10K best only 11 seconds/mile faster than 10mile -- problem?

ghostface killah wrote:

I just ran a new 10 mile best @ 6:09/mile, and it seems like my 10k best (which comes to 5:59/mile) is comparatively slow.

Do I have a problem? Do I need more intervals?

How old are you? A little more speed work for the 10K might help.

Was it a fast 10 mile course?

A ten second difference per mile for 10 mile PB/10K PB is actually within a normal range. I'm almost exactly the same.

Consider a world class runner runs 10 miles in 47 min (4:42 or so miles) and runs a 10K in 27:30 (4:27 or so). Not that much different except they're going a lot faster.

exactly, although i think that 27:30 is alot better than 47:00. on a flat fast course, a 28:00 guy can definitely run 47:00. either way this is even better for you point as 4:29 and 4:42 are only 13 seconds apart.

Nah. Could be you're just a slow-twitch type. In which case your 400m time sucks. Don't be surprised to find that your performances get better as the distance gets longer (you slow up less than other folks). You can check to see what your performances SHOULD be on some of the online calculators (input 10k time and get predictions for all other distances).

If I am correct, your 5k time should be less than 12-15 secs per mile faster than your 10k pace. If it's NOT. If it's wayyyy (like 20 secs+) faster than your 10k pace, ignore the first paragraph.

Or you could be in better shape now.

I don't see a problem here. These two performances are very close using Daniels' VDOT system. Another typical adjustment is 12-15 secs/mile for a doubling of distance. 10k to 10 miles is a factor of about 1.6, so 10 seconds/mile seems to be just about right.

Your 10 mile time is about what it should be in relation to your 10K time.