Are fast runners naturally fast, or can you train yourself fast?

I Will Do It! - www.justgiving.com/woof2

27/03/2007 at 22:42

Are fast runners naturally fast, or can you train yourself fast?

Basically I would like to know if its is possible to become a fast runner with pure dedication and training or if you need a certain amount of natural talent? Would I ever be able to run a 3.15 marathon?

Ok, I know that I am a long way off of this now, but with a few years of hard training would this be possible? Do runners that run 6 min miles and then pick up an injury start running again at 9 min miles or just start back at the 6 min mile pace? Do all the different speed training sessions make a difference or just highlight your natural ability?

Are my dreams of being a fast runner just that…a dream?

Johnny J

27/03/2007 at 22:48

You'll get out of it precisely what you put into it. Those with all the right attributes will be just a bit quicker for the same input. It's a long slow process though and there aren't any short cuts.

No they don't restart at 6 minute miling (which is not quick at the very top). They go for some gentle runs and ease their way back in.

JJ

Plodding Hippo

27/03/2007 at 22:49

bit of both i think

Reverend Countess Pig the Capricious of Much Bottom but you may call me Mrs Pig

27/03/2007 at 22:50

Yes and yes

I Will Do It! - www.justgiving.com/woof2

27/03/2007 at 22:51

I know its not the fastest but kind of pitched the 6 min at a respectable speed.

I have done my marathon training and have built up my miles but have not done any speed training. I think i should get a 3.45 for my first one, but am now thinking about my next. Faster one!!

Plodding Hippo

27/03/2007 at 23:02

good for you

see how you do in the first

and then-well-lots of good advice on here

Stille Nam Heilige Nam

27/03/2007 at 23:06

I used to think size matters (i.e. long legs?) but my mate is only barely scraping 5 foot and runs a 38 min 10k.

Silver shadow

27/03/2007 at 23:08

It's a mixture of genetics and hard work. There's obviously a limit to how good a runner you can be. Some people are "natural runners" and can run jaw-dropping times with a modicum of training. Others put in vast amounts of training and end up running pretty average times. The only way you'll find out how much talent you have is by trying. I'd heartily recommend it. One of the great joys of running is pushing yourself and seeing just how good you can be. This is where the other factor comes in: hard work. With a lot of hard work you can achieve a surprising amount. Take a look at theroadtobeijing.co.uk. Alex Vero is somebody who has simply committed himself to being the best he possibly can. With hard work, you can obviously go a long way. You might be interested to know that fast runners don't do all of their running at supersonic pace! I'm fairly nippy and I do a lot of my training at seven-minute pace, which is a lot slower than my race pace. Good luck with the marathon.

Plodding Hippo

27/03/2007 at 23:09

seven----------

er

wibble

yes right

shuffles out of thred

Siance

27/03/2007 at 23:23

I can pick up the pace when I'm nearly home, for the last 0.5 mile. Try it too early and I feel pukey though :o(
Size certainly doesn't matter - a friend of mine is 4'8" and she runs 8 min miles.

My OH who runs 6.5-7 min miles was humbled recently when a tiny female trotted past him up hill on a race, and he never saw her again. It's a great leveller, running!

kittenkat

pirate

28/03/2007 at 07:12

somatatype, natural ability, fast twitch/slow twitch muscle fibres etc. Everyone can reach their potential with the right training/diet etc but some will be faster than others and some will never be super fast.

I have a theory that the potentially fastest runners in the world have not been discovered as running has not crossed their paths.

--amadeus--

28/03/2007 at 10:35

Speed is all relative. In my (ever so 'umble) opinion training maximises whatever talent is there. Some people are naturally faster in teh same way that some can naturally jump higher or are good at maths or languages.

However someone with bags of ability but untrained could be beaten by someone with less ability who has worked thier socks off. Ultimatley though it's about personal development. For example I've taken nearly 3 mins a mile off my pace from when I began mid length runs.

I'm interested in your own experience - you say you are aiming at sub 3:45 in your first marathon. How long have you been running and how have you decided that target?

PhilPub

28/03/2007 at 10:55

You could always have a muscle biopsy to assess your proportion of slow-twitch, fast twitch type-A and fast-twitch type-B muscle fibres. Doesn't sound like a barrel of laughs though.

Stille Nam Heilige Nam

28/03/2007 at 11:14

It says that Olympic sprinters have been shown to possess about 80 percent fast twitch fibers while those who excel in marathons tend to have have 80 percent slow twitch fibers. http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/exercisephysiology/a/aa080901a.htm At the same time though there is some evidence showing that human skeletal muscle switches fiber types from "fast" to "slow" due to training.

For a beginner to know which race length suits their biology the best and gives them the best chance of getting decent times is it just a case of experimenting with different distances? I did some sprints with my (elite) running pal who was positively surprised considering I've not run that long. She thinks I may be better suited to short fast races? I found my first half very hard and feel I have much more of a chance to improve my 10k times? Is it just a cop out or could it be that there are some race lengths that suit my genetics better than others?

beebs

28/03/2007 at 11:23

IWDI

boinged an old thread for you

Ultra Ironwolf pirate

pirate

28/03/2007 at 11:29

you answered your own question - if you have predominantly fast twitch you will most likely feel more comfortable and do better at the shorter distances. Only time (or a biopsy)will tell. You don't say how long you trained for the half - maybe you just weren't ready for it?

PhilPub

28/03/2007 at 11:33

If you start to put together a few race results and PBs over different distances, you can then compare the numbers against age-adjusted tables for performance.

Hope this works...

http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/agtimes.php

Stille Nam Heilige Nam

28/03/2007 at 11:37

Build up to it over half a year. Will try another in autumn in the meantime keep experimenting? I feel really weak with legs like lead over 9-10 miles. Also develop problems and pains I don't have on runs shorter than 8-9 miles. Could never imagine ever surviving a full mara? Maybe its just very early days?

Stille Nam Heilige Nam

28/03/2007 at 12:42

PP: Interesting. Thank you!! For me the age/gender comparisons are much more favourable the shorter the race, and decidedly average for half mara.

nrg-b

28/03/2007 at 13:31

A few points, IMHO:

1. For the majority of people especially those who post here (me included!), genetics plays a minor part.

2. Childhood and adolescent lifestyle also plays a minor part. Loads of former couch potatoes here (me included!).

3. The major areas that can lead to fast running is:
- training approach: sensible schedules, nutrition, rest, etc
- realistic objectives, personal commitment, consistency, positive attitude, discipline etc
- running style & technique in terms of a skill which anyone can learn.

The part on skill is hardly ever mentioned.

Hot threads

Most discussed articles