It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I was just wondering if anyone else was feeling a little unfit and inadequate after reading this article in this months magazine?
I would consider myself a fairly good runner with a 5k PB of under 25min and I am generally fit and healthy, however a couple of the tests show me up in a very poor light!
The first one is the speed test. To be judged to be of 'fair fitness' you have to be able to run 400m in 70s. Does that not equate to an approx 5min mile? I usually run my 400m repeat intervals in around 110s so this seems to be extremely fast to me. It seems that to be judged as 'good fitness' you need to be able to run close to a 4min mile!!
The other is the endurance test. In this test you must warm up for 10min and then time yourself for a 30min tempo run, which should be run at a pace just slower than 10k pace. My 10k PB is just under 55min so I would be aiming for approx 9min/mi...so about 3.3mi in 30min. Again, accordig to this test you need to be able to run 4.2mi to be judged as fair, 5.1mi to be judged good and >5.1 miles to be great, So, this equates to somewhere between 6-8min miles for a 30in duration.
Is it not a little unfair to judge fitness based on speed alone??
I couldn't run 30min at 6min/mi if my life depended upon it but that doesn't mean I am not fit does it?