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

elusive dreams wrote:

Typical high mileage week:

M - 8 miles (7:30/mile pace)

T - 5 miles (7:30/mile pace), or day off (every other week)

W - 11 miles (7:45-7:50/mile pace)

Th - 7 miles (7:20/mile pace)

F - 5 miles (7:00-7:10/mile pace)

Sa - 8 miles (7:30/mile pace)

Su - AM: 10x300 in 57" or 8x400 in 76". PM: 6 miles (7:20/mile pace)

41 year old runner here, recently ran 4:27 1500m, 2:07 800m, 57s 400m, so you have enough time and speed to crack 5:00 for the mile.

Your training has too much slow mileage, and not enough specific paced workouts. As a result, you lack strength.

Look at some of the other posters training suggestions, or get yourself a copy of Jack Daniels Training Formula. I think you'd benefit a lot from the second phase of his 800m training program.

It starts like this.

Q1: 1 hour easy run with 6 (uphill) strides (100m, mile pace)

Q2: 20min easy, 6x 200m R (mile pace) w/200m jg, 10min easy

Q3: 10 min easy, 8x 200m R w/200m jg, 10min E

By the end you've built up to:

Q1: 1 hour easy run with 6 (uphill) strides

Q2: 20min easy, 2x 200m R w/200m jg, 2x 600m R w/600m jg, 4x200m R w/200m jg, 10min easy

Q3: 10 min easy, 4 Strides, 1x 600m R, 2x 400m R, 4x 200m R, 10min E

The rest of the week you do strength training and 20-30 min easy runs. After 8-12 weeks you'll feel very comfortable at mile pace.

Economics nothing! That's how many hours of your life spent chasing sub 5 when you already ran 2:11 and 55, which are better by far? No, I just don't believe it. There is not enough mystique around sub 5 to obsess like that.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Economics nothing! That's how many hours of your life spent chasing sub 5 when you already ran 2:11 and 55, which are better by far? No, I just don't believe it. There is not enough mystique around sub 5 to obsess like that.

I did not know of U.S. 1600m/one mile obsession until I started reading letsrun posts about seven years ago. I was a high school and college runner and never saw this. My sub-2:10 high school 800m teammates, focused on attempting to break 2 minutes, 800m; my college 800m teammates in 1:47.xx to 1:52.xx range focused on attempting improve their 800m performances. I guess it is one mile culture in U.S. It is not really logical. In 1989, U.S. and Kenya had roughly the same number of sub-1:44 800m men on all-time sub-1:44 list. U.S. has a history of having the best 400m & 400mH athletes in the world going back to 1896 Olympics. It has been like that regardless of ethnic/racial heritage. Eight-hundred metres training is hard. At least one more day per week of anaerobic training and possibly a risk of injury in weight lifting room for 800m runners versus 1500m runners is the reason too many in U.S. avoid 800m training. From 1936 through 1956, four straight Olympics of U.S. men winning 800m Olympic gold medals. All four would be classified as 400/800 men. Going back to John Woodruff, 1936 Olympics, 800m, as soon as he raced sub-1:50 800m, he could have quit training for 800m and focused his training chasing sub-4 one mile. Instead, Woodruff stuck to the event in which he was the best, 800m.

I keep thinking of this thread whenever I read about claims that Bolt or any other elite 100 sprinter would be able to run a sub 5 mile. Sorry, folks, I just don't see that happening.

Carl Lewis (2:16 800) and Usain Bolt (2:10 800) both had times that were comparable to the OP's 800 time:

https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/how-fast-would-usain-bolt-run-the-mile/amp

They were obviously more fast twitch than the OP, and their 100-800 time dropoff (10 seconds to 2:10ish) is more dramatic than the OP's dropoff from 12 seconds to 2:11. But the OP has yet to run a sub 5:15 mile, and even his recent 4:46 1500 would only convert to a 5:09. Based on that, I'd be surprised if any pure 60/100 sprinter could even crack 5:20. A few 200/400 guys may be able to run 5 flat, but they would have to do a ton of distance work.

Sub sub elite wrote:

But the OP has yet to run a sub 5:15 mile

Racerator wrote:

Also what were your splits in those miles? If you are going out in low-70's and running 5:20s then you are not respecting the event.

Just PR'd with a 5:13 yesterday. Splits:

1/4 - 1:18.3 (78.3" quarter)

1/2 - 2:38.4 (80.1" quarter)

3/4 - 3:57.6 (79.2" quarter)

Mile - 5:13.8 (76.2" quarter, 2:35.4 second half)

Alternatively,

400 - 1:17.8 (77.8" lap)

800 - 2:37.7 (79.9" lap)

1200 - 3:56.3 (78.6" lap)

1600 - 5:12.1 (75.8" lap, 2:34.4 second 800)

Mile - 5:13.8

Those splits may not be perfectly even, but I don't think it's that far off the best way to run a mile. Not a single lap was at sub 5 pace, so it's going to be tough to drop another 14 seconds.

Videos are below for anyone interested. Apologies for the technical difficulties, as it somehow got split into two parts. A short segment of the race from ~425m to ~500m is missing from both videos, but the important parts (lap splits) are there.

slow bro 84 wrote:

First off, I feel the short man's plight. I'm 5'5".

Besides, your performance curve indicates that you're a fast-twitch, short-distance sprinter-type

As fas as height goes, both Bekele and Haile Geb are 5'5". Being short shouldn't be bad for distance running unless you're a midget, but the OP is 5'6" and not 4'6".

I do agree with you on the fast twitch stuff. The thread's title should be "it's too damn hard for a sprinter to run a sub 5 mile". He's actually quite good in the 100 when you consider his lack of sprint background, limited facilities, and non-existent coaching. Maybe he could have gone sub 11 if he started sprint training at an early age and went to a school with a good sprint program. But we'll never know.

We do know that his performances get worse as the distance increases, even for the 100-400. From the videos he posted, we have:

100 - 12.15, 579 IAAF points

200 - 25.09, 550 IAAF points

400 - 55.86, 546 IAAF points

800 - 2:11.3, 509 IAAF points

1500 - 4:46.9, 391 IAAF points

Mile - 5:13.8, 359 IAAF points

For reference, a 4:59.9 mile is 465 points.

There's a reason he's not posting any of his longer distance PRs. No 3K times, no 3200/ 2 mile times, and definitely no 5K times. I bet it's something horrendous like a 20-21 minute 5K.

I agree 100% with the original poster. Breaking 5:00 for a mile is very, very hard. I ran 4:40 my junior year in high school, but I was 6'1" and 150 pounds and running basically all year round under a wonderful coach. I also think the Letsrun notion that practically anyone can break 3:00 in the marathon is nonsensical. My personal best is 3:22:14, and that's largely because I can't run more than 40 MPW without getting hurt (I have a long history of knee and lower leg problems from high school and college). The people that post on this forum self select and often forget that the average American does not have the genetics or talent to come close to the times even hobbyist runners take for granted.

quad strengthening exercises and slow calf drops, plus maybe some body weight squats, should get you healthy enough. With a 4:40, no reason you can't figure out a training/strengthening plan that will get you way, way under 3 hours in the marathon.

Thank you for the advice, but to be clear that was 30 years, 30 pounds, a wife and two kids ago (I also ran 2:00 for 800 meters, 10:40 for 3,200, and 17:38 for 5K in high school before quitting my Division I track team due to a nasty stress fracture and a desire to focus more on academics and having fun, which I could do because I was an 800 meter walk on). Haven't run a timed mile since high school, but I am guessing I would struggle to break 6:00. I am running the Chicago Marathon this fall with a goal of qualifying for Boston (3:19) and am definitely incorporating a lot more strengthening into my training (including working with a really good physical therapist). But enough of me highjacking the thread...

elusive dreams wrote:

I hopped into a meet for fun last month and dropped a 4:46 1500

It's now a 4:43 1500 with a 70 second last lap. Splits from yesterday's race:

400 - 1:17

800 - 2:36

1200 - 3:51

1500 - 4:43.55

If I were somehow able to maintain that 70"/lap pace for another 109.4m, I'd end up with a 5:02 mile and close to 5 flat for the 1600. So those first and second lap splits would have to come down by a few seconds. Still tough, but that sub 5 is finally starting to seem remotely plausible.

I'm on the far outside lane at the start of the race video below. For a change, there's music from the Youtube audio library (27 seconds into the video) to break up the monotony.

elusive dreams wrote:

elusive dreams wrote:

I hopped into a meet for fun last month and dropped a 4:46 1500

It's now a 4:43 1500 with a 70 second last lap. Splits from yesterday's race:

400 - 1:17

800 - 2:36

1200 - 3:51

1500 - 4:43.55

If I were somehow able to maintain that 70"/lap pace for another 109.4m, I'd end up with a 5:02 mile and close to 5 flat for the 1600. So those first and second lap splits would have to come down by a few seconds. Still tough, but that sub 5 is finally starting to seem remotely plausible.

I'm on the far outside lane at the start of the race video below. For a change, there's music from the Youtube audio library (27 seconds into the video) to break up the monotony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Di04msiolE

That time is 5-6 seconds off from a sub 5. A 4:43.6 1500 is a 5:05 mile on the IAAF tables and a 5:06 mile if you multiply your 1500 time by 1.08, which is the generally accepted conversion.

But you could probably have run that 1500 in 4:39-4:40 yesterday if you paced it right. Your first two laps were too slow because you drafted off that guy for way too long in that race. I'm guessing you could pull off a 5:00 1600 and a 5:02 mile if you had ideal weather and pacing.

elusive dreams wrote:

1500 - 4:43.55

x 1.08 is roughly the equivalent of a 5:06.3 mile.

there's music from the Youtube audio library (27 seconds into the video) to break up the monotony.

So that's where all that dumb a/s s music comes from. Usually when people add that cr/p I simply give them a negative and turn off the video. WTF is the matter with people. Just leave the natural sound that would be in the video. If I WANTED to play music then I'd already be playing something that I liked, instead of.... watching a video on youtube.

Sub sub elite wrote:

I keep thinking of this thread whenever I read about claims that Bolt or any other elite 100 sprinter would be able to run a sub 5 mile. Sorry, folks, I just don't see that happening.

Carl Lewis (2:16 800) and Usain Bolt (2:10 800) both had times that were comparable to the OP's 800 time:

They were obviously more fast twitch than the OP, and their 100-800 time dropoff (10 seconds to 2:10ish) is more dramatic than the OP's dropoff from 12 seconds to 2:11. But the OP has yet to run a sub 5:15 mile, and even his recent 4:46 1500 would only convert to a 5:09. Based on that, I'd be surprised if any pure 60/100 sprinter could even crack 5:20. A few 200/400 guys may be able to run 5 flat, but they would have to do a ton of distance work.

Bolt and Lewis never trained for the 800 or the mile. If they ran 2:16/2:10, it's with their body optimized for sprinting and jumping and without ever having done any aerobic work.

Put them on a distance program, let them drop 30+ lbs of muscle mass primarily in their upper body, get them up to as much mileage as they can handle (maybe 30 mpw, maybe even 40 mpw) and train them based on their strengths similar how Igloi would train them (e.g. 30x100 in 16-17 with 100m walk) and they will have no problem breaking 5. You don't understand how BEAST these guys are as an athlete, they got the mindset and willpower to achieve almost anything. Also highly resistant to injuries or they wouldn't have been able to do the insane training necessary for a sub 10 100m or to jump very far.

I agree with you that a CURRENTLY active 100/200m sprinter optimizing his performance would be very slow over an event that's 80%+ aerobic like the mile, but to state that the greatest T&F athletes of all times would struggle with a 5 min mile or 2 flat 800 if they actually cared for it is outrageous.

Also, 400m sprinters are already very fast in the 800/mile, since that event is 43% aerobic (Gastin, PhD). Even without training van Niekerk or Wariner would be very strong over 800/1500, and if they specialized for it would be very good at it.

Lebron James ran 4:50 in a rec gym before and is way more fast-twitch and heavier than 400m sprinters like van Niekerk or Wariner. Just look at their physique, they look way more than 800m runners than 100/200m sprinters.

dunes runner wrote:

elusive dreams wrote:

1500 - 4:43.55

x 1.08 is roughly the equivalent of a 5:06.3 mile.

there's music from the Youtube audio library (27 seconds into the video) to break up the monotony.

So that's where all that dumb a/s s music comes from. Usually when people add that cr/p I simply give them a negative and turn off the video. WTF is the matter with people. Just leave the natural sound that would be in the video. If I WANTED to play music then I'd already be playing something that I liked, instead of.... watching a video on youtube.

At some of the meets I've been to, the guys running the meet play some music during the distance races. Most of it sucks, and sometimes, it's obnoxiously loud. If you listen closely, an out of place tune and/or the beginning of a rap lyric is heard just before the added music, so the same thing could be happenning here. It's certainly possible that the video uploader added that music to cover up the sound of the even worse music he heard during the race.

Back on topic, I think the OP is definitely capable of running sub 5 eventually. If a pure fast twitch sprinter like the OP can be trained to run that fast for the 1500/mile, I don't see why the vast majority of able bodied young males would not be able to run that time.

You do not know O.P. is a pure fast twitch athlete. 55 seconds 400m. A lot of people have 400m PB faster than 55 seconds. Elite Marathoners have 400m PB usually in 50.xx to 55.xx range. Sprinting is largely a combination of strength to weight ratio and neuromuscular coordination. That said, I would rather O.P. do the grueling training of a 400/800 athlete. I would rather see O.P. focus on racing 54/2:04 400/800 than knocking his head against the wall racing 1500m/one mile.

600yd/600m man wrote:

You do not know O.P. is a pure fast twitch athlete. 55 seconds 400m. A lot of people have 400m PB faster than 55 seconds. Elite Marathoners have 400m PB usually in 50.xx to 55.xx range. Sprinting is largely a combination of strength to weight ratio and neuromuscular coordination. That said, I would rather O.P. do the grueling training of a 400/800 athlete. I would rather see O.P. focus on racing 54/2:04 400/800 than knocking his head against the wall racing 1500m/one mile.

Finally one guy that gets it right. It's becoming laughable that everyone thinks he is "fast-twitch" when they just have a normal, typical for distance runners distribution of 60%, 30%, 10% fibers and aerobically underdeveloped.

It takes YEARS to develop the aerobic system to it's fullest extent. If someone can do a 40 dash in 4.8, yes he probably has a lot of fast, explosive fibers. However most "self-proclaimed" fast-twitch runners would get smoked by real sprinters/fast-twitch guys. They run 50+ mpw, 10+ mpw long runs and still call them very "fast-twitch". Nonsense. Talk to one of these real sprinters, they don't like running for more than 30s at once and certainly don't want to go on an hour long run. They want to run fast and with a lot of rest, that's what their muscle fibers like.

I disagree that 400/800 training is more crueling than 800/1500 or 5k training (both involve much harder threshold sessions, higher mileage and long runs). How hard something is is relative to someone's strengths - an endurance monster will throw on 5k training, a speedy guy like Rudisha or Kszczot with a lot of fast-twitch fibers on 400/800 training, and the typical in-between guy on 800/1500 training. The key thing is not to train something wrong, like you don't want to train Rudisha with 100+ mile weeks like you do Lewandowski, a 800/1500 guy by definition and you also don't want to let Lewandowski train all hard workouts with Kszcszot, when Kszcosct has over 1s faster 400m speed.

elusive dreams wrote:

It's now a 4:43 1500 with a 70 second last lap. Splits from yesterday's race:

400 - 1:17

800 - 2:36

1200 - 3:51

1500 - 4:43.55

This is apparently the first thread that comes up when you Google "sub 5 mile" and letsrun, so here's how to end that multi-year quest of yours:

Step 1: Buy Dragonflies. The spikes, not the animal.

Step 2: Drive to a track and locate the starting line of the mile run.

Step 3: Warm up.

Step 4: Put on the Dragonflies.

Step 5: Run sub 5.

first time i've seen this thread--wonder how the OP is doing during covid. since it looks like he's a local dude, if interested, look me up on facebook and i'll let you know about a loosely organized road mile in march,

cush (christian cushing-murray)

socalcush wrote:

first time i've seen this thread--wonder how the OP is doing during covid. since it looks like he's a local dude, if interested, look me up on facebook and i'll let you know about a loosely organized road mile in march,

cush (christian cushing-murray)

Yup, I'm local. Lived in socal for pretty much my entire life. I'd rather break 5 on the track than on the road, but hey, beggars can't be choosers. Congrats on your fast times, BTW.

As far as training goes, I've kind of been in a holding pattern the past few months. I'm averaging 23-25 MPW, including 1-2 workouts a week along with a few strides to keep the legs from going stale.

I threw on some spikes and ran a solo self-timed 1200 time trial in 3:45.12 today. Splits were perfectly even - 1:15, 2;30, 3:45. It was just short of an all-out effort. I could have gotten 3:44.x on that solo run if a million bucks were on the line, but not a 3:43.

I'm planning on heading to Arizona next Saturday to race the mile. Proposed taper looks like this:

Sat - (today, just finished) 800m warmup jog, 1200 in 3:45, 500, 400, 300, 200, 400 with plenty of rest in between. 3 km cooldown jog.

Sun - 10K long run

Mon - 1 mile warmup, 5x200 @ 800 PR pace with walk back recovery

Tues - 2 miles easy

Wed - 3 miles easy, 4 100m strides

Thurs - off

Fri - 1 mile warmup, 6 100m strides

Sat - Sub 5 mile???