Projected 3K Time

8:10 - 8:15 would seem reasonably optimistic, although if recovery times were cut down more, a better idea could be given.

I haven't done a wokout like that and I've run under 8:10...

Ran a very similar workout with similar rest like that in college one season. The last 800m I went after a bit and ran 2:02. I ran under 8:10 that same season.

If you can feel good through a 4:19-22 opening mile and be ready to run, you should be able to go sub 8:10. Of course, there is a lot more that factors into your racing than the one workout.

I have done 7 x 800m in 2:06 avg. with 2:00rec and have run 8:00. Also you should be able to go 15 x 400m in :62 with :35rec, this kind of fitness will get you to the show...

are you serious??? I have seen a number of GENUINE top guys train (thats sub 13.10 5km runners and 3min30-32 guys) and they would be pressing in a workout like that. Komen used to run 2 sets of 10x400 in 60 with a minute, but that was with a 3-5 set break depending on how he felt. But then again Komen ran 3.46, 7.20 and 12.39.

My advice, to a point, sessions and numbers dont mean anything. The only way you will know what your training means to you personally, is the run the distance more than once and evaluate from there.

Also once we did 5 x 1000m in 2:34 avg with 2:30rec. On that one i nearly bled out of my eyes-it is still the hardest I have ever done. Outdoors we also did 3 x 2 mile in 8:55 avg with 5:00rec. Training hard was not a big deal in the stable that I used to be in. All this was done on 90 miles a week in season. I have been going through old logs recently. Oh the memories....

Seb did 8 x 800 in 1:56 average w/50 sec. recovery, with no warmup or cooldown. He only ran 7:50 or so in the few times he raced the 3K, but would have run 7:18 if he had decided to race the distance seriously. I wouldn't let him do this as the extra few miles would have taken him too far away from speed, and would have pushed his reportable mileage to over 36 miles/week, an unacceptable consequence.

Are you guys kidding me? I ran with a guy who did that same workout, except 2 min rest between. After 2:08s and 2:07s in that workout he ran under 7:50 two weeks later.

Simple Simpson,

You should have run under 7:40 and 13:10 if you were really doing those workouts.

The workout times that you guys think are needed to run as fast as you want are a little quick as far as I can tell. Why leave your best runs on the training floor. Hell most people who who are 4:20 milers can run 10x400 in 60 with a min rest. But most of those guys cannot brake 4 in the mile. Just have the abilty to do a workout means nothing. When I was in highschool, I ran hard track workouts 4-5 times a week. And my best workout was 15x 400m in 65sec with 60sec rest. And I was only a 16:07 5k guys. So that should give you some type of idea about what workouts really mean. Also I did a workout of 20x200 with 45 sec rest in 27-29 sec and my fast 800 at that time was 2:07. It is better to leave a little in the tank and then let your races tell you how fast you can run.

SoRichards wrote:

And my best workout was 15x 400m in 65sec with 60sec rest. And I was only a 16:07 5k guys. So that should give you some type of idea about what workouts really mean. Also I did a workout of 20x200 with 45 sec rest in 27-29 sec and my fast 800 at that time was 2:07.

bullshit.

10+400 in 60 with 1 min rest is legit. You WOULD be capable, or close, to a 4 min mile....

I think your workout indicates at least 805...

I agree. In high school once I ran 7x400 in 60 with 3 minutes rest and ran 3:58. 10x400 with 60 seconds rest could not be done by a 16:05 5k runner (unless he had a low 4 mile pr).

I have run 30x400m in 55/56 seconds consistently with 30 seconds rests. I have managed to run a 17:26 5K. I think I could run faster in a decent race. From your times I reckon you could run a 9:50 3k if you felt really good.

Good luck

dipshits... the 10x400 guy is running 65 pace... not 60 pace. Its believable if you know how to read

You are correct, I should have run those times-if I ever could have gotten to Europe, instead I ran 8:00-13:51 and 28:39 in domestic races. I ran during a time when the sport took some big hits and doors were really closing all over the place as far as opportunity. So I got a job and went out into the real world-no bigee. The world still moves on...

kid wrote:

dipshits... the 10x400 guy is running 65 pace... not 60 pace. Its believable if you know how to read

no, mr. richards claimed he ran 15 x 400 in 65 with a minute rest (as a 16:05 5k guy) and ran 20 x 200 in 27-29 with 45 sec. rest as a 2:07 half miler.

now, either he was a complete nut-case when the gun went off, or he's lying.

i called bullshit.

doped up wrote:

kid wrote:

dipshits... the 10x400 guy is running 65 pace... not 60 pace. Its believable if you know how to read

no, mr. richards claimed he ran 15 x 400 in 65 with a minute rest (as a 16:05 5k guy) and ran 20 x 200 in 27-29 with 45 sec. rest as a 2:07 half miler.

now, either he was a complete nut-case when the gun went off, or he's lying.

i called bullshit.

you are absolutely right, look at it this way, Kipketers 200 sess goes 20x200 in 26 with 40s rest, BUT HE RAN 1min41.11.

Why, oh why, oh why for the love of god, do people make up fantasy wokouts and post them on boards like these?

Anyone else think the truth is bullshitting - 30 400s off 30secs in 55/56 - good one mate.