Terrible mile training leads to surprising results. Explanation?

Honestly last winter I wasn’t doing a lot of mileage with a bit of speed work and maybe a month of mileage beforehand

I lasted for a little bit, got sick in winter and by the end of the season I was dragging along just waiting for the season to work

If you stay healthy it’s decent training

Look at Banister, the poster boy for efficient use of time and what can be down on low mileage. The biggest problem with low mileage is doing multiple heats and maybe running 800-5k in distances like you do in high school or college. Banister was only training for a TT, and one distance.

Mileage helps your body handle the rigors of multiple heats and most of the best will be in that 7-10 hrs of running/training window.

I was always slow by this forums standards (4:37 mile), but saw real improvement going from mileage in the 30s, to the 40s-50s, esp. in the longer stuff.

So there seems to be an almost universal improvement just by getting in these ranges. I never could tolerate over 7 hrs training (always seems to get injured for what ever reason), but imagine I would of gained maybe at least a few %s, in endurance if I could of.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-oly-bannister-day0/bannister-says-owes-famous-record-to-olympic-failure-idUKBRE86Q18O20120727

Right out of college, and tired of the grind, I started running as little as I could.

I'd head out the door like a bat, and go ten minutes or twenty, as fast as I could. Or I'd head out at what I'd say LT pace to the nearby steep hill, and sprint up and down it until I couldn't any more.

My 5K times for that year were as fast as I'd run in college. (No surprise, as I was just one year out of college, but I was now doing it on maybe 12 miles a week.) I try to do that same thing now, but I'm not fast, so not fast.

Isn't your PR like 4:40-something? 5:49 is a terrible time. I would not analyze this result at all.

This is Jim Kiler wrote:

Right out of college, and tired of the grind, I started running as little as I could.

I'd head out the door like a bat, and go ten minutes or twenty, as fast as I could. Or I'd head out at what I'd say LT pace to the nearby steep hill, and sprint up and down it until I couldn't any more.

My 5K times for that year were as fast as I'd run in college. (No surprise, as I was just one year out of college, but I was now doing it on maybe 12 miles a week.) I try to do that same thing now, but I'm not fast, so not fast.

I ran a 4:37 road mile a few years after staring to run @ 24, but was only running 10Ks in the 35-36 range. Fast forward to when I was 34, ran a 4:37 on a track at his work meet, but was running 10ks in the 33s, and a PR 1:13:3x, in the Half. It seems I kept what little speed I had and increased my endurance over the years. Went from 30s into the 50s in mileage.

Yes it is, 4:59 ish unofficially. Soon after running that time, i had an issue with my knee and had to take quite a bit of time off to recover (2-3 months). The only reason this is suprising is because I did not expect to come back this quickly. It required a lot of work to go sub 5 and so I thought I would be at 6:00 for this season, at least until I got into shape. From this result and how quickly it came I could see myself going sub 5 again this season (this time an official PR).

Wow my spelling is really getting bad! Think I'm missing the keys. LOL! :) But I'm old and never did learn typing or spelling much. Need glasses too. ?

Also a workout I ran yesterday was 5x400 w/400m jog recovery the times were:

1:18

1:18

1:17

1:16

1:15

I was very happy with how this workout turned out.

5:49 isn't "back"... it's almost a minute off your PR... at your age you should be able to get back and surpass your old times fairly quickly

ElGuerroujFan wrote:

Yes it is, 4:59 ish unofficially. Soon after running that time, i had an issue with my knee and had to take quite a bit of time off to recover (2-3 months). The only reason this is suprising is because I did not expect to come back this quickly. It required a lot of work to go sub 5 and so I thought I would be at 6:00 for this season, at least until I got into shape. From this result and how quickly it came I could see myself going sub 5 again this season (this time an official PR).

Hang in there, it sucks coming back from injuries, and you'll do that and better! ?

Thank you

OP, I haven't been able to get past the first two sentences. Particularly the second one. Why do you need a COVID-infected brother to come along to keep you safe?

ElGuerroujFan wrote:

Ever since my brother got COVID, I have not been able to run every day. He has to come along with me on my runs so I'm safe.

because my parents

Hardloper wrote:

5:49 isn't "back"... it's almost a minute off your PR... at your age you should be able to get back and surpass your old times fairly quickly

EGF has been recovering from some injuries. It'll take some time and patience to bounce back.

EGF - Keep at it. You can probably get back to breaking 5 this spring. No rush, there's months to go. Your recent 400m repeats aren't too far off the pace. Be patient and keep doing the work. It will come :)

If this is true you must be trolling. 7/10 for getting people wrapped up in this bs. But still annoying by the way.

Sub-8 Mile wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

5:49 isn't "back"... it's almost a minute off your PR... at your age you should be able to get back and surpass your old times fairly quickly

EGF has been recovering from some injuries. It'll take some time and patience to bounce back.

EGF - Keep at it. You can probably get back to breaking 5 this spring. No rush, there's months to go. Your recent 400m repeats aren't too far off the pace. Be patient and keep doing the work. It will come :)

Thank you! It is a little hard to come back with everyone being like "Is it true you broke 5 over quarantine?", and I have to say yes, and know that they are thinking why I am so slow. I'll be back soon.

I think your getting into your own head too much and psyching yourself out. If you have ran a 4:59 mile then you should be able to run 5:40 off the couch from zero training. Your baseline fitness is not as far from your peak fitness as you think it is. My best mile is 4:53, but I can run a 5:25 just with my baseline fitness, I've tested it. Not to mention even with just a month of easy running you will get dramatically closer to whatever you could potentially run at the end of the season. I don't have any actual physiological knowledge to back this up, I'm just talking about myself and what I've seen. For me personally, after 4 weeks of easy running and strides, I was already within 15 seconds of the best mile I would ever run. Thats just me though, I'd be interested to know if others experience the same thing or maybe I just have high baseline fitness and low trainability.

What was your previous mile PR and what are some of your PR's at other distances? I'm sorry, I just can't imagine a legitimate 4:59 miler not being able to break 6 minutes, even after taking several months off. There must've been something wrong with your GPS.