Dear Lord, please learn the word “than.”
Dear Lord, please learn the word “than.”
5k 20x400 wrote:
EXPERTATHLE wrote:
About 22-23 minutes.
Yeah ok, 20x400 in 87-82( avg 84) with 50 seconds recovery, at a relaxed effort. I did a temp 5k in 18 the other day. My easy days are faster then that, actually l will do a second run tonight at a faster pace then that. I was running easy because l was running on tired legs and a sore calf, but that workout time is way faster then that.
I am guessing in the 17s range then. I you really did that 18 minute 5k in 18, than 17 is what your 5k race pace should be, unless you had an injury since then... So was your calf injury before or after this tempo?
I meant if you really did that tempo 5k in 18, then I predict 17s
5k 20x400 wrote:
Idkman wrote:
That workout really doesn't seem indicative of a that great 5k time. I felt pretty relaxed running 17x400 at 73 and my 5k pr the season before was 18:37.
2 weeks before l did 31:55 in a 10k, l did 14x1/4 in 71-73 with 45 seconds recovery. Something is wrong with you.
If you're runnning a sub 32 10k, why are you running 400s in mid 80s?
browski wrote:
5k 20x400 wrote:
2 weeks before l did 31:55 in a 10k, l did 14x1/4 in 71-73 with 45 seconds recovery. Something is wrong with you.
If you're runnning a sub 32 10k, why are you running 400s in mid 80s?
I meant 41:55, it was a typo.
Look, I've already said my calf was sore, I was taking 50 seconds rests, and I was running relaxed. Obviously I'm in better shape than 18:37. Obviously I'm not running 31:55. So just tell me what you think I can do for 5K, ok??
5k 20x400 wrote:
EXPERTATHLE wrote:
About 22-23 minutes.
Yeah ok, 20x400 in 87-82( avg 84) with 50 seconds recovery, at a relaxed effort. I did a temp 5k in 18 the other day. My easy days are faster then that, actually l will do a second run tonight at a faster pace then that. I was running easy because l was running on tired legs and a sore calf, but that workout time is way faster then that.
I’m going to say 21 minutes. If you knew the correct usage of than and then I’d probably have said 16:30.
Idkman wrote:
There was a 2-3 month gap, and I'm better at shorter stuff and at Track in general compared to XC. I'm also unfortunately better at workouts than races most of the time. IDK
I call BS. Do you normally do sessions at almost 20 seconds per 400 faster then race pace and the volume over a mile longer?? And with a little recovery??? And feeling easy??? BS or short course?? Maybe it was 300s??
The 400s were supposed to be at mile pace, so they were 73s. Irdk if you believe me though
I also said relaxed, not easy
So you ran an 18 min 5k tempo the other day but can only pull off a 42 minute 10k? Things aren't adding up here.
I'm guessing that that 18 minute 5k tempo was 18:55 for 4650m.
browski wrote:
So you ran an 18 min 5k tempo the other day but can only pull off a 42 minute 10k? Things aren't adding up here.
I'm guessing that that 18 minute 5k tempo was 18:55 for 4650m.
Are you on the WRONG thread or you just have no reading comprehension? Nothing on here talks about a 42 minute 5k. The only time I mention a 10K is a 31:55 that l did when l was doing 12x 1/4 in 73-71 with 45 second recovery, in response to the imbecile who said he did 17x 400 in 73 relaxed with 50 seconds recovery and runs 22 seconds slower in a 5k per 400. Some people are just playing with their responses. I was looking for some positive intelligence feedback, but I guess that's what you get. The workout was a nice volume workout, at a controlled effort, working on the recoveries. I couldn't run top speed because l was working around an injury, so l kept it under control, almost able to talk, working on the volume and the recovery.
18:10-17:40
5k 20x400 wrote:
browski wrote:
So you ran an 18 min 5k tempo the other day but can only pull off a 42 minute 10k? Things aren't adding up here.
I'm guessing that that 18 minute 5k tempo was 18:55 for 4650m.
Are you on the WRONG thread or you just have no reading comprehension? Nothing on here talks about a 42 minute 5k. The only time I mention a 10K is a 31:55 that l did when l was doing 12x 1/4 in 73-71 with 45 second recovery, in response to the imbecile who said he did 17x 400 in 73 relaxed with 50 seconds recovery and runs 22 seconds slower in a 5k per 400. Some people are just playing with their responses. I was looking for some positive intelligence feedback, but I guess that's what you get. The workout was a nice volume workout, at a controlled effort, working on the recoveries. I couldn't run top speed because l was working around an injury, so l kept it under control, almost able to talk, working on the volume and the recovery.
How about going back and rereading my post. Or better yet, rereading some of your own.
YOU said YOU ran a 31:55 10k. YOU then said YOU misstyped and meant 41:55. YOU said YOU ran an 18 min 5k tempo. NONE OF THAT ADDS UP.
If you want intelligent feedback, post something that makes sense.
5k 20x400 wrote:
browski wrote:
So you ran an 18 min 5k tempo the other day but can only pull off a 42 minute 10k? Things aren't adding up here.
I'm guessing that that 18 minute 5k tempo was 18:55 for 4650m.
Are you on the WRONG thread or you just have no reading comprehension? Nothing on here talks about a 42 minute 5k. The only time I mention a 10K is a 31:55 that l did when l was doing 12x 1/4 in 73-71 with 45 second recovery, in response to the imbecile who said he did 17x 400 in 73 relaxed with 50 seconds recovery and runs 22 seconds slower in a 5k per 400. Some people are just playing with their responses. I was looking for some positive intelligence feedback, but I guess that's what you get. The workout was a nice volume workout, at a controlled effort, working on the recoveries. I couldn't run top speed because l was working around an injury, so l kept it under control, almost able to talk, working on the volume and the recovery.
Wait, so now its back down to 31:55? Make your mind up.
Anyway why do you need to know? It's only a 5k, get out and go do one now FFS. Report back. Jebus wept.
5k 20x400 wrote:
I meant 41:55, it was a typo.
41:55.... 31:55.... what's the difference??? ---- as my friend and I used to joke.
In 1996 a did 31:55 10k and did a similar workout, but much less volume. The times where 73-71 with 50 seconds recovery, total volume 12. That was in response to the dude who claims he does 17x 400 relaxed in 73 and runs 18:37. I already explained the Tuesday workout this week, no need to go over that.
FFS dude! Learn the difference between "then" and "than" you toddler!
Lunchbocks wrote:
FFS dude! Learn the difference between "then" and "than" you toddler!
A FN typo!! Are you the dude that we used to stick his head in the toilet?? I think you are Azzz!
5k 20x400 wrote:
Lunchbocks wrote:
FFS dude! Learn the difference between "then" and "than" you toddler!
A FN typo!! Are you the dude that we used to stick his head in the toilet?? I think you are Azzz!
All illiterate morans use this excuse.