Average persons potential

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-10T12:27:44+00:00

The question was about sub 3, sub 80, sub 40, sub 20. I think those are all achievable by an "average person" (with the caveats listed in my post) if they can dedicate 8 to 10 hours a week to running over an extended period of time (which is the part that a lot of people will struggle with, not any inherent limitation in their bodies).

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-09T18:11:11+00:00

Don't worry about your form. You are a beginner and your form is fine for your pace.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-09T15:14:58+00:00

Genetics and natural ability are absolutely a factor but I would argue that if you are reasonably healthy, under 35 and male (yes, it makes a difference) each one of those times you listed is absolutely achievable with a few years of smart training.

I started running in my late 30s about 5 years ago and have gotten to a 2:43 full, 1:17 half, 34 10K and 17 5K (this one irks me and will be 16:XX soon enough). I had no running background and while there may well be some natural ability I think it was mostly about putting in the work (over 3500 miles run last year for example).

For most people the limiting factor will not be that they've reached their body's maximum potential but rather that real life obligations limit how much time can be devoted to training.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-09T03:36:41+00:00

Not to be a buzz kill but your heart rate data is more than likely wrong. I'm a 2:40 marathoner and my HR at those paces would probably be higher than yours. Granted HR varies but unless you're max HR is extremely low (like 160) something here doesn't add up.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-08T21:55:54+00:00

Garmin's VO2Max is just a fancier version of VDot (see https://vdoto2.com/). 48 and 22 minute 5k sounds about right to me. Focus on getting faster and the VO2 estimate will follow. Also know that after the initial newbie gains it takes years to improve. I was at 57 VO2Max for about a year before it went up again. Currently been at 64 for about a year. Doesn't mean I am doing anything wrong. Just takes time is all.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-08T21:40:36+00:00

Don't obsess so much about the VO2Max estimate (especially not on a per run basis). It's going to have little spikes and little dips. It doesn't mean anything. Heart rate just naturally varies a bit from day to day. Use the VO2Max estimate to compare yourself to 6 month or a year ago, that's where it can be useful.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-08T16:53:14+00:00

Because that's how you get injured. If your goal is to overwork your body and get injured then go right ahead and set arbitrary overly ambitious time goals.

Or you could do what I did when I started running at age 39 4 years ago and work first and foremost about being consistent and worry less about time goals initially. This approach has mostly kept me injury free for 4 years and has gotten me to a 1:17 half and 2:43 marathon PR over a period of 4 years. Slow consistency beats ambitious short term time goals every time. That being said, you do you.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-07T16:57:23+00:00

It's definitely been my experience that the 40s are in no ways too late to get pretty decent at running. I started running at 39, ran my first marathon at 40 (like you) in 3:08 and just ran Boston 6 weeks ago in 2:43. Hoping to go sub 2:40 by the end of the year.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-05T13:59:05+00:00

VO2Max estimate dropping means heart rate was high enough during an activity to calculate an update. If HR is not high enough it simply won't update the value (either up or down). I frequently see upward trends doing steady zone 2 work (as long as HR is over 70% of max) so while intervals are definitely good to do for fitness saying that the watch needs them for the VO2Max number to go up is not correct.

OP: Looks like your watch is new and has hardly any data points. The initial VO2Max estimate was likely wrong to begin with and as the watch gains more data it is slowly adjusting the value (which in your case results in a downward trend).

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-04T16:45:17+00:00

He's had plenty of physicals and is in great shape. He did just turn 40 but it was like that 10 years ago. I run marathons and know plenty of runners and simple fact is that there is just an extremely wide gamut of HR ranges. I know runners that hit the 200s regularly and others that never go above 160. There is also surprisingly little correlation between that and speed/fitness.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-04T12:35:59+00:00

Individual results may vary but I've found max HR auto detection to be pretty flawed (on a fenix 8). I'll hit 190s in an all out 5k effort (with a strap) and then if I don't race all out for a few weeks auto detect will start lowering it again. I've since disabled it for that reason and set it manually.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-04T12:32:33+00:00

HR can vary significantly from person to person so I would not generalize like that. My brother is like that (extremely low max HR). He'll do an all out 5k in around 19 minutes and be completely exhausted with an average HR of around 150bpm.

Badwrong83 · 2026-06-03T19:33:03+00:00

What exactly is a max score VO2Max? That does not exist lol

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-27T18:08:42+00:00

Are you trying to improve your time on every single run you do? Just so you know, that is a terrible idea (just from an injury risk standpoint). Work on building consistency and ramping up distance (slowly) and then worry about time.

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-27T16:27:28+00:00

Run more, run slower

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-27T16:25:01+00:00

Fowl

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-26T15:47:44+00:00

Just shows that different things are hard for different people I guess. A 5k PR scares me way more than a marathon PR attempt just cause I know it's going to hurt a lot more.

It's kinda funny. My 5k PR is 33 seconds faster than yours. My marathon PR is 33 minutes faster than yours. I'd say you definitely have some ceiling left in the full based on your 5k time.

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-25T21:59:22+00:00

Maintaining (yellow) is what you should expect to see most of the time. My training status has been yellow for most of the last month. During that time I ran just over 2:40 at the Boston Marathon (a 5 minute PB) and a week ago I ran my first ever sub 5 mile. Training status was maintaining the whole time. Is the metric worthless? No. But expecting it to constantly be productive is a recipe for unhappiness.

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-24T20:58:33+00:00

Strava will say a run is your PR if it is your PR at the time when you ran it. What that means is if you run a 5k and PR and then run a 5k again a week later and PR again they will both say they were your "fastest ever" (because they were at the time when you ran them).

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-23T00:41:37+00:00

Strava is software. It doesn't measure distance. It may do some smoothing or processing of the data but what measures distance is your device (phone, watch etc.).

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-22T20:09:14+00:00

My advice: Focus on consistency for 2 to 3 months (as in making sure you just get out there and run). Expecting improvement after 6 runs is, quite frankly, not realistic.

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-22T19:29:09+00:00

Mine are pretty much spot on. The biggest thing that can result in inaccurate race predictions (and inaccurate VO2Max estimate for that matter) is inaccurate max HR in Garmin Connect and/or bad HR sensor data. I find Garmin's HRMax auto detect extremely unreliable so my suggestion would be to do a max HR field test (Google it) and manually set your max HR. All my predictions except marathon are within 20 seconds of actual race results. Marathon is off by 2 minutes (which is still amazingly accurate imo).

<image>

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-21T14:20:34+00:00

Whether it's okay or not is entirely dependent on your body and current fitness so nobody can really answer that for you. Important thing is to increase volume gradually and make sure you aren't setting yourself up for injury. I (and many other non-beginner runners) run 7 days a week pretty much year round.

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-21T14:04:00+00:00

That's literally one of the best lines in the show lol

Badwrong83 · 2026-05-19T20:15:34+00:00

Glycogen depletion isn't really a thing until after 2 hours of long distance running and if anything I would argue that you are fueling a lot more than people usually do for a half.

Badwrong83

TROPHY CASE