Uhhhh need more details. When I was in 7th grade and could run 63 I could probably only run 2:3x. Now that I'm old I feel like I could run ~2:15 off a 63 fitness.
My endurance could improve more but I do around 35-40 mpw and do a 10 mile long run at the end of the week. During the week, I’ll do 2 speed days, 2 7-mile easy runs, and sometimes a tempo in there too. According to v02 max, I could go around 20 flat for a 5k right now.
My endurance could improve more but I do around 35-40 mpw and do a 10 mile long run at the end of the week. During the week, I’ll do 2 speed days, 2 7-mile easy runs, and sometimes a tempo in there too. According to v02 max, I could go around 20 flat for a 5k right now.
If I had to guess, I'd say your very close but not quite there. I'd say low 2:20s, but 2:19 should be there in no time if you keep it up.
I feel like I can put two sub 70s back-to-back but I suppose there is no way to know until I hop into a race.
How you "feel" has nothing to do with what you can actually do. Technically, if 63 is a true indication of your speed endurance, then the best you could hope for if you were properly trained for an 800 would be around 2:14-2:15. I don't think a 20 minute 5K, according to VO2max, indicates 2:19. I do think 2:25 to 2:30 is probably more reasonable.
I have found this calculation to be way too optimistic for most ms/hs runners. The one i see is close, add 5 sec per 400. Also too optimistic as you see from other posters.
I have found this calculation to be way too optimistic for most ms/hs runners. The one i see is close, add 5 sec per 400. Also too optimistic as you see from other posters.
It is an estimate apparently based on an unusually high degree of stamina in relation to speed. We don't have any indication he possesses that.