It (sadly) took me 80 miles per week to go from a 20 minute 5K to a 16 minute 5K

Slow 5K Guy:

Thanks a lot for your story and for sharing your plans and considerations with us.

In fact, you are not a slow guy at all! Your dedication and consistency deserve great respect.

My only suggestion is to evaluate whether 5K is indeed the best distance for you. With your impressive mileage it may well happen that your optimum is somewhere near 10K or even HM. Or maybe a mid-distance runner is sleeping inside and you rock 3000?

There are various calculators (race/pace predictors) on the net where you just entry your current result at a certain distance (e.g. 5K) and it returns predictions for other distances.

My personal experience is that some not obvious things happen. Being an M63 low mileage runner (35 mpw) I have always thought that 5K is the only distance now where I can show something decent (in my age group). And was quite surprised when after 19:10/5K this spring I ran 10K at 39:34 (while the predictor gave 39:59 as an equivalent for 19:10). So, I put emphasis on 10K this summer and when I "returned back" to 5K in October I saw 18:53 at finish.

With all that said, perhaps it is worth you while to play with the target distance a little bit. Try to train for a shorter distance for a few months and then for some longer one. It will make your training less boring and may push your 5K speed further on.

Best of luck!

I would say you’ve done a great job. Enjoy your progress. Work on your PR Mile.

The overwhelming positivity with this thread is really strange here on Letsrun.

I think most people think his accomplishments are really good for running under 16:30 at close to age 40. Most people can't do that unless they're talented and training hard and smart at that age.

OP's self-deprecation is too much for me. He can't possibly think what he's done is underwhelming. I'm sure at any local 5K that he races, he finishes top 3, and wins his age group. I'm sure everybody around him in real life think he is super fast and fit. They all probably think he's delusional for thinking that he's slow.

Props to OP for self-deprecation to get all of this positive vibe on Letsrun.

1. The B10 coach gave you excellent advice. Keep following it. Your easy pace makes a lot of sense for a hilly area.

2. The best thing about running 80 mpw is you get to run 80 miles, every week. Running is fun!

3. My favorite races are when I'm in the mix with the local HS runners. Being double the age of the other runners in the top 5 is awesome. Within a few years, you'll also finish on top of the master's division in the big city race near you.

And to add that he runs 20:30 at his first 5K at age 34. And after just 5 years of training in his mid-30s to get down to 16:30 is amazing.

I understand OP downplayed it as Letsrun can be very harsh. But come on, it's pretty obvious of what he did has been outstanding.

Positiver wrote:

Props to OP for self-deprecation to get all of this positive vibe on Letsrun.

Normally I'd agree with you, but normally the trend on LetsRun is so unrealistically negative and discouraging in the opposite direction ("You ran a 2:53 marathon at age 45? You suck! Anything less than 2:15 at any age is hobby-jogger pathetic! GIVE UP NOW!") that it's refreshing see some positive encouragement going around for a change.

If he had come in without the self-depreciating qualifier, he'd have been savaged by trolls with delusions of grandeur.

What great discipline, regardless of how 'fast' you end up being. Kudos and a salute to you. You've performed the experiment that so many people are afraid of doing: setting a goal that requires some sacrifices and seeing what you can do to get close to it. No replies on what training you need to do, but just keep experimenting. But your post reminded me of the little rhyme:

I chase a dream that may never be

If I fail, I am still a better me

For if I chase the dream that may never be

At least I'll know my heart was free.

Positiver wrote:

And to add that he runs 20:30 at his first 5K at age 34. And after just 5 years of training in his mid-30s to get down to 16:30 is amazing.

I understand OP downplayed it as Letsrun can be very harsh. But come on, it's pretty obvious of what he did has been outstanding.

Thank you so much. I think some of it is looking at the running logs of other faster runners and really acknowledging the talent they had and just accepting that I did not have that gift, while also just realizing that it would just take a lot more time to get within two minutes of their times. I just saw a runner in my area run a 2:22 marathon and it just astounds me that someone can string together 26 consecutive miles at a 5:27 pace when I feel like my body is about explode after 3 miles at that pace.

In regards to the 20:30 5K. It was 10 weeks of training to get there, but prior to that it was about 5 to 10 miles per week of jogging as well as playing basketball twice per week. I had some aerobic conditioning, but actually training for a race is a whole other level of committment.

Some (a lot of) people lie about there volume. Or 'forget' about the warm up and cool down time, and 'forget' about other things. And then they claim how talented they are, and how little they have trained:) They provide always too little volume (you know these guys and can savely add +10 to 20% volume). Just fugget about that, a joke.

I would gave a s.it on others volume declarations, so OP look more what you can do for you, and not what others claim.

Running 16:30 off of hard work is pretty amazing. Who cares if there are a small number of more talented folks. Most people will find your time unimaginably fast. Talk to some of them.

You are doing what so many runners neglect....running your easy runs easy and staying in zone 1 or 2. That is where mitochondria are built and recovery from the tougher workouts happen.

I ran in college and I remember one of my teammates would always fall off the back of the pack on our 8-10 mile and long runs. The main group would have a pace around 6:40-7:00 (or faster) and he was probably running 7:00-7:20. It wasn't because he couldn't run that fast but because he saw it as his easy pace. We were also probably running too fast and not benefiting from it. Fast forward 2 years and that same guy turned into an 8:40 3000m steeplechaser and low 14:00 5k guy.

Moral of the story: there is a long road to developing endurance and speed and often it seems repetitive and boring.

EhThere wrote:

You are doing what so many runners neglect....running your easy runs easy and staying in zone 1 or 2. That is where mitochondria are built and recovery from the tougher workouts happen.

I ran in college and I remember one of my teammates would always fall off the back of the pack on our 8-10 mile and long runs. The main group would have a pace around 6:40-7:00 (or faster) and he was probably running 7:00-7:20. It wasn't because he couldn't run that fast but because he saw it as his easy pace. We were also probably running too fast and not benefiting from it. Fast forward 2 years and that same guy turned into an 8:40 3000m steeplechaser and low 14:00 5k guy.

Moral of the story: there is a long road to developing endurance and speed and often it seems repetitive and boring.

+1

I'm older than OP, but have run a 5K in about the same time in the last year. My marathon pace is somewhere in the 6:10-6:20 range right now. I very frequently run above 8:00 pace on my easy runs, and even 8:30 the day after a hard workout or long run. Doubles sometimes even go slower than 9:00 pace. That's not to say that every easy run is that slow. But a lot are, and my and Eh There's point is that easy should mean easy. So I wouldn't change what you're doing in that respect.

Positiver wrote:

OP's self-deprecation is too much for me. He can't possibly think what he's done is underwhelming. I'm sure at any local 5K that he races, he finishes top 3, and wins his age group. I'm sure everybody around him in real life think he is super fast and fit. They all probably think he's delusional for thinking that he's slow.

Agreed.

OP's insecurities are a bit sickening, unless he's just fishing for compliments. Get therapy OP.

//TL:DR Average Mileage/Times correlation for untalented runners:

20 mpw - 20:30 5K

35 mpw - 19:30 5K

//

This is just ridiculous. The "average" runner doing 20mpw is barely breaking 30 minutes in the 5K and is over the moon with that.

1. Congrats. Keep the big picture in perspective--you are at the very pointy tip of fitness for 39/40 yos in this country. 2/3 adults are obese, and the other 1/3 ain't so hot, either. I do not believe there are any US cities where there are many 40 yos running sub-15 5ks, 80mpw or not.

You probably have earned yourself a stylishly slim physique, look great in well-tailored clothes, and can still produce turgid erections--again, you are in the small minority for your age. Keep going and see what you can achieve!

2. Your mileage and corresponding results are not unusual, they are exactly what we should expect. I also do not think you need to speed up your long runs; you may see returns by increasing your tempo run volume and speeds. Read the following study very carefully: the total weekly VOLUME is the number one factor in success. Not the PACE, but volume. Followed by dedicated tempo runs and short intervals.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332769237_World-Class_Long-Distance_Running_Performances_Are_Best_Predicted_by_Volume_of_Easy_Runs_and_Deliberate_Practice_of_Short-Interval_and_Tempo_Runs

Inspiring story op. It took me 120 mpw for 2 years to break 16 - which I finally did in grad school. At 60 mpw, I was barely sub 18 in hs, at 100 mpw I dropped my pr from 1739 to 1608 between those 2 periods. I seemed to plateau there, running a bunch of races between 1620 and 1650. What finally got my time down for the last time was doing very long progression runs where I went from not quite tempo pace to tempo pace to race pace. I'd try to run the last mile or two of my tempos like I was running a 10k race. Repeats never seemed to do a lot for me. I could do them at race pace or a little slower or faster, even progressively faster to end the last few reps faster than race pace, but in the actual race I'd never have the stamina to hold that pace and would fade in the second half.

That's a great post! I can't even break 21 minutes, no matter what I do. I did run a 21:14 on the track a week after the marathon in a solo TT. Maybe in an actual race I might get to 19:50 or the low 20s.

I empathize. I'm still pissed at myself for bonking and blowing up my 3:10-3:15-level of training with a 3:20 because I went out too fast. I would kill to break 18 (My best is 18:33). But to hit 16s or 17s would be wonderful.

Your post inspires me. I am training for the marathon but I think all of it will help me with my 5k as well to an extent. To go from a 27-min. 5k to a sub-20 in 8 mos. is impressive.

EhThere wrote:

You are doing what so many runners neglect....running your easy runs easy and staying in zone 1 or 2. That is where mitochondria are built and recovery from the tougher workouts happen.

I ran in college and I remember one of my teammates would always fall off the back of the pack on our 8-10 mile and long runs. The main group would have a pace around 6:40-7:00 (or faster) and he was probably running 7:00-7:20. It wasn't because he couldn't run that fast but because he saw it as his easy pace. We were also probably running too fast and not benefiting from it. Fast forward 2 years and that same guy turned into an 8:40 3000m steeplechaser and low 14:00 5k guy.

Moral of the story: there is a long road to developing endurance and speed and often it seems repetitive and boring.

This is the best thing--I am running my EZ runs at 8:40-9:00 and not caring if people mock me on Strava. It's HUGE for recovering for big workouts at sub-7 minute pace.