Forums >General Running>Weight loss - seconds per mile per pound
I think it is difficult to come up with a metric that specifically equates racing weight with running performance. I found myself in your shoes a while ago and concluded that 6' 2 - 192 pounds was not a good way to run and have taken my weight down to the low 170s. Lo and behold.....I got faster. However, I also went through a very good stretch of properly structured training that I think had more of an impact on my running speed so who knows the actual seconds / mile impact of the the weight loss. In any event, less weight will make you faster (within healthy limits) so why not give it a try?
I think it is difficult to come up with a metric that specifically equates racing weight with running performance. I found myself in your shoes a while ago and concluded that 6' 2 - 192 pounds was not a good way to run and have taken my weight down to the low 170s. Lo and behold.....I got faster. However, I also went through a very good stretch of properly structured training that I think had more of an impact on my running speed so who knows the actual seconds / mile impact of the the weight loss.
In any event, less weight will make you faster (within healthy limits) so why not give it a try?
JML is on to something here because while weight loss will surely make you faster, it almost never happens in a vacuum.
Have you qualified for Boston? I want to interview you!
Message me!
www.miloandthecalf.com
I am sure that I could do better (Race times) at the weight range I have trained for all PRs (200-205)
One issue I have is that I have not stayed in that range for long - Hit the range - run a goal race, get fatter. If I had stayed in that range and raced more often in that range I believe my PRs would be better .... blah, blah, blah - I am sure everyone (At least most) thinks they underperformed their fitenss
But realistically - 200-2:05 pounds - I figure all I could eek out of my body
5k 17:00
10k 35:00
Marathon 2:42
At 43 soon 44, I am sure I am past those numbers
At 175 pounds I feel like I could still ecplipse them.
Long dead ... But my stench lingers !
So if your VDOT = 49 (See table) 191 / 2.2 = 87KG Lose 10KG = 77KG 87KG x 49 = 4263 MMO2 4263 / 77 = 55.4 VDOT 55.4 VDOT ~ 18:18 5k So in theory if you changed nothing else and only reduced your weight, your maximum gain would be the above. You will not change nothign else - Muscle content, aerobic fitness will change and your ability to transfer theoretical gain to actual will be less than 100%
So if your VDOT = 49 (See table)
191 / 2.2 = 87KG
Lose 10KG = 77KG
87KG x 49 = 4263 MMO2
4263 / 77 = 55.4 VDOT
55.4 VDOT ~ 18:18 5k
So in theory if you changed nothing else and only reduced your weight, your maximum gain would be the above. You will not change nothign else - Muscle content, aerobic fitness will change and your ability to transfer theoretical gain to actual will be less than 100%
I support this calculation in my VDOT Calculator - http://fellrnr.com/wiki/VDOT_Calculator - if you put in your current weight, it will give predicted performances based on weight changes.
Some notes http://fellrnr.com/wiki/Weight_Loss_and_Performance
fellrnr, you might want to specify on your calculator page that it's only good for certain paces--slow runners will get a "VDOT out of range" message.