Tempo pace for a 4:50 miler?

That is exactly how fast it should be for you. A tempo at your point in development is about as fast as you can run for 20 minutes before you can't really go any further. When you get older and more mature with many more miles, you will be able to run at your tempo pace longer.

Ah... well I guess I just haven't been running them hard enough. Thanks.

5:50 for 3-4 miles is probably a little fast. Comfortably hard is the right feeling. 6:20 is probably too slow, but in the end you should do what you can do at the right effort. If you do them consistently for several weeks, your pace should get faster as you become stronger.

My teamate just recently ran a 4:47 in an indoor meet and he along with a couple other guys who are in that range try to get their tempos in the 5:55 to 6:00 pace. They started off at two miles a month or two ago and now go 3 to 4.

Depends who you are. If you're an anaerobic monster might be as slow as 6:20 or something. If you're a really strength oriented guy maybe closer to 5:30/5:40.

Honestly mile isnt usually a distance that let's you nail down threshold well. A 5 or especially 10k is much better for that.

A minute slower than your mile page is one definition. 25 seconds slower than your 5K case is another. Comfortably hard is a third.

You're not supposed to be going all out. Next time, try starting at 6:20 and then let the right pace come to you. It takes experience to get a feel for it. Nothing wrong with backing off the pace the first few times if you feel yourself racing.

I don't think you could be too wrong aiming for like 6:10. It supposed to be a pace you could hold for a 1 hour race

A minute slower than mile pace or 25s slower than 5k pace is only accurate for relatively fast times.

Better off thinking of it as a percentage. Mile pace plus 20 or 25% is probably a better way to gauge.

As stated above though, 5k is a better baseline to choose a tempo pace from. Again though, it is better as a percentage than a set time off of pace.

In the OP's case, I think his tempo pace is probably around 6:10 pace, possibly slower if he is mostly speed based.

Wefarted wrote:

A minute slower than mile pace or 25s slower than 5k pace is only accurate for relatively fast times.

Better off thinking of it as a percentage. Mile pace plus 20 or 25% is probably a better way to gauge.

As stated above though, 5k is a better baseline to choose a tempo pace from. Again though, it is better as a percentage than a set time off of pace.

In the OP's case, I think his tempo pace is probably around 6:10 pace, possibly slower if he is mostly speed based.

OK. the only thing is 4:50+20% is 5:48 and 4:50+25% is 6:02, so why 6:10? If it helps 5k PR is around 17:10 from cross a couple of months ago. 800 PR is 2:14 from outdoor last year. I think I'll try 6:00/mile if no one has any other suggestions.

LM wrote:

Depends who you are. If you're an anaerobic monster might be as slow as 6:20 or something. If you're a really strength oriented guy maybe closer to 5:30/5:40.

Honestly mile isnt usually a distance that let's you nail down threshold well. A 5 or especially 10k is much better for that.

I'm probably one of the older guys on LRC and to me "tempo pace," since it became a running term is a substitute for what we used to call fast distance.

This means covering 5 miles or so fast but not all out. Some days you will run slower than others depending on how you feel.

As a writer interviewing Olympic runners I have found that many run by feel and do not time everything. Why be so gutbustyclenchfisti?

Bring Back the 880 again4 wrote:

LM wrote:

Depends who you are. If you're an anaerobic monster might be as slow as 6:20 or something. If you're a really strength oriented guy maybe closer to 5:30/5:40.

Honestly mile isnt usually a distance that let's you nail down threshold well. A 5 or especially 10k is much better for that.

I'm probably one of the older guys on LRC and to me "tempo pace," since it became a running term is a substitute for what we used to call fast distance.

This means covering 5 miles or so fast but not all out. Some days you will run slower than others depending on how you feel.

As a writer interviewing Olympic runners I have found that many run by feel and do not time everything. Why be so gutbustyclenchfisti?

I dont think anybody is suggesting tempos be run on the track. I think the suggestion is to run it by feel, but for somebody knew to the concept, it helps to have a minutes per mile to calibrate to. I assume the OP will try to run by feel to a specific pace.

Personally, I do get onto the track about once per season to do some tempo paced stuff just to see how fast it is. I then run my tempos by feel for the rest of the season, but now with a better idea of what that pace is. From day to day I'm sure if speeds up and slows down slightly based on fatigue, etc.

comfortablyhard? wrote:

Wefarted wrote:

A minute slower than mile pace or 25s slower than 5k pace is only accurate for relatively fast times.

Better off thinking of it as a percentage. Mile pace plus 20 or 25% is probably a better way to gauge.

As stated above though, 5k is a better baseline to choose a tempo pace from. Again though, it is better as a percentage than a set time off of pace.

In the OP's case, I think his tempo pace is probably around 6:10 pace, possibly slower if he is mostly speed based.

OK. the only thing is 4:50+20% is 5:48 and 4:50+25% is 6:02, so why 6:10? If it helps 5k PR is around 17:10 from cross a couple of months ago. 800 PR is 2:14 from outdoor last year. I think I'll try 6:00/mile if no one has any other suggestions.

Alright then, 6 flat based on mile pace.

My suggestion of 6:10 was based on the assumption that you may be a newer runner, in which case your speed may be better developed than your aerobic side. This would suggest that a tempo based on mile pace may be a little too fast compared to your 5k time. Your 5k pr seems to be fairly aligned with your mile time, though, so I think you're good to give 6 flat pace a shot. If it starts to feel like a race rather than a moderate workout, slow it down a hair.

As others have stated, a tempo pace of 5:50 is likely a little fast for a speed/undertrained runner. I coach a high school kid who has run 4:52 and we try to do cut-down tempos to get the comfortably hard feeling without getting blown up. Last week 6:20/6:11/5:50 on a flat trail.

If you are a newer runner without a big aerobic base, I think the cut-down is the way to go. You should find that you go faster through the workout without really trying. That's a good tempo run.

I think I've got it. Who knew LRC could be helpful?