One mile, average fitness - how fast?

Hi folks. I need some advice.

I have a friend who is a handy soccer player and has started up a small bit of running of late. He's convinced he's the new Mo Farrah already and has started giving me ridiculous times for training runs he's been doing - for example he reckons he can do 31 mins for five miles in training. He doesn't carry a watch and times himself off his phone, which he keeps at home, and the five miles is also a pure guess on his part.

Whenever I point out that his times are not very plausible, he accuses me of being a patronising elitist. He really has zero idea of the training required to get to a decent level in the sport. When I was doing high mileage for the Dublin marathon last year, he asked me was I hoping to win it!

Anyway, he claimed the other day that he would be able to do a sub-five minute mile on the back of about three nights' training a week and no speed work. Naturally, I couldn't suppress my laughter and again he got quite offended. So, being the competitive guy that he is he's agreed to do a time trial over one mile for a bet. Childish, I know but it could be fun.

Now, I don't want to humiliate him and I'm not going to bet him that he can go sub-five so I suggested we make it a bit more realistic. I was thinking he might get close to around 6.30 for one mile...

So, my question is: How fast do you reckon a guy in his mid 20s in good health, but with very little specific training done and only an average level of fitness can go over one mile?

I want to make this interesting but at the same time I want to win the bet to shut this guy up for once and for all.

YFlyer

He'll probably break 6 minutes on 3 days a week training.

If you want him to go slower then 6:30. Try to get him to go really quick for the first few hundred metres and then he might start slowing up rapidly.

When I say training, he bombs around for about half an hour a few nights a week. And I'm not sure if he's even kept that up over the last few weeks.

He's already let me in on his racing strategy and it involves 'sprinting' for the full mile and then falling over the line, completely spent and with nothing left to give. I'm not sure he knows how long a mile actually is.

lamai

Deleted User wrote: »

When I say training, he bombs around for about half an hour a few nights a week. And I'm not sure if he's even kept that up over the last few weeks.

He's already let me in on his racing strategy and it involves 'sprinting' for the full mile and then falling over the line, completely spent and with nothing left to give. I'm not sure he knows how long a mile actually is.

that's the idea run the mile and have nothing left when crossing the line, jesus your mate sounds like some kind of running genius lol. Will be good to see how this goes.

AntiVirus

I'd say he'll beat 6:30, considering he's only running 1 mile its not really a fast pace.

Krusty_Clown

Perhaps he's mixing up kilometers and miles? Wouldn't be the first or last.
A former colleague of mine wanted to sign up to walk the Dublin marathon, as they could comfortably walk 7.5kms, so walking 26 of them back to back didn't seem like that much of a challenge.

ecoli

3 nights a week bombing it around - Tempo work
Football type lad - anaerobic sessions 2 a week including his matches of up to 5k worth of work in a match

Look at it like that and its the basis to general middle distance training plan to me

Depending on what he has been doing recently he could actually surprise you. Had a mate of mine who used to play for Shelbourne back when they were a top team in Ireland (he wasn't on senior team). Tried his hand at schools T&F and ran 4.15 for 1500m.

I say he could run roughly 5.30-6.00 if he is half way decently trained as an estimate

D Chief

A group of us used to do the Goal mile in Belfield on Christmas morning. Varied from year to year but usually about 4 or 5 of us. Based purely on GAA training we were doing at the time and following a night in the pub on Christmas Eve we would do it in the 5:30-6:30 range. I was in my early 30s and would do about 6:30, but some of the fitter, faster lads would be well ahead of me. We did no training other than the GAA.

TheRunningDude

ecoli wrote: »

3 nights a week bombing it around - Tempo work
Football type lad - anaerobic sessions 2 a week including his matches of up to 5k worth of work in a match

Look at it like that and its the basis to general middle distance training plan to me

Depending on what he has been doing recently he could actually surprise you. Had a mate of mine who used to play for Shelbourne back when they were a top team in Ireland (he wasn't on senior team). Tried his hand at schools T&F and ran 4.15 for 1500m.

I say he could run roughly 5.30-6.00 if he is half way decently trained as an estimate

I agree.

Add in the fact that being a handy soccer player, he has probably been doing physical exercise most of his life.

Being a handy soccer player too may also mean that he has a certain element of natural speed which is often an important element in being a handy player.

I think there may be a big element of the green eyed monster in the OP...

EDIT: Actually given your description of this guy, I would be very surprised if he couldn't do a mile in under 6 minutes.

johnners2981

I agree with your friend, you do sound like a patronising elitist. I play football and can run 5 miles in 31 min, trying to get under 30 in a race this year.
And if he can do a 5 miles in 31 minutes without much training I can see him getting very close to a 5min 1 mile. Hope he proves you wrong.

RandyMann

There were a couple of ex GAA players who joined the middle distance group in my club last year. Heavy set guys, who didnt look like typical athletes. They went under 11 mins for 3k after a few months training. These footballers can move....

Donelson

If he is in any kind of shape 5:30 would be poor for a mile

misty floyd

Get this guy down to a track. Tell friends, family and all the boardsies that he's attempting a sub 5 mile. Half way into it, everyone gets onto the track to cheer him on. A bit like this youtube clip someone posted but right at the end when he crosses the line and the clock reads 6+, everyone points and laughs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOur8qXvpnk

Everyone's happy.

village runner

johnners2981 wrote: »

I agree with your friend, you do sound like a patronising elitist. I play football and can run 5 miles in 31 min, trying to get under 30 in a race this year.
And if he can do a 5 miles in 31 minutes without much training I can see him getting very close to a 5min 1 mile. Hope he proves you wrong.

Is this your mate in disguise.
Double the bet and let him break 5 min. Tell him u want cash...............

rom

Was down in CIT track for the goal mile and I saw two lads do a sub 5 mile. One lad was like 4:30 or so and was a serious runner. The 2nd was an ex pro soccer player and was closer to 40. Generally the more modest the person the better they are at something I have found as the have learned the hard way. more like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESuHkSOhmas

johnners2981

johnners2981 wrote: »

I agree with your friend, you do sound like a patronising elitist. I play football and can run 5 miles in 31 min, trying to get under 30 in a race this year.
And if he can do a 5 miles in 31 minutes without much training I can see him getting very close to a 5min 1 mile. Hope he proves you wrong.

Thanks Johnners! The problem is he can't get close to 31 mins for five miles. His timing is all over the place and he's only guessing the distance he's covering. If you think someone can crack out a five-minute mile on that kind of training, then you're just as deluded as him.

I wouldn't join a Leinster Senior League soccer team in the morning and expect to walk straight into their team on the basis that I play five-a-side twice a week.

By the way, if you're hoping for sub-30 for five miles and are only running part-time then I'd suggest packing in the football and joining an athletics club! That's very good going.

Woddle

Deleted User wrote: »

Thanks Johnners! The problem is he can't get close to 31 mins for five miles. His timing is all over the place and he's only guessing the distance he's covering. If you think someone can crack out a five-minute mile on that kind of training, then you're just as deluded as him.

I wouldn't join a Leinster Senior League soccer team in the morning and expect to walk straight into their team on the basis that I play five-a-side twice a week.

By the way, if you're hoping for sub-30 for five miles and are only running part-time then I'd suggest packing in the football and joining an athletics club! That's very good going.

Back when I used to play ball. I was always close to 6 mins. A lap of my local park is 1 mile and I used to love going down and giving it a lash. I reckon sub 6 is a fair bet.

Woddle

Woddle wrote: »

Back when I used to play ball. I was always close to 6 mins. A lap of my local park is 1 mile and I used to love going down and giving it a lash. I reckon sub 6 is a fair bet.

Agreed. I think I was being a bit generous with 6.30 so sub 6.00 is what i'm going to suggest.

augustus gloop

if he sets out as planned, flat out sprinting.... he wont even finish the mile

bo-sco

You are completely judging people by your own standards. You evidently think a 5 minute mile is very fast and if you have to train very hard to do that then everybody must be the same.

If a guy is playing a decent level of soccer, doing a few evenings supplementary running training and has a reasonable level of natural talent then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to run 31 minutes for 5 miles or run a mile down around 5 minutes. They are not particularly fast times.

Just because, by the sound of things, you probably couldn't off such training, doesn't change that.

bo-sco

bo-sco wrote: »

You are completely judging people by your own standards. You evidently think a 5 minute mile is very fast and if you have to train very hard to do that then everybody must be the same.

If a guy is playing a decent level of soccer, doing a few evenings supplementary running training and has a reasonable level of natural talent then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to run 31 minutes for 5 miles or run a mile down around 5 minutes. They are not particularly fast times.

Just because, by the sound of things, you probably couldn't off such training, doesn't change that.

And you are making wild judgements about two people you have never met and know absolutely nothing about...

Go out and try and run a five-minute mile or 31 mins for five miles (6.10 pace) on very little specific training and get back to me. It sounds easy, but trust me it's not.

Update: My mate has upped the ante by telling me yesterday that he did 5.48 in a practice run. He seemed a bit iffy on how he measured the distance, though, as he doesn't have a Garmin. This is going to be very close.

Krusty_Clown

Deleted User wrote: »

And you are making wild judgements about two people you have never met and know absolutely nothing about...

Go out and try and run a five-minute mile or 31 mins for five miles (6.10 pace) on very little specific training and get back to me. It sounds easy, but trust me it's not.

Update: My mate has upped the ante by telling me yesterday that he did 5.48 in a practice run. He seemed a bit iffy on how he measured the distance, though, as he doesn't have a Garmin. This is going to be very close.

Better base the bet on a 5 minute mile (just to be safe).
Then tell your mate to go join a club if he gets under 5:30.

walshb

bo-sco wrote: »

You are completely judging people by your own standards. You evidently think a 5 minute mile is very fast and if you have to train very hard to do that then everybody must be the same.

If a guy is playing a decent level of soccer, doing a few evenings supplementary running training and has a reasonable level of natural talent then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to run 31 minutes for 5 miles or run a mile down around 5 minutes. They are not particularly fast times.

Just because, by the sound of things, you probably couldn't off such training, doesn't change that.

I tend to agree here. 31 mins for 5 miles is hardly blistering for a non athletics athlete. If the person is fit, young enough and in good shape, this is more than capable

I run 5 K (3.1 miles) in 20:30 and I am fit, not fit as a fiddle. That pace I run isn't killing me either. Now, I am sure I could go lower, but I don't want to really, as I run for enjoyment. Increasing the pace to try and set some "record" proves nothing, well, nothing for me.

hot to trot

And never estimate the will of the mind. He is likely to bust himself proving you wrong

baalthor

dancinpants wrote: »

bo-sco wrote: »

You are completely judging people by your own standards. You evidently think a 5 minute mile is very fast and if you have to train very hard to do that then everybody must be the same.

If a guy is playing a decent level of soccer, doing a few evenings supplementary running training and has a reasonable level of natural talent then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to run 31 minutes for 5 miles or run a mile down around 5 minutes. They are not particularly fast times.

Just because, by the sound of things, you probably couldn't off such training, doesn't change that.

And you are making wild judgements about two people you have never met and know absolutely nothing about...

Go out and try and run a five-minute mile or 31 mins for five miles (6.10 pace) on very little specific training and get back to me. It sounds easy, but trust me it's not.

Update: My mate has upped the ante by telling me yesterday that he did 5.48 in a practice run. He seemed a bit iffy on how he measured the distance, though, as he doesn't have a Garmin. This is going to be very close.

Why don't you join him for a run?
Then you'd have a better idea of how fast he is.

ultrapercy

baalthor wrote: »

Why don't you join him for a run?
Then you'd have a better idea of how fast he is.

A mate of mine who played junior soccer and had one season at the lower div in The LOI ran 5.05 on the road for a mile and 56 for 400m he ran 2 marathons in 3.30 off very very little training.Id say hed have been realy good at some distance if he gave it a go but he didnt have much interest. These things are of course possible if the talent is there.It frustrated me a small bit tbh that he could causualy run 56 for 400 in flat shoes on awindy day with no training while I trained full time an could hardly run 65. I got over it tho.

walshb

walshb wrote: »

I tend to agree here. 31 mins for 5 miles is hardly blistering for a non athletics athlete. If the person is fit, young enough and in good shape, this is more than capable

I run 5 K (3.1 miles) in 20:30 and I am fit, not fit as a fiddle. That pace I run isn't killing me either. Now, I am sure I could go lower, but I don't want to really, as I run for enjoyment. Increasing the pace to try and set some "record" proves nothing, well, nothing for me.

You did 3.1 miles at 6.36 pace, which is good going. Now run the 3.1 miles and add in another 1.9 miles at the end, and all at 6.12 pace. There's a pretty big difference. And do it in training as a casual run. This is what my mate claims he regularly does, which apart from being silly, I struggle to believe.

It's all well and good throwing things like that casually out there, but the reality is that it's training that will get you there not idle talk.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

You did 3.1 miles at 6.36 pace, which is good going. Now run the 3.1 miles and add in another 1.9 miles at the end, and all at 6.12 pace. There's a pretty big difference. And do it in training as a casual run. This is what my mate claims he regularly does, which apart from being silly, I struggle to believe.

It's all well and good throwing things like that casually out there, but the reality is that it's training that will get you there not idle talk.

Yes, but your friend is young, and in good shape isn't he? This is key, and if he's naturally good at running, then I see nothing special about 5 miles in 31 mins.

BTW, can anyone back me up and tell me if you are running consecutive miles is it odd that the last mile of say a 4 mile run may well be the "easiest," or at least feel the easiest on the legs and body?

I have found that when I am on form, somethimes the last mile is when I can really flow and move with less effort than the fist mile or so. It's like a car heating up and flowing freely after a run.

BTW, over the past two years my best mile time is 6 mins flat. So, 6:36 pace over 3 or 4 miles with a best of 6 mins for one mile isn't special.

walshb

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but your friend is young, and in good shape isn't he? This is key, and if he's naturally good at running, then I see nothing special about 5 miles in 31 mins.

BTW, can anyone back me up and tell me if you are running consecutive miles is it odd that the last mile of say a 4 mile run may well be the "easiest," or at least feel the easiest on the legs and body?

I have found that when I am on form, somethimes the last mile is when I can really flow and move with less effort than the fist mile or so. It's like a car heating up and flowing freely after a run.

BTW, over the past two years my best mile time is 6 mins flat. So, 6:36 pace with a best of 6 mins isn't special[/QUOTE

Young, yes. The thread name says he's of 'average fitness' and nowhere have I said that he's naturally good at running. In fact, I would pick out at least three or four of my friends who I think would make better runners.

With regard to the last mile of four being the easiest, it's not that unusual as you'll often feel sluggish at the start and then feel your way into the run. If you're racing, the last mile should nearly always be the quickest.

Well done on the 6.00 minute mile. Do three or even five of them in a row in your next race and you'll be doing even better. I never said 6.36 is special, but it's decent going for a casual runner. I wouldn't even describe my mate as a casual runner; he goes for a couple of runs a week and sometimes not at all.

walshb

I'm mid 30s now and not near as fit/fast as I was when I was 19 or 20. I could run a 5:25 mile then. I am a casual runner, by no means very good.

Not sure about your friend. Maybe he has his distances confused.

Sometime people can be like that. They may pluck a distance or time out of their asses.

bo-sco

Deleted User wrote: »

And you are making wild judgements about two people you have never met and know absolutely nothing about...

Go out and try and run a five-minute mile or 31 mins for five miles (6.10 pace) on very little specific training and get back to me. It sounds easy, but trust me it's not.

Update: My mate has upped the ante by telling me yesterday that he did 5.48 in a practice run. He seemed a bit iffy on how he measured the distance, though, as he doesn't have a Garmin. This is going to be very close.

I know nothing about you or your friend?

Here's what I know.

Your friend is a sportsman at his physical peak age wise. He plays for a decent soccer team which would mean training at least twice a week and probably a match at the weekend. It also implies that he's a fairly decent athlete. On top of this he runs 3 times a week.

You have come on here encouraging us to agree with you as to how ridiculous the notion that he could be running 31 minutes for 5 miles is. That implies that you couldn't do so given the same training.

Whether your friend can do it or not is irrelevant. You think the idea is laughable, I'm telling you it's not. They are not fast times.

BTW, in May 2001 someone I know ran their first 5 mile road race in the BHAA race in RTE. At the time they were playing hurling and running 2/3 times a week (no speedwork). They ran 29.30. Nine years later, having giving up hurling and taken up athletics properly two and a half years earlier they were able to run the Raheny 5 over three minutes faster (26.20) so were clearly nowhere near the peak of their ability when doing non specific training years before.

What's more, I personally haven't been able to run for over 6 months as I'm suffering from a relatively severe back complaint. I've put on nearly two stone and haven't run a step since last August. But I know if I had to go out in the morning and run a mile in under 6 minutes to save my life I could do it standing on my head. There's no reason why your friend who is younger and fitter than me shouldn't be able to run faster than me.

bo-sco

bo-sco wrote: »

I know nothing about you or your friend?

Here's what I know.

Your friend is a sportsman at his physical peak age wise. He plays for a decent soccer team which would mean training at least twice a week and probably a match at the weekend. It also implies that he's a fairly decent athlete. On top of this he runs 3 times a week.

You have come on here encouraging us to agree with you as to how ridiculous the notion that he could be running 31 minutes for 5 miles is. That implies that you couldn't do so given the same training.

Whether your friend can do it or not is irrelevant. You think the idea is laughable, I'm telling you it's not. They are not fast times.

BTW, in May 2001 someone I know ran their first 5 mile road race in the BHAA race in RTE. At the time they were playing hurling and running 2/3 times a week (no speedwork). They ran 29.30. Nine years later, having giving up hurling and taken up athletics properly two and a half years earlier they were able to run the Raheny 5 over three minutes faster (26.20) so were clearly nowhere near the peak of their ability when doing non specific training years before.

What's more, I personally haven't been able to run for over 6 months as I'm suffering from a relatively severe back complaint. I've put on nearly two stone and haven't run a step since last August. But I know if I had to go out in the morning and run a mile in under 6 minutes to save my life I could do it standing on my head. There's no reason why your friend who is younger and fitter than me shouldn't be able to run faster than me.

Firstly, I feel your pain with regard to the injury and wish you the best of luck getting back to full fitness. I tore my groin a few weeks before last year’s Dublin marathon and was devastated.

Secondly, I said my friend was a handy soccer player and mentioned nothing about any team he plays for and much training he does for it. I said his fitness is average and nothing more. I also said he runs a couple of nights a week and probably hasn’t maintained this, which he hasn’t.

The 31 minutes for five miles he said he was regularly doing was in training and I still don’t believe that. I’m sure if he put his mind to it and with some additional training he could do it. I’ve played football with him before and know very well that he is not the kind of guy who can pull those times out of nowhere, as he never displayed any athletic prowess. You’ll have to trust me on that. He hasn’t got that natural ability or the physique.

I’m perfectly aware that there are guys out there playing other sports that are naturally very talented and have the ability to pull off these times without much specific training – he’s not one of them. For example, my sister ran a 3.01 marathon off six weeks training and one long run in 2008. That’s real natural talent. I’m also sure that we all know at least one person that is capable of those kinds of times, but that’s not the point I was trying to make.

I simply felt that him saying he could run a five-minute mile was a fairly audacious claim. It annoyed me because he had no real understanding of the kind of work that goes into a time like that for mere mortals like most of us. It also reflected the kind of dismissive attitude towards running I get off some people in other sports. They often just don’t get the kind of training and dedication that is required to run fast times. And a five-minute mile is a good time in anyone’s language. Some would say it’s harder to achieve than a sub-3 marathon.

As for personalising the matter and saying that this reflects some kind of insecurity on my part, well that’s just not nice and I would also suggest is pretty silly given you don’t know my background or my character for that matter.

Maybe I came across as a bit of a pr1ck, but this was just supposed to be a bit of fun and the result of the kind of stupid bet that is made in the pub. I was simply trying to get people on here who have a knowledge of the sport to give me a realistic time that a person of modest athletic ability and little training could run a mile in. Nothing more.

And by the way, if you think running sub-5 for a mile and 31 mins for 5 miles in training (that would equate to about 27.30 for a race) is so unimpressive, I presume you will out running real times as soon as you are back from injury...? I'd be interested to see how you go.

bo-sco

Deleted User wrote: »

Firstly, I feel your pain with regard to the injury and wish you the best of luck getting back to full fitness. I tore my groin a few weeks before last year’s Dublin marathon and was devastated.

Secondly, I said my friend was a handy soccer player and mentioned nothing about any team he plays for and much training he does for it. I said his fitness is average and nothing more. I also said he runs a couple of nights a week and probably hasn’t maintained this, which he hasn’t.

The 31 minutes for five miles he said he was regularly doing was in training and I still don’t believe that. I’m sure if he put his mind to it and with some additional training he could do it. I’ve played football with him before and know very well that he is not the kind of guy who can pull those times out of nowhere, as he never displayed any athletic prowess. You’ll have to trust me on that. He hasn’t got that natural ability or the physique.

I’m perfectly aware that there are guys out there playing other sports that are naturally very talented and have the ability to pull off these times without much specific training – he’s not one of them. For example, my sister ran a 3.01 marathon off six weeks training and one long run in 2008. That’s real natural talent. I’m also sure that we all know at least one person that is capable of those kinds of times, but that’s not the point I was trying to make.

I simply felt that him saying he could run a five-minute mile was a fairly audacious claim. It annoyed me because he had no real understanding of the kind of work that goes into a time like that for mere mortals like most of us. It also reflected the kind of dismissive attitude towards running I get off some people in other sports. They often just don’t get the kind of training and dedication that is required to run fast times. And a five-minute mile is a good time in anyone’s language. Some would say it’s harder to achieve than a sub-3 marathon.

As for personalising the matter and saying that this reflects some kind of insecurity on my part, well that’s just not nice and I would also suggest is pretty silly given you don’t know my background or my character for that matter.

Maybe I came across as a bit of a pr1ck, but this was just supposed to be a bit of fun and the result of the kind of stupid bet that is made in the pub. I was simply trying to get people on here who have a knowledge of the sport to give me a realistic time that a person of modest athletic ability and little training could run a mile in. Nothing more.

And by the way, if you think running sub-5 for a mile and 31 mins for 5 miles in training (that would equate to about 27.30 for a race) is so unimpressive, I presume you will out running real times as soon as you are back from injury...? I'd be interested to see how you go.

Thanks for your good wishes, much appreciated.
I don't know when I'll be back running or if I will be the way things are.
As you asked (kind of) I've never raced a mile but I have run 4.14 for 1500m.

I wasn't trying to personalise the issue. Apologies if it came across that way. It's just natural to judge things by your own standard. When you're reasonably good at something and work hard at it it's hard to imagine that someone else can do as well or better without nearly the same effort.

And like I said I have no idea whether your friend can do those times or not because I don't know him. But they're not so fast that someone couldn't run at or near them with a decent level of fitness and a degree of talent.

At the end of the day, you asked how fast we thought a mid twenties competitive sportsman could run a mile. I'd expect most guys to be able to break six minutes and the faster guys to go less than 5.30. Guys with a bit of running talent who are doing some supplementary aerobic running could easily run down around five minutes or quicker.

Krusty_Clown

bo-sco wrote: »

Guys with a bit of running talent who are doing some supplementary aerobic running could easily run down around five minutes or quicker.

The real question is whether or not they could easily run a sub-3 marathon.

<evil cackle>

bo-sco

bo-sco wrote: »

Thanks for your good wishes, much appreciated.
I don't know when I'll be back running or if I will be the way things are.
As you asked (kind of) I've never raced a mile but I have run 4.14 for 1500m.

I wasn't trying to personalise the issue. Apologies if it came across that way. It's just natural to judge things by your own standard. When you're reasonably good at something and work hard at it it's hard to imagine that someone else can do as well or better without nearly the same effort.

And like I said I have no idea whether your friend can do those times or not because I don't know him. But they're not so fast that someone couldn't run at or near them with a decent level of fitness and a degree of talent.

At the end of the day, you asked how fast we thought a mid twenties competitive sportsman could run a mile. I'd expect most guys to be able to break six minutes and the faster guys to go less than 5.30. Guys with a bit of running talent who are doing some supplementary aerobic running could easily run down around five minutes or quicker.

Good luck with it, take your time getting back and don't do anything premature even if it drives you bananas.

That's serious running for 1,500m. I won't give you my times as I'm not interested in getting into a mickey-measuring contest. Having come into the sport late in life after playing soccer and GAA when I was younger, I'm in the shape if my life and loving my running. That's the important thing.

I suppose the underlying suggestion in your posts is that this stems from some form of jealousy of my mate. The reality is that it's an annoyance at the lack of respect some people have for my chosen sport.

Anyhow, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Krusty_Clown

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

The real question is whether or not they could easily run a sub-3 marathon.

<evil cackle>

No bother. As long as they stay at the front in the laps of the bottom field and eat loads of bananas.

bo-sco

Deleted User wrote: »

I suppose the underlying suggestion in your posts is that this stems from some form of jealousy of my mate.

Like I say that wasn't the intention. If it came across that way I apologise.

Best of luck with your running.

Racman

I wonder if we are all basing our expectations on our own abilities. Maybe so. Here is mine. I don't often run single mile time trials but a while back my coach gave me a schedule to do two miles, as fast as I could, recover for 8 minutes, then do a mile as fast as I could. I did the 2 miles in 10.59 and then did the mile in 5.08. This was two months after I turned 50.

Don't be surprised if the young, fit footballer can get close to 5 minutes. I don't think you said what build he is. If he is comfortably under 12 stone, he just might do it.