Ok, the first bit is obvious but nessesary, the second part is a theory, please read from start to finish.
A “nearly average” young man (A) walks at around 4 m.p.h for 1 km. lets say 1000 strides.
He walks to work every day (1 km) and that is more or less the only exercise he gets.
He never plays sport or work out, he has an office job, and he is slightly over-weight.
The next person (B) is a VERY unfit lasy older person, sits down ALL day, a lazy bum, even sends other half to the shops to collect their fags and booze etc…sedentry. This person would probably average 2.5 - 3m.p.h for 1 km walk which would make them tired, if they was ever to attempt it.
Person A probably has the ability to jog for 80-100m, they are out of shape.
Person B probably does not even have the ability to run. No kidding, the fitness of an elderly person.
My reasoning that person A can cover a 100m faster than person B is becuase, there is SOME carry-over to sprinting/running, even from walking. (For very out of shape sedentry people.)
Now for the main bit;
Imagine person C;
He faces a long flight of steep stairs (at the beach cliff) which has 50 steps on it. They cover 2 steps per stride and take 25 strides to reach the top. He goe’s up that staircase 40 times (2000 steps) = 1000 strides = 500 left, 500 right. He does this allmost every day. He has developed the ability to where it is even comfortable. To top it off his name is “cool man” lol.
He would obviously win a 100m race against either of the other two.
Actually, he © might very well have sub-elite or even elite sprinting speed, just from that and some sit ups, push ups. = theTHEORY
His genetics are not crap but not sensational.
This is all a hypothetical scenario.
I’m expecting some people to tell me my theory is flawed.(Partly becuase it is unconventional.) I just don’t know why it is flawed.
“Why is this theory a bad one?”