Well OP just needs to run a 5k and someone will be leaving this thread devastated.
Well OP just needs to run a 5k and someone will be leaving this thread devastated.
webby wrote:
Have you ever run 6 x 1K significantly faster than your 5K pace with 2 minutes rest? I can run it at 5K+5 seconds/K or so with 60 second recoveries, but not 6x1K cutting down to 3K pace like that, even with a 1:2 walking break. Not without an all-out effort, anyway.
The dude is running 4:03 1ks, and all the last one proves is he had a good kick. Everyone runs their last rep the fastest. Seriously, 4:03 with an average of 3:55 walking around for 2 minutes is great, but again; you need to add 7-10 seconds on to the average to get an accurate prediction. Also he hasn't raced it's different running workouts then it is putting it back to back. He will definitely brake 20 if the race director let's him walk 2 minutes at every k and stop his watch. He is great at that. Run a DAM race enough with the predictions. Look tommorow do 5x1k no rest, and that will predict your race.
truther wrote:
Well OP just needs to run a 5k and someone will be leaving this thread devastated.
He isn't breaking 20 off what l see. The only sure way to tell is run 5x1k with ZERO rest. Once the race is run he will know the feeling of a race. Then we can go off all these workouts and crap because we will have a baseline. We can say before he ran x race he did x workout. We will have something to go off of and compare workouts.
Fatribs29 wrote:
The 6x1000 that i did were by effort, not with a pace in mind. I tried to hit a pace that felt good but hard. It was never an all out workout, plus i could have done 2-3 more reps but not trying to be a workout hero.
I also do a 7k tempo run every friday, total time usually is 29:45-29:55. Feeling good and strong at the end.
As another poster noted, that tempo run is very strong. Even with the walking rest, I would now definitely think you should break 20 on a course not too dissimilar to a track (i.e. fairly flat) in decent conditions.
I think some of the confusion in this thread may arise from the fact that it is possible to blast 1km repeats quite easily with sufficient rest, but not to have the stamina to hold that pace for long. One such case is that of a 'fast-twitch' runner whose endurance is weaker. 'Fast twitch' is an over-simplification and over-generalisation of a term, but conveys something of the correct idea: such runners typically have good speed, and are strong in middle-distance events, but have not developed their stamina sufficiently to last 5km.
Another case is that of where the 1km repeats are really tough, i.e. one is digging very deep, holding on, and only just making it. Then the rest may be just enough to allow one to complete the workout, but one would not be able to put five such kilometres together in sequence.
This is why I asked about a tempo run in my earlier post: ability to carry out a good tempo run, or more generally strong performance in workouts containing longer segments, usually allows one to see whether the runner's stamina is sufficient.
In this case, it seems clear that the OP is on target stamina-wise: the 1km's are fairly comfortable, and the tempo run, even though it was not terribly hard, was at a very good pace.
It would still typically be better to use jog rest rather than walking for this kind of workout, though :-). Walking would be more appropriate in a tougher, more anaerobic workout at faster than vVO2Max pace, where one really needs the recovery time.
Fatribs29 wrote:
3:10, 2:55, 3:08, 3:10, 3:10, 3:10
Done in the street, elevation around 15-16m for each segment (2% grade) 2 min rest
Jack Daniels estimates that every percent gradient of incline will slow you by 12-15 seconds per mile, so subtract 7 seconds from each repeat, and you get:
3:03, 2:48, 3:01, 3:03, 3:03, 3:03
When I was comfortably under 20:00 for 5K, I ran 6 x half-mile quite often, on a dead-flat canal path, at nearly identical pace. My recoveries were actually a bit longer (2:30), so there's no reason not to expect sub-20. I think those saying "no way" must be high school kids who hammer every workout. For 800m repeats, I figure 3K-5K race pace.
Here are my actual workout splits, and 5K race times within a week of the workouts, during a four-month period (at age 59):
3:07, 3:05, 3:02, 3:02, 3:00, 2:56 -- 19:35
2:55, 2:53, 2:59, 2:58, 2:53, 2:59 -- 19:13
3:07, 3:04, 3:03, 2:58, 3:00, 2:57 -- 19:23
Allen1959 wrote:
Jack Daniels estimates that every percent gradient of incline will slow you by 12-15 seconds per mile, so subtract 7 seconds from each repeat, and you get:
3:03, 2:48, 3:01, 3:03, 3:03, 3:03
Oops, that would be only a 1% grade. So for 2%, figure 2:58, 2:43, 2:56, 2:58, 2:58, 2:58.
I would expect the OP to certainly race a 5K at 19:15 or better.
Allen1959 wrote:
Allen1959 wrote:
Jack Daniels estimates that every percent gradient of incline will slow you by 12-15 seconds per mile, so subtract 7 seconds from each repeat, and you get:
3:03, 2:48, 3:01, 3:03, 3:03, 3:03
Oops, that would be only a 1% grade. So for 2%, figure 2:58, 2:43, 2:56, 2:58, 2:58, 2:58.
I would expect the OP to certainly race a 5K at 19:15 or better.
Wow he's getting faster everyday from old post.lol.. RUN A DAM RACE!!! We can speculate till the cows come home!!! Run a race!!!! I personally don't think he's going to break 20!! Run a race!!
Allen1959 wrote:
Fatribs29 wrote:
3:10, 2:55, 3:08, 3:10, 3:10, 3:10
Done in the street, elevation around 15-16m for each segment (2% grade) 2 min rest
Jack Daniels estimates that every percent gradient of incline will slow you by 12-15 seconds per mile, so subtract 7 seconds from each repeat, and you get:
3:03, 2:48, 3:01, 3:03, 3:03, 3:03
When I was comfortably under 20:00 for 5K, I ran 6 x half-mile quite often, on a dead-flat canal path, at nearly identical pace. My recoveries were actually a bit longer (2:30), so there's no reason not to expect sub-20. I think those saying "no way" must be high school kids who hammer every workout. For 800m repeats, I figure 3K-5K race pace.
Here are my actual workout splits, and 5K race times within a week of the workouts, during a four-month period (at age 59):
3:07, 3:05, 3:02, 3:02, 3:00, 2:56 -- 19:35
2:55, 2:53, 2:59, 2:58, 2:53, 2:59 -- 19:13
3:07, 3:04, 3:03, 2:58, 3:00, 2:57 -- 19:23
You can argue all day!! But it takes races to get better!! Run a race!! Until then you really don't know how his body will handle the stress... As you noted you had ran a couple of races before that.. run a race!!! The best prediction for him to do to solve all this is to go out today and Run 5 1,000 back to back with no recovery.
Maybe o p is scared to race, so he likes to post some workouts on Let's Run, so he can tell his friends when they ask what he can do a 5k" well based on my workouts and a couple of anonymous people on Let's Run, l can kick your butt". He might just be scared of the results! Just saying!
Ive done 5x1k with 2 mins walking at about 1:20 faster than what I've done a 5k in.
That might say more about my poor racing ability than anything else though.
Allen1959 wrote:
Fatribs29 wrote:
3:10, 2:55, 3:08, 3:10, 3:10, 3:10
Done in the street, elevation around 15-16m for each segment (2% grade) 2 min rest
Jack Daniels estimates that every percent gradient of incline will slow you by 12-15 seconds per mile, so subtract 7 seconds from each repeat, and you get:
3:03, 2:48, 3:01, 3:03, 3:03, 3:03
When I was comfortably under 20:00 for 5K, I ran 6 x half-mile quite often, on a dead-flat canal path, at nearly identical pace. My recoveries were actually a bit longer (2:30), so there's no reason not to expect sub-20. I think those saying "no way" must be high school kids who hammer every workout. For 800m repeats, I figure 3K-5K race pace.
Here are my actual workout splits, and 5K race times within a week of the workouts, during a four-month period (at age 59):
3:07, 3:05, 3:02, 3:02, 3:00, 2:56 -- 19:35
2:55, 2:53, 2:59, 2:58, 2:53, 2:59 -- 19:13
3:07, 3:04, 3:03, 2:58, 3:00, 2:57 -- 19:23
I noticed that you where racing regularly. Other factors need to be set. Other then just random training times. Weather of the race, course, competition, and so on? Just a race time and workouts don't tell the story. What was the weather during the workout? How where you feeling? Sickness? And was any fast runners at the race? Did you win by a lot, 25 or more seconds ( no competition). Why doesn't this dude run a race? Then get back to us with the official results.
Run a race wrote:
You can argue all day!! But it takes races to get better!! Run a race!! Until then you really don't know how his body will handle the stress... As you noted you had ran a couple of races before that.. run a race!!! The best prediction for him to do to solve all this is to go out today and Run 5 1,000 back to back with no recovery.
Agreed. And even this time of year there are plenty of Jingle Bell 5Ks, Resolution Runs, etc. So, yes, go run a race!
I will mention, though, that prior to my first example, I hadn't raced a 5K in more than a year, and hadn't run any race for 7 months, which included 3 months of no running at all (injured).
6 x half mile w/2:30 walk/jog recoveries -
3:07, 3:05, 3:02, 3:02, 3:00, 2:56.
5K race one week later: 19:35
I think 6 x 800 is a good predictor workout, and OP's workout predicts 19:15-19:25, especially given the 2% grade.
Fatribs29 wrote:
3:10, 2:55, 3:08, 3:10, 3:10, 3:10
Done in the street, elevation around 15-16m for each segment (2% grade) 2 min rest
I would say you can definitely run 6 800s in under 3:10 with a 2 minute rest? I hope that helps you.
NERunner053 wrote:
Nice time trial. That looks maybe stronger than your 800s, although if they were mostly uphill like I said earlier you could probably knock them out in 3:00. basically what you did in the time trial. Daniels gives you a 19:46 5k. You're knocking on the door of sub-20 & can get to sub-19 once you're hitting 2:50s. Keep the ball rolling.
Not according to the people on here, if you are running 2:49 800s then you will run 17s low.?. And 2:50 is equal to high 17s, not 19 minutes, going off what they say.?
high school xc coach wrote:
Ive done 5x1k with 2 mins walking at about 1:20 faster than what I've done a 5k in.
That might say more about my poor racing ability than anything else though.
I don't run repeat 1000m very often. Had to go back a few years to find an example:
5 x 1000 with 2-min recoveries. Added up to 17:10. I raced a 5K at 17:48 a week later. Two weeks after that, 17:32. It was another six weeks before I equaled the 17:10 in a race.
For VO2max workouts, I figure current 3K-5K race pace, or sometimes think of it as 5K "goal pace."
Actually! wrote:
NERunner053 wrote:
You're knocking on the door of sub-20 & can get to sub-19 once you're hitting 2:50s. Keep the ball rolling.
Not according to the people on here, if you are running 2:49 800s then you will run 17s low.?. And 2:50 is equal to high 17s, not 19 minutes, going off what they say.?
Well, a week before running 17:10 --
6 x half mile w/ 2:30 walk/jog recoveries:
2:37, 2:39, 2:38, 2:36, 2:36, 2:37.
About a month prior to racing 18:57 --
6 x half mile w/2:20 walk/jog recoveries:
3:15, 3:13, 3:12, 3:11, 3:12, 3:10.
Fitness was improving rapidly at the time of that second example, but racing at 6:06 pace was still a huge surprise. Certified course, so the time was real. Between the half-mile workout and the race, I had run unmeasured 2%-grade hill repeats as workouts (~2:50 each, jog back). Good training efforts, but no quantitative prediction opportunity.
Just wanted to add that there were 14 years between the two examples above (age 43 versus age 57). When I ran 18:57 after the 3:12 repeats, it wasn't like I was still a low-17 guy just getting back into shape.
webby wrote:
So funny. He's not "running 4:03 1k reps." He ran the first at 4:03 and then 5 more, progressively faster, at an average pace of 3:55. And there are lots of 20:00 5K runners who run 6x1K reps without ever hitting 4:03. True, the walking recovery muddies the waters (fatribs, it would be good to break that habit to get the most out of the workout, even if you have to slow down) -- but for god's sake, he's running his weekly 7K tempo at 21:20 5K pace. Why anyone thinks 20:00 is far-fetched is beyond me.
Exactly, well said.
This summer I did 5x1k that added up to 18:22. 2 mins walking rest.
3:41, 3:38, 3:38, 3:43, 3:40
exactly 2 weeks later i solo time trialed 19:39.
so i guess the key is I need to get in an actual race, and then do it again and again.
I've always kind of prided myself on being able to push myself without a race, but I am most likely not getting all that I can out of myself. Maybe not even close.
Allen1959 wrote:
Actually! wrote:
Not according to the people on here, if you are running 2:49 800s then you will run 17s low.?. And 2:50 is equal to high 17s, not 19 minutes, going off what they say.?
Well, a week before running 17:10 --
6 x half mile w/ 2:30 walk/jog recoveries:
2:37, 2:39, 2:38, 2:36, 2:36, 2:37.
About a month prior to racing 18:57 --
6 x half mile w/2:20 walk/jog recoveries:
3:15, 3:13, 3:12, 3:11, 3:12, 3:10.
Fitness was improving rapidly at the time of that second example, but racing at 6:06 pace was still a huge surprise. Certified course, so the time was real. Between the half-mile workout and the race, I had run unmeasured 2%-grade hill repeats as workouts (~2:50 each, jog back). Good training efforts, but no quantitative prediction opportunity.
Notice that you averaged close to 10 seconds per rep faster then your 5k pace and that was for an 800. Thanks, point provided. I said all along add 10-13 seconds on to your 1k reps to get a ballpark. And people where like, "No" or 'it's about the same" . Point proveded, now go race.