|
|
 Posted: 11/05/04 - 03:38 Post subject: Is it possible for heavy runner (over 180lbs) ....
I'm very heavy for runner (5'10"/181lbs). I'm decent MTB-er and have very good aerobic base from cycling. I'm wondering is it possible for such heavy runner to run 10k under 40min?
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 07:48 Post subject:
I don't see why not
Do you have any times for other races or distances that we can do our comparision on
|
|
|
|
|
MechEngDropout
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 10474
Location: Off the grid
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 07:50 Post subject:
First of all, it can't really be determined from your weight. I know of several runners heavier than you who run better than a 40 minute 10k. With enough training I'm sure you'll make it. But as far as when you get to that point... it depends on what shape you are in already. What's your current 10k time? How much are you running? What's your weekly mileage?
Good to see another MTB'er on the forums!
|
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 08:29 Post subject:
[quote="MechEngDropout"]First of all, it can't really be determined from your weight. I know of several runners heavier than you who run better than a 40 minute 10k. With enough training I'm sure you'll make it. But as far as when you get to that point... it depends on what shape you are in already. What's your current 10k time? How much are you running? What's your weekly mileage?
Good to see another MTB'er on the forums![/quote]
For 4 weeks of running I improved from ~58 min down to 51:45.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 08:42 Post subject:
| dot wrote: |
For 4 weeks of running I improved from ~58 min down to 51:45. |
That's a good progression. Maybe try to some speedwork on interval training. How many miles a week are you running?
|
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 09:02 Post subject:
[quote="Cappy"]
That's a good progression. Maybe try to some speedwork on interval training. How many miles a week are you running?[/quote]
Not a lot and I don't plan to run more than 50-60 km per week
|
|
|
|
|
MechEngDropout
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 10474
Location: Off the grid
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/05/04 - 09:24 Post subject:
| dot wrote: |
Not a lot and I don't plan to run more than 50-60 km per week |
I think you're well on your way. Don't get discouraged if you don't get there soon though. 58 to 51 is a fantastic start, but once you get faster, you'll find it takes more work to get small gains. If you haven't been running for very long, I'd recommend getting good consistant mileage in. 50-60 km a week sounds like plenty, and if you aren't running that much yet it would be best to gradually increase to that. Once you have a consistant weekly mileage that you're satisfied with, that's when I'd start doing speedwork.
Since you're a MTB'er, I'll also throw in a little plug for off-road duathlons. They usually consist of a trail run, mountain bike, then another trail run. They're a heck of a lot of fun and really a challenge. Just planting some seeds in your head... 
|
|
|
|
|
dg12
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 46
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 12/29/04 - 16:04 Post subject: Re: Is it possible for heavy runner (over 180lbs) ....
| dot wrote: | | I'm very heavy for runner (5'10"/181lbs). I'm decent MTB-er and have very good aerobic base from cycling. I'm wondering is it possible for such heavy runner to run 10k under 40min? |
I weigh 210 and am currently at 50 min 10k. I know I will get faster, but if I was at a scrawny 180 lbs I know I would shave 10 mins to a 40 min..
Yes this attainable.
|
|
|
|
|
robp
Pyromaniac
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Jul 2002
Posts: 16242
Location: Waiting in line at the beer store...
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 12/30/04 - 14:41 Post subject:
I ran 41:13 at 170 lbs so I'm pretty sure with the proper training sub 40 at 180 is very attainable.
|
|
|
|
|
spongebob
Former FFL Champion
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 3602
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 12/30/04 - 15:45 Post subject:
I ran a 38:30 at 175.
The catch is, if you do the training you need to get sub 40, you'll probably by default drop the weight.
|
|
|
|
|
sonnylax
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 12/30/04 - 16:05 Post subject:
| robp wrote: | | I ran 41:13 at 170 lbs so I'm pretty sure with the proper training sub 40 at 180 is very attainable. |
Cue the music.
Did you ever know that you're my hero?
|
|
|
|
|
jrjo
Gone Fishin
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 16451
Location: Lake Wobegon, MN
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 12/30/04 - 17:36 Post subject:
| Quote: | | The heaviest runner to win the Boston Marathon was Lawrence Brignolia in 1899 (2:54:38). Brignolia reportedly weighed 173 pounds. A blacksmith from Cambridge, Massachusetts, he also participated in rowing events. He died in an auto accident in 1958 at age 82, weighing close to 300 pounds. |
A 2:54:38 calcs to an 'equivalent' of 37:12 for a 10km.
|
|
|
|
