5x2000, what can I run

I did a similar workout, 4 x 2km off 3 mins averaging 5.54's. I ran just under 31 minutes for 10km shortly after and 68 minutes for a half. I reckon you are in sub 34.15 minute shapes. Good luck "...da king". Keep us posted!

Do the math wrote:

10k hopeful wrote:

If I can't run under 35 off of that, I'm very interested to know what my workout should be to run 33:30.

Your workout totaled 10K in 33:10 with 3 minute breaks every 2K. I'm sorry to break it to you, but there's no way you run 33:30 ore even 35:00 off that.

Could you please tell me what they should have been in to run 33:30?

Assuming you didn't rest up before the session, you should comfortably run sub-33 on race day. I did the same workout but with only 90 seconds recovery last April and ran 33:35 three weeks later. My splits were in the 6:40-6:43 range and I was doing a lot less base mileage.

Actually, I meant sub-33:30. he he

for f*** sake people...it's not rocket f***ing science...3:19/km x 10

Could you please tell me what they should have been in to run 33:30?

The responses to your question are very telling. (Telling, with regards to the posters who claim that "there is no way that you can run ...") This tells me, and it should come as no surprise, that there are a lot of "Tuesday Afternoon Heroes" out there "winning" their workouts, but falling short in the races - when it counts.

Given your mileage, recent 5K effort and this workout, you should be able to run sub 34:00.

As for me, I'm not a Tuesday Afternoon hero, I can't race sub 34 without a monumental effort but I know I can do that workout without one.

Maybe this guy can knock it out of the park but the workout just doesn't show that. Remember, he took a LOT of rest between each 2000.

Tuesday Afternoon Hero wrote:

This tells me, and it should come as no surprise, that there are a lot of "Tuesday Afternoon Heroes" out there "winning" their workouts, but falling short in the races - when it counts.

I'm not sure I understand, are you suggesting that people who push themselves very hard on workouts are doing more harm than good?

5krun wrote:

Tuesday Afternoon Hero wrote:

This tells me, and it should come as no surprise, that there are a lot of "Tuesday Afternoon Heroes" out there "winning" their workouts, but falling short in the races - when it counts.

I'm not sure I understand, are you suggesting that people who push themselves very hard on workouts are doing more harm than good?

Ding ding, we have a winner...

thats right cause tergat never did that neither did khannouchi or jim ryun or seb coe or el g or any of those guys they took all their workouts e.z.

It seems to me that what time this person can run off this training depends on many factors. I reckon anywhere between 32.30 and 35 mins! I personally dipped under 32 mins having just run 40 mile per week for 4 weeks with random efforts thrown in. I could not tell you what times i wouldve knocked out for 5 x 2k at this point in time!

Well that's kinda what I was thinking. I see the point in running with consitency and not killing yourself so that you can't run tomorrow, but then again sessions have to be hard, otherwise why not just run long and steady?

Gotta disagree with you there, Average_Joe. 3 minutes is just about the right amount of recovery for this session as a workout. That makes it too much recovery to be a good race predictor, but that's a different question. Oh wait, it is the question ...

Obviously you never get a random sample on here, but I happen to think that these "what can I for Y after N x X at Z pace" threads aren't the crying shame that some people make them out to be. Sure, it would be lovely to always know based on your own history what a workout indicated (if you believe workouts reveal the shape you're in, rather than make you into the shape you want to be in) but rapid improvement, injury, whatever, means one's own past experience is not always a reliable guide.

Now, sure there are probably people who would claim a prediction from a letsrun thread as their PR in some circumstances. And the best prediction is a race itself.

At their best, these threads offer people a range of possibilities for what they could run. That can be helpful, either in restraining people from believing they're in better shape, or maybe giving them a sense they could achieve something a little better than they'd imagined. Nothing wrong with that.

I did the exact same workout a few years back, also with a three-minute rest, and ran all the 2Ks between 6:35 and 6:40.

I ran the 10K race two weeks later in 33:45. My PR at the time was not close to yours - actually, I PRd in the 10K race when I came through at 16:45. (Came back with 17:00 for second 5K.)

Running 80 miles per week and with a 15:59 5K PR, I think you can run close to 33:00, as long as you pace yourself correctly. A 16:30 shouldn't hurt too bad, and you can probably come back with a 16:30 to 16:45.

Good luck. Report back after you race.

i agree with this prediction as well. you have the potential to break 33 also. kick ass bud.

-jorge

Well thanks for the responses all, I plan on going out at about 16:30-16:45 depending on how I'm feeling and how the race goes. We'll see from there and I'll post my time on here, see how close everyone was.

kartelite wrote:

5krun wrote:

I\'m not sure I understand, are you suggesting that people who push themselves very hard on workouts are doing more harm than good?

Ding ding, we have a winner...

5krun wrote:

Well that's kinda what I was thinking. I see the point in running with consitency and not killing yourself so that you can't run tomorrow, but then again sessions have to be hard, otherwise why not just run long and steady?

there's a time and place for super intense workouts and not so intense workouts. your workouts aren't meant to prove your fitness, they're meant to improve it. the times don't matter as much as the effort. how fast you recover from one interval to the next and the time it takes you to recover from one session to the next will show as much about your fitness as the times you run. i did 5x2k with 400 jog in 6:12, 6:13, 6:13, 6:13 and 6:12. add those up and you get 31:03 for 10k. the effort was very hard and running that pace without a break would've been impossible that day. i ran 31:01 on the track 16 days after that workout.

the point is to mix up a couple super hard sessions, do a bunch of solid, consistent sessions, mix in some easier ones and be best prepared for your most important session which happens on race day.

the op should be able to run right around 33 minutes. the 5x2k workouts shows some pretty good aerobic fitness. 15:59 shows some race sharpness. 79s and 80s in a race setting should be doable. good luck.

With guys claiming that they ran this workout, but only ran 35 min, they are racing their workouts.

You must train as the athlete you are, not the one that you want to be.

If you are a 31:00 min 10K runner, you are not going to become a 28:00 min 10K runner by doing workouts at the same pace as the 28:00 min guy.