Effects of taking a year off from running and other physical activities

bump

In a strikingly similar situation myself - interested in finding out how it all went for you.

58, 2:18, 5:23

54

2:16

5:45

57

209

528

55, 2:20, 5:30

400m: 1:05

800m: 2:20

mile: 5:00

Muscle memory remembers a lot...

Alan

My guesses are: 58, 2:16, and 5:30.

Let's get a little "Wisdom of the Crowd" thing going here. After guessing, I calculated the average of all the estimates (up to and including my post).

It will be interesting to see if the times converge and if the average guess proves to be close to the actual time. (Even though the condition of independence is violated because we're all influenced by what's already been posted.)

So, I've added up all 18 observations to date. I'm not going to post the averages because I don't want to anchor the estimates. However, here are the raw numbers

Here are the raw numbers in case you want to check it out or to save time if you want to maintain the game after my post:

400 1053.60

800 2465.50

Mile 5886.00

All sums in seconds, 18 observations.

My guess is

400m 60.5

800m 2:14.5

Mile 5:22.0

Runningart2004 wrote:

400m: 1:05

800m: 2:20

mile: 5:00

Muscle memory remembers a lot...

Alan

What on God's green earth does muscle memory have to do with running a mile?

400: 59

Didn't wejo and rojo race a 400 two years ago? Wejo said he didn't run for a long time, and he still won the race in 60.2. The OP was faster than wejo in his prime, so he's got to run at least a sub 60.

800 and mile: 2:25 and 5:35

I've seen middle school kids run a 2:30 800 and a sub 6 mile off of minimal training. The OP should be able to run at least that fast, subtracting a few seconds due to physical maturity and a better knowledge of pacing.

400-57800-2:191600-5:09

used to be injured wrote:

Last December, I got severe Achilles tendonosis (caused by running through it for 2 months) and had to take a lot of time off. I haven't ran or done any physical activity besides walking and doing eccentric calf drops since that time, and I'm sure I've fully recovered by now.

Although I haven't decided whether or not to return to competitive running, I've just ran an all-out 400, 800, and mile last week to see how much fitness I lost. What do you think my times were?

My PR's before the injury (off of 45 MPW) were:

400: 50.3

800: 1:54

1200 (solo time trial): 3:19

1500: 4:15

mile: 4:36

I'm giving everyone until this Saturday (midnight East Coast time, 9 PM PST) to guess what I ran. Closest one gets bragging rights.

54, 2:09, 5:09

400: 56 high

800: 2:17

1600: 5:16 (~5:19 if full mile)

I took 19 months off and went from about 420 mile to 459 mile-gained a little more weight then you did...

So based on your prs ill go with

58.5

224

510

W. Mitty wrote:

My guesses are: 58, 2:16, and 5:30.

Let's get a little "Wisdom of the Crowd" thing going here. After guessing, I calculated the average of all the estimates (up to and including my post).

It will be interesting to see if the times converge and if the average guess proves to be close to the actual time. (Even though the condition of independence is violated because we're all influenced by what's already been posted.)

So, I've added up all 18 observations to date. I'm not going to post the averages because I don't want to anchor the estimates. However, here are the raw numbers

Here are the raw numbers in case you want to check it out or to save time if you want to maintain the game after my post:

400 1053.60

800 2465.50

Mile 5886.00

All sums in seconds, 18 observations.

I used your numbers and the rest up to here and I like what the average says, except I think the mile might be a little fast...

Other than that, I think its probably:

400 --> 58

800 --> 2:17

Mile -> 5:36

2:08, 56, and 5:02.

400 - 57

800 - 2:09

Mile - 5:10

400: :59

800: 2:08

mile: 4:59

I would guess :57 for the 400 but you did do it after the 800, so I tacked on a bit knowing that.

57.8

2:22

5:24