, tempos, etc) to run faster & competitive times....without developing debilitating injuries!
A "5:20" mile & "19:30" 5k you're proposing for the average male with "no running talent" is simply insane. You're not going run those times with a few miles of easy pace running, a couple of striders and a cool down. Lol. The training to run those times, especially the mile, is pretty serious & disciplined; moderate to high mileage, intense & structured speed work, vigorous tempo runs, etc. This is where people that are not built for running and don't have the genetics develope acute injuries that become chronic. Chronic injuries become depressing & frustrating, and many end up quitting running. I've seen it myself in over 40 yrs of running.
Probably most average males with "no running talent" can safely fitness/recreational run without enduring the physiological stresses of higher mileage, speed work, tempos, etc. However, weight will still be a problem with some of these males as running generates more than twice the ground reaction forces of walking. And the heavier you are, those impact forces increase significantly, even with younger runners.
Even somebody with average talent is capable of getting down to a decent lean build with discipline say a BMI of 21 with most of that being muscle is a very achievable physique for a young male in their prime, most guys I know how put in the effort to look like that are running around the high 16/low 17 range after a few years. I would say the corresponding measure would be about 21ish minutes for women because they have 2.5x the fat% plus the hormones to deal with. I am sure these types may have some talent but not heaps, maybe top 25% of the population kind of talent. It is hard to think somebody even in the lower 50% couldn’t run a couple of minutes slower than these people (who are nowhere near elite) with top coaching, strengthening, gradual and smart build up to prevent injury, hard work and a great diet/sleep/recovery regime.
Thousands of high school XC teams train year round yet have 5 guys only running 17-18 minutes. These are trained runners in their prime. These are not the other 500 untalented kids at the school who would run 22 minutes fully trained.
So ther average guy at perfect weight, perfect diet and with 8 years of training is running 22 minutes? That equates to a vo2 max of 45 which is considered below average on tables for males aged 13-19.
About a 6:30 mile
The VO2 tables are developed based on runners' performances. You can't apply the times of the other 90% of the population because their times would be much slower which would then update the tables.
I can assure you these are not runners VO2 maxes. Trained runners’ are 45+ for females and 55+ for males.
97.5 x 4 wrote:
About a 6:30 mile
Yeah....with a downhill course and the wind at their back. ?
Why does everyone here seem to think the average person wouldn’t even be able to run a mid 6 mile with training? That’s like saying the average person couldn’t juggle without training or do 35 push ups consecutively without training or learn the piano with training. These are basic skills. Being able to hold a near sprint for a few minutes is just a basic skill which can also be improved with training. Sure, learning these things takes “talent” in the sense of being physically able but a lot of you are acting like so called “untalented” runners are a different species or somethimg that have the inability to learn or adapt with training.
I guess an average joe could run under 6 minutes with good training. Maybe around 5:00 or low 5s is where greater natural talent would be needed. I am also assuming these people start training at a reasonable age and are healthy because if we are talking about fatass average 43 year old obese joes who chain smoke cigars and use the mobility scooters then I doubt they could even “run” a 20 minute mile because their bodies are so wrecked and most of them blow a knee getting on the bus.
I am that person and I couldn't break 20 in highschool for 5k after 4 years (My main problem was that I didn't run in off season at all and focused on lifting weights). My coach was disappointed because he said "You're a senior and the only person in your class that ran cross-country, you gotta at least break 20 this season." annddd I didn't. Keep in mind, I found out I am a natural swimmer my senior year and qualified for states never swimming before that season.
Bruh
WAG percentiles by mile time for 18-25 year old males given 4 years of training.
80% - 7:00
50%- 6:00
30%- 5:20
10%- 5:00
5%- 4:40
1%- 4:30
0.1%- 4:10
0.001%- Sub 4 (1 in 100,000) With 1.6 million male US hs grads each year that's about 16 American sub 4 milers per birth year. There were 97 sub 4 miles in the NCAA this year so that seems about right when accounting for international students and 5th and 6th year seniors.