3x1 mi more specific by far and I would say you should be able to run at least sub 5:10 all of them otherwise kinda unlikely but who knows.
Best of luck let us know about your race.
From my experience I barely broke 16 in my 30’s twice.
I was able to run 3x1 mi at 5:04-5:05 with couple min rest walking. I could also run 5x1k 3:06-3:08 with 1:30-1:45 rest.
I was also able to run like 12x400 at 1:10-1:11 but this short w/o didn’t feel tough at all with a min rest.
U gotta be rested for a 3x1 mi.
Maybe if he didnt do those 400 and 1600 on the track
highhoppingworm wrote:
For what it is worth...
I ran 15:56 a few weeks ago. 10 days prior I ran 4x1600 with 3’ rest in 5:05/5:06/5:07/5:08 and would call it about an 8/10 difficulty. I am more of a speed oriented runner.
I tend to agree that unless that 3xmile workout was an off-day it is hard to predict a sub 16.
3mins versus 90s is a big deal (and so is another 1600m) but yeah that is about what I would expect from a 15:40-16:00 runner. If you look at the OP, the only thing that suggest 16:00 ability is the 9:45 (call it like 5:15 pace) over hills. But given how easy the rest of the workout is (5:50 type pace) this could have been close to a race effort. Fast people can crank out 400s and the mile workout shows a guy dying to try to hold a pace not one running with in themselves
I vote for 16:30 unless he ran like 90mpw for the first time and has some really dead legs. Or if it is really early in a training cycle (say first 3 weeks) and you expect some big gains early on.
based on workout 1, last split at 9:45 with hills, a sub 16 is possible. also depends on other training. if there is more of an overall endurance focus in his build up or significant crosstraining (biking swimming etc) then I think that would improve chances considerably
cecilh wrote:
based on workout 1, last split at 9:45 with hills, a sub 16 is possible. also depends on other training. if there is more of an overall endurance focus in his build up or significant crosstraining (biking swimming etc) then I think that would improve chances considerably
This and only this says sub 16.
I'm assuming we're talking about a 5k. I don't think it was otherwise specified.
I don't know why American's are so obsessed with workouts, or this ridiculous practice of predicting performance times from workouts. It means nothing. If you did your workouts too hard, you are taking away from the important performance. Simple.
Have your guy run a time trial and stop wasting time predicting from workouts.
I like letsrun for some things, but these threads are brutal.
Sub 16 on the track? Probably.
I find the first workout very impressive. Not too sure how the second translates to 5k fitness. Third workout I hope wasn’t too hard of an effort, honestly seems a little lackluster for the same guy who just dropped a 9:45 3k at the end of a workout
Much info left out. Was the person devastated after any workouts... or fresh and happy. 16:15 give or take.
Olmel wrote:
I chased sub 16 for a couple of years and finally did 15:55. I was 42 and had 5 years of running. Was averaging 75 miles per week. Key speed workout was 12x400 in 69, and they were all-out.
Olmel, do you recall what your 5k time was at 6months after you started running (presumably at the age of 37, and then 1yr after and 2 yrs after? Can you recall and share your progression over that first five years?
TIA
Considering all three workouts and assuming they were all done over a week or ten days, I would say yes. Not too worried about workout 3 because workout 1 was very solid. 90s rest for repeat miles at 5k effort is extremely hard. Especially solo. With 3 minutes rest each I would bet he doesn’t blow up and avg around 5:10. However, your athlete has to put it together on race day. The last mile is going to really hurt.
just run a 5k wrote:
If you did your workouts too hard, you are taking away from the important performance. Simple.
Question (1): What is "too hard" of a workout, relative to MaxHR?
Have your guy run a time trial and stop wasting time predicting from workouts.
Question (2): Suppose an athlete performs a 1mile TT workout and then a 5x1000m 'predictor' workout in the days/weeks leading up to the 5k race. The athlete will most likely hit MaxHR in the 1mile TT, and come close to, if not hit MaxHR in the 5x1000m 'predictor' workout. In order to "not take away from the important performance", what is the minimum number of days out from the race that these workouts be run?
TIA.
LateRunnerPhil wrote:
TheXCrunner wrote:
Workout 3 is probably your best indicator of sub-16. If all three miles were under 5:10 its a guarantee that a sub-16 should be no problem!
I did 5:16, 5:04, 4:55, completely dying and only managed 16:15 in a 5k (also dying), and the next ones in 16:25-17:00 getting slower and slower (peak reached). 3xMile in 5:10 is definitely not a guarantee for sub 16 for a runner who is better at intervals and shorter stuff, and the 400s indicate decent speed in this athlete.
Based on the workouts, the 1st & 2nd easily indicate sub 16 (especially the 3rd 3k rep in 9:45 on hilly terrain is worth a ton, indicating even 15:30 or better), but the 3rd workout is an extremely negative outlier, absolutely no reason to drop down to a pace slower than what he did in the last 3k of the 3x3k on hilly terrain, so something is wrong here, maybe the hilly terrain wasn't accurately measured and a good bit shorter than 3k.
I run a lot in hills and my first thought about the last 3k was wondering if it was sufficiently net downhill to look faster to us than it was effort wise...workout 2, for me personally, stuff like that has never been indicative of my 5k times... workout 3, again personally, when I’m fading a workout like that one (and assuming it wasn’t just a bad day), the middle time tends to be closest to reality so I guess I’d say 16:09+. Maybe If he shows up on fresh legs in perfect weather with solid competition for 16 flat and motivated to hammer it out... maybe.
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I didn't want to give too much detail because I wanted to encorage response, but since some of you asked for more detail so I have included additional notes below. Also, these workouts were done in a 'microcycle' of three successive weeks in the lead up to a track race in the fourth week (this Saturday):
Workout 1
3 x 3k over hills
10.59, 10.57, 9.45
-- Athlete was running with another and was instructed to go only moderately fast for the first two so that the last one could be really strong.
-- 1km jog in between the 3k bouts
Workout 2
8x 400m (90s jog recovery) + 4 x 200m (90s jog recovery)
67, 74, 70, 66, 68, 66, 68, 66, 68, 65, 32, 32, 30, 29
Workout 3
3 x mile (90 seconds jog between efforts)
5.08, 5.13, 5.23
-- conditions were mildly windy
-- athlete could not hold on
Tapered, on an easy course on a good day, maybe. However that hugely positive 3rd mile in a workout is a red flag.
Don't think they're quite there yet. Is this for a cross country prediction or for the roads/track? XC courses aren't always accurate -- maybe 16:15-17:00 depending on terrain & actual distance. I'd go 16:15-16:30 on the roads or track. Something a little quicker wouldn't shock me.
As others have said, the 3 x mile is concerning. Even dropping a little from 5:08 to 5:13 early in the workout tells me the pace was hot since they couldn't do another 5:13 or get back down to 5:08. 5:08 is right at pace. The 3k workout is good but, as with the mile repeats, I'd like to see a full threshold session. Maybe every rep at 10:15-30 versus blasting the last one. Most runners can close workouts well on the last rep but that doesn't always indicate fitness.
Anyways, you have a good runner on your hands. The 400s/200s show they have enough speed for it. Work on their endurance & they'll get there.
No wtf is workout 3 talk about positive splitting
My first year of running was jogging 4-5 days each week, trying to lose weight. (I had never run in my past) It took 3 years to go from 214# to 155# (I'm 6'-2"). My first race was maybe 1 & 1/2 years into running and I ran 39:40 for 10k. This was 1979 and there were very few 5ks. It was 3 years into running when I got serious about racing and began to work hard. The first 5k I ran was 17:51 on a CC course. Then a 17:06 a few months later. Soon I moved to New Orleans where there were multiple races almost every weekend. So a weekly speedwork session, hard training runs (lots were sub 7:00 pace) and racing a lot caused a nice progression. In '83 I went 16:58, 16:44, 16:29 down to a few in the 16:10 range. Then on a cool day in '84 I ran 15:55. Incidentally, that year I ran my 10k and HM PRs of 33:25 and 1:14:22.
Hope this encourages you.
Somebody else said it too: that 3 x mile w/ 90 secs jog is an extremely hard workout. In my view, it's foolishly difficult (save it for the race!) and I'd permanently take it out of your coaching playbook, but maybe that's just me. So I wouldn't necessarily read too much into blowing up in that workout. That's on you, Coach.
Chris R wrote:
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I didn't want to give too much detail because I wanted to encorage response, but since some of you asked for more detail so I have included additional notes below. Also, these workouts were done in a 'microcycle' of three successive weeks in the lead up to a track race in the fourth week (this Saturday):
Workout 1
3 x 3k over hills
10.59, 10.57, 9.45
-- Athlete was running with another and was instructed to go only moderately fast for the first two so that the last one could be really strong.
-- 1km jog in between the 3k bouts
Workout 2
8x 400m (90s jog recovery) + 4 x 200m (90s jog recovery)
67, 74, 70, 66, 68, 66, 68, 66, 68, 65, 32, 32, 30, 29
Workout 3
3 x mile (90 seconds jog between efforts)
5.08, 5.13, 5.23
-- conditions were mildly windy
-- athlete could not hold on
Olmel wrote:
My first year of running was jogging 4-5 days each week, trying to lose weight. (I had never run in my past) It took 3 years to go from 214# to 155# (I'm 6'-2"). My first race was maybe 1 & 1/2 years into running and I ran 39:40 for 10k. This was 1979 and there were very few 5ks. It was 3 years into running when I got serious about racing and began to work hard. The first 5k I ran was 17:51 on a CC course. Then a 17:06 a few months later. Soon I moved to New Orleans where there were multiple races almost every weekend. So a weekly speedwork session, hard training runs (lots were sub 7:00 pace) and racing a lot caused a nice progression. In '83 I went 16:58, 16:44, 16:29 down to a few in the 16:10 range. Then on a cool day in '84 I ran 15:55. Incidentally, that year I ran my 10k and HM PRs of 33:25 and 1:14:22.
Hope this encourages you.
Interesting! So you got up to a VDOT of 52.5 (extended out to 10k) after 1.5 years of running, and then to a 60.3 VDOT (the 16:58) after ~ 3.5years from when you started, to an eventual 65 VDOT (the 15:55) at age 42, 5 years after you started running, where you also extended your half-marathon out to a 63.5 VDOT.
Thanks for sharing!
I ran 16:00 in my last 5k (which was a personal best).
Looking at my workouts before:
3 x 5:00 T (1:00 rest), 3 x 3:00 I (2:00 rest), 3 x 400m R (1.5 weeks before the race)
5:40, 5:42, 5:39 for the tempo; 5:18, 5:17, 5:18 for the I (~5k pace), 73, 71, 71 for the R (~mile pace)
19 miles (2 x 10 min, 60 min E, 2 x 10 min) (2 weeks before the race)
Avg. 5:42 and 5:44 for the 10-min sections
6 x 5:00 (4:00) recovery (3.5 weeks before race)
5:24, 5:24, 5:25, 5:23, 5:23, 5:17 pace