One mile, average fitness - how fast?

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.