After all this I am going with the initial post.
The question is a bout PACE.
If you do not believe that pace is the differentiator then the question is moot for you.
For those that can run a 5K between 13:00 and 18:00, easy runs are done at about 7:00 pace.
When you get down to 8:30 you are at a jogging effort rather than a running cadence.
Anyone trying to put science into this is really over analyzing this relatively unscientific question.
read the post S-L-O-W-L-Y, then read the entire thread again m-o-r-e s-l-o-w-l-y
it is not MY contention, it belongs to Mr. Kelley, I merely present it as a possible answer to the question as to the drawing line between jogging and running
Humbled wrote:
hobbyjogger wrote:The exact point you go from slow to swift is 7 MINUTE PACE.
Alright, I'll take your bait (since you've thrown it out twice and no one else has). What makes "7 MINUTE PACE" the exact dividing line??
I do not have an answer for you. I am only relaying what I was taught by my respected elders and passing that information down to the next generation.
Factoid wrote:
read the post S-L-O-W-L-Y, then read the entire thread again m-o-r-e s-l-o-w-l-y
it is not MY contention, it belongs to Mr. Kelley, I merely present it as a possible answer to the question as to the drawing line between jogging and running
Perhaps you should try reading your own posts before responding to mine. You didn't merely present a quote from Mr. Kelley, you expounded, elucidated, and pontificated on the quote attributed to Mr. Kelley. I simply stated that if you claim that statement as gospel, then there would be very few runners in the world. In addition, you provided an example of a runner who by Mr. Kelley's definition is actually a jogger. Are you reading this S-L-O-W-L-Y enough?
I submit that 7 mins got its historic place because it yields 3;05 marathon(ie Boston Qish)...if you can run 7 for 26 you can run 6;00 for a few miles...thus you can run your fast days with fast runners on their slow days.
wineturtle wrote:
I submit that 7 mins got its historic place because it yields 3;05 marathon(ie Boston Qish)...if you can run 7 for 26 you can run 6;00 for a few miles...thus you can run your fast days with fast runners on their slow days.
I think you are on to something. In the first running boom
(late 70's) the goal for every marathoner was to break three hours. The goal now is merely to finish and raise money for your favorite charity.
I think you are on to something. In the first running boom
(late 70's) the goal for every marathoner was to break three hours. The goal now is merely to finish and raise money for your favorite charity.[/quote]
And since the late 70's we've gone downhill. Downhill in this context, not being a good thing.
It's not a pace, it's an entry blank
I r-e-a-d y-o-u-r p-o-s-t s-l-o-w-l-y, i-t w-a-s K-e-l-l-e-y-'-s w-o-r-d-s. O-K?
slow high school runner wrote:
It's not a pace, it's an entry blank
qfe
the most knowledgeable definition in this thread
Factoid wrote:
So, if you are beginning (say a Jr HS kid), start off with getting used to running a mile or a couple of miles a day at 7-minutes per, then build up. Starting at 1-2 miles a day, in less than a year you'd be at 50 miles a week just by adding a mile to your daily run with each succeeding month.
Sounds simple, doesn't it? Keep all the speedwork and complicated forumlas and books and programs and monitors and fancy overpriced shoes and GU and 'ade drinks and watches and "what is Geb doing right now?" thoughts off the table until you have a solid year or two (or THREE) of 50MPW at 7 minutes-per mile.
If you're not that fast, you can work at it until you get to that level. Even if you're more interested in other sports the discipline and conditioning you develop can only help you. Nature will take its' course after that.
You have to start someplace. Keep it simple and build.
Factoid, Can you tell us the source of your Kelley quote as you state it above?
It was an old interview somewhere... when I read it I recall thinking it was interesting to some degree to hear an oldtimer give HIS definition.
Sadly, however I cannot recall the magazine (it was a long time ago). It may have been Boston Running News (which is now New England Runner magazine) or an older copy of Running Times. I recall the 50-mile, 7-minute part very clearly.
There appears to be confusion. Kelley, said 7-minute miles and 50 miles per week. That was ALL he said or was quoted.
The rest of my original post was just my taking his original 7-minute mile target and showing a very rudimentary (sp) linear progression method of getting a kid started & moving up to 49 per week using Kelley's definition. That was NOT anything Kelley said.
Good grief I did not know that was going to cause a furor.
...well, you'd have to take it up with Kelley. I doubt he'd argue for long if you told him you did it on less than 50 per week.
Ok, I went 8 miles @ 7:25 pace this morning. I'm confused, did I run or jog??
Unless you did 50 more at sub-7:00 this week, no. Jogger.
"Frankly my dear I don't give a damn" Rhett Butler
enough of this s*it
Hahaha!
I still say 55% VO2 max pace. Slower than this is "impact stress only" vice aerobic conditioning benefit. I very much disagree with those who assign a pace. It's all relative. A 5min km may be all out for a beginner, but that's not a "jog" for that person.
I also would have to consider the length of the "run". I've seen plenty of people go run, and run hard, but for only around 15-20 minutes or less. During college some footies would run on the indoor track, but only go for a half mile or so, but they were running hard.
I'm thinking waaaay too much about this subject. [quote]Skuj wrote:
Heathen wrote:
Ok, I went 8 miles @ 7:25 pace this morning. I'm confused, did I run or jog??
You were jogging unless you ran part of the workout at faster than 7 minute pace. Then you were running during that time and jogging the rest of the time. No confusion about that.
Most of my running these days is slower than 7min per Mile. But I ran a 4:33 Mile this year.
Am I a "jogger"?