If running a sub 16 minute 5K earned you $100,000 per year, 85% of American males 20 - 40 years old would do it.

typical runner or sockpuppet wrote:

A typical LRC idiot wrote:

They might be "training" but not to the max potential. How many of them run 13 times a week? Probably ZERO. Most of them have full times jobs (or full time study and part time jobs), and cannot devote their life to running fast.

Train for 15 years (starting at age 12-13), with the sole focus on running the fastest 5K possible. Most of them could run under 16, unless they are crippled. Whether $100K is enough incentive for doing that is another question.

Wrong.

Going from 30 mpw to 90 mpw is worth about a minute or two on a 5k.

Okay, but going from 30 to 90 mpw...requires some talent for running and perseverance! It's some aspect of talent all the way down to the ground.

The more I think about this, the more I think that this would be a fantastic economic stimulus plan.

Imagine if this had be implemented when we were going into recession a few years back!

A heck of a lot better than cash for clunkers...I'd imagine that specialty running store sales would soar as well. People would run instead of drive cars so streets would be less crowded and more greenways and pedestrian paths would be built. Maybe it isn't too late to give this a try.

I am a belieber wrote:

If I gave you a 1 day old baby boy and said I will give you $10million dollars if you can train the boy to run sub 16. I would think the success rate would be pretty high, no?

Yes, probably > 5% which is high compared to the general population, but not 85%.

Lots of replies far to one side or the other ITT, with few people really thinking critically.

First, can we clarify that if you run sub-16, you will earn $100k for that year, and that year only? Because if you only had to run sub-16 once, and be guaranteed $100k/year for the rest of your life, the incentive is MUCH greater.

As it stands, $100k for just one year isn't actually that great of an incentive for someone to "train their whole life" to achieve. Which is, more or less, what a relatively large percentage of people would have to do to achieve sub-16.

Before estimating the # of people that would actually find this to be a worthwhile pursuit, it might be helpful to think about the actual maximum percentage of men who could realistically run sub-16 assuming INFINITE incentive.

That's to say, if every male human born were trained from birth with the sole goal of running sub-16 at some point in their life, how many could actually do it? Let's assume that we live in a society where you will be executed at age 30 if you have failed to run a single sub-16 by that age.

Within one generation or so, I think we'd be at 50%. And if you go farther out into the future, in a purely running-based society like this, it seems as though we would self-select that number ever higher, until it's virtually 100%.

Remember, we're talking about children being guided from birth toward a running lifestyle, receiving optimal training throughout their youth, and given the time and incentive required to do their best. A completely different society than the one in which we reside.

Back to the original hypothetical. The number is going to be lower than 50%. By far. Because when you think about the idea that you'll need to stay in sub-16 shape to actually make a "career" out of this, the incentive drops for many people.

The lengths some folks would have to go to to reach sub-16 would probably prevent them from having a normal career. And even 5-7 years at $100k per year isn't that great. What are you going to do when you're done? You'll be ages behind your peers who went right into the regular workforce.

I don't know what percentage of men can currently run sub-16, but let's just say it's 0.1%. I doubt we'd see a jump to anything higher than 1.0% given the $100k/year scenario proposed in the OP. It's just not that valuable unless you can EASILY crack sub-16 and continue to do so for years. It's not worth it to put in 10 years of 90-mile weeks for a single $100k payday.

Is there a human alive, now or ever, who could run a sub 16, xc, daily, for more than ten years of their life?

85% of all statistics are statistically speaking unsound.

Also, if 85% earned $100K a year, everything would cost roughly twice what it costs right now and the world would look just like it does now.

Also, life doesn’t actually end at 40.