How many of you run negative splits or even splits and had a PR from it (5k or any race )?

My best race ever was a half marathon where I had massive negative splits.

Of course, it helped that it was an out and back with a 20mph tailwind on the way back!

For 5k, positive split all the way. You need to get the best time you can get without blowing yourself up in the first mile, which is often a fine line. From there you hang on through mile two as steady as you can, and push yourself into red in mile 3. Negative split always leaves something on the table IMO.

If I was running more than 10k, I would go for neg split. For 5k, it's one fast mile and gut busting the rest of the way.

Yes passing a bunch of people can boost your mood, but some people start to doubt themselves it they don't hit their targets during the race.

If that sub 9 guy in my example hits the halfway in 4:33 he may start to stress out and lose focus.

That can also happen because they set an unrealistic target. (i.e: the guy is worth only 9:15 and sub 9 is ambitious)

I wouldn't exactly say that setting the tone purposely faster is a viable alternative, but more often than not, that can happen when you forget about the time and focus on competition: It feels like a 3 flat but ends up being slightly faster because you want to beat some guys in that race. And that's not bad as long as you don't split under 2:50 or something.

I understand this because that sub 9 wannabe used to be me the last 2 years. But I finally realized that no matter the distance, if you are training right, staying healthy, being confident and focusing on racing other people instead of obsessing with the watch, the time will follow eventually.

Your closing statement hit it home.

Come on you idiots. If it is possible to run your fastest on positive splits, then if you extrapolated that out, you could theoretically run a 10k faster than 5k pace. We all know that is not possible.

Fisiologically impossible.... wrote:

Come on you idiots. If it is possible to run your fastest on positive splits, then if you extrapolated that out, you could theoretically run a 10k faster than 5k pace. We all know that is not possible.

Conclusion about 10k faster than 5k pace does not necessarily follow from premise. Try again. I agree that positive splits are not ideal, though.

Splits for my PR mile my freshman year of HS

66, 66, 68, 62

even with a negative last lap leading to 800m splits of 2:12-2:11

Felt amazing

My 10 mile PR is 58:50

1st half in 29:55, 2nd half in 28:55

Again, felt amazing

Negative splits work well for any race longer than 800m

I disagree with "banking" time. There typically is a correlation between how "too fast" you are through the first few laps, and how much you slow down in the last few. It is proportional.

This is really evident with women and girl runners. I once saw some research that showed something like for every second they were too fast in the first two laps of a 2-mile, they would slow down like 4-5 (or more) seconds on each of the last two laps. So if a HS girl was in shape to break 12:00 in a 3200 and went out in a couple of 86-87s, I'd expect to see them probably run 12:15-12:20. HS Kids, girls in particular can be reckless in this regard.

I've coached DIII 10k guys trying to break 31:00. If they came through the mile at 4:53 or something I'd usually see them fade and not make it. If they ran 5:01, I was pretty excited and figured that they would do it and they typically worked the pace down and did.

With that said. a lot of "break through " races are the result positive splits - go out with the leaders and hang on for dear life. But that is a mentally daunting task to do week after week. A lot depends on how often you are racing and distances involved.

My prs. 800- 1:07+1:07=2:14.9

3200-5:40+5:40=11:20(last lap was 1:09)

5k- 5:46+5:47+5:45+33=17:51

10k-19:30+20:53=41:23

You guys waaaaaaay overperformed in the mile based on those prs.

I. Think I ran the race you should have run:4:35, 4:34, 4:40, :30 = 14:19.

konami code wrote:

I ran a PR 5k with first, second, and last miles of 4:39, 4:39, 4:27. Was getting over a cold (clearly I was completely over it, though I didn't know it at the time) so I went out controlled, anticipating a final time in the 14:30s. I've always regretted having that much in the tank at the end because I ended up running 14:22. I never got under 14:20 in that season, which was my last year of college, so the PR stands.

So yes, you can PR with negative splits, but you'll always wonder if perfectly even pacing would have gotten you a better result.

In HS, I ran road races (no track team as a FR, SO and ineligible as a JR) I had plateaued for 10k in the mid 35s, despite more mileage, better training, etc. My coach suggested that I run with a masters runner for the first 2 - 3 miles, then I could do "whatever". Long story short, I crushed it, running

PS - I never figured out the 5000 ... always went out too fast or something.

My 800m, 3k, and half marathon PRs are all from negative splits. My 1500m was in a championship race where I did a hard second lap to break the field, so hung on with a positive split. My 5k was in a race where everyone around me dropped out at 3k (the host school was doing it as a time trial), and had to run the last 2k alone so faded just a bit. I think my steeple PR is a slight positive split but that makes sense since the first part of the race is without barriers. I would also run very even, slightly negative splits in cross country, and my brother has a video of me at D3 nationals where I'm literally a good few steps behind the second last runner 200m into the race...and once I won a race by 9 seconds (8k xc) where I was outside the top 30 at the 1-mile mark. My positive split PRs I think were suboptimal performances compared to what I could have done with better pacing, not the case with the negative split PRs.

Last year I ran a 1:18:14/1:17:58, so it definitely worked for me--that was a half marathon PR. But a caveat--the last 6 miles were downhill, and I stopped three times to get gels from the aid stations.

But I'm guessing my experience would translate to the 5k or 800 just the same.

In my ultra I went out way too fast: just under 8 hours because I was foolish and thought I could win the thing. But boy did I pay for that exuberance. The bear jumped on my back and the last half was the worst I've ever run--it took me a little over 9 hours.

I would've been much better to negative split it: maybe 8:20 for the first 25 miles and 8:15 for the last 25.

What event did you run at the D3 nationals race in question, and what place did you finish? As a former D3 guy, I am curious.

I ran very carefully planned negative splits for my Half Marathon PR. Easily the best race I have ever executed.

For my 5k PR, my last mile was my fastest, and my first mile was my second fastest. That doesn't necessarily mean I actually ran a negative split, however.

10k and marathon were both "went out too fast and managed to crawl to a PR." Still PRs, but much less pleasant experiences, lol.