Couldn't find what you looking for?

TRY OUR SEARCH!

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?

Loading...

I don't see why not

Do you have any times for other races or distances that we can do our comparision on
Reply

Loading...

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!
Reply

Loading...

For 4 weeks of running I improved from ~58 min down to 51:45.
Reply

Loading...

That's a good progression. Maybe try to some speedwork on interval training. How many miles a week are you running?
Reply

Loading...

Not a lot and I don't plan to run more than 50-60 km per week
Reply

Loading...

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...
Reply

Loading...

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.
Reply

Loading...

I ran 41:13 at 170 lbs so I'm pretty sure with the proper training sub 40 at 180 is very attainable.
Reply

Loading...

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.
Reply

Loading...

Cue the music.
Did you ever know that you're my hero?
Reply

Loading...

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.
Reply

Loading...

The heaviest runner to win the Boston Marathon was Lawrence Brignolia in 1899 (2:54:38). Brignolia reportedly weighed 173 pounds. ...


Hi, found your topic by searching on google.
I'm a bit heavyer than you are(230 pounds) I'm some kind of bodybuilder, but not a serious muscle head. So I usally run on treadmill, even so my results are fare away from yours (48min to 10000, but 5min to one mile), I used to be a good runner back when I was playing rugby, but I was always to heavy to be a runner. What do you think is there any kind of running sports that are related to weight, like handicap or sometin'?

thx.

Reply

Loading...

Like another guy said, you'll lose weight training for the sub 40min 10k.
Reply

Loading...