10 mile to 1500 conversions?

The two distances are too unrelated to make a conversion from one to the other. I'm 19 and run in college, and from your times i believe i would finish in front of you in the ten miles but you would completely house me in the mile. Don't worry about it and just do your best and have fun is all I can tell you.

~BigBear

Leroy, how have your xc results been this winter? Have they been at club or college level?

How much training were you doing at 15/16? The kind of 400m/800m ability that you had at 16 will not have left you by the forthcoming summer, and providing you work on your 400m/800m sessions then you will find that you are running at least as fast as your 400m/800m pb in your very first outings....this is just the way things happen at your age, natural improvement with growth. You should be aiming for around 51-52 sec/1:53-1:55 though this year.

Anyway, much of your 1500m performance this summer is going to depend heavily upon these two distances, in conjunction as Tinman says with the continued work on your aerobic system. However, I think that Tim's prediction is far closer to what is 'possible' this summer, but you will have to ensure that you are in the right place at the right time to run the optimum race.

To that end, what kind of races will be on offer to you this summer?

my x-c results have been okay, not what they were before injury, but that's to be expected as the competitors have moved on.

At 15/16, i was training much the same as now, except the mileage was about 15 less, i.e-30-35 a week, with maybe two track sessions and a fartlek or something else. However, 2 years ago, i went a lot slower on my long runs and used them to recover and go easy. Now, as my 10 miler shows, i've been going a lot faster even on my "off" days for 8 or nine miles, when it used to be 5 or 6.

I'll be running races for my school and club, some of which are always fast with a good pace. I can also run in this junior race at a good senior meet, won last year in 3.55.

a 51-52 sec 400 sounds pretty fast, especially at the moment when my speed on track isn't too great, but i guess that's whats needed.

>You should be aiming for around 51-52 sec/1:53-1:55 though this year

Well if are we saying 3:55 is possible (and agree everything is only possible until you actually do it) then I was right on the very upper (slow) side of those ranges. I did 3:55.5 for 1500 but 1:55.8 for 800 (only 1:56.2 when I did the 3:55) and 52.8 for a 400 relay leg.

When all is said and done, I would not get too hung up on these predictions. The key is to get out there, put in the training, try a few races with different tactics and see how it goes.

Why don't you just timetrial a 1500 and see what time you get?

Timetrials are useful, but only if the athlete is very very comfortable running one. I certainly would not push an athlete into a timetrial over his/her racing distance. Instead perhaps look at a 1200m tt, and remember, timetrialling takes practice sometimes so don't panic if the result does not match how you feel in training.

to be honest, if i tried a time trial tomorrow, i'd be doing well to get 4.20, as i feel quite sluggish and have got a bit of an awakening of how much is needed to be done to get to 3.55 since getting back on the track and looking at my current times. what i was hoping to predict was my capability for the 1500 in 6 or 7 months time.

Try an 800-1000m time trial to see where you are at, periodically, or do an 800m race. It doesn't take much out of you and you don't have to adjust your training much before or after it. Seriously, not only can you get feedback, but you can use it as a means of training. Add some more reps or a tempo run to it and you have good workout. Tinman

Dude, my pr in the 10 mile was 57 minutes in HS... my 1500 meter pr was 3:51. I used to do 4 x 400 meter workouts with a TWO minute rest at 56 to 57 seconds per 400. If you are really interested in busting 3:55, don't worry about your 10 mile time... worry more about your 1,200, 800 and 400 speed. You said you could run a 54 400m and only a 2:01 800m? Please... if you think you can slow only seven seconds a lap and do 4 times the distance... not going to happen. I could run 49s flat, thats twelve seconds slower per lap to run a 4:05 mile, BIG difference. I know this is the "speed" approach to the 1500... but lets face it, The 1,500 is a speed event. With the slow foot speed you appear to have and the descent endorance... I'd focus on the 3,000 not the 1,500 ~ you'll find more success there... you did say you were more of a XC guy anyway.

how can you guys put a guys performances through a prediction chart when he is still developing at the phenomenal rate that kids do in athletics.

it is horseshit to expect the table to predict correctly for somebody of this age who has just had 6 months off this year.

stupid posts guys,Leroy, ignore them.

very fast times as a 15 year old and a huge improvement over longer distances this year.

both factors in your racing this year, anything from 3:53-4:00 is possible, but take the results as they come and dont overstretch yourself. chance is that you will run 4:00-4:10 for the first half the season, so run plenty of 800/3k races too at this time.

good luck buddy

Leroy, just out of interest, what was your injury? Any idea what caused it? 6 months out is a very very long time at that age, what did you do in between? glad you kept going, it should prove a wise decision.

leroy wrote:

heres the deal, i'm a 17 year old 1500/x-c runner.

2 years ago, i ran 61.30 for a 10 mile road christmas race at 15. I then went on to run 4.08 6 months later for 1500.

last year, i got injured and missed 6 months, missing both the x-mas road race and all of track season. i got back running in july this year, and after 5 months of training (about 45-50 a week avg,) i ran the same 10 mile race in 54.20.

My question is, can i expect a similar improvement to my 1500 time next summer, and considering the reduction in 10 mile time (7 mins into 61 =11% reduction), what is a realistic time to expect to run 1500 next summer, if things go alright????

PS-I know these stupid posts are up the whole time, so i'd greatly appreciate any opinions or answers.

i've tried to do these various sort of estimates for a while & they are OK for top athletes

it depends on whether your 54'20 was flat out

if it was, then with your current flat out 400m ability at that time ( whatever that may be ?)

say maybe you hade 55s ( ??? ) ability at the time, so a possible 1500m time for a superb athlete (maximised their abilities)

55s / 54'20 -> ~ 4'01

we'd need to know if that 54'20 was as flat-out as you could have run & what your flat-out 400m ability on that day was ( NOT a 400 PB from a year before )

i am a 15 year old 800/1500m runner but occasionally do over distance races such as 5 miles and 10 miles, i have a pb of 26:07 for 5miles and 58:43 for 10miles. i feel this does help with my 1500m and 800m times as last season i ran a 4:02 1500m and a 1:54 800m. surely this must mean running over distance races benifits your 1500m time.

please reply to this message.

STOP! only one query at a time please....could all under 16s please go back to dyestat.

Remember, this poster is 17 years old and is not fully developed in terms of capillarization. While he may exhibit a natural propensity for longer distances, he certainly is not as experienced and developed aerobically as he will be in 5-10 years, assuming he stays with the sport. Most performance charts are geared toward mature, adult runners, which skews the curve a bit for a high schooler. On average, younger runners tend to perform better in shorter distances when compared to their adult counterparts.

Most charts are also based on theoretical physiological limits such as stroke volume, oxygen consumption, and lactate clearance. They make the assumption that the running surface will be the same for all the events. As we know, 1,500s are contested on the track, while 10 mile races are road events (except in extremely rare circumstances). The road is slower than the track for many runners due not only to possible elevation changes but also to minor irregularities such as crowning, slight grooves or lumps, and changes in the quality of pavement (or changes in paving material). These irregularities necessitate prolonged recruitment of minor stabilizing muscles in the feet and lower legs. If these muscles are unaccustomed to high stress for long distances, they will fatigue quickly and additional shock will be transferred up the body, resulting in inefficiency and subsequent distress. A hard, unforgiving surface will also take its toll after 10 miles of pounding, exponentially exacerbating any incipient problems.

My own charts indicate a 54:20 for 10 miles as the equal of 4:08.4 for 1,500 meters for an adult.

By comparison, El G's 1,500 WR of 3:26.00 would equate to an astounding 43:49 for 10M. This is basically the same as 40:37 for 15k, about 50 seconds faster than any performance so far recorded. Again, the road will usually be slower than the track, plus the 15k is not contested at the elite level as frequently as is the 1,500. Thus, it's possible some of the world's best distance runners could run 15k on the track in 40:37, which is an average per mile pace of 4:21.4. Considering the WR for 10,000 required a 4:14.3 mile pace, a 40-mid 15k time on the track doesn't seem too far-fetched.

All these comparisons really amount to mentally punching the clown, anyway. They ignore the key factors of competition, natural talents, and training emphasis (time of year). In the end, it's all about doing intelligent, hard work to prepare yourself, then getting in a meet and giving everything you've got to beat the competition. The fast times will come sooner or later if your primary goal is to win.

Ya know, when you guys ask for these conversions, guys are decent enough to rpovide conversions and then they get ragged on for providing conversions. Just go out and run will ya guys? And quit asking for shit when people are getting criticized for answering your repetitive questions.

its ok for them to ask, its not ok for guys to keep giving it the big "according to my charts" bullshit!

Charts are for guys without the knowledge and experience to guess racing times. They are guessing times for guys they dont know anything about too, which is crazy! Find out more about the kid, thats the best way to judge performance, dont just get a chart out guys!

Of course you have to find out more about the kid. But those comparitive performance tables seem to work well for Jack Daniels and Bill Dellinger. I'd take their methodology over yours.

I think those two could both give him a more thougtfull and personal answer than "er, jeeez, i think i may have to look at the table for that one".

If young runners want to get a prediction from a chart, then they can do that using a book, if they choose to come and ask on here, then that tells us that they want more than just a table prediction.

thats my view of it anyway.