General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: What's a good mile time

Started by Terry R. McConnell · · Last activity · 7 posts · 605 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRe: What's a good mile timeTerry R. McConnell · 13 Jul 2004 02 / This pagePosts 1–7Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #7Ted · 14 Jul 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
13 July 2004
Last activity
14 July 2004
Original author
Terry R. McConnell
Posts
7
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
605
Views / 30 days
1

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–7 of 7
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    Terry R. McConnell
    Archived post
    #1
    In article said:


    What do you think would be good a mile time (time it would take to jog a
    mile), for an adult male with no particular genetic giftedness in jogging?
    At what point does he have something that he can be proud of that other
    runners might not scoff at?

    In the (good? bad?) old days this post could have been counted on to start
    at least one of the standard group flame wars, including

    J1) What's the difference between running and jogging?

    R5) Is time (x:xx🙂xx:x.x or less in distance y a respectable one?

    R5e) Are people who fail to consider time (x:xx🙂xx:x.x or less in distance y
    respectable elitists?

    G4) Is the ability to run fast a genetic trait?

    G4e) Is the ability to run fast a genetic trait of ethnic group e ?

    G4ee) Is there such a thing as an ethnic group, and if so, how is it defined?

    But hey, it's a fair question! I'll say 5:00, for these reasons: a) it's a
    nice round number; b) I did it, and I'm not particularly genetically gifted
    in any obvious way; and, c) it's a nice round number.

    --
    ************************************************************************
    Terry R. McConnell Mathematics/215 Carnegie/Syracuse, N.Y. 13244-1150
    [email hidden] 229B Physics Bldg http://barnyard.syr.edu/~tmc
    ************************************************************************

    Report
  2. Dan Stumpus
    Archived post
    #2

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    I'm not very gifted and I can run a 5:00 mile. I'm not in any
    way suggesting that people who can't are bad runners or
    anything. I just don't think I'm anything special at all, certainly
    not someone you'd refer to as a "serious guy".

    Anyone who can get down around 35 minutes for the 10k is in the top few
    percent, even though the world record is 26 and change...

    Keep at it,

    Dan

    Report
  3. SwStudio
    Archived post
    #3

    "Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

    Quoted message said:

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    I'm not very gifted and I can run a 5:00 mile. I'm not in any
    way suggesting that people who can't are bad runners or
    anything. I just don't think I'm anything special at all, certainly
    not someone you'd refer to as a "serious guy".

    Anyone who can get down around 35 minutes for the 10k is in the top few
    percent, even though the world record is 26 and change...

    I look at it a different way: anyone that can get down to around
    35 minutes for 10k is in the top few percent; yes - but only of runners
    who enter road races, not the general population, or even runners who
    apply themselves.

    When I enter a 10k race with 1000 entrants, I imagine the percentage
    of runners who train hard and have motivation is pretty close to the
    same percent... the top few percent.

    It doesn't make me feel better to compare myself to an older woman
    who just took up jogging to lose weight, or whatever. Our goals are
    completely different, so "padding" my percentage by adding her to the
    mix (along with the other fitness/weight loss runners) is dumb. Yet the
    bulk of races are run by people like that - no interest in getting fast,
    only
    to get healthy, etc (which is fantastic, but nothing to do with me).

    I'm a very average runner with high motivation and a fair amount of
    free time, which doesn't make me a "good" runner, it simply makes me
    someone who has invested a lot of time, thought, and energy towards
    the singular goal of being faster.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

    Report
  4. Ted
    Archived post
    #4

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I look at it a different way: anyone that can get down to around
    35 minutes for 10k is in the top few percent; yes - but only of


    runners

    Quoted message said:

    who enter road races, not the general population, or even runners who
    apply themselves.

    When I enter a 10k race with 1000 entrants, I imagine the percentage
    of runners who train hard and have motivation is pretty close to the
    same percent... the top few percent.

    It doesn't make me feel better to compare myself to an older woman
    who just took up jogging to lose weight, or whatever. Our goals are
    completely different, so "padding" my percentage by adding her to the
    mix (along with the other fitness/weight loss runners) is dumb. Yet


    the

    Quoted message said:

    bulk of races are run by people like that - no interest in getting


    fast,

    Quoted message said:

    only
    to get healthy, etc (which is fantastic, but nothing to do with me).

    I'm a very average runner with high motivation and a fair amount of
    free time, which doesn't make me a "good" runner, it simply makes me
    someone who has invested a lot of time, thought, and energy towards
    the singular goal of being faster.

    You are full of [censored] too.

    I know a lot of highly, highly motivated runners that run 50 miles a
    week + and bust their ass and have never broken 40 minute 10k's, never
    broken 20 min. 5ks, and never broken 5:30 in the mile.

    You don't go from 17 years of smoking and inactivity to 33-34 min. 10ks
    without some freakin' talent which doesn't mean a damn thing about your
    motivation. We all know you are motivated but you do have some ability.

    Glad to clear that up.

    Quoted message said:

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

    Report
  5. Donovan Rebbechi
    Archived post
    #5
    SwStudio said:

    "Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

    Quoted message said:

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    I'm not very gifted and I can run a 5:00 mile. I'm not in any
    way suggesting that people who can't are bad runners or
    anything. I just don't think I'm anything special at all, certainly
    not someone you'd refer to as a "serious guy".

    Anyone who can get down around 35 minutes for the 10k is in the top few
    percent, even though the world record is 26 and change...

    I look at it a different way: anyone that can get down to around
    35 minutes for 10k is in the top few percent; yes - but only of runners
    who enter road races, not the general population, or even runners who
    apply themselves.

    When I enter a 10k race with 1000 entrants, I imagine the percentage
    of runners who train hard and have motivation is pretty close to the
    same percent... the top few percent.

    Yes, but level of ability is not independent of amount of training. Also, even
    on the training load of the midpack runner, you'd be pretty fast after a year or
    so (I know I was).

    I think most people would have a hard time running sub 5.

    I agree that percentile in road races is almost uninterpretable.

    Quoted message said:

    I'm a very average runner

    .... for certain values of "average" and "runner".

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

    Report
  6. SwStudio
    Archived post
    #6

    "Ted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    You don't go from 17 years of smoking and inactivity to 33-34 min. 10ks

    Wow, I just got 2 minutes faster. Learn to read much?

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

    Report
  7. Ted
    Archived post
    #7

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Ted" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    You don't go from 17 years of smoking and inactivity to 33-34 min.


    10ks

    Quoted message said:


    Wow, I just got 2 minutes faster. Learn to read much?

    Yea, running a 5 min. mile is above average. Wasn't that the point?

    Quoted message said:


    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

    Report

Related discussions

Closely matching published threads from General fitness, health and nutrition.

01Now We Have "Bad - Good HDL" Cholesterol and "Good - Good HDL" Cholesterol 2 replies · 119 views02Re: What's a good mile time 0 replies · 810 views03Re: What's a good mile time 22 replies · 1,434 views04Re: What's a good mile time 2 replies · 383 views05Re: What's a good mile time 0 replies · 419 views06Re: What's a good mile time 1 reply · 502 views

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionGeneral fitness, health and nutrition Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.