1) March: 6x 1k w/ 3 min rest on the track from 3:30 down to 3:24, avg. 3:26
2) A week ago: 8x1/2 mi on flat gravel path with 2 min rest.
First 2:50, avg. 2:48, last 2:38. Path is pretty soft/absorbs energy.
Can you compare my fitness at these two times. (especially for 5k xc and or the mile/2mile)
Prs: 4:50, 17:50
epic failure wrote:
1) March: 6x 1k w/ 3 min rest on the track from 3:30 down to 3:24, avg. 3:26
2) A week ago: 8x1/2 mi on flat gravel path with 2 min rest.
First 2:50, avg. 2:48, last 2:38. Path is pretty soft/absorbs energy.
Can you compare my fitness at these two times. (especially for 5k xc and or the mile/2mile)
Prs: 4:50, 17:50
first workout is way better. your PRs are weird because these workouts only say 5:00/18:30 to me. I'm guessing injuries?
In terms of fitness, the two workouts are nearly the same. You're probably fitter now based on more running, but exactly how much is impossible to tell from the workouts.
Your mile PR is significantly better than your 5K PR. The two workouts both predict around 17:20, while the mile PR predicts under 17, but you need to develop the endurance to realize that time.
how can I have barely improved after months of training? I increased my mileage, started doing long runs and tempos, etc. I might as well have sat around all summer.
reality czech wrote:
In terms of fitness, the two workouts are nearly the same. You're probably fitter now based on more running, but exactly how much is impossible to tell from the workouts.
Your mile PR is significantly better than your 5K PR. The two workouts both predict around 17:20, while the mile PR predicts under 17, but you need to develop the endurance to realize that time.
Bet. No way this kid is running low 17s right now. Trust me I probably know more about this than you.
epic failure wrote:
how can I have barely improved after months of training? I increased my mileage, started doing long runs and tempos, etc. I might as well have sat around all summer.
cuz you aren't a good runner..? what is the point of this thread? you're clogging up the forum.
I'd agree the first workout is better but I don't think it indicates 5/18:30. His pr's are believable.
I'd disregard the second or just not draw any conclusions. Wait for a race to get an indication of true fitness.
Not a big difference between workouts. Running on the track is certainly easier than on xc. The reality is that you are just under developed aerobically. I think it's pretty common for 4:50 track 1600 guys to run 17:45-18:00 in cross country. On a super flat course 17:30-17:45. On a tough course 18:00-18:15.
Never listen to people who talk about how "this time for this distance predicts for another distance". They don't know your individual partiality towards speed or endurance. Sure, endurance can be improved, but the extent to which that can happen and the methods used will vary greatly between a fast-twitch guy and a slow-twitch guy.
I would say that the March workout is marginally better than the last-week one. Sure, the times were significantly faster on the first one, but the rest ratio was more difficult for the second, plus the second workout was done on gravel, which I know from experience can really affect performance.
Because you haven't done any race prep yet. Most of summer was to increase your strength, so you don't have the speed yet to be in PR shape. But come championship season, when you will be doing tapers and 200 workouts, your legs will be faster and you will have gained the endurance over the summer to PR.
epic failure wrote:
how can I have barely improved after months of training? I increased my mileage, started doing long runs and tempos, etc. I might as well have sat around all summer.
Do you race above your workouts? I would interpret those as 17:3x and 17:15, respectively, because the gravel slows you down.
^ for a flat 5k.
epic failure wrote:
I might as well have sat around all summer.
That's the spirit! Wish I had realized this when I was younger. Life is too short to waste running, because in the end, we all end up hobbyjoggers.
decadence wrote:
Do you race above your workouts? I would interpret those as 17:3x and 17:15, respectively, because the gravel slows you down.
I don't think I usually run that far above my workouts, but the one last week was the monday after a saturday race and a sunday 10-miler (long for me and hilly). Maybe when I'm rested I'll be a few seconds faster.