Running

3023 readers

3 users here now

A place for runners.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

odin@lemmy.world

calhoon2005@aussie.zone

Do you run faster and further than the average UK runner? [and other interesting aggregate running stats from Garmin] (www.runnersworld.com)

submitted 1 month ago by Zagorath@aussie.zone to c/running@lemmy.world

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Defining "a runner" as someone who ran two times per week for at least 75% of weeks of the year, they get:

Japanese runners run the furthest. 41.5 km per week, nearly a marathon equivalent!
UK runners average 31.1 km
UK non-runners average 7.2 km
South African runners average the longest record run, at 42.5 km
UK runners average 30.7 km
UK non-running Garmin users do 15.3 km
Global average run pace is 5:39
UK does 5:50, according to the article. Though it also says the UK does better than the global average, so something may be wrong with their reporting
Ireland: 5:24

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

UK runners have an average of both 31.1km and 30.7km?? Which one is the correct one then?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Each of those bullet points should be read in the context of the bullet point above. 31.1 km is the average weekly distance by UK runners. 30.7 km is the average longest run by UK runners.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I see, that is not clear from the formatting (or wording for that matter)

[–] jboy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Appears to be a conversion issue. Assuming the reported min/mile pace is correct, the UK average pace is 05:34, not 5:50.

(I'm guessing these numbers are means, not medians.)

[–] jboy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago

The article seems to be based on a report from December of last year. Unfortunately I can't find a way to explore the underlying data in greater detail.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Assuming the reported min/mile pace is correct

Ah I see, thanks. I completely skipped over the min/mile paces, because they're completely useless to me. I'm a runner first and foremost, and that pretty much requires working in kilometres even if I didn't use kilometres for my day-to-day, since all common races are measured in kilometres (from the 100 m sprint up to the 42.195 km marathon).

[–] jboy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago

I agree, but sadly certain anglophone publications like to assume that everyone thinks of a marathon as a 26.2-mile event 🙄