3X1 mile at 5K pace

think a little wrote:

Doing that workout in a build up for a slower runner is TOO MUCH.

It's far too much. A 14 min 5k runner is NOT a 17 min 5k runner which is NOT a 20 min 5k runner.

It is ridiculous to assert that 5-6x 1 mile at 5k is the same or the standard for ANY of them. It is NOT a standard workout at all like "from the past" is saying. He's just oblivious.

3-4x1mile is PLENTY for a 17-18 min runner, yet earlier you asserted that 5-6 is better because 3x1 mile isn't enough of a stimulus?

Well that's just wrong.

If nothing else, compare the times. Someone running 6x4:30 miles is running hard for 27 mins. 6 x 5:30 miles is 33 mins!!

That's a whole extra mile + the faster runner could do!

You cannot EVER compare workout volume between a faster and slower runner.

I never said 5-6 x Mile at 5k pace. I wouldn't suggest doing 6 miles at 5k pace. But 5 is manageable.

There is a difference between spending X amount of minutes at VO2 max pace and spending X amount of minutes at 5k race pace.

VO2 max is the pace you could sustain for a maximum of something like 10-11 minutes according to Jack Daniels. If you're running at VO2 max then yes, you don't want to spend too long at that pace.

But for slower runners, 5k pace is much slower than VO2 max, so taking longer to complete a workout being run at 5k race pace is okay.

3 x 1600m at 5k pace is seriously easy stuff. You should be able to do that repetition 3 times in a row without stopping and then continue on for half a lap. If you're taking 2 whole minutes between each, then you're not taxing your system as much as you should be if you want to get a meaningful session in.

6000m worth of volume should really be the minimum for 5k pace work for most runners. As I've said, you don't have to do 4 x 1600. You can split it up differently. But 4-5 miles at that pace shouldn't leave your eyes rolling back into your head.

3x1 mile at 6:20, 6:19, and 6:17 with 90 second jog between. A workout I did a couple weeks ago. I run 25-30 miles a week and this was pretty easy for me. Easy meaining i didnt feel like i was gonna die and was able to make the 1 mile run back home in just over 8 min. Goal 5k pace is 6:25. Either up the distance or up the speed. 3x1 mi goal 5k pace is good, but not great.

I just want to add that the 'classic' 4 x mile @ 5k pace with 90 seconds recovery is when you are in peak condition and ready to roll in like 2 weeks for your big race!

Other than that, I would say 3 x mile at 5k pace with even 50% recovery is a pretty taxing workout and might constitute 'the standard'.

Oh, yeah, 5 miles (8k) at 5k pace is manageable.

I love how oblivious you are.

I know this will probably blow your mind, but there are a lot of serious distance runners that aren't running 14 min 5ks. Yet you're going on about doing 7-8k worth of 5k repeats?

Oh, but now you backpedal and say 6k? Because 3x1600m at 5k is seriously easy stuff?

How many 17-18 min runners do you need on here telling you how difficult (or impossible regarding 5-6xmile) these workouts are in the midst of regular training?

MOST RUNNERS are NOT sub 15 min 5k runners and if they're not, then 6k worth of 5k work is WAY TOO MUCH.

Why can you not understand that? You can NEVER compare workout volume of faster runners to slower runners. Slower runners trying to do the same distance volume will KILL themselves over time because they're working TOO hard.

Did I mention how oblivious you are? You really need to understand how important it is to take into consideration a runner's race pace and where they're at in their running career.

Those with slower race paces (and especially those without a number of years of fairly high-mileage base) should not be doing anywhere near the volume you or "from the past" are suggesting if they're keen on long-term improvement and/or doing any other moderate or quality runs each week.

Think a little.

Wow.

I think you need to step back and take a deep breath.

Don't know where all the hostility is coming from...

For one, I'd like to think I know a thing or two about training, as I ran on an ncaa D1 team & have an ncaa title, and no I won't elaborate further on that because it doesn't have much to do with what I'm saying but I thought I'd throw that out there after your continuous claims that I'm clueless...

Secondly, I never backpedaled. You, incorrectly I might add, claimed I said to do 6 miles at 5k pace. That is something I have never, ever said in this thread or anywhere else for that matter. I said in my very first post, in reference to a post someone else made that was getting attacked, that doing 4-5 x 1600m at 5k pace with 2 minutes rest was not a ball busting workout.

Get that? As in about 6000m - 8000m worth of volume, broken up in many different ways, is not over the top. It is not easy, but it is not a twice in a season type of workout either. It is challenging - as it should be.

And yes, I stand by what I said. 3 x 1600m at 5k pace with a 400m jog or a 2 minute recovery is easy stuff. If you disagree that is fine, it doesn't affect me. But any intelligent coach or distance runner will tell you that that workout is easy.

At this point it seems you're resolute in your obliviousness.

Obviously you have zero experience with anyone that "doesn't have an NCAA title".

No need for me to keep pointing it out when so many others have gotten on here and said the exact same thing regarding the difficulty of these stupid workouts.

But you keep sticking your fingers in your ears and telling yourself you know what you're talking about. I'm sure that'll work well for you.

i have an ncaa title wrote:Doing 4-5 miles at 5k pace is standard stuff for serious distance runners.

I appreciate that you're sharing your training experiences (without the bizarre aggressiveness of the "from the past" guy). Just to provide another voice, I'll share mine: I've never done 5x1600 at 5K pace, and would have found it either impossible or at least full-on, 100% race intensity.

I've never won an NCAA title (I'm not the from the U.S. and didn't compete in the NCAA), but I ran well under 14:00 and trained with several training groups that included world-class distance runners. I don't remember any of them completing a workout like that. We certainly did 5x1600 frequently, but no one was ever hitting 5K pace. (Actually, I suppose it's possible that some of the slower guys in the group might have been, since they'd be killing themselves to stay with the faster guys and then underperforming in races. Not sure, though.)

Why the difference? I think everyone who's ever trained in a group for any length of time understands that different people have different workout-to-race conversions. Some people are able to train at much closer to their race intensities than others. And among top athletes, there are plenty of "fast trainers" and plenty of "slow trainers" -- so I'm not saying that one approach is necessarily better than the other, just sharing a different perspective.

That's why I take the pace prescriptions for workouts with a grain of salt. If someone tells you to do X x Y meters with Z rest at 5K pace, I take the pace as a ballpark suggestion. Ultimately, the goal is to do that workout as fast as you can within the limits of what you believe an appropriate effort for that workout is. Doing 10 x 400 at 60 seconds doesn't mean you're going to run a 4:00 mile. It's the other way around: being in 4:00 mile shape means you'll likely feel relatively controlled running 60s for that workout. If you treat the workout like a race and manage to squeeze out 59s instead, that doesn't mean you just got 4s faster for the mile. Fitness and effort are what matter; pace suggestions just give you a rough yardstick to begin with.

As for the OP's question, the workout sounds like a reasonably good one. But any workout repeated over and over starts to suffer a bit from diminishing returns. My $0.02: do it every second week, and on the alternate week sub in 6 x 800, 5 x 1000, 4 x 1200, or whatever other permutations like you.

Lot of bickering here.

At the least, I can say that the people telling you to just train harder make no sense. Anyone who has been on a team has known workout warriors who didn't race well. Train smarter.

I would say that you're getting in very good general aerobic training with the weekly mileage, and the mile repeats allow you to get in a little anaerobic training at the end of each rep. Mainly though, they'll help you to pace yourself, and run efficiently during the race.

Why no Tempo run? I know you're trying to limit strain but even 2.5 miles at 10k pace, with easy running before and after, could help to prepare you.

You might also try to vary the distance of your intervals, as the above poster said.

think a little wrote:

At this point it seems you're resolute in your obliviousness.

Obviously you have zero experience with anyone that "doesn't have an NCAA title".

No need for me to keep pointing it out when so many others have gotten on here and said the exact same thing regarding the difficulty of these stupid workouts.

But you keep sticking your fingers in your ears and telling yourself you know what you're talking about. I'm sure that'll work well for you.

Again, I don't know where the attitude is coming from.

Second - the disconnect between what you're saying I'm posting and what I've actually said very much confuses me.

4x1600 at 5k pace is not an impossible workout.

5x1600 at 5k pace is not an impossible workout.

Doing 6k - 8k worth of volume at 5k pace is not impossible stuff.

You keep saying I'm oblivious but guess what. I was not always a D1 level runner. I certainly wasn't when I started. And I did the sort of workouts I've been writing about here and they were not impossible.

If those workouts don't work for you, again, that is fine. You can break it up differently if you want to. As I wrote earlier, you don't need to do 4x1600, you could do 5x1200, or 6x1000, or 8x1000.

I understand that you can bring a horse to water, but you can't force him to drink. I won't try. I won't be responding to you anymore because all you've been is hostile towards me for no reason whatsoever. So feel free to post once again how "oblivious" I am, but don't expect a response.

Good luck to the OP if he even reads this, as this thread was created a while ago...

i've read this thread with interest b/c i've been performing this exact workout over the last six weeks or so -- 3x1600. i can offer one man's perspective at the very slightly-above-average hobby jogger level.

as background, i'm a 46 year old male. i've been averaging 45 mpw for the last 18 months. i try to do a track session, a tempo run (4 - 5 miles) and a long run (typically 15) every week. i've run a couple of 2:59 marathons in this period, and, after the six weeks of 3x1600 workouts, a 38:15 10k and an 18:20 5k.

i've been able to average ~5:52-5:55 per 1600 with an 800m jog (which takes me around 4 - 4:15 min). maybe if i jogged my recovery a little slower, i could get away with a little less recovery, but i can't imagine being able to average only two minutes. my workouts felt hard, but not so difficult that i couldn't get on with the rest of the week. they turned out to be a pretty good predictor for what i felt was a good-effort 5k race.

i'd always heard the 2 min of recovery as the standard, too, but when i looked at my daniels forumula book, he suggests that recovery is less important for such a long interval b/c i'm spending quite a bit of time at an elevated heart rate anyway. in fact, he doesn't recommend someone like me even run 1600's b/c i can't complete them in under 5 min.

for a much faster runner -- someone able to complete the interval in a much quicker time, i can see how the recovery becomes very important. you don't want to be so rested for the next interval that you spend most of it ramping the physiological systems back up to speed.

of course, jack daniels is just one man, and so am i. i'm slower than the OP, but i'd guess we'd both be better off doing 1000's or 1200's. it's possible something else entirely would be even better. it's possible that i'm not well-trained enough yet, either. i'm certainly no expert.

A lot of people here seem to be missing the point. The OP asked if 3 X 1 Mile at 5k pace with a 400 recovery jog was

"too hard".

Based on the rest of his post, we know he runs approximately 60+ miles per week and more importantly is over 40, a master.

The simple answer is no that workout is not too hard, even for a master.

Then one of the posters gets off on the "standard workout" for a serious runner would really be 5-6 at 5k pace with 2 minutes rest. And away we go. For the younger high mileage runners that is probably OK and not too challengeing although a hard workout. For a masters runner, only running 60 miles per wee, it is near impossible. (Note I said near).

But the bigger question for the OP would be, why are you only using one workout per week, with appears to be a VO2 max type, when you are racing 5k? You need tempos, and some true speed workouts. As a master it might not be advantageous to do three quality workouts per week, but over a two week period they should all be included to race your best at 5k.

Again, for these master runners, the 1600s/mile repeats are too long for VO2 max workouts and should be limited to 1000 -1200 meters, at 5k pace. Given 60 miles per week, they should be able to handle 8 of these. With equivalent recovery time.

The 1600s/mile repeats should be treated as tempo runs, done at approximately 10k pace (perhaps 5-10 seconds faster). Rest is limited to approximately 1 minute for each minute run, so a 5:00 minute mile deserves a 1 minute rest a 7:30 minute mile gets 1 and 1/2 minutes rest. For a 60 mile per week guy 6 of these is not unreasonalble even for a master or senior (50+)

Since the OP is racing 5k and not a marathon or half, he also needs some basic speed work and I believe in 400s at mile pace. Full recovery is recommended, and for the 60 mile per week guy about 8 should be fine.

Then a long run on the week end of about 12 miles and the other days are easy recovery days. The master runner probably needs the easy days even more than the younger runners, but everyone should back down a bit and rest.

There you have my 2 cent and maybe I gave you 4 cents worth. Argue and call me stupid if you want but you won't get any further response. I have said what I believe and doubt if your arguements and insults will change my opinion.

RodneyL wrote:

Is 3X1 mile at 5K pace (400m jog), once a week, too hard? This will be the only workout of the week.

The other days will be about 10 miles/day in singles.

My running buddy and I are masters runners trying to get under 17 minutes for 5K this fall. Right now we're both in the 17:15 range. He's convinced this workout is the key.

Seems fine, although I wouldn't call this (or any other single workout) "key."

5k of running at 5k pace is a good thing, obviously, although this could be a lot of of rest depending how slowly you jog the recovery.

Why not mix it up? 5-6x1000? 8x800? 2x(1600,1200,800)? Why not throw in a tempo or progressive effort within (or even instead of) one of your 10-milers?

There are endless ways to get at the elements required for a 5k, and doing the same workout week-in and week-out seems to have little if any merit.

Sorry, correction 1 minute rest for each 5 minutes run. Example was correct.

from the past. wrote:

4-5 x 1600m @ 5k pace w/ 2 mins rest is a VERY STANDARD workout

Absolutely not.

t minus one wrote:

when I was finally able to do 6 x mile at goal 10K pace off of a 2 minute recovery, I was ecstatic. Those are damned hard sessions, assuming you are doing decent mileage and other sessions.

This ^

If 6x1600 at your 5k pace w 2:00 rest is a standard workout for your, you underperformed in your 5k PR race. Period.

Just think for a second. 8000 meters of running, at the FASTEST PACE YOU ARE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING FOR 5000 METERS.

Put it this way: for a 17:30 5k guy (the OP), this 31-minute beauty has *****21 minutes***** of running at the fastest pace he can maintain for 5k. Even with five 2:00 breaks, this is. very. very. hard.

Not undoable. But not "standard" in any program out there for guys in this range. (References to El G's workout are meaningless here.)