Sub 14:50 5k shape indicators?

When did you run sub 15? How many times have your run under 15 minutes? Are you a man?

wow bro you're fast

It's a 5k. They have those almost every weekend pay the $20 get your t-shirt and find out. If not you ran a good workout and can try again in 2 weeks.

I would say none of those are indicators of sub 1450. The 1600s are too slow to truly indicate sub1450 (4:46pace). LT is roughly 5:10 on average for someone who can run sub 1450. Your tempo is far off from that (5:35+ to start) and then 5:19 for the next 4.. That 5:35 is more like what a 1530 guy would do.

All that said though none of this means you aren't in sub 1450, but none of it says you are. Everyone is different. You ran sub 15 so what did you do when you ran that? Tell us that then we can tell you if these new workouts show a 10s difference.

None of the workouts you posted indicate that you can run 3 consecutive 4:46 miles.

LetsRunFaster wrote:

Recently had some decent workouts and was wondering if I am close to my goal of sub 14:50 shape. First one (last Monday) was 4x1600 in 4:57, 5:00, 4:59, 4:58 with 200m run recovery then 4x300 in 1:27 average. Second workout (last Wednesday) 8x300 in 47 average with 200m run recovery. Saturday was a mile race in 4:24 (closed in 62). Yesterday 13 mile long run with 7 miles at tempo (2 mi WU (6:30s), 3 miles relaxed tempo (5:41, 5:35, 5:37), 1 mile easy (6:28), 4 miles tempo (5:25, 5:18, 5:16, 5:17), 3 mile CD (6:30s). PR in the 5k is just under 15 minutes. Thoughts?

Doesn't make any sense. I ran reps in those sorts of time and I never broke 15'. Either your course was short or you train like a pansy. Also your mile time quoted is rubbish for a sub 15 guy. You should be sub4 1500m shape MINIMUM.

I'm confused by some of these workouts. I don't get how your threshold pace is as slow as it is relative to those 1600m repeats - the workout that was head and shoulders above anything else you listed.

I don't think that any of those other workouts indicate 14:50 shape, but that 1600s workout was a really strong workout. I'm not sure people are focusing on the roughly 1:00 rest in between.

Still, the other workouts and the 4:24 don't strike me as sub 15:00 indicators (even with a nice close to the race).

The best indicator is your sub 15 pr. How long ago was that?

These workouts aren't particularly impressive, but if they weren't too difficult you're not too far away.

Another poster mentioned you train like a pansy. Maybe. Or maybe you race like a BEAST.

LetsRunFaster wrote:

Recently had some decent workouts and was wondering if I am close to my goal of sub 14:50 shape. First one (last Monday) was 4x1600 in 4:57, 5:00, 4:59, 4:58 with 200m run recovery then 4x300 in 1:27 average. Second workout (last Wednesday) 8x300 in 47 average with 200m run recovery. Saturday was a mile race in 4:24 (closed in 62). Yesterday 13 mile long run with 7 miles at tempo (2 mi WU (6:30s), 3 miles relaxed tempo (5:41, 5:35, 5:37), 1 mile easy (6:28), 4 miles tempo (5:25, 5:18, 5:16, 5:17), 3 mile CD (6:30s). PR in the 5k is just under 15 minutes. Thoughts?

The only thing that is a little off are your tempos, but people also don't notice that they are in the context of a long run. For all we know, the goal would be to feel comfortable and progressive. At the end he ran 5:19 average for 4 miles off the back of 6 previous miles (2 being at quality pace, the other 3 being at higher-end aerobic pace). It isn't as conventional as a 20 minute tempo or whatever Daniels might spew out (sorry Smoove), but he is ready to crack 15:00 for sure.

My walk-on guys run similar to him and the group ran under 14:50 together solo a few weeks back. Please don't say they are talented either. Two never broke 10:00 last year as HS seniors. The key for you will to hold on during the 6th-10th laps and then imagine a hard 1k is all you got.

20-25 seconds slower than your 5k estimated mile pace is too aggressive for tempo running in my opinion--at least when it is continuous. Your speed is there. Your threshold/stamina is there. Yeah sure, your 1600 reps could have been more specific when it comes to pace, but that stuff really isn't important as people make it out to be. Good luck this season.

I'm not sure if he can break 15 but everyone crapping on his tempo saying it isn't right in line with the 5:10 LT pace he should be hitting are pretty far off base.

It was in the middle of a long run and include 7 quality miles. Not all tempos have to be daniel's 1 hour race pace pretty tough tempos.

If I had done with workouts the OP had done I'd bet I'd be under 15, but I am also much more fast twitch than most distance runners, so I struggle pace-wise with the longer workouts.

Here are comparable workouts I ran when I went 14:53. I believe I was in sub-14:50 shape at the time:

3 x 1600m [4:30 rests]; 2 x 800m [2:15 rest]; 1:00 rest after last 800m, then 1 x 300m fast

4:44, 4:43, 4:44, 2:21, 2:20, 45.2

6400m tempo [4:00 rest]; 3200m tempo

20:33 (5:06, 5:09, 5:07, 5:09); 10:26 (5:13, 5:13)

4 x 200m [1:10 rests]; 2 x 800m [4:30 rests]; 6 x 400m [2:10 rests]

34, 32, 33, 32

2:09, 2:09

62, 65, 63, 63, 63, 62

Hope that helps. Don't copy/paste these workouts -- there was a lot of training that led up to them.

jewbacca wrote:

Here are comparable workouts I ran when I went 14:53. I believe I was in sub-14:50 shape at the time:

3 x 1600m [4:30 rests]; 2 x 800m [2:15 rest]; 1:00 rest after last 800m, then 1 x 300m fast

4:44, 4:43, 4:44, 2:21, 2:20, 45.2

6400m tempo [4:00 rest]; 3200m tempo

20:33 (5:06, 5:09, 5:07, 5:09); 10:26 (5:13, 5:13)

4 x 200m [1:10 rests]; 2 x 800m [4:30 rests]; 6 x 400m [2:10 rests]

34, 32, 33, 32

2:09, 2:09

62, 65, 63, 63, 63, 62

Hope that helps. Don't copy/paste these workouts -- there was a lot of training that led up to them.

You worked really hard to break 15:00. What was your background? That is too much in my opinion for what you got out of it. Anecdotally, I find ~30 seconds off of 5k pace a much better indicator than what a lot of people prescribe (which the OP is right at). Sounds like you were a bit underdeveloped aerobically and/or at a fundamental speed level.

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

I'm not sure if he can break 15 but everyone crapping on his tempo saying it isn't right in line with the 5:10 LT pace he should be hitting are pretty far off base.

It was in the middle of a long run and include 7 quality miles. Not all tempos have to be daniel's 1 hour race pace pretty tough tempos.

If I had done with workouts the OP had done I'd bet I'd be under 15, but I am also much more fast twitch than most distance runners, so I struggle pace-wise with the longer workouts.

It wasn’t in the middle of a long run. He warmed up for 2 miles and then started the first section. He just called it a “long run”.

As I think we've covered before, There is a place in the Daniels world for longer and slower tempo efforts, progrsssion runs, etc. our perspectives on that are not as fart apart as some may think.

That being said, I'm 46 and in 15:30 shape and the only workout that I'm sure I couldn't do out of those the OP set out was the 1600s on a minute rest. All of the tempo efforts were eminently doable, and I think the 300s in 47 are probably doable.

Jewbacca's workouts are aboutbehat if expef to see a 14:45-14:50 guy doing in training - pretty conventional stuff there.

Former Sub 14:00 wrote:

You worked really hard to break 15:00. What was your background? That is too much in my opinion for what you got out of it.

What does any of the above mean?

duhwhat? wrote:

Former Sub 14:00 wrote:

You worked really hard to break 15:00. What was your background? That is too much in my opinion for what you got out of it.

What does any of the above mean?

I think he means that the guy put in more effort than some others to break 15:00. I didn’t work as hard as him to do it but I know others that did even more.

Former Sub 14:00 wrote:

You worked really hard to break 15:00. What was your background? That is too much in my opinion for what you got out of it. Anecdotally, I find ~30 seconds off of 5k pace a much better indicator than what a lot of people prescribe (which the OP is right at). Sounds like you were a bit underdeveloped aerobically and/or at a fundamental speed level.

Worked really hard how? The paces and workout volumes do seem pretty standard. I underperformed slightly in my goal race, but not terribly. I ended up with 3:59.9 for 1500 and 14:53 for the season, which line up by VDOT. Are you commenting on the tempo workout? The pace there also follows VDOT, though the pace in that run more or less just happened rather than me forcing it to fit the VDOT tables. I ran that one more by feel than anything.

I was pretty well developed aerobically. It's my speed that was lacking, which is why I made this season 1500m/5000m focused. My mile PR coming in was 4:25. I was shooting for sub-14:40 but never quite got there.

jamin wrote:

None of the workouts you posted indicate that you can run 3 consecutive 4:46 miles.

breh... you don't know a damn thing lol #worsetrollonletsrun

Agree. I tend to agree with Former Sub 14:00 a lot more than I disagree, but this is a head scratcher to me. You posted three workouts - an interval workout, a tempo workout and a speed workout - that were intended to be comparable to three workouts posted by the OP.

- Volume and pace for the intervals were in line with what one would expect.

- Pace for the tempo workout was right in line with conventional wisdom.

- Pace for the reps was at most a little on the fast side, but not by more than a second or so, and that is well within any margin of error.

The only thing that indicates a disproportionate effort relative to conventional wisdom is the total volume of the rep workout, and, depending on your mileage, arguably the tempo workout. But for a strength oriented runner trying to develop his speed some, the tempo volume is not really very surprisingly high. That leaves the rep work out as the only workout that, if I were your teammate at the time, might make me think, "Man, that guy is putting in some serious work, I need to step it up some if I am going to keep up."