1k Time Trial Prediction Thread

02:37 --02:40

2:34.5

These intervals in spikes or training shoes?

Are you mid-20s?

I was a 2:24 1,000m runner and had 48 400m speed and 4:01 Mile. My endurance was sub 14:20 and sub 29:10 5,000 and 10,000. Based on your speed 2:44-2:48 is my prediction.

ModerateTime wrote:

I was a 2:24 1,000m runner and had 48 400m speed and 4:01 Mile. My endurance was sub 14:20 and sub 29:10 5,000 and 10,000. Based on your speed 2:44-2:48 is my prediction.

That's it?

I was in my late 20s, training fairly consistently, and ran from a standing start 5 x 1000m in 2:41-2:44 with 400m jog and 200m walk. I came through the 800m in 2:10-2:12. Within a few months of this workout, I ran 3 x 800 in 2:05-2:08 with a few minutes recovery. Both workouts were in spikes.

I don't know if OP workouts were in spikes, but if so, I say easily under 2:40 unless the weather is not good. If his intervals were in training shoes, then 2:34 is not out of the question.

ModerateTime wrote:

I was a 2:24 1,000m runner and had 48 400m speed and 4:01 Mile. My endurance was sub 14:20 and sub 29:10 5,000 and 10,000. Based on your speed 2:44-2:48 is my prediction.

You were very fast at one point. You are also very poor at predicting times. 2:44-2:48? You have to be kidding me. That is probably closer to 3k pace than 1k pace.

2:38.5 is my guess. He has better speed than endurance. I've run 2:45 and could never imagine those 200m times and never broke 60 for 400m(some of the 500's in your 400 workout were like literally as good as 57 seconds for 400m). Your 800m(apart from last rep) would have been easy for my 2:45 shape. The tempo would of been doable for me too but isn't to revelant. The easiest way to guess is look at your last 800m in 2:08(my PB too). 2:08 is literally 2:40 pace per k. If you done 2:08 at the end of a workout then running at a faster pace for 200m longer should be management.

2:33

2,31.8

Dude who said 2,44 is crazy

I ran 2,28 and am unsure if I could run that tempo or those 200s at peak fitness. 4x500 is similar to 3x800 for the mile; double your average should be a good predictor

I would say 2:33-2:35, have a nice day :)

sub-2:40 for sure. The 2:08 at the end of that workout has to be a good predictor. That's 2:40-flat if you can tack on another 200 with some fresher legs. Maybe go out at 2:05-2:06. Work as hard as you can the last 200. Could probably be closer to 2:35 than 2:40.

2:32–2:33 if you run it well.

I ran 2:26 low two years back. You have better endurance than I had, but you haven't done enough speed endurance/specific work. Running 26s in cold weather ain't bad though, so you've got the baseline speed. I barely broke 16:00 in a 5k race, let alone a 3 mile tempo like that. All my tempos were like 4–5 miles at 5:50 or so. I could have never closed 6x800 in 2:08, I would run 6x800 in 2:25ish with 2min standing rest.

If you wanted to max out your potential you gotta hit some harder reps. Key sessions for me were something like:

4x400 @ 57 + 4x200 @ 26

2x800 @ 2:05 + 300,200,100

And the final workout a few days before was something like 6x200 cutdown from 27 to 24.

Seems like many of the replies are a bit nutty (or jokes) and all of them a bit slow.

I’ll go with 2:30.4 (58-1:58-2:30). I think it could be a few seconds faster if you put in some more specific lactic acid buffering workouts.

I don’t like how you said your PRs aren’t relevant. I could definitely use them to hone in on a prediction.

John Wesley Harding wrote:

Seems like many of the replies are a bit nutty (or jokes) and all of them a bit slow.

I’ll go with 2:30.4 (58-1:58-2:30). I think it could be a few seconds faster if you put in some more specific lactic acid buffering workouts.

I don’t like how you said your PRs aren’t relevant. I could definitely use them to hone in on a prediction.

I think you are underestimating the impact of a rust busting TT here. I could see working down to 2:30 over the course of a season but doubt it is doable off the bat. I will stick with my 2:34.5

John Wesley Harding wrote:

Seems like many of the replies are a bit nutty (or jokes) and all of them a bit slow.

I’ll go with 2:30.4 (58-1:58-2:30). I think it could be a few seconds faster if you put in some more specific lactic acid buffering workouts.

I don’t like how you said your PRs aren’t relevant. I could definitely use them to hone in on a prediction.

I agree. I was thinking 2;30. Some of these workouts seem a little crazy for how slow they ended up running.

I ran 2;22 in a semi-tactical affair with some of my final workouts being 400, 300, 300, 200, 200, 200 with previous distance jog in double time (I ran 59, 42, 41, 28, 27, 26) or 3x500m with change of shoes and 5k tempo at 16;00 pace and repeat change into spikes with reps at 1;10, 1;07, 1;02.

I would think 4x400 @ 57 + 200m repeats @ 26 would yield faster than 2:26, but what do I know. That poster sounds like a 1;50 guy to me, so I would think running 1;56 en route would feel relatively easy.

Like everyone says, I think I could have gone faster, it was a bit of a negative split, blah blah blah. I ran a PR of 1:53 low like 2 months later during outdoor, off of zero race specific sessions. I failed to run faster later in the season off of actual hard sessions. The way she goes boys, the way she goes.

highhoppingworm wrote:

John Wesley Harding wrote:

Seems like many of the replies are a bit nutty (or jokes) and all of them a bit slow.

I’ll go with 2:30.4 (58-1:58-2:30). I think it could be a few seconds faster if you put in some more specific lactic acid buffering workouts.

I don’t like how you said your PRs aren’t relevant. I could definitely use them to hone in on a prediction.

I think you are underestimating the impact of a rust busting TT here. I could see working down to 2:30 over the course of a season but doubt it is doable off the bat. I will stick with my 2:34.5

My intuition is that the OP is some 24 year old who ran like 1:51/3:51 in college and is actually in pretty decent shape right now. I’m reading some into his “obviously my speed isn’t exactly there” comment, as if it’s self-evident that 26-27 second 200s are sluggish. He may have run 2:26 indoors 3 years ago, or something. That said, you could be right—sometimes those rust-busters are quite disheartening.

I think 70, 67 and 62 for 500m is far superior to his 5 x 500m in 75 or slower. I can see 2:22 from the former, and nowhere near that from the latter.

2:36.01