No way that 14 minute guys can only run 57. Every guy on my college team could run 54. 14 minute guys have been known to break 57 at the end of the 5k.
No way that 14 minute guys can only run 57. Every guy on my college team could run 54. 14 minute guys have been known to break 57 at the end of the 5k.
The point is that you are going to need 57 second speed to break 14.
Of course it's "easier" but you still need to be that fast.
Geez! You must know my real name! I must have spilled beer by accident on you at a bar/restaurant. 57 seconds 400m is not equal to a 14:00 5000m. 14:00 5000m is equal to about 48 second 400m. Didn't I state that hours ago! One needs to have at least sub-58 400m talent to race a sub-14:00 5000m. If I gave the specific calculation for me to get to 57.33 400m for a 14:00 5000m, we would be fighting for years.
ironside wrote:
What? What? wrote:
57.33 is incredibly specific and arbitrary and that number alone makes anything you say questionable
We usually find elite 5000m athletes averaging more than 10 seconds slower than their 400m PB for 12.5 laps. 14 minutes is 67.2 seconds per 400m. 57.33 is not an arbitrary number.
So the minimum speed for sub-14 is not 57.33 but 67.2. The rest is about endurance.
The question was talent by OP. Go to JV high school track & field teams. Get the 67.xx 400m guys to try to run sub-14:00 5000m. Good luck!
A Typical LRC Idiot wrote:
So the minimum speed for sub-14 is not 57.33 but 67.2. The rest is about endurance.
You are paralyzed by what you learned in formal logic course. Judging by your foolish statement, you must believe any 50.xx 400m runner is capable of breaking the world record in 800m.
I knew 3 guys on our track team who all ran for a couple of years for a very good post-collegiate team. They all were 3:51 to 3:53 1500 guys. 2 of them ran marathon OTQs of 2:20 and 2:21. None of them ever broke 14:00 for 5K. They all ended up with 5K PRs between 14:02 and 14:08. The one guy I knew personally and sometimes ran with who got down to the high 13:40s qualified for O trials in the steeple twice. P.S. I had 51 second 400 speed but couldn't even break 15:30 in the 5K.
I am revising my estimate. There are only about 1 in 500,000 humans capable so it is takes more talent than what we think and we are not giving enough credit to the people who have done it.
it takes sub 14 talent
This must have been before 2008 because the OTQ marathon has been sub 2:19:00 since then. That being said there are probably more guys that run sub 14:00 in college than run sub 2:19:00 in the marathon....in the US. I'd consider a sub 14:00 5km to require much more natural talent (talent in VO2max, and Speed that is) than a sub 2:19:00 though (which is more "talent" in durability, continuing to run 100+ mile weeks after college and can be done on less "pure Vo2max talent"). I know guys that run OTQ's that could barely crack 15-min for 5km. Sub 14-min for 5km requires a nice mix of good speed, a fairly high Vo2max. I ran 8:46 for 3km, 4:09 for 1500m, 15:17 for 5km and 32:05 for 10km in high school. Now I trained quite a bit to do that (up to 70mpw)...I also trained up to 150 mpw in college and put in a lot of 100+ mile weeks. Maybe my college progression wasn't great, but I only got down to 8:22 for 3km and 14:29 for 5km (and 29:47 for 10km...). Because I trained fairly seriously in high school and reached full physical size by age 16 maybe I didn't have much of a ceiling for improvement. My 400m "speed" (56-high) never improved despite trying to work on it. Other NCAA guys that i saw surpassed me...some who were 9:40+ 2-mile guys in hs would end up cracking 14:00. Usually it was the 9:10-9:15 guys and faster though. There are plenty of 9:10-9:15 two milers in hs that don't end up cracking 14-min in college though....many, ,many fizzle out with injury, quit the team, or just don't progress very much. It is hard to predict how your body will respond to training after age 18 and into your early 20s (going with college age here). Of course the more naturally talented someone is, the less training they will need to run a sub 14:00 5km. Some guys could do it on 50-60mpw. Other guys need over 100mpw. I will also say most guys need at least sub 3:55 1500m speed or sub 4:15 mile speed at the bare minimum. You get a cross over of faster 1500m runners "moving up" and more pure "distance guys moving down who do the 10km/xc." I honestly thought maybe if I focused on the 5km after college (not my strongest event at all in college as I was too slow and much better at 10km cross country), maybe I could have gotten down to 14:10-14:15 or so (when I was in college that was always the goal because it got you into regionals...which meant you were about top 100 in the country for NCAA DI. That might have been wishful thinking though because I was still over 15 seconds off that. But I honestly don't think I ever had the talent/speed to run a sub 14:00. Some people (who work extremely hard and run 100mpw+) don't have the talent to crack 15:00 for 5km either though....
ballpark speed wrote:
I knew 3 guys on our track team who all ran for a couple of years for a very good post-collegiate team. They all were 3:51 to 3:53 1500 guys. 2 of them ran marathon OTQs of 2:20 and 2:21. None of them ever broke 14:00 for 5K. They all ended up with 5K PRs between 14:02 and 14:08. The one guy I knew personally and sometimes ran with who got down to the high 13:40s qualified for O trials in the steeple twice. P.S. I had 51 second 400 speed but couldn't even break 15:30 in the 5K.
No way jose wrote:
No way that 14 minute guys can only run 57. Every guy on my college team could run 54. 14 minute guys have been known to break 57 at the end of the 5k.
Example #1: Alberto Salazar.
ironside wrote:
One needs be able to race sub-4:05 1500m. One needs to be able to race sub-57.33 400m. Running 150 miles a week isn't going to get the previously mentioned times.
Do you mean sub 4:05 mile? Because 4:05ish 1500 isn't even remotely close to the ability needed to break 14. I guessed 3:50, then took a look at the IAAF scoring tables. 14:00 is almost exactly at 1000 points; 3:48.3ish for 1500m which translates to right around 4:05 mile I think.
not even close wrote:
ironside wrote:
One needs be able to race sub-4:05 1500m. One needs to be able to race sub-57.33 400m. Running 150 miles a week isn't going to get the previously mentioned times.
Do you mean sub 4:05 mile? Because 4:05ish 1500 isn't even remotely close to the ability needed to break 14. I guessed 3:50, then took a look at the IAAF scoring tables. 14:00 is almost exactly at 1000 points; 3:48.3ish for 1500m which translates to right around 4:05 mile I think.
Sub-14 was first done in 1942 by Gunder Hägg. In 1942 the 1500m WR was 3:45 (also Hägg) and the WR in the mile in 1942 was 4:06 and then 4:04, so I'd say that you are just about right (I love it when the scoring tables and the WR progression line up so neatly).
You need lots and lots of talent. Hell, you need lots of talent to run 4:05 1500m. You need talent to run 5:05 1500m.
DontFeedTheTroll wrote:
You need talent to run 5:05 1500m.
lol
hell yeah wrote:
DontFeedTheTroll wrote:
You need talent to run 5:05 1500m.
lol
So true. People run for decades and never even sniff that time.
S. Canaday wrote:
This must have been before 2008 because the OTQ marathon has been sub 2:19:00 since then.
Yeah, we're all weekend warriors now, celebrating 40th birthdays and thrilled to run 16:xx 5Ks before our kids' soccer games. It was interesting to read Don't Feed the Troll's post that the IAAF scoring tables show 14:00 equivalent to about a 3:48.3 1500 and seeing that my team mates who were 3-5 seconds slower than that at 1500 ended up 2 to 6 seconds slower than 14:00 for their 5Ks.
5000m under 14 takes a lot of talent and training.
BUT, a 5k is an odd race.
I've run probably 40 sub 15minute road races, and 15 sub 14:30's on the track and roads , but always struggled putting together a decent 5000m (14:07 pr).
I could run with the 5k guys in the mile. Outlast them over 10k, but they always drubbed me in the 5k.
I never figured it out.
Takes something, maybe it's the X factor...
It takes a lot of talent, training and good coaching ... even more good coaching and training if you are lower in the talent category.
I think my college's record was ~1401 until a Kenyan import rolled through. We had a handful of guys who barely broke 4:00 for the mile, and a similar number running sub 30 for 10k.
the kid of talent where you can run close to 4 minute mile without relying on pure speed. Small frame but a lot of muscular endurance.
This thread is confusing talent (potential ability) with current abillity.
In terms of talent I would say that it comes down to the type of ability you have more so than the amount of ability. For instance, a sub 4:04 miler who can also go under 24:40 on a quality 8k course. Plenty of reasonably talented guys will achieve one of those two things in their careers, but it is rare you find someone so capable on both ends of that spectrum.