How Fast Can A Hobby Runner Run?

Yes there are non-responders. Though the article is titled "marathon running" it states there are low-aerobic responders to distance running in general:

So you believe a random biology professor more than for example Steve Magness, one of the most successful coaches and a 4:01 miler?

He already destroyed the myth of non-responders.

In Timmons study, they only gave people 2-3 hours training a week, and some didn't respond. This is in line with what Magness found out. However, Magness also tested enough to find out that if someone trains 4-5 hours a week, he suddenly become a responder. Non-responder rate after 4-5 hours of training dropped from 20% to 0%.

Yes, there are high responders, low responders, and even super-responders (I'm one of them). But you can't be a non-responder, maybe the type of training is wrong (individualize after FT vs ST athlete), or the volume is simply not big enough to cause adaptions in that specific individual because he is a low responder and needs to train more volume to get a stimulus that's big enough.

hj53 wrote:

Apparently, not much non-professional people reach this level. On the other hand, being in this kind of shape myself I see quite a few of my peers. Some train harder, some train easier, but everyone trains consistently, at at least 50 mpw. Also, the guys who run their easy and long runs at paces that would probably make me drop dead tend to either underperform at races or be in their early 20s.

All in all it's my fir belief that it doesn't require any particular talent to run like this, but it does require consistent training over a period of several years, that's why most hobbyjoggers are slower: they either lack motivation or are unlucky and get impeded by injuries.

THIS. Exactly!

For the 16-17 min 5k range in good age, talent is not a requirement. Canova already said that all males from 20-40 can run 15:50, 33:00, 1:15 and 2:33 with training. He is coaching Olympians and 2:05 marathoner's (the most talented people of course), but he can also coach the average Joe to a solid time. He truly believes in his own training methods and knows how much our bodies are able to adapt to stress and training.

Why is a 16-17 min time very good and not many hobby runners achieve it? Because they don't OPTIMIZE their running performances! Look at your local club. All the clubs I've seen train very inefficient. Runs don't have a purpose, tempo runs and interval sessions are done half-heartedly and at random paces and rests, they go out every weekend for a big party with friends and ALCOHOL, they work 60 hours in a job just so they can make $200k a year, don't get enough sleep, don't strength train, stretch etc.

It's not the training alone to get an untalented person with low base VO2MAX to 16 min 5k, but ALL the things around it.

- consistent training over 5-10 years, gradually building mileage to 80-100 mpw (depending on FT vs ST runner)

- the right training, based on abilities, muscle fiber composition and other genetics

- getting enough sleep, at least 8, better 9 hours a day

- not too stressful of a job or family life, 35 hours in a running store would be much less stress than 60 hours as a manager

- strength/core training, stretching

- cross-training if mileage is not very high (swimming, cycling)

- no alcohol, less sweets, more water and fruits/vegetables

- do regular training camps, training at altitude

- getting friends that support the way to a top runner

Yes, a talented manager might be able to run 16 min 5k on 50 mpw, with kids and a 60 hour job and only 6 hours sleep a night. But most can't! But the people with less talent can STILL do it if they give up their $200k 60 hour job for a $40k job in a running store, get more sleep, do some exercises while there are no customers etc. I'm not saying people SHOULD do that, or optimize their life for running, but IF they would, they could also be fast.

Problem is those managers start blaming lack of talent when their whole life has soo many improvements for running that could be done.

It was asked here in this forum a few months ago to link Strava profiles of serious runners running 80-100 mpw for many years, getting enough sleep etc and unable to run in the 16 min 5k range - no one found one.

Talent is a real limiter for a lot of runners. I am at a great weight, have built a mileage base for a few years, have good natural speed for a woman and cannot break 20. All of my friends are scared to run with me, all of them.

You can do it!

In 2008, I had not run for a few years (2001, 18:53 5k in HS), but decided to train for the KSU Bowman Cup. Started training in July, going 2 miles in 19 flat. Race was in October. I ran no more than 36 mpw and did 3 speed sessions (6x1000s at race pace each, or 3:40 each).

Ran the Bowman Cup and came in 8th, 18:33. Not a great time, but I ran even splits (5:59, 6:01, 6:00, 0:33 for the kick) in great weather.

If you take 12-15 months and train well, you can at least get under 18 and go from there. Also get a coach!

Also, my times are NOT fast, but borderline mediocre. BUT it shows rolling off the couch and doing even so-so aerobic base-building can get you down under 20 within a few months. And that was taking 7 years off running (although I walked every day at a normal pace for 1-2 miles).

Kind of a stupid post. To run the type of mileage you're talking about to be competitive and run fast times 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. A high-impact activity like running is a whole different ballgame than doing non-weightbearing endurance activites like cycling, swimming, rowing, etc. And fitness or recreational running is much different than competitive running.

Body weight in relation to height is paramount. That's why your elites are diminutive and scrawny. Some of the short dudes (5-6 to 5-8) go 120-125 lbs (built like HS XC girls). Even the taller runners (6 ft +) are bean poles at 130 - 140 lbs. Look at the Kenyans & Ethiopians, for example.

Heavier runners accumulate higher-impact forces which increase risk of injury. And even injuries with some lighter runners can be gentically determined (I think that super elite 800 meter stud Nigel Amos, who is a?very thin runner, has had significant injuries in his career).

If it isn't great genetics, you could take every HS runner who is dedicated and willing to commit to your's & Canova's training methods and turn them into a D-1 runner and an elite. But the truth of the matter is very, very few progress to D-1 and elite status. Why...when there are tens of thousands of HS runners Simple...GENETICS! Same with other sports in HS. You can all play and participate but genetics runs the show for the next level. Most competent HS coaches already know this.