Easy runs are slow compared to PRs?

There is never one correct way or perfect formula that works for everyone. Pace charts and things of that nature are general guidelines. Genetics play a huge factor in endurance performance (~30-40%). In your case you maybe able to run those times with that training, while someone not as genetically gifted would run times closer to what the pace chart tells you. It all depends on the individual

There is never one correct way or perfect formula that works for everyone. Pace charts and things of that nature are general guidelines. Genetics play a huge factor in endurance performance (~30-40%). In your case you maybe able to run those times with that training, while someone not as genetically gifted would run times closer to what the pace chart tells you. It all depends on the individual

mark b wrote:

What's the purpose of an "easy run"? To aid recovery from harder sessions. Consequently, don't bother with pace; - think effort and keep this very low. Your actual pace will vary a lot from day to day but you should be unawre of this. Just keep the effort very low.

An aerobic conditioning run - one where you are looking for some training effect, an increase in fitness, is a different thing altogether and should never be "easy". It should be far from all out but it should require some effort/concentration to maintain the pace at some stage of the run.

You need to be clear about the difference between the two very different runs.

LOL. Clueless noob has read a book.

WTF? In what world is a 50.2 better than a 4:20 mile?

Wake up guys.

TF??? wrote:

WTF? In what world is a 50.2 better than a 4:20 mile?

Wake up guys.

They actually both age-grade to about 90.5 for a 16-yr old. Both are national class times for that age. I didn't bother to check if OP posted an age

That's awesome, thanks!

National class for a junior in the 400? Don't think so.

This kid has great range for whatever and is definitly an 800 guy, but wanna make my point clear to everyone.

4:20 is like top 700 in the US, I just looked.

While 50.2 is just under top 2000.

That's all. This kid is good tho.

your a parrot wrote:

mark b wrote:

What's the purpose of an "easy run"? To aid recovery from harder sessions. Consequently, don't bother with pace; - think effort and keep this very low. Your actual pace will vary a lot from day to day but you should be unawre of this. Just keep the effort very low.

An aerobic conditioning run - one where you are looking for some training effect, an increase in fitness, is a different thing altogether and should never be "easy". It should be far from all out but it should require some effort/concentration to maintain the pace at some stage of the run.

You need to be clear about the difference between the two very different runs.

LOL. Clueless noob has read a book.

"your"...Talk about clueless!

Your 400, 800, and full mile times are all very fast (high major recruit). Your 5k XC time is more of a mid-major look (unless you ran it on a tough course like Woodward Park in CA). Talk it over with your coach, but you may want to ditch the 4 mile tempos (by the way, a 5:30-5:50 range encompasses my team's #2-18 runner's tempo paces. BIG difference) and focus more on the 800

Don't EVER worry about the pace of your recovery runs. They're almost like a rest day.

And yes, outside factors such as the weather WILL impact your ability to perform athletically.

Confused Runner wrote:

I'm a rising high school senior boy. I'm 6'1" and 160ish pounds.

My PRs are 50.2 for 400, 1:53.7 for 800, 4:21.2 full mile, and 15:52 for 5k XC.

From all the research I've done on training and from every pace chart or calculator I've ever seen my training paces are much slower than what a person with my PRs is usually capable of. My recovery runs are 7:30-8:00, normal easy runs are 7:00-7:20, tempo runs (usually 4 miles) are 5:30-50 pace. And these are my training paces when the whether is good, when it's hot and humid they get signifigantly slower. Is it weird that I've run as fast as I have only training with these paces?

The problem with using some of those pace charts is that they assume you have more endurance and less top end speed. That means that the training paces they suggest for you (and any other speedier distance runners) will be too fast.

If you want to be able to use something more tailor-able to your unique fitness, you can try this calculator:

However, the PRs you listed are all over the place. The calculator is only reliable for 2 times that represent your CURRENT fitness. You can't use a PR from a year ago combined with a PR you ran yesterday.

Messing around with your times, the 50.2 with 1:53.7 makes the most sense compared to the training times you provided. The calculator calculates your threshold pace to be 5:55 min/mile based off of those times.

I'd also like to suggest that you use this calculator also to see your true shape in your PR times:

A few seconds off in 800 or mile can make a big difference in what fitness the calculator thinks you are in.

idiot alert wrote:

your a parrot wrote:

LOL. Clueless noob has read a book.

"your"...Talk about clueless!

As I said, a noob.

But welcome to lrc!

In college I was around your size: 6 ft 2, 160-165lbs depending on the time of year. 1:51/3:44

In season, most of my east runs were 7+ minute miles. Out of season when we weren't doing hard workouts I would usually run around 6:30. I didn't change the pace on purpose, it was more of an effort thing.

If a day is structured to be an easy/recovery run, don't get tied up on the pace. Go by effort.

midlife crisis wrote:

Enjoy it while you're young. Just wait 20 years, when your "hard" days are only a few seconds per mile faster than easy runs. And you run 800s, miles, and 5ks are all run at the same pace.

And then when you're older like me your 800 pace is slower than your 5k. Life's a butch!

easy runs should be easy, the pace is irrelevant. If you get bored, speed up, unless its making you sore. BTW some japanese 2:10-2:15 guys run over 8 min pace on their easy runs. There is no too slow and too fast is only what you can't recover from before the next workout.

slow fast formula wrote:

Keep em slow. You're doing it right. A real slow twitch runner will go quicker on an easy run, but you are faster than those guys at shorter distances, so you should run slower than them on slow runs, endurance runs, tempo runs.

^^^ This. You sound like a fast-twitch runner, so you will naturally go slower on easy runs due to fewer slow-twitch fibers.

Confused Runner wrote:

I'm a rising high school senior boy. I'm 6'1" and 160ish pounds.

My PRs are 50.2 for 400, 1:53.7 for 800, 4:21.2 full mile, and 15:52 for 5k XC.

From all the research I've done on training and from every pace chart or calculator I've ever seen my training paces are much slower than what a person with my PRs is usually capable of. My recovery runs are 7:30-8:00, normal easy runs are 7:00-7:20, tempo runs (usually 4 miles) are 5:30-50 pace.

I'm 6'1, 160, but twice your age. Current 5k ability about 1:00 slower than you, so I'd assume I'd be 20 seconds per mile slower across various training paces.

Meanwhile, I run about those recovery and normal run paces as you, although tempo around 5:50,.

I would think if you are running 1:53 and tempoing (genuinely tempoing) at 5:30, then 8:00 must be ridiculously slow for you, especially guessing that your mileage isn't very high.

I'm 17

I didn't know those calcs existed, thanks a lot!

Are you talking about your daily pace when you're in base phase?

Do you even do a summer base? Or do you train for track during the summer?

Do you consider yourself a mid-distance guy who does XC or are you a equally interested in XC and track?

I think most people would need more info to know if your paces are appropriate.

With developing runners, it is OK for the daily runs to be a little closer to a focused pace than just a jog. This is because most new runners are aerobically deficient and will gain a lot from becoming better in this regard. That and the training of a focused daily run really isn't too stressful. I like for mine to do this during the base phase in summer and winter when there aren't any workouts.

Someone in a previous post suggested the same. As you get closer to hard training and key meets, the daily runs become more recovery in nature and then pace isn't a big deal - whatever is needed to still get the mileage in while leaving you ready to successfully complete the next workout.

Just looking at PRs, I would say you look like you have really good tolerance for high lactate/H+ situations. 50.x and 1:53 indicate no real drop off from 400 to 800. A 1:53 800 runner who is a miler should probably be able to pop somewhere between 4:06 and 4:16 for a 1600, though.

I would say you have some aerobic development to do and I would be interested in seeing where your tempo work is in the season and if you remove it completely at some point...perhaps too early? Or if the tempo density is too low in the training plan. Sometimes 800 runners avoid it because they're just better at workouts that involve tolerating high H+ conditions.

I also agree with the person who said you would probably benefit from some of Tinman's 90% CV workouts. Or perhaps look into Daniels-style cruise intervals for your tempo work instead of straight tempo running.

Tempo goal (and this is a ballpark figure) should be about 60s slower than mile date pace. It also would hurt to do some occasional early season work at 1/2m pace. So add between 80-90s over mile date pace. This will prep you to handle better cruise intervals or short tempo runs that are closer to 10k pace.

I'll let others chime in. There are a lot of ways to attack it. I don't see any deficiency in 400/800, so my guess is you've got that portion figure out and could now benefit from improving the clearance of H+ instead of just tolerance of it.