Mile equivalent to dunking a basketball?

I ran seriously from 15-25, and never got near 4:10.

I set a goal of dunking the year I turned 30, and made it within four months.

One is easy if you have the talent, and the talent isn't that rare. (Dunking.)

One takes a lot of work, even with the talent, and the talent itself is rare. (4:10.)

4:30 seems reasonable.

Dr. Dunkenstein wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

How tall are you, your wife and son? At my mostly white HS, the tallest guy on the BB team was 6'4" and I never saw a dunk in a game.

Me: 6'3", wife: 6'0" (3 inches taller than men who are "six feet"), son: 5'11" and dunking at 13, 6'5" and hitting his head on the rim by college.

So your so has a 43 inch vertical. Golly.

If you did not dunk during a game, or run your mile time during a real race, it should not count.

Perhaps looking at the number of actual biological females that have dunked in an organized game could be used to figure out an equivalent mile time. I still believe there are very few actual biological females that have dunked in an organized game. So it might be something like sub 4:20.

Also, who actually runs a timed mile race anymore? Sure lots of people can run the equivalent splits in a longer race, but adjusted times from 1500 or 1600 meters should not count.

OP here. Wow, sounds like I was way off! I‘d guess I know at least 30 people who went 4:15, but maybe only 1 or 2 who could dunk. I couldn’t even touch the rim (I’m 5’8”).

I agree with many that have already posted. Directly related to height. I think sub 5 about right. If you are under 6’ and can dunk that is talent. Other wise you are just an arm reach away.

Bad Wigwams wrote:

There is no "equivalent." Basketball hoops are measured in feet, which is a unit of length. The mile is obviously measured in miles, which is a unit of distance. You cannot convert between the two units.

Yeah, this. The basketball hoop is a FIXED HEIGHT. Whereas, running a mile is almost infinitely variable. You could compare say, how far a runner could run in the FIXED TIME of four minutes and compare that to the FIXED HEIGHT of a dunk. Or you could take a FIXED TIME of say 4:30 for the mile and keep raising the basket until the number of dunkers equaled the number of 4:30 milers in whatever population you're measuring.

Or we could fix the basket at 10 feet and see how many guys out of a sample size can dunk and take the same sample and see what time the same percentage of guys hit in the mile. Wait, that is the question. But you can start your own thread. I say it is 4:45.

My high had 600 kids and very good track and basketball teams. We had at least 10 guys on our undefeated basketball team that could dunk and 7 guys who could break 5 in the mile. Would think sub 5 and dunking would be equivalent.

I wouldn't describe your track team as very good. We had 21 guys break 5 in our 1600 trial in a school of 1200. We have a pretty good team but not great.

My high school wasn't exactly representative but we had 8 guys in a small high school of 100 that could dunk. No track team. 4:50 mile is my thought

Sally Vixxxxxxxens wrote:

Do you have any idea how rare it is for a collegiate female basketball player who is much taller than your 6-ft wife to dunk in an actual game?

I don't know if Dr. Dunkenstein is telling the truth or not, but he has a point. It's easier to casually dunk with a volleyball in practice.

5mins. For people who have never run track is a daunting thing. You actually have to work towards it. There is no one who can just lay on there ass and play normal sports who is breaking 5mins, not many anyway. Dunking is something either you can or can't do. Low 4s is WAY too low

How do you know who can and can’t dunk? I’m just your typical white collar guy in his 30s, not particularly tall (6’2) and I can dunk. I could be the guy in the cubicle next to you for all you know. Never played competitive basketball after ninth grade, but dunking doesn’t take any particular skill just a little bit of coordination and athleticism. I’m sure if you asked people at my work if they knew anyone who could dunk they’d say no, but in fact they do and I’m sure it’s the case for you as well. It’s just something that almost never comes up in daily conversation.

We don't or we wouldn't have this thread if the dunks and mile times of everyone was cataloged. That is why people are making guesses based on experince.

Jamie ADJETEY-NELSON , common wealth decathlete gold winner, from Windsor Ontario, could do a 2 handed dunk from a standing position, no step. I saw it myself.

He could run a 4:49 1500 in competition , so about a 5:07 mile while fatigued from 9 previous events.

He was 6 foot 3 inches. At 6'3" you can easily dunk every day with FT fibers.

Being capable of dunking doesn't ensure any particular level of excellence in basketball, so I would say the equivalent for a miler is having sub 55 400-meter speed, or 5% body fat . . . or something like that.

Equivalent fraction of males who have dunked / will dunk, and people who have run / will run a mile under a certain time: 5:30.

Equivalent fraction of males who have the capacity to dunk during their lifetime with optimal training, and people who have the capacity to run a mile under a certain time with optimal training: 4:20.

The substantial difference (and most of the disagreement here) reflects the different importance of training vs. genetic traits.

I could dunk in HS, but couldn’t break 5 in the mile. We had about 10 kids in hs that could dunk and a little more breaking 5.

I’d say the equivalent is right around 5 min mile.

No. Most high schools could offer $1m to anyone who can break 4:20 by the time they graduate and still have none do it.

But they can offer $10 to anyone who can dunk and they will get 10 kids to do it. Dunking ability and mile ability equivalency is around 4:45.