That should be 50-60 mile range.  This type of logical fallacy is common  
-- that because group A does something means that everyone needs to do  
that something.  In other words, because world-class athletes have certain  
nutritional requirements, means that everyone has those nutritional  
requirements.  That's simply untrue.

The reason comparisons with world class athletes is idiocy:

Consider the filtering mechanism to become world class.
In high school somewhere in the 10-30% range can qualify
if variety sports.  Move on the college and it's 10-30% of
those who can qualify for variety at the college level.  Only
the top 0.1% of the total population can ever be considered
at the semi-pro level in sports.  By the time you're world
class the percentage of the total population is a few more
digits - 0.001% or less.  It's idiocy to think that what works
for a tiny fraction of a percent of a percent makes any sense
for the majority of the population.

So what does make sense for athletic aspirations:  Getting
into the top ten percent of your current bracket, that's what.
For pro athletes that is getting to world class level.  For
college athletes that is getting to pro levels.  For high school
athletes that is making it to college varsity levels.  For 90%
of the population, it's making it to your age group's equivalent
of high school varsity levels.

If you make running a part of your exercise program, that
would mean spending a year building up to the point where
a 10K run is straightforward.  Then starting to compete in
local 10K run events.  Target getting into the top half of your
age bracket.  Get to that level, then think about better.  But
thinking world class means anything to the majority of the
population, lunatic idiocy.

You're doing this at under 100 carb grams per day, right?
so long as I read the book and follow the directions, aka
build up gradually, I don't have any problem working the
Bowflex and such.