Is 23:30 for 5km untrained a decent time?

In principle there is some truth in that post. 23:30 is no great time, 'untrained' is not really defined, and improvement depends a lot on if the OP is willing to put in some work, and is able to stay injury free and so on.

Under the Bridge wrote:

I doubt people without endurance training backgrounds use the words "time trial". 2/10

Not only would he not use the term 'time trial', he would hardly pick a 5K 'time trial' for his first ever run.

Mo effing Farah wouldn't be able to run 23 minutes 'off the couch' (I mean truly 'off the couch' with not even any exercise) at age 20. I'm supposed to not know anything about running compared to most here, yet I can tell that posts like this are complete and utter bull$$$$.

I googled results 2018 5k and looked at the first two returns.

At Fitger's 5k 23:30 would have been 166 out of 667 for men.

At Bockfest 5k 23:30 would have been 133 out of 1070 for men.

So not in the top 10%.

More like top 20% (average of 300 out of 1770).

23:30 is a good result on average, especially with no training.

Probably 5 to 7 minutes of improvement with training.

Maybe 8 or 9 if you got the right genetics.

define “untrained”

I know soccer players who play on the park every single night (and have done for years and years) so they’re obviously fit year round because they get 2-3 hours of exercise all day, but they consider themselves “untrained” until they do specific conditioning work in season.

I know people who genuinely are untrained and find it hard to run for the bus on the rare occasion they try. They wake up, go to college, come home, eat, go out for drinks then go to bed.

So untrained can mean two very different things. Either way, 23 is mediocre for a male, I’d say it’s quite good for a woman though. Either way, you are very thin at that weight and you should see pretty big improvements just by getting out the door to run 3-4 times a week. You could go sub 20 within a couple of months to be honest.

I am completely inactive, as in I never exercise. The last time I engaged in any physical activity was in my gym class in my senior year of high school (2015).

ki1020 wrote:

Hi everyone. First time poster here.

I ran a 23:30 5k time trial yesterday morning, without any training whatsoever. I don't exercise and would describe myself as a sedentary individual. I eat fast food every now and then, but usually cook up a healthy meal at home.

Would you say that is a good time based on my lifestyle? Could I improve significantly if I trained consistently?

Where you start does not matter too much. If you’re like Justyn Knight and run a 15:20 for your first 5k, then you’re looking at serious talent, but outside of genetic freaks like this, people start everywhere and then their natural talent and dedication take them further.

I started at a similar place you did, and ended up running 16:30 in college. I know a guy who ran 27 minutes for his first 5k, and is now running under 31 minutes for a 10k.

Maybe you only run an 18 min 5k if you train, maybe you break 14. Get your mileage up safely, pick a philosophy (ie. Daniels, Canova, Tinman etc.), and work hard. Only time and hard work will tell your true ability.

Well said. Thanks for your input

stateroftheoblivious wrote:

23:30 is a good result on average, especially with no training.

Probably 5 to 7 minutes of improvement with training.

Maybe 8 or 9 if you got the right genetics.

Somebody who can truly run 23:30 without any exercise having never ran before should be able to run faster than 18:30, probably within a year.

The guy is obviously either trolling or exaggerating. Presumably he had to have ran at school (I mean at least in gym class), which for a 20 year old is not so long ago. And how does a 20 year old American male weigh 135 lb whilst being supposedly completely sedentary? There's about 100 million of his countrymen at least who would love to know his secret.

I'm from Canada, and of Eritrean/Ethiopian background. I've been very skinny my whole life.

ki1020 wrote:

I'm from Canada, and of Eritrean/Ethiopian background. I've been very skinny my whole life.

In that case then, yes, you should be able to get down to 14 minutes within a year or two before hitting a wall, then if you take regular winter breaks back home and visit the local pharmacies, for sure you will be representing Canada in Tokyo and perhaps becoming the greatest distance runner in history and further proof that East Africans are natural born runners.

Coevett wrote:

The guy is obviously either trolling or exaggerating. Presumably he had to have ran at school (I mean at least in gym class), which for a 20 year old is not so long ago. And how does a 20 year old American male weigh 135 lb whilst being supposedly completely sedentary? There's about 100 million of his countrymen at least who would love to know his secret.

I believe him. I was completely sedentary between 19 years and 36 years old. My weight was always around 160lbs even though I'm 6'4 tall. No secret, just good genes and a healthy diet.

Thanks. I'm honestly just here since I want the advice of others so I can improve myself as a runner.

I ran 23:32 in my first 5k of XC season as a 14 year old. I improved in 2 months to a 19:50 or so. Later that year I ran 4:37 for 1600m. I finished high school with PRs of 4:14 and 1:54. In college I ran 4:04.

There are way too many factors to consider. There were kids that beat me in my first race that had also never run before, but as we all matured and grew up, I became way faster. Such is life. I will say I definitely had the body for it. 5'7 120 pounds or so at my fastest.

That time is not impressive for someone your age and size. There is not that much upside since you are obviously the size of an elite runner already.

Of all places, why would you come to this website to ask for validation? Everyone self-identifies as a 4:20 miler/15:00 min 5k runner.

At least you're faster than my wife who enjoys running, but doesn't care about running faster.