It's too damn hard to run a sub 5 mile

I'm not completely sure yet, but if the weather is good, I'll drive to Arizona to race. I couldn't find any full-mile races next week in So Cal either :(

I haven't decided whether or not to fly to the east coast again to race, but if I do, I'm going to see whether I can do two races in a weekend instead of one. That'll take some pressure off and allow me a second attempt the following day if the first one fails.

This is generally the case, but the vast majority of the U.S. population is suburban or urban, which accounts for the relative popularity of the sub 5 minute mile goal. Comparatively speaking, not many people both like long runs and have lots of trails available.

It's also a great crossover distance. The long sprinters can attempt a five minute mile, and so can the 5k/10k guys. But you'll almost never see a sprinter training for a 5K or a marathoner training for a 400m.

elusive dreams?. wrote:

where are the meets at? wrote:

Nice, are you going out of state again? I'm also looking to run a fast mile next week in So Cal, but the only races I could find are 1600s and 1500s.

I'm not completely sure yet, but if the weather is good, I'll drive to Arizona to race. I couldn't find any full-mile races next week in So Cal either :(

I haven't decided whether or not to fly to the east coast again to race, but if I do, I'm going to see whether I can do two races in a weekend instead of one. That'll take some pressure off and allow me a second attempt the following day if the first one fails.

Good luck. The forecast may change, but it's currently calling for strong winds in Phoenix/Mesa (your only real options, since the other AZ meets are at altitude). No downpours or hot/cold temps, though.

ugh.. wrote:

Are there really people who can't run a sub 5 mile after training for a while? You guys suck haha.

ugh.. wrote:

Are they training consistently or playing hookie and eating donuts? When I was in high school like 80% of the track team half-@ssed it and never ran unless at practice.

The five minute mile takes either:

- optimal training and slightly above average talent (60th percentile)

- quite a bit of training and above average talent (80th percentile)

- some training and quite a bit of talent (90th percentile)

- occasional inconsistent training and a lot of talent (99th percentile)

- no training and elite talent (99.999th percentile)

It was true that the majority of the HS track team were playing hookie and eating donuts, but that mainly applied to the sprinters. Not all of the distance guys worked hard, but I'd say that about half of them did.

cvcv wrote:

i just watched your videos. Nice,

the two thing i noticed is your right arms swings a little wide and you have a little trouble finishing (no kick).

For the kick: practice finishing with a little surge (everything) warm ups - yes

cool down - why not

intervals - yes

you are trying to teach you brain to kick as much as your body.

The OP hasn't posted many recent videos (due to pandemic restrictions on spectators?), but his kick has gotten much better in the past 2 years. He ran a 71.45" last lap in his 4:39 1500:

and a 72.96" last 400m in his 5:03 mile:

the perfect distance wrote:

elusive dreams?. wrote:

I'm not completely sure yet, but if the weather is good, I'll drive to Arizona to race. I couldn't find any full-mile races next week in So Cal either :(

Good luck. The forecast may change, but it's currently calling for strong winds in Phoenix/Mesa (your only real options, since the other AZ meets are at altitude). No downpours or hot/cold temps, though.

Thanks! I ran the mile and then the 1000m about 2 hours later. I didn't PR but ran my second fastest time in both events.

Mile splits:

409m: 1:14.81

809m: 2:31.64 (1:16.83 lap)

1209m: 3:49.28 (1:17.64 lap)

1609m: 5:06.58 (1:17.30 lap)

1K splits:

200m: 34.29

600m: 1:46.75 (1:12.46 lap)

1000m: 2:58.23 (1:11.48 lap)

It was moderately windy (10-15 mph?) but not terribly windy. I think I would have been able to beat my 5:03 PR if there weren't any winds, but I don't know about running 4:59.

Last week's training:

Sunday (1/16) - 4.5 miles

M - 6x100m in 14.2-15", 5K cooldown

T - 2 100m strides, did the Kosmin test and ran 1410m (4x60" hard, with 3', 2', and 1' rest). 2 mile cooldown

W - off

Th - 800m warmup, 300m in 56", 500m in 1:30, 1.5 mile cooldown

F - 1k jog, 2x50m strides

Sat - 300m in 58", 300m in 54", 1 mile in 5:06, 2x100m in 16", 1k in 2:58

Results:

Minor typo, it's at:

It's probably going to be on TFRRS soon.

I also Googled around and found that a 10 mph headwind would hurt by 12"/mile, while a 10 mph tailwind would help by 6"/mile. So perhaps my 5:06 today would have been a 5:00 in ideal conditions?

thread follower wrote:

cvcv wrote:

i just watched your videos. Nice,

the two thing i noticed is your right arms swings a little wide and you have a little trouble finishing (no kick).

For the kick: practice finishing with a little surge (everything) warm ups - yes

cool down - why not

intervals - yes

you are trying to teach you brain to kick as much as your body.

The OP hasn't posted many recent videos (due to pandemic restrictions on spectators?), but his kick has gotten much better in the past 2 years. He ran a 71.45" last lap in his 4:39 1500:

https://finishedresults.trackscoreboard.com/meets/9856/events/21/Final

and a 72.96" last 400m in his 5:03 mile:

https://www.lancertiming.com/results/winter22/BU1204/results_15.html#round_1

I get the vibe that you are the OP. It makes me wonder about your mental health.

I get the vibe that you're still bitter that your earlier claim has been thoroughly debunked:

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I was thinking more along the lines of high school runners who can run 55/2:11 and consider themselves distance runners. To me it seemed like anyone who trains the aerobic system seriously and has those kinds of PBs should annihilate 5:00. I think back to my friend who ran 2:12 and then 4:53 later on in the season. Most high schoolers would, but I guess adults are not the same.

Appreciation?? wrote:

I was thinking more along the lines of high school runners who can run 55/2:11 and consider themselves distance runners. To me it seemed like anyone who trains the aerobic system seriously and has those kinds of PBs should annihilate 5:00. I think back to my friend who ran 2:12 and then 4:53 later on in the season. Most high schoolers would, but I guess adults are not the same.

Most high schoolers running 2:11 or 2:12 would not annihilate 5:00.

Iowa has a thing called QuikStats / Varsity Bound that's the rough equivalent of TFRRS for Iowa HS kids:

In 2019, 459 out of 1857 boys ran a 4:58.26 1600 or better, which is the equivalent of a 5:00 mile. That's 24.7%. That same percentile would get you a 2:12 in the 800 and a 55 in the 400.

On the girls side, 6 girls ran a 2:11 or better in the 800. But only 5 girls ran a 4:42 or better in the 1500, even though a 4:42 1500 is significantly slower than a 5:00 mile.

Running a five minute mile is like summitting Everest. Both the genetically gifted folks and the armchair warriors claim that it's easy since 70 year olds have done it before, there's no route-finding involved, no highly technical obstacles on the main route, and you can pay a bunch of sherpas to carry your stuff.

But in reality, both tasks require many years of preparation and drive a lot of people crazy. The only difference is that Everest is more likely to kill you.

Iowa is a cold rural state that's better at longer distances. 4:59 becomes even more impressive than 55" in southern states and urban areas.

In many years, states like Louisiana and Mississippi would have one or more girls running 55" or better and no girls running 5:05 or better. There are also plenty of inner city schools where a 55" wouldn't even get you on the boys 4x4 team, but a 5:00 would make you the fastest 1600m guy on campus.

Appreciation?? wrote:

The vast, VAST majority of young, able-bodied men with no preexisting conditions, barring any catastrophic injuries, WILL CERTAINLY break 5:00 with perseverance and consistent training.

No, it is not fast. And it does not require talent.

lvrhs1992 wrote:

I have trained with lots of regular guys. Even talentless distance runners could run sub 4.30 1500m with good few year training.

I know few ex sprinters, who started to run long distances. Although they have body like distance runners, they struggle with small heart size. And even they can go below 5 in mile.

Mr. Slowpoke wrote:

You think only 3% of able bodied men who were trained from birth to run a fast mile would never break 5 by the time they're 35 ?!?! I'd guess 99.999% could, and maybe 99% could go under 4:30.

It it amazing how out of touch some people are.

Powerlifting forum: Anyone can bench over 500 lbs without PEDs. If that sounds too much because you only weigh 130, eat more!

Trust fund kid forum: How can anyone survive on less than $50K/year? Everyone I know spends more than that in a month!

Chess forum: Anyone can become a grandmaster. They just need to start playing at age 3, be homeschooled, and spend 10+ hours a day learning the game.

Yup, people think whatever they do is what anyone else can do. And if you are talented, you are around a lot of other people who are talented. So only the slow dudes run 14+ min in the 5k when you’re training with world class people.

thread follower wrote:Most high schoolers running 2:11 or 2:12 would not annihilate 5:00.

Interesting. I would intuitively assume that most high school milers who could run 2:12 for 800m would easily go sub-5 for the mile.

Maybe that's the nuance. I recall 2:06 HALF-MILERS on my high school team who couldn't break 5 for a mile. They were generally built more like sprinters than distance runners. And didn't train much, volume-wise.

My frame of reference: I was a "miler," and time-trialed 440y in 59 seconds on our sh!tty gravel track, maybe ran about 2:12 for 880y, and raced 1-mile in 4:53 on the same track.

On an all-weather track immediately post-season, I raced 4:45 for 1-mile. That time at age 17 remains my lifetime PR. Best-ever 800m is 2:10 (impromptu "race" against a college teammate).

Allen1959 wrote:

thread follower wrote:Most high schoolers running 2:11 or 2:12 would not annihilate 5:00.

Interesting. I would intuitively assume that most high school milers who could run 2:12 for 800m would easily go sub-5 for the mile.

Maybe that's the nuance. I recall 2:06 HALF-MILERS on my high school team who couldn't break 5 for a mile. They were generally built more like sprinters than distance runners.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the opposite end of the spectrum, the thousands of sub 3 marathoners who have no hope of running under 5:00. I know of at least three sub 2:50 'thoners who have never gotten under 5 because they just don't have the speed for it. They can run a mile in ~5:10 and a 5K at ~5:25/mile pace, but they'll never break 5 since their best 400 time is something like 71" in spikes with a running start.

You need both good speed and excellent endurance for a sub 5. Very few people have both. Genetics is the bottleneck for the former, and injuries, motivation, and time are the bottleneck for the latter. And once you have all that, you need a reasonable amount of luck and resources to find the right pacers/competitors in the right racing atmosphere in the right weather.

This thread will hit 500 posts before the OP runs under 5:00.

My advice would be to do long intervals. 800-700-600-500 with full recovery in season, and 2x800 with 60" recovery as a peaking workout toward the end of the season.

silvery gold wrote:

you‘re gonna get there. Just gotta stick with it. You‘ve been steadily improving and are now four seconds away. And while rarely is a race perfect, not sleeping well, warming up with a mask, and dealing with an indoor track does add up and your next opportunity will hopefully have fewer obstacles.

Overall you should feel really good about this effort. It‘s a big PR and you can never take those for granted

elusive dreams?? wrote:

I ran the mile and ... didn't PR but ran my second fastest time.

1609m: 5:06.58

It was moderately windy (10-15 mph?) but not terribly windy. I think I would have been able to beat my 5:03 PR if there weren't any winds, but I don't know about running 4:59.

No excuses this time.

I gave it another shot today and pretty much had perfect conditions. Ideal temps (mid 60s), no rain, barely any wind, and little travel. I PR'd by 0.90 seconds but missed getting sub 5 by less than 3.1 seconds. Oh so close :(

Results:

MILLER, Garrett Westmont 4:33.13

URESTE, Damien Westmont 4:45.07

KWOK, Michael Unattached 5:03.06

BUENAVENTURA, Samuel Santa Barbara 5:19.29

Last week's training:

Sunday (1/23) - 3 mile run

M - 4-5x100 at 600m pace, 3 mile cooldown

T - 1000m warmup, 300 in 52, 10 min. rest, 800 in 2:29, 60" rest, 400 in 75', 15 min. rest, 100 in 16', 15' rest, 600 in 1:41.8, 1400m cooldown

W - 5 mile run

Th - off

F - 2 mile warmup, 2x200 in 36" and 34", 100m in 16", 1100m slow cooldown jog (8:00 mile pace)

Sat - 1200m warmup, 100 in 17', 300 in 52', 5:03 mile, 1200m cooldown

I thought I had it until the last part. There's no official splits that I know of, but I glanced at the infield clock and saw a time in the low 4:20s at the 1400m mark. I hit 1500m at 4:41 according to my watch and was just one final sprint away from running 4:59.99 or better and finally putting this thread to rest.