How do elite level runners look so relaxed during the races (especially 5k and over) ?

it is time wrote:

You can find several interviews where runners talk about staying calm during their races. Even sprinters do it. They think about their form, hip position, arm swing, head position, and any other cues their coach gives them. Some athletes use those key points as distractions from the pain itself.

In the 400-800 you are always thinking about your form and mobility when you go lactic. You're trying to delay that as much as possible. It's why in the longer events you do your best to keep your heart rate down.

Obviously if you're totally out of shape it doesn't matter what you're doing. But for people who are truly fit, there's more to it than just being in really good shape. Stuff like an increased heart rate can kick some systems into gear faster and faster so you're trying to "weather the storm." You're also playing the mental game of convincing yourself you're in control and comfortable and the pain that is creeping in is manageable.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

it is time wrote:

You can find several interviews where runners talk about staying calm during their races. Even sprinters do it. They think about their form, hip position, arm swing, head position, and any other cues their coach gives them. Some athletes use those key points as distractions from the pain itself.

In the 400-800 you are always thinking about your form and mobility when you go lactic. You're trying to delay that as much as possible. It's why in the longer events you do your best to keep your heart rate down.

Obviously if you're totally out of shape it doesn't matter what you're doing. But for people who are truly fit, there's more to it than just being in really good shape. Stuff like an increased heart rate can kick some systems into gear faster and faster so you're trying to "weather the storm." You're also playing the mental game of convincing yourself you're in control and comfortable and the pain that is creeping in is manageable.

I often see posts about a mental factor in distance running but it’s very physical. If the pace is too fast, a runner will reach a point where it’s impossible to move his arms and legs fast enough to keep up. No one can outrun talent and fitness.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

MoPo wrote:

Aerobic capacity, most will have 10+ years of high mileage training behind them, the higher your capacity, the faster you recover your oxygen debt from a hard effort.

Also the years of training strengthens their form and muscles so even when they pop and fade, their form doesn't deteriorate as much as you see in weekend warriors

Also, in sit and kick races, 1 or 2 seconds per lap is a huge difference to an elite, because they are so fast and highly trained, the gaps between mile pace, 5k pace and 10k become smaller in absolute pace so if an elite runner is running 2 seconds per lap slower than 5k pace(which would be miniscule to a weekend warrior), the elite would be running 10k pace. Some even would only need to slow 1.5 seconds or less than 5k pace to be running 10k pace. Thats only 6 seconds per mile difference between 5 and 10k pace. A difference most hobbyjoggers wouldnt probably even detect but would be comparatively cruising for an elite.

Typing something doesn’t make it true. If you check their PRs, elite runners slow down by 10-11 seconds per mile from 5 to 10k. If what you said was true, several runners would be under 2:00 for the marathon.

MoPo wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Typing something doesn’t make it true. If you check their PRs, elite runners slow down by 10-11 seconds per mile from 5 to 10k. If what you said was true, several runners would be under 2:00 for the marathon.

Eer, i said some and not all. Take Zernesay Tadesse for instance:

5k PR pace: 4:11

10k PR pace: 4:17

The general rule of thumb is 2 seconds/per lap as the distance doubles. Or take Canova's guideline that strength based elite should be able to run the 10k at 5k x2 + 40 seconds which is about 6.5 seconds per mile. Anywhere between 5k x 2 + 40 to 60 seconds is considered good strength which is 6-10 seconds per mile.

In fact, let me show you a few examples wayyy below your 10 to 11 seconds

Paul Tergat: 7 seconds

Nicolas Kemboi: 5 seconds

Abebe Dinkesa: 7 seconds

Grant Fisher: 7 seconds

Micah Kogo: 6 seconds

So half of the top 10 all-time slow down less than 8 seconds a mile. In fact, not a single one of the top 10 slow down by 11 seconds a mile. But I'll keep going...

Paul Koech: 7 seconds

Zernesay Tadesse: 5 seconds

Hassan Abdullah: 7 seconds

(8 of the top 15 under 8 seconds a mile difference, still no one over 11 seconds)

Boniface Kiprop: 7 seconds

Sammi wanjiru: 3 seconds( obviously can't count this)

Galen Rupp: 7 seconds

So 10 of the all-time top-20 10,000m runners(excluding wanjiru) slow down by 7 seconds per mile or less. Not one single one over 11 seconds. 10 seconds per mile is on the slow side but a few do slow that much, so I guess that means that just because you write something, that doesn't mean it's true ;)

SDSU Aztec wrote:

MoPo wrote:

Eer, i said some and not all. Take Zernesay Tadesse for instance:

5k PR pace: 4:11

10k PR pace: 4:17

The general rule of thumb is 2 seconds/per lap as the distance doubles. Or take Canova's guideline that strength based elite should be able to run the 10k at 5k x2 + 40 seconds which is about 6.5 seconds per mile. Anywhere between 5k x 2 + 40 to 60 seconds is considered good strength which is 6-10 seconds per mile.

In fact, let me show you a few examples wayyy below your 10 to 11 seconds

Paul Tergat: 7 seconds

Nicolas Kemboi: 5 seconds

Abebe Dinkesa: 7 seconds

Grant Fisher: 7 seconds

Micah Kogo: 6 seconds

So half of the top 10 all-time slow down less than 8 seconds a mile. In fact, not a single one of the top 10 slow down by 11 seconds a mile. But I'll keep going...

Paul Koech: 7 seconds

Zernesay Tadesse: 5 seconds

Hassan Abdullah: 7 seconds

(8 of the top 15 under 8 seconds a mile difference, still no one over 11 seconds)

Boniface Kiprop: 7 seconds

Sammi wanjiru: 3 seconds( obviously can't count this)

Galen Rupp: 7 seconds

So 10 of the all-time top-20 10,000m runners(excluding wanjiru) slow down by 7 seconds per mile or less. Not one single one over 11 seconds. 10 seconds per mile is on the slow side but a few do slow that much, so I guess that means that just because you write something, that doesn't mean it's true ;)

Not everyone has 5000 PRs that represent their ability at that distance. For example, Fisher’s 12:53 included a huge negative split over the last 2000m and with an even pace, he would have run 12:45 or faster.

If you take all PRs at face value, it’s impressive that in HS, Nico Young managed to run 4 times his 800m PR without taking a break.

MoPo wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Not everyone has 5000 PRs that represent their ability at that distance. For example, Fisher’s 12:53 included a huge negative split over the last 2000m and with an even pace, he would have run 12:45 or faster.

If you take all PRs at face value, it’s impressive that in HS, Nico Young managed to run 4 times his 800m PR without taking a break.

So you are going to cherrypick one race and one performance to hang your hat on your theory? When not a single athlete in the top 20 all-time 10000m performances has ACTUALLY got a performance that is more than 11 seconds per mile slower than their 5k PR? You realise how statistically improbable it would be for every athlete on that list to just so happen to have underperformed at 5k? And that they overperformed in the 10k which is a race that is run far far less regularly than the 5k.

And btw, even in your hypothetical world of Fisher running 12:45, that would be 10 seconds a mile faster than his 10k pace. And that's not even counting the fact he went 13:23/13:10 with a 4:06 final mile in his 10K PR which means his 10k PR should be significantly faster too in your hypothetical world thus cancelling out the difference you tried to create.

And this is before the fact that I said SOME which you interpreted as all or most in your haste to nitpick and take out of context. So I will go with what the actual PR's(as you said to look at in your first reply and were demonstrated to be incorrect by the actual PR's and then followed up by moving the goalposts to say PR's don't count when proven incorrect), the stats and a world class coach in Canova who says that 10k specialists should be able to run their 5k time multiplied by 2 plus 40 seconds and who also said that Geb and Bekele never prepared properly for the 10k if you want to get into hypothetical.

In fact, here's a post where Canova actually discusses this:

Thread:www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?th...

bluh wrote:

TheHobbs wrote:

I'm an hobby jogger and I've only ran a dozen or so 5k races.

What I'm observing is that it seems like if you stop an elite runner in the middle of a 5k race, they would still be relatively okay. Like they breath hard, but they seem relaxed, they're aware of their surroundings, they can think straight etc.

While in my case, after 1k I'm slowly battling against death after each minutes passing by.

Practice and talent. Anyone who’s been practicing a skill for years at the elite level will seem like a magician to normal people dabbling in it, like how what magicians do literally seems like magic to the rest.

In running, it is easy to underestimate both how much one can improve with practice as well as the impact of innate talent because it seems like we all have seemingly equally functional legs and it deceptively feels like there is no special skill needed to run, but years of practice is what it takes to acquire the skill of running with low economy and maximizing your aerobic capacity and strength.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

MoPo wrote:

So you are going to cherrypick one race and one performance to hang your hat on your theory? When not a single athlete in the top 20 all-time 10000m performances has ACTUALLY got a performance that is more than 11 seconds per mile slower than their 5k PR? You realise how statistically improbable it would be for every athlete on that list to just so happen to have underperformed at 5k? And that they overperformed in the 10k which is a race that is run far far less regularly than the 5k.

And btw, even in your hypothetical world of Fisher running 12:45, that would be 10 seconds a mile faster than his 10k pace. And that's not even counting the fact he went 13:23/13:10 with a 4:06 final mile in his 10K PR which means his 10k PR should be significantly faster too in your hypothetical world thus cancelling out the difference you tried to create.

And this is before the fact that I said SOME which you interpreted as all or most in your haste to nitpick and take out of context. So I will go with what the actual PR's(as you said to look at in your first reply and were demonstrated to be incorrect by the actual PR's and then followed up by moving the goalposts to say PR's don't count when proven incorrect), the stats and a world class coach in Canova who says that 10k specialists should be able to run their 5k time multiplied by 2 plus 40 seconds and who also said that Geb and Bekele never prepared properly for the 10k if you want to get into hypothetical.

In fact, here's a post where Canova actually discusses this:

Thread:www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?th...

Geb and, Cheptegei all ran 10-11 seconds slower per mile and Cheptegei’s WRs are about 10 seconds. Slowing down by only 8 seconds would imply some type of super endurance but Salazar, who would presumably be as strong as it gets, was also at 10 seconds.

For 5/10 guys, the training for both distances is identical.

it is time wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Geb and, Cheptegei all ran 10-11 seconds slower per mile and Cheptegei’s WRs are about 10 seconds. Slowing down by only 8 seconds would imply some type of super endurance but Salazar, who would presumably be as strong as it gets, was also at 10 seconds.

For 5/10 guys, the training for both distances is identical.

5/10 training ISN'T identical. Yes, they're similar in most ways but identical is the wrong word. You're also training for different things, a time trial 10k takes a lot more longer reps at goal pace. A slower, kicker's race but take a little more specificity. You would be training to cut down your pace and finish really hard. Probably doing some "fartlek" type work to prepare for pace changes.

So first you'd have to decide what kind of race you're training for, then if you decide 5 or 10 yes the training is similar but probably not exact. Most people just train with the mindset of "just do go training and get better" but you can't ask your body to do things in races that you don't rehearse in practice...just like staying relaxed.