Is 4x1600m a good indicator of 5k race time?

If you're going to run 4 x 1600 why don't you just run a d amn 5k on the track and find out how you're going to do instead of posting these stupid threads

Try 3x1600 with 2:00 rest. If you run those in 5:00, then you should be good for a 15:30 5K.

dumb wrote:

If you're going to run 4 x 1600 why don't you just run a d amn 5k on the track and find out how you're going to do instead of posting these stupid threads

Because you train different than you race, stupid.

try 25 x 200m @ race pace with no recovery, let us know and then I'll be able to tell you what type of shape your're in

I've heard this wrote:

Try 3x1600 with 2:00 rest. If you run those in 5:00, then you should be good for a 15:30 5K.

He still would have to run 200 more meters.

Its an excellent test, but I think your rest intervals are too long. Bobby McGee uses this test, but only 90s rest intervals. I have done it before (with w/u and c/d) and it is within 5-10s of my race. Gordo Byrn uses one, too, that is 3x1600 w/ 40s rest and then a 400 all out. add up the 1600s and half the time of the 400 and that is your predicted 5K time. Its pretty close, too.

And to answer, "why would you do this when there are so many 5Ks"

1) Its cheaper

2) Its easier logistically, if you are busy

3) The paces get you in line with your mcmillan/Jack daniels paces just as easy.

why not just do a 4 mile time trial where you go 5:20 5:15 5:10 5:00? that'd be a better predictor IMO.

Honestly the 4xmile at 5k pace with 90sec rest sounds harder than the race itself (i.e. would predict a slower time than capable).

Your recovery is too long, so race pace will be slower. Reduce the recovery to 2:30 and get back to us. 6x1000m with 1:30 recovery usually works for me

I always found 4x1600 to be a good indicator using the last 3 as my total for 5k

Yep use the last 3 (avg pace) or you can use all 4 and average pace for the 4. Comes out very close, either way... assuming you paced it pretty evenly.