I ran 1:08:30 in my first HM. Ran conservatively, dreams of getting near OT standard with some work. Can I do it with these wheels (or lack thereof):
31:10/15:10/4:19/1:59
for 10K/5K/mile/800. I am definitely finding myself to be more distance-oriented. Just curious as to the shorter distance PRs of guys close to the standard for the half.
You might be able to do it, but you'll need to improve your PRs at shorter distances. You have to be able to run 4:57/mile for 13.1 miles. That's faster than your current 10k PR.
I would say that if you ran 1:08:30 in a conservative way, then you could almost certainly have run faster than 31:10 and 15:10 on that very day. So you might not be as far away as it seems.
There's always the marathon, as well, if you find yourself getting better as the distance grows. 2:17 might be the better thing to train for.
You'll find a pretty wide range of prs for 64:xx half guys, especially in the mile and 800. I know guys in the trials with 1:50 800 prs and guys who couldn't break 2 if you put a gun to their head. Even their 5k and 10k prs can show substantial variation. The average is probably like 14:10 and 29:20 or something like that though.
But I don't know why you're worried about your shorter distance prs. Any information we could have gleaned from them is overridden by the fact that you've run 1:08:30, which is better than anything else you've run, especially if it was conservatively run like you said. Based on that I'd say 65:xx is unlikely but not totally out of the question. Of course if you do manage to get down to 65:xx, your 5k and 10k prs will undoubtedly drop substantially, so don't worry about that.
bank with maxpreps wrote:
I ran 1:08:30 in my first HM. Ran conservatively, dreams of getting near OT standard with some work. Can I do it with these wheels (or lack thereof):
31:10/15:10/4:19/1:59
for 10K/5K/mile/800. I am definitely finding myself to be more distance-oriented. Just curious as to the shorter distance PRs of guys close to the standard for the half.
I think you'd need to improve on those shorter PRs to get down to 1:05. My 13.1 PR is 1:08:26 and my other PRs are 30:32/14:49/3:53(1500)/2:00.
I don't think I could have gotten close to 1:05 without improving the other PRs.
68:30 is worth about 2:26 for the full marathon. Might be easier to run 2:18:59 than 64:59 for you.
Of course, the results of his discussion don't matter. You need to get in better shape, regardless of your PRs at any distance. You can run 64 before running the equivilant shorter races, or you can go run 14:10 for 5k and then run some halves.
DougC wrote:
I think you'd need to improve on those shorter PRs to get down to 1:05. My 13.1 PR is 1:08:26 and my other PRs are 30:32/14:49/3:53(1500)/2:00.
I don't think I could have gotten close to 1:05 without improving the other PRs.
Well, sure. But the real question is whether you should specifically try to improve those PRs or rather focus on your goal distance, and let the other PRs drop (as they inevitably will, if you bother to race the distances).
I think it's generally a mistake to put to much emphasis on hitting particular PRs to get yourself ready to PR at a different distance, especially when the distance is longer. What you should do instead is just focus on balanced training:
- Do strides and real sprints year 'round
- When you're a long ways out from your goal race, do intervals at 30-45 seconds per mile faster than goal race pace. Keep the recovery long enough that you aren't accumulating too much oxygen debt. Basically, take what would've been a really hard 3k workout and double the recoveries.
- As you get closer to the race, move your workout pace closer to goal race pace. Do mile repeats at what feels like 10k pace (just so long as it's a solid step faster than goal race pace, you're fine), with short recoveries of 1 minute or 90 seconds.
- In the last 6 weeks, do very hard runs at race pace. Alternate between uninterrupted and broken runs. So one week you might do 30 minutes at race pace. Next week you might do 3x13 minutes with a couple of steady minutes between. Then do the same distance you did in one run (39 minutes, or 40 if you want a round number).
- During each phase, you do one workout per week at whatever speed you're emphasizing and one workout per week at the paces that you already worked on, just to maintain. Those maintenance workouts can be easier, and they can contain a blend of paces.
When I actually ran 1:04:32 (way back in 2011) I was coming off a few years of marathon/half training and 3 years out of college.
PRs in college were: 3:55 (1500m), 8:22 (3km), 14:29 (5km) and 29:47 (10km).
I've known super strong guys who've run around 1:05 and were barely 30:30 10km guys though. More often than not, sub 1:05 guys are at least sub 30-min 10km guys and it usually is going to take that kind of "speed."
It sure helps know you can run at least sub 4:50-4:48 pace for 6.2 miles when you have to try to run 4:57-4:58 pace for 13.1 miles...
30:00 10K is barely faster than 5 min/mile which isn't even what a 65 minute 21.1K is.
rooak wrote:
30:00 10K is barely faster than 5 min/mile which isn't even what a 65 minute 21.1K is.
math genius right here. probably 190 IQ
PRs: 4:18 mile, 14:50, 30:56, 1:05:44, 2:18:15
College PRs: 4:24, 15:27, 31:20, 1:10:10, 2:30 (NAIA)
After college I focused on the longer stuff because I wasn't getting anywhere trying to run a fast 5k or 10k. I couldn't see myself hitting the trials standards in those events, not even close. I switched my focus to the half marathon and marathon with intentions of getting the OTQ. In training I focused on goal race pace. For the half marathon it could be 4-6 mile tempos, 2-3x3mile or 5-6x1mile with 60 sec rest...all of these at goal race pace. Went from 1:10:10 to 1:08:45 to 1:06:44 to 1:05:44 in four consecutive half marathons. For the marathon I did the same thing but more suited for marathon goal pace. Usually long tempos or long intervals with high mileage. Went from 2:30:21 to 2:18:15. This is just what worked for me. This all happened in 2 years. Everyone is different but this is just my experience I thought I'd share.
rooak wrote:
30:00 10K is barely faster than 5 min/mile which isn't even what a 65 minute 21.1K is.
Is this the new trolling? Or am I finally at the age where I look at the previous generation and can't imagine how they function based on their comments.
Most people I know who have run 65 or slightly under are low 30, to high 29 min 10K people. A few exceptions (30:30 being right around the limit, but that is probably more a function of when they ran their PR as I imagine they are faster than that).
I had Track PR's of 1:52; 3:45; 8:16; 14:17; and 29:05. This indicated I should have been able to run a Half in 1:02-1:03 and a Full in 2:12-2:14. My Half PR was 1:09 and my Full PR was 2:23. You can't necessarily base how fast you can run a Half or a Full Marathon off of your Track PR's. My problem was I just could not put together anything that great on the road I was very much so a Track athlete. I only ran the 5000m during my junior year once had I taken it seriously I might have been able to develop into a 13:20 something guy over time but the reality is that doesn't get you very far if you cannot hold your own in any road race. Keep positive put in some solid years and you will develop fine it seems like a few of the great US Runners were not the fastest in College look at Nick Arciniega (spelling?) he turned into an unbelievable marathon runner and had he asked people 10 years ago what they though he was capable of running at the 2016 Chicago Marathon nobody would have ever said I think you will run 2:16, and then go on to run 2:10-2:11.
ran 1:05:40 and won by 4 minutes pr's were 8:20 3k,14:21 5k, 23:35 8k, 29:55 10k, 45:32 15k, all manageable. Think in the right race was capable of 1:04's. Raise your threshold and you with your current times will run fast. Favourite workout was 3 miles steady, 1 mile control, 2 miles hard, 400 easy. Start of season in 33's for 10k but when very fit low 31's. Efficiency and threshold can be improved. Just keep working!
1:59, 3:56 (1500), 8:20, 14:41, 30:07 (4:49 per mile approx.), 66:24 (5:04 per mile approx.)
Was probably in 30:20 10K shape when I ran my half PR. Think you will need to get down below 30:30 to have a realistic shot at. it
bigtool05 wrote:
You'll find a pretty wide range of prs for 64:xx half guys, especially in the mile and 800. I know guys in the trials with 1:50 800 prs and guys who couldn't break 2 if you put a gun to their head. Even their 5k and 10k prs can show substantial variation. The average is probably like 14:10 and 29:20 or something like that though.
But I don't know why you're worried about your shorter distance prs. Any information we could have gleaned from them is overridden by the fact that you've run 1:08:30, which is better than anything else you've run, especially if it was conservatively run like you said. Based on that I'd say 65:xx is unlikely but not totally out of the question. Of course if you do manage to get down to 65:xx, your 5k and 10k prs will undoubtedly drop substantially, so don't worry about that.
The vast majority could break 2 or at least before they moved up in distance
You can't run a 1:05 off poor mile speed and you can't run a decent 1500/ mile withour being able to break 2. After all its easier than sub 4 1500m all the runners I've know could go sub 2 sub 4 and they were not particularly speedy
You should improve your times over the shorter distances, but don't focus on it. The better you are aerobically, those times will be crushed once you do a good race. Keep training for a half marathon, but remember to do sub-half marathon pace work as well, and faster times should come naturally
68 for your first half is solid, especially with those PRs. You should think about hitting 1-3 more halves then see where you can line up a full. My biggest regret is not doing the marathon sooner while I had leg speed. Most won't admit that on here but it's imperative for the marathon
3:48/8:07/8:38 (steeple)/14:20/29:54/1:05:30/2:18:36
ukathleticscoach wrote:
bigtool05 wrote:You'll find a pretty wide range of prs for 64:xx half guys, especially in the mile and 800. I know guys in the trials with 1:50 800 prs and guys who couldn't break 2 if you put a gun to their head. Even their 5k and 10k prs can show substantial variation. The average is probably like 14:10 and 29:20 or something like that though.
But I don't know why you're worried about your shorter distance prs. Any information we could have gleaned from them is overridden by the fact that you've run 1:08:30, which is better than anything else you've run, especially if it was conservatively run like you said. Based on that I'd say 65:xx is unlikely but not totally out of the question. Of course if you do manage to get down to 65:xx, your 5k and 10k prs will undoubtedly drop substantially, so don't worry about that.
The vast majority could break 2 or at least before they moved up in distance
You can't run a 1:05 off poor mile speed and you can't run a decent 1500/ mile withour being able to break 2. After all its easier than sub 4 1500m all the runners I've know could go sub 2 sub 4 and they were not particularly speedy
I'm a 65:20 guy and have a 29:40 10K PR. PR's can be misleading because I ran that back as a junior college and never took a shot at it on the track again.
I also could run a faster half but have moved my focus to the marathon and haven't peaked for a half when I've been at prime shape.
As far as the sub 2 for the 800 I gurantee almost every guy running 65 has sub 2 ability. I have poor speed for guys at my relative level and still ran 2flat for an 800 in high school. Now marathon training has taken some of my speed so I might not be able to do that right now but if I cut mileage and focused on speedwork for a couple months I'm sure sub 2 would be no problem.
Did you run a marathon Primo Numero Uno? If so, how fast?