Turning 40 is around the corner. Former HS sprinter. Just starting to run. Is a sub-18 5K realistic?

nobody can answer this. very few 40 year olds run 18min 5k. But very few 40 year olds are willing to train 7+ hours/week for 2 years...

Understand that no one has a crystal ball, just looking for general opinions :)

Sounds like you're saying,

1.) Based on actual results from most 40 year old runners, sub-18 is very unlikely, but

2.) It isn't out of the question.

What's a good 5k goal for a 40yo / beginner runner over a 24-month period with some decent sprint speed? Sub-19 minutes?

This is a pretty specific goal, why did you chose it?

Seemed like a small improvement on my best time from almost 25 years ago. From a layman's perspective, 24 months seemed like enough runway to get there. But I'm just wildly guessing.

Would love to get some opinions on what a more realistic (but still somewhat aspirational) goal & timeframe might look like. Thanks.

I was a 52 second high school 440 guy who did random low level fitness stuff (biking, surfing, basketball) until I turned 40. I decided I wanted to try and break 5:00 for the mile after 40. With family and work commitments I was running around 45mpw. I didn't make it (best of 5:03), but got my 5k down to 17:43, and continued to run sub-18 5k's until my last one of 17:56 at age 49. I thought I could hit sub-18 at 50, but got injured in my training. I stayed in the low 18s through my 50s, and recently ran 18:48 at age 60 (on about 50-55mpw).

Sounds a bit ambitious based upon your 70 second quarter.

Getting under 20 might be a more realistic goal, but really impossible to say at this point.

seth82 wrote:

Looking for a mid-life challenge. Will soon be turning 40, and am healthy/active (occasional hikes, occasional bike, walk, etc.), but don't really run. Is a sub-18 5K within 2 years realistic? If not, what's a more realistic goal?

More about me:

*6'1, 180lbs

*Decent high-school sprinter (11-flat 100m)

*1 year of cross country when I was 15yo -- PR (also my first race ever) was just under 19 minutes

*For kicks, I recently went to a local track to see what an all-out 400m felt like. I ran it in 70 seconds.

You definitely can. In less than 1 year. Just start running low intensity miles now and build up to 40 miles a week. Then start putting in some workouts. You’d be better off around 165 so also drop the weight. If you want it and with your above average athletic ability I don’t think inside of a year or sooner is unreasonable.

This would be a full out vomit when it’s over effort though. Not coming in comfortably inside the time.

Yes, a sub 18 5k is achievable with your background. You will know within 3-4 months whether you actually like running regularly. To stay motivated, target a local Octoberfest or Turkey Trot for your"return" to distance racing.

Suggestions-

First two weeks- Run- Tu- Th- Sat -Sun. 3mile jog on flat course or track. Walk if you have to.

Do strides and form runs EASY before and after your jogs. The one and only goal of this 2 week prep period is to not get injured.

Next 4 Weeks- Run Tu-We-Th- Sat- Sun. Make one of the weeknd days a 5mile "long run" and one of the weekdays a controlled interval day. Start intervals with something like 2 mile warm up, form runs, 8 x 200 with 100 jog, 1 mile cool down. Don't max out on the 200s.

Run a 1 mile trial at the end of this first 4 week mini-cycle but don't make it an all out time trial. Instead, run the first lap at a controlled 85 secs (17:40 min 5k pace) then see if you can accelerate on the last three laps.

Next 4 weeks- Gradually increase your long run to 8 miles. Bump up your interval days to sets ike 12 x 400 and 6 x 800.

Next 4 Weeks- Add a few short tempos to your normal continuous runs where you run 2 miles easy and then without resting accelerate to 6:20 pace (or fitness appropriate pace) for 3 miles before cooling down with an easy mile. This should feel hard but in control.

Do a 3 x mile workout at 5:50 pace (or fitness appropriate pace) with 4 mins rest 7-10 days before the target race.

Take a rest day 3-4 days out before the race and run easy the days before the race. Try, try, try to to control your pace the first mile. Have fun.

There are plenty of beginner running books out there. IMO, most overestimate the amount of mileage needed to run respectable 5k-10k times.

If you run 25-40 mins a day 5 days a week for 12 weeks you will improve significantly from your couch fitness. If you do well and like running then you can add 12-15 mile long runs, double days, ladder workouts, etc but all of these are more likely to hurt rather than help you as you adjust to long distance running.

You need to answer your own question by starting the training process. It takes a strong base to build as a start. Not like a sprinter. Then adding in speed work. And the main key is consistency without getting injured. Not easy for older runners. You can’t train the way you did as a 25 yr old. More recovery days. That all doesn’t help getting fast times. But with dedication I think it’s possible for sure

Mid 40's, last one I tried a few months back was 17:32 at about 80%, but to your point, averaging 5-600k's a month

All very helpful replies - thanks fellas

Seems like the 18min mark is not an unreasonable goal... but certainly not a lay-up. I'll see where some basic training takes me, and will target a Thanksgiving turkey trot as an initial checkpoint.

Got a new pair of Brooks shoes -- eager to get started (maybe a bit of Olympic fever, along with the realization of turning 40 on the near-term horizon).

I managed a 19:18 @ 45 with a 73 second quarter, but I'm more of a typical sized distance runner.

You are a big guy, which is going to make it more difficult. Not impossible, but you're going to

have to hit it hard.

Easily. You just have to fit though. At 40, you didn't lose that much yet. But every year from now, you will lose about a percent. Get it done now and not drag this out.

seth82 wrote:

Seemed like a small improvement on my best time from almost 25 years ago. From a layman's perspective, 24 months seemed like enough runway to get there. But I'm just wildly guessing.

Would love to get some opinions on what a more realistic (but still somewhat aspirational) goal & timeframe might look like. Thanks.

you arent a 15 year old who just ran a 19min 5k. go out tomorrow and run a 2 mile and let us knoe how you do.

Again nobody can tell you what a realistic goal is. You need to do the work and see where you end up. if yoy best time was 20 mins, would yoy give up? if it was 16mins would you train extea hard? That 70s quarter tells us nothing. A mile after 16 weeks of training will tell us a lot. drop a 540 and you will break 18. run a 630, and I dont like your chances....

I was in a similar situation, a little slower high school speed than you. I only got down to about 18:40. However, I found I could sprint nearly as fast at 40 as I did at 16. An 11.00 hundred at 40 is world class. It hurts a lot more though so I ended up migrating back to the road races. They're more fun. So there is masters track. That's something you might want to look at. In a few years, I'll be 70 years old. I may give the 100 another go. I think the world record is only 12.77. That seems a little soft to me.

Ignore the doubters. 40 isn't that old. You aren't carrying that much extra weight. Your 15-year-old PR and recent 400m time do actually suggest plenty of athletic talent. You'll have to train carefully at first and deliberately after that, and it may take 12-24 months, but breaking 18 sounds like a good goal for you. It will require some effort, but it's definitely not out of reach.

It can be realistic, but not at 180.

When people harp on volume training, the #1 effect of it is weight restriction. They may not realize it but that's probably 80% of the gain.

160 vs 180 is worth 2 minutes at ~18 minute 5k level. One ninth. It really is roughly proportional, and returns only diminish once weighing less robs you of the strength and energy to run fast. Look at runners like Kiprop and Sifan to know just how skinny that is.

You sound a lot like me. Former sprinter in high school and jumper in college. Same 100 time and size roughly (6”2’/185). I am a bit younger (36) and have been at it for a bit over 2 years. Worked my way down from slower than where you are now to quite a bit faster than your goal.

It’s all about aerobic development. Any reasonably athletic person can run sub 18 but you are going to have to put in good consistent work and stay away from injury.

My recommendation would be to work up to 40-50 miles a week with a day off every 2 weeks or so. Do it slowly and fold in cross training at first. Once a week do some hill sprints (10-12x15 seconds). Another day each week do a longer tempo 6-8 miles rotating between 95% marathon pace and 105% marathon pace. After you get this down fold in some LT work. Things like 3-5 miles continuous, 4-6xmile with 1’ rest. 2 mile LT then 4-6x45s hill sprints. Stuff like that. Keep your other days EASY. You get nothing but injury and crappy workouts from being a Strava hero.

Once you are comfortable with this routine start folding in more traditional 5k workouts or just pick up a Daniels plan. 99% of achieving your goal is going to be basic aerobic development and you will get the most bang for your buck building consistent volume and with longer sub threshold and threshold efforts.

Bad Wigins wrote:

It can be realistic, but not at 180.

When people harp on volume training, the #1 effect of it is weight restriction. They may not realize it but that's probably 80% of the gain.

160 vs 180 is worth 2 minutes at ~18 minute 5k level. One ninth. It really is roughly proportional, and returns only diminish once weighing less robs you of the strength and energy to run fast. Look at runners like Kiprop and Sifan to know just how skinny that is.

This is garbage. Some people, especially former sprinters are just bigger. This dude isn’t trying to break 13 in the 5k. Yes, all things being equal, lighter is better but 6’1”/180 isn’t exactly huge. It is a normal athletic frame. If he builds volume he will probably lose 5-10 pounds anyhow given where he is starting.

-A former sprinter with a similar BMI.