Do you believe any healthy young male can run a sub 5 minute mile with enough training?

In one of the similar threads, someone posted that the average middle school kid can run 8:00. After 6 years of competitive running in HS and college I managed to take a little more than a minute off of my middle school time. How are these average kids able to improve by 3 minutes? Good coaching?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

In one of the similar threads, someone posted that the average middle school kid can run 8:00. After 6 years of competitive running in HS and college I managed to take a little more than a minute off of my middle school time. How are these average kids able to improve by 3 minutes? Good coaching?

Puberty

For many of them it's just coming to the realization of what their body can do. Many kids starting out running walk as soon as there is a hint of difficulty, often before they even get a second wind. Learning that it doesn't get exponentially worse from that point on is often worth two minutes.

ahh the old sub-5 debate. the mile is the ultimate test of manhood and those who reach sub 5 achieve a kind of immortality. true manhood, in a way. that being said, no, it's simply not possible for everyone.

large hands wrote:

For many of them it's just coming to the realization of what their body can do. Many kids starting out running walk as soon as there is a hint of difficulty, often before they even get a second wind. Learning that it doesn't get exponentially worse from that point on is often worth two minutes.

When I ran my middle school mile, the first 2-3 laps felt easy. Why wouldn't that be the same for the other kids?

Anyone that does not have any physical limitations can do it. As a former fatty that didn't run until I was 25, and has no family members that have EVER competed in endurance events from countries that have little to no background in that either...there are no excuses. They're so irrelevant in athletics that a guy currently ranked just outside of the top 5 for his country in the marathon has never even cracked 2:35. In fact his wife is faster than he is with less experience. Would I want to try to break 5 if I knew it would take a gargantuan effort? No because it would not be worth it to simply break 5 and have to put immense amount of time and effort for it. That doesn't mean it's impossible. It's got to be worth it in the end.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

large hands wrote:

For many of them it's just coming to the realization of what their body can do. Many kids starting out running walk as soon as there is a hint of difficulty, often before they even get a second wind. Learning that it doesn't get exponentially worse from that point on is often worth two minutes.

When I ran my middle school mile, the first 2-3 laps felt easy. Why wouldn't that be the same for the other kids?

I just explained that.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

Anyone that does not have any physical limitations can do it.

Sub 5 equivalent in any distance? Probably.

The actual sub 5 mile? No, you're bound to get some outliers on the slow side who will get close but can't do it despite training for 8+ years:

Interesting that you used a swimming perspective to explain a running training concept, but this is good advice. So many runners are fooled into believing mileage and lung capacity is the end-all-be-all of training; that it is the only way to improve times 1500m and up, and it couldn't be further from the truth. When holding a steady pace over a long distance, the pace is less demanding the further away it is from one's maximal effort. If a person is exhausted after a few 32s 200m intervals, absolutely no way they can maintain a pace of 37s per 200m for an entire mile.

I was 5’9” about 195 lbs at 29 years old and fear of hitting 200 forced me to run. My first mile probably took ~13 minutes and I felt like I was about to die. About 2 months later I struggled through a 27 min 5k.

After about 5 month of piss poor inconsistent training I had a pr of about 25 for 5k. I started to consistently put in 30+ mile weeks and two month later was down to 23... 3 months after that I broke 21. Few months later I was under 20 min and down to about ~165lbs. Hit 18:21 and 19:17 on Sat/Sun races now long after. Ended up going back to school to finish my degree in Math and ran cross country that fall and in my first indoor mile I hit about 4:54. Ran sub 4:30 1500 before mostly focusing on 800. Most of my Aunts/uncles are 300+ lbs and diabetic or pre-diabetic and can barely walk from their garage to their car.

I was actually super fortunate that we were dirt poor most of my childhood so I barely had enough to eat and was super competitive with my brothers so we played baseball/football a lot and got exercise in. I have a hard time believing a good portion of people couldn’t break 5 if they tried, I don’t think you could get 99% interested enough to really try.

I'm inch taller than you and was over 10lbs heavier, totally agree with your experience.

Why would I be swayed by a thread from a letsrun rando? Who believes someone with 55 speed and a 2:11 800 can't run sub 5 when they've tried high mileage? There are a million posts on here with people saying they've tried high mileage and you find out they were running 45-55 MPW. I guarantee you such posters run their easy days far too quickly and thus are too exhausted to complete their workouts. Especially so with someone that has speed like that. Not a chance in hell you have 55 speed and legitimately attempt a high mileage program correctly and still can't even come close.

I haven't read all of the posts in that thread, but those times are legit based on the videos he posted. His 12.15 wind-legal, electronically timed 100m video backs up his 55" 400 video and his 39" 300 video. There's absolutely no chance that those were faked. He also has a video of his 2:11 800.

For the longer distances, he posted videos of his 4:43 1500, 4:46 1500, 5:13 mile, and 5:15 1600. You could say that he was sandbagging or trolling if he just posted one video, but he posted four of them over a long timeframe. That's a strong indication that he just can't break 5.

95% can yes.

If they train for it and don't get injured and aren't wusses.

The other 5% are big-boned mooses that's can't.

amonduul2 wrote:

95% can yes.

If they train for it and don't get injured and aren't wusses.

The other 5% are big-boned mooses that's can't.

The guy in that thread I posted earlier was not big boned and trained for it for years. He ran a 55 400 and a 2:11 800, so he wasn't a wuss either.

Ugh... wrote:

amonduul2 wrote:

95% can yes.

If they train for it and don't get injured and aren't wusses.

The other 5% are big-boned mooses that's can't.

The guy in that thread I posted earlier was not big boned and trained for it for years. He ran a 55 400 and a 2:11 800, so he wasn't a wuss either.

If he ran a 4:43 1500 and could only hit 5:15 for a mile something is seriously off. Worst case take a week easy, start a new 6 week training cycle and break it in two months. I haven’t followed whatever other thread was out there, but there’s nothing ‘magical’ about 5:00. If you are that close and you really want to break it, keep doing what you’re doing for to more months +5%.

Heck no!

Some people are built like football linemen, not like distance runners.

My high school track team had one high school mile when I was a sophomore (me), and six when I was a senior as enthusiasm built. But there were another twelve kids huffin' and puffin' between 5:00 and 5:40.

he is wrong though wrote:

Ugh... wrote:

The guy in that thread I posted earlier was not big boned and trained for it for years. He ran a 55 400 and a 2:11 800, so he wasn't a wuss either.

If he ran a 4:43 1500 and could only hit 5:15 for a mile something is seriously off. Worst case take a week easy, start a new 6 week training cycle and break it in two months. I haven’t followed whatever other thread was out there, but there’s nothing ‘magical’ about 5:00. If you are that close and you really want to break it, keep doing what you’re doing for to more months +5%.

His mile PR is 5:13, but I get your point. His 4:43 1500 was done 1-2 weeks before the lockdowns, so we'll never know whether he could have pulled off a sub 5 mile or 1500 equivalent.

The weird part of all this is that he ran faster when he was training for a hike, and not when he was training for a sub 5. Maybe the high mileage that's advocated by everyone here isn't always the best option. From that thread:

" I swore that I would make it all the way up the mountain the following year.

So for the past few months, I started rebuilding the mileage and went from around 5 MPW to 25-30 MPW. I did strides, tempos, and intervals on occasion to break up the monotony and had no intention of racing or training for a specific event. I didn't carry a stopwatch for any of my runs and have no idea what my paces were, even for the intervals. I don't know how long my rest periods were either, as I pretty much did the whole thing by feel. I ran hard on my intervals. When I was tired, I stopped to rest. When I recovered somewhat, I ran again. When I felt really tired, I stopped the session and did a cool down.

I wasn't really expecting anything much, but I hopped into a meet for fun last month and dropped a 4:46 1500 with a 73 second last lap. Seriously, WTF? Not only was it a PR that came out of nowhere, but my last lap has never been the fastest part for any of my races or time trials that were longer than a 400."

He ran his 4:43 1500 PR a few weeks after that.

The elephant in the room is the phrase "with enough training", but to answer the question, "yes".

No. That is like asking if any of them can run sub 2:35 marathon.