Based on their previous results and training history, no, I don't believe OP has the talent required to break 15 at age 34-35. If they started younger and dedicated everything to the sport? Maybe, but sub 15 is unrealistic for most people. Those that act like everyone can break 15 with hard work are delusional.
"I did around 30 mpw for about two years, hopped in a 1500 for the hell of it last year, and ended up cracking 4:40"
I'd argue 30 mpw for two years is enough volume and consistency to determine if OP had an above average level of talent for distance running. IMO their results do not indicate this at all.
I didn't really keep a running log and my memory isn't the greatest, so I picked that 30 mpw figure since I exceeded it for some weeks and was under it on others. But now that I think about it, there were definitely more weeks under 30 mpw than over 30 mpw from 2020-2022.
The only training I'm fairly confident on is the one I posted for the last few months. 10ish mpw from April 2022 - Early November 2022, a buildup from 10 mpw to 33-35 mpw between November and early January, and then a 3:41.94 solo 1200m earlier this month.
I think what I'm hoping for is that I'm a super-responder to training. Perhaps there are people out there who do terribly on low mileage and then have a breakthrough when they ramp up the miles. I know I'll never be elite, but like someone posted earlier, an 8:45 3K / 15:00 5K isn't exactly elite-level material.
Based on their previous results and training history, no, I don't believe OP has the talent required to break 15 at age 34-35. If they started younger and dedicated everything to the sport? Maybe, but sub 15 is unrealistic for most people. Those that act like everyone can break 15 with hard work are delusional.
How much does being 35 even matter in the 3000/5000? Probably a tiny bit, but it's not a critical factor like it would be in the sprints.
I would tend to think the 8:45 3000 mark is easier than the 15 5000. But it depends on what you can deal with better--a faster pace or a longer distance. If you recently ran 4:40 off of minimal training at your age, with a sprinter training, I'd say shoot for the 3k.
I'm not going to say it's completely possible--the real unknown here is how much talent you truly have. While your 1500 result gives a small indication that you might be talented enough to do it, it really isn't a definite indicator. This all matters because at your age, you're going to be relying a lot on your genetic talent to get you through this. You don't have any significant training history and your body is definitely past its peak.
But, if you are talented enough to do it, I would say there is a chance. You will definitely need to start training ASAP--the longer and more consistent your training is from now until race day, the better chance you have.
I would also suggest you try to find another fast track that World Athletics picks up results from, and plan on racing to hit this mark at least a couple of times. IMO, you are giving yourself a better chance the more times you race.
I would tend to think the 8:45 3000 mark is easier than the 15 5000. But it depends on what you can deal with better--a faster pace or a longer distance. If you recently ran 4:40 off of minimal training at your age, with a sprinter training, I'd say shoot for the 3k.
I'm not going to say it's completely possible--the real unknown here is how much talent you truly have. While your 1500 result gives a small indication that you might be talented enough to do it, it really isn't a definite indicator. This all matters because at your age, you're going to be relying a lot on your genetic talent to get you through this. You don't have any significant training history and your body is definitely past its peak.
But, if you are talented enough to do it, I would say there is a chance. You will definitely need to start training ASAP--the longer and more consistent your training is from now until race day, the better chance you have.
I would also suggest you try to find another fast track that World Athletics picks up results from, and plan on racing to hit this mark at least a couple of times. IMO, you are giving yourself a better chance the more times you race.
Thanks, and yeah, I'm inclined to go for the 3k. I don't know if this means anything, but back in middle school when me and everyone else was untrained, I was the fastest guy I knew in the sprints and but only the second (or third?) fastest in the PE mile. So I'm probably more speed-oriented and have a lot more talent than the average person, but I'm not D1 material or anything. I don't remember my times from those days.
In my mid-late 20s, I ran under 12 in the 100 three times, but they all have an asterisk. One was hand-timed, the other two were electronically-timed but weren't wind-legal.
I have a world athletics profile from several sub 2:35 marathons. Not sure if that’s still the standard, but i feel like that’s the easiest one to hit. It would require much more of an investment in training.
Problem is that the 24.9 200 speed hasn't correlated to strong distance results for OP, who has never even officially broke 5 in a mile. Now they expect to string together a couple of 4:41s by the end of next year. 0% chance, sorry OP.
I'm not a math or English major, but "a couple of 4:41s" is incorrect. It's less than two 4:41s for the 3K and a couple of 4:49s for the 5K.
Make up your own event like Matt London. He has broken numerous world records in self-created events. Maybe try the 8.3m dash from a standing start while wearing flip flops and balancing a discus on your head. I'm certain NOBODY has ever done this so you will be the world record holder. Then you make your pitch to World Athletics about your page.
I have a world athletics profile from several sub 2:35 marathons. Not sure if that’s still the standard, but i feel like that’s the easiest one to hit. It would require much more of an investment in training.
The post states "in a track event", so the marathon would be ruled out. And even if it wasn't, you get far fewer attempts and more opportunities for failures (i.e, bad weather) than an indoor 3k or 5k.
Make up your own event like Matt London. He has broken numerous world records in self-created events. Maybe try the 8.3m dash from a standing start while wearing flip flops and balancing a discus on your head. I'm certain NOBODY has ever done this so you will be the world record holder. Then you make your pitch to World Athletics about your page.
WA doesn't even have a category for the 600-yard dash, and you expect them to have one for the 8.3m dash in flip flops?
There's a reason why this bet was "get a WA profile" and not "set a world record". One is riddled with loopholes, the other one isn't.
Just double checked the pace calculator, 8:45 3k is 4:42 mile pace. If you're referring to the fact that it's less than two full miles, yeah, okay. I was just making it simple by saying he'd need to string two 4:41s together. Apologies for the one second error. At the end of the day, this whole thread is totally silly. We're sitting around debating if a 34 year old man with a roughly 5 min mile PR is somehow, in less than 2 years, going to become a good enough distance runner to warrant a WA profile page. I wish them the best in training but it's absolutely delusional IMO to think that's even close to realistic.
Just double checked the pace calculator, 8:45 3k is 4:42 mile pace. If you're referring to the fact that it's less than two full miles, yeah, okay. I was just making it simple by saying he'd need to string two 4:41s together. Apologies for the one second error. At the end of the day, this whole thread is totally silly. We're sitting around debating if a 34 year old man with a roughly 5 min mile PR is somehow, in less than 2 years, going to become a good enough distance runner to warrant a WA profile page. I wish them the best in training but it's absolutely delusional IMO to think that's even close to realistic.
sounds like a man who has given up on their dreams
Some of what you've stated about your sprint times are very interesting. This may not be what you want to hear but it's quite possible that your muscles are more fast-twitch oriented. If that's true, it means you'd most likely have more sprint talent than as a long distance runner. It's a shame that sprint speed declines so steeply with age because you may have had a better shot at this challenge as say a 400-800 guy.
Some of what you've stated about your sprint times are very interesting. This may not be what you want to hear but it's quite possible that your muscles are more fast-twitch oriented. If that's true, it means you'd most likely have more sprint talent than as a long distance runner. It's a shame that sprint speed declines so steeply with age because you may have had a better shot at this challenge as say a 400-800 guy.
If OP can run a decent 800, 1:56–1:54 or so, at BU in December they might have a shot at cracking the top 1,000 for the season very briefly. 25 isn't lightning fast, but it's fast enough for a 1:55.
OP, have you ever run a 400? Do you have any idea if you're naturally anaerobically strong? This type of fitness can be built faster than the long slow endurance needed for a 3k or a 5k if you have some genetic inclination towards it, but comes with more chance of injury, especially when you're older.
Some of what you've stated about your sprint times are very interesting. This may not be what you want to hear but it's quite possible that your muscles are more fast-twitch oriented. If that's true, it means you'd most likely have more sprint talent than as a long distance runner. It's a shame that sprint speed declines so steeply with age because you may have had a better shot at this challenge as say a 400-800 guy.
If OP can run a decent 800, 1:56–1:54 or so, at BU in December they might have a shot at cracking the top 1,000 for the season very briefly. 25 isn't lightning fast, but it's fast enough for a 1:55.
OP, have you ever run a 400? Do you have any idea if you're naturally anaerobically strong? This type of fitness can be built faster than the long slow endurance needed for a 3k or a 5k if you have some genetic inclination towards it, but comes with more chance of injury, especially when you're older.
I ran a 59" 400 off of maybe a month's training back in 2013. Long story short, one of my co-workers bragged that he could beat anyone in the office because he was tall, had really long legs, and played Ultimate Frisbee "all weekend long". I called him out on it and raced him the following month, but I ended up losing.
When I actually trained for the sprints from ~2014 to ~2018, I ran a self-timed solo 300m in 39.6. So that's maybe worth a 54 or a 55.
This shows my obvious inexperience, but I'm wondering how much I can "muscle memory" this. An 8:45 3k is 70"/lap pace, so what if I did nothing but run at that speed all the time? Easy days would be maybe a dozen 35" 200s with plenty of recovery, hard days would be 600s in 1:45, and long days would be just doing as many 70" laps as I can within a 90-minute period. Is that plan even remotely feasible for getting someone under 8:45?