6 mile tempo @ 6:15 pace, predict my 10K

37:17

If you are a good racer, you might dip into 36.

6:00 will be a stretch, your pacing of that "tempo" does not indicate controlled effort.

You can probably run 5:50 pace for 5K, 6:05 for 10K. My guess is 37:30 to 38.

I agree with the others. Most people's tempo paces are 10 to 15 seconds slower than 10k race time. Or maybe I should say most calculators put it at that. But a recent race of mine bore out the same results (tempo mid 5:50s, 10k race low-ish 5:40s).

And it does sound like you were reaching a tad on that workout. But that kind of subjective stuff is always really hard to get across in writing.

With this info, I think you should shoot to go out in 6:00 to 6:05. Roll comfortably and start squeezing the pace down after 3.5 miles or so.

But you also only listed one workout. What have your other workouts been like? Past races?

37:00

maybe this: wrote:

You can probably run 5:50 pace for 5K, 6:05 for 10K. My guess is 37:30 to 38.

I am much more on the anaerobic side still. I raced a somewhat hilly 5K a couple weeks ago and the average pace was 5:28. Also to the person that said that it wasn't controlled, it was, it didn't feel anywhere close to the pain you feel at the end of a race

OVO wrote:

maybe this: wrote:

You can probably run 5:50 pace for 5K, 6:05 for 10K. My guess is 37:30 to 38.

I am much more on the anaerobic side still. I raced a somewhat hilly 5K a couple weeks ago and the average pace was 5:28. Also to the person that said that it wasn't controlled, it was, it didn't feel anywhere close to the pain you feel at the end of a race

So low 17 for 5k? If that was your time you should be able to do 5:50s for the 10k.

But if that is your recent 5k time, then your tempos should comfortably be 6 flat. If your aerobic fitness is lacking, then tempos around 6:10 to 6:15 would make sense. But I think that would be the better predictor of your 10k potential than your recent 5k.

Tricky stuff. I'd still say go out around 6 flat and then try to push things down. Either way, it will be a learning experience. Have you raced many 10k's?

itdepends wrote:

But if that is your recent 5k time, then your tempos should comfortably be 6 flat.

Simply not true.

5:50 is a very reasonable 10K pace based on his tempos without knowing his 5K.

Sorry, should not have made it sound like fact. But I grabbed that number from three different pace calculators. McMillan and Daniels both had the tempo pace sub 6, actually.

OVO wrote:

maybe this: wrote:

You can probably run 5:50 pace for 5K, 6:05 for 10K. My guess is 37:30 to 38.

I am much more on the anaerobic side still. I raced a somewhat hilly 5K a couple weeks ago and the average pace was 5:28. Also to the person that said that it wasn't controlled, it was, it didn't feel anywhere close to the pain you feel at the end of a race

Are you kidding me? 36:30 for sure.

itdepends wrote:

Sorry, should not have made it sound like fact. But I grabbed that number from three different pace calculators. McMillan and Daniels both had the tempo pace sub 6, actually.

Most serious runners here agree those calculators are stupid.

I agree being a strict follower of the calculators is pretty stupid. But I am often surprised at how close they can be, which is why I think they can still be worth looking at.

itdepends wrote:

I agree being a strict follower of the calculators is pretty stupid. But I am often surprised at how close they can be, which is why I think they can still be worth looking at.

Could be, I think they almost always give tempo paces that are too fast though

OVO wrote:

maybe this: wrote:

You can probably run 5:50 pace for 5K, 6:05 for 10K. My guess is 37:30 to 38.

I am much more on the anaerobic side still. I raced a somewhat hilly 5K a couple weeks ago and the average pace was 5:28. Also to the person that said that it wasn't controlled, it was, it didn't feel anywhere close to the pain you feel at the end of a race

I always think people asking for predictions are running these workouts pretty hard and will improve a little in a race. A 5K race has more value as a predictor than a 'tempo' for which we're not sure of the effort level. Throw that 5K number into a calculator and add a little time to the result to account for being 'anaerobic,' as you say, and you'll have a decent estimate.

HardLoper wrote:

itdepends wrote:

Sorry, should not have made it sound like fact. But I grabbed that number from three different pace calculators. McMillan and Daniels both had the tempo pace sub 6, actually.

Most serious runners here agree those calculators are stupid.

I look at both VDOT and McMillan quite a bit. For my own running I find them to be quite accurate.

Thanks all, I'll make sure to post my results on here after the race

I think you got sub 40 locked up!!! good luck!!!!

I'd bet 5:50-5:55 based on your description. Sounds like the tempo wasn't too hard if you only "slightly pushed" on the last mile. Even when my tempos feel very hard my tempo pace is still 25-30s slower than 5k pace. People forget that while there is a scientific definition of "tempo", such as "slightly faster than lactate threshold steady state", your 80% effort might actually be 90% or 70% or whatever. Lots of variation.

OVO wrote:

Thanks all, I'll make sure to post my results on here after the race

Awesome. Have a fast fun race. And I look forward to hearing how it goes.