Fitness

A place to talk about fitness and health on Farcaster.

I’ve read this around my FB feed. 
As a runner, I have a strong opinion loosely held: for me it’s much easier to do a sub20 5K.  Considering the fact that I’m a complete beginner in the lifting sector but quite experienced into running. But I remember the sense of achievement the first time I went sub20. Maybe one day I will feel the same benching 100 kg. 

I want to know your opinion on that. In the OP comments it seems that most agreed on this and a good part said 335 lb (150 kg) was more accurate. 

What’s your take?

Im a bit of a degen, but also a chad.
Base Maxi




I guess I should clarify. 

I think less than 1% of the general population can currently do a sub 20 5k.

I’d guess 5% of semi serious runners can do it.

My 50% comment refers to potential, not current capability. I think with structured training and dedication, about half of males aged 15-50 are capable achieving that goal. Most will never try

50% is too optimistic imho. 
We should restrict by age groups for sure, but I think sub20 5k is for like 5% of population. Let’s consider that only 10% do running or at least jogging.

Are we talking 225 just once? I’d say a sub 20 5k is equivalent to 225 x 10.   I think both are achievable by about 50% of a relatively healthy male population. 

PRs for both (at different points in my life:

5k just over 18
225 x 18

like even in the height of my rugby playing, I found it easier to lift heavy than run a fast 5k.  Think my fastest ever being 23mins.

yeah you seems aligned with a lot of comments I've read. many said 30 min was their best.

I can lift 225 pounds, but I can't run sub 20 5k. In the shape I'm in at the moment I think I'd do a 5k in 30mins.