Various fitness tests... what are the standards?

Mattt · 02-02-2009, 06:50 PM

For the following 'events':

50m sprint
100m sprint
1 mile run
10k run
# of Burpees in 3 mins
# of push ups in 3 mins
#of squats (no bar, calisthenic) in 3 mins

What would you say reasonable standards are for the following categories: 'moderately fit', 'very fit', 'elite (not olympic level, just 'very very fit')'.

Just trying to see where i'm at and get some ideas of goals to set in future.

DrBdan · 02-02-2009, 08:07 PM

Since I'm waiting for my laundry to be ready I'll throw out some numbers.

- 1 mile run
moderate: 8:00
fit: 6:00
elite: <5:00

- 10k run
moderate: 50 minutes
fit: 40-45 minutes
elite: <35 minutes

- 100 m sprint
moderate: 13 seconds
fit: 12 seconds
elite: 11 seconds

- # of burpees in 3 minutes:
moderate: 40
fit: 50
elite: 60

Those are mostly based on what I can do (or think I could do) and what I found online. thoughts?

andrewbc · 02-02-2009, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBdan

Since I'm waiting for my laundry to be ready I'll throw out some numbers.

- 1 mile run
moderate: 8:00
fit: 6:00
elite: <5:00

- 10k run
moderate: 50 minutes
fit: 40-45 minutes
elite: <35 minutes

- 100 m sprint
moderate: 13 seconds
fit: 12 seconds
elite: 11 seconds

- # of burpees in 3 minutes:
moderate: 40
fit: 50
elite: 60

Those are mostly based on what I can do (or think I could do) and what I found online. thoughts?

jesus christ way to make me feel out of shape. i think some of your times are a bit off though. a 12 second 100m sprint is pretty fast dude. i think a 10 k in 40 minutes would be pretty difficult too

Rocked · 02-03-2009, 12:59 AM

I don't think that his numbers are way off. College distance runners run 10k's in the 28 minutes. Many 10ks for marathoners are in the 35 minute range, so I can't really say that it is off. The 100m in 9.9 and change, but high schoolers are usually in the mid 10's and I would not call them elite, but are truly fit. The others i have no clue but those two distances should be accurate.

andrewbc · 02-03-2009, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocked

I don't think that his numbers are way off. College distance runners run 10k's in the 28 minutes. Many 10ks for marathoners are in the 35 minute range, so I can't really say that it is off. The 100m in 9.9 and change, but high schoolers are usually in the mid 10's and I would not call them elite, but are truly fit. The others i have no clue but those two distances should be accurate.

hmm i wasnt aware of those times. those are all times for athletes that specialize in those "events" though. your post is accurate, but i would like to know what would be considered "good times" for an amateur combat athlete

Rocked · 02-03-2009, 02:24 AM

Some running times that I would think are good for a combat athlete
Mile a 7:00 or better
100m in 11.0
10k in 45:00
I think my numbers may be screwed as I ran track and cross country in high school and was running well, but had friends who were wrestlers running ridiculously quick. They were running 5k in 18 minutes or under miles in the 5:30 range, and were overall very quick runners.

Mattt · 02-03-2009, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewbc

but i would like to know what would be considered "good times" for an amateur combat athlete

Yeah, this is what i'm looking for really.

I will never run 100m in less than 11 seconds.

Does anyone have anymore ideas?

DrBdan · 02-03-2009, 09:22 AM

After looking at the times for a second time they are probably a bit more suitable for an athlete that trains more specifiably for running.

A 8:00 minute mile isn't that hard which would translate to around 50 minutes for a 10k but obviously you would be running a bit slower for a 10k. So maybe add 5 minutes to the 10k time, so <40 minutes would be elite.

For the 100m sprint I don't have any real world experience really so I was basing it off stuff I read online. When the weather gets nicer I'll have to find a track and time my 100m sprint and then come back and edit this post

Rocked · 02-03-2009, 11:58 AM

Numbers really don't mean alot. Everyone of us has a different body type, muscle structure, ect. I can run what I do and even faster becuase I have ran so much, others are bigger than me and stronger and won't run as fast becuase they need more oxygen for the muscle as well as blood and that puts a greater strain on the body. I personally set goals for myself that are just out of reach without a crazy amount of effort, so take it with a grain of salt and just wing it when you train.

SlowMatt · 02-06-2009, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattt

...
What would you say reasonable standards are for the following categories: 'moderately fit', 'very fit', 'elite (not olympic level, just 'very very fit')'.
...

Not sure if you've seen this before, but here's a link to a PDF showing a pretty wide variety of physical tasks and levels to strive for. It's from Crossfit (don't know if that's a plus or a minus in your book) and might give you some idea of where to set your goals or map your progress? I guess anyone who can hit all of the elite categories would be pretty broadly fit.

Athletic Skill Standards