Easy day pace 135% of 10k race pace?

I go for like 7:45 E pace but can run a 10k about 5:20-25 pace. So like an extra 20sec slower than 135%

I was thinking about this in a meeting today (bored) remembering an old Malmo post where he ridiculed the idea of running 7:00 pace for easy days and said he always ran 6:00 pace or faster. I was thinking the relevant metric isn't how many "minutes per mile" slower one runs on easy days as a comparison across abilities, but what percent of a given race pace. As Malmo was a 28:00 10k runner (I think), 6:00 pace as a percent of his 10k race pace is the same as 7:00+ for us mortals.

I settled on 135% as a pretty likely candidate for an average difference between 10k race pace and a clock-punching easy run that might hold for runners of all abilities. I'd love to hear more chime in.

135% is like your mile pace.

you should be running 65 - 70% easy and 70 - 80% regular.

I should have taken the chart down to 4:20 (a 27:00ish 10k), 135% of which would be 5:51. Would that be Rupp's pace on a clock-punching run? I would almost think that true elites probably run slower than 135% of their 10k pace on a clock-punching easy run, but I wouldn't know.

I don't like the way you do your maths.

135%RP = RP - RP(35/100)

When I was in shape to run a 10k around 5:25 pace, my easy pace was around 7:10

I always thought easy was about effort, rather than pace.

I run a little slower than 5:10 pace for 10k, but my E pace is 7:30, usually lower at the end, sometimes sub 7.

easy day is easy don't worry about pace.

Brian wrote:

I was thinking about this in a meeting today (bored) remembering an old Malmo post where he ridiculed the idea of running 7:00 pace for easy days and said he always ran 6:00 pace or faster.

Get your facts straight. I've never ridiculed the idea of running 7:00 pace unless it was in the context of my own training. On the contrary I've ALWAYS stated that easy isn't the same to all runners and can be quite a large range. I've certainly run slower than 6:00 pace so "always" cannot be attributed to me either. Perhaps you heard the words "generally" or "almost always" and decided to run with whatever characterization that makes your post more evocative?

Your math is wrong.

Gauss wrote:

I don't like the way you do your maths.

135%RP = RP - RP(35/100)

the average male runner wrote:

I run a little slower than 5:10 pace for 10k, but my E pace is 7:30, usually lower at the end, sometimes sub 7.

+1. I've run around 32:30 and I almost always start my runs in the 7:45-8:15 range for the first couple of miles and just let my body loosen up from there. I usually finish around 7:00-7:20 pace at the end.

rekrunner wrote:

Your math is wrong.

Gauss wrote:

I don't like the way you do your maths.

135%RP = RP - RP(35/100)

I seen Canovas training and that's how he calculates it I think. Makes sense 100+% is FASTER than RP.

I wouldn't be bothered with anything like this for easy runs anyway.

I have run 29.20 10k - most of my 'easy' runs are watch less, but when someone I jog with wears a Garmin we would often be outside 7 min/mile. It all depends on the phase of training, mileage block etc but my attitude is simple - remember the purpose of the run/session you are doing and the pace takes care of itself.

Hm, my best 10K is about 7:04 / mile, so that would be a 9:32. That sounds about right. I run a wide variety of paces, and tend to run a lot faster with others than by myself.

7:45 - 8:15 / mile, brisk, marginally conversational, usually in a group. I like this pace as long as I don't try to have a super-involved conversation on the uphill portions. It feels like a great workout without being unpleasantly exhausting.

8:15 - 9:30 / mile - easy / moderate run usually with others. My heart rate is a bit elevated but I'm not really breathing all that hard.

9:30 - 11:00 / mile - easy or long run by myself (often early morning or late evening or when I am otherwise not feeling 100%). My legs get tired and sore at a certain point, oddly enough sometimes my legs get more tired at a slower pace. However, I don't feel like my heart rate really gets elevated very much at all. Its still peaceful and energizing.

Interestingly enough, many elite runners run their easy runs much, much slower than their races. (race at 4:30 but train at 7:30 - 8:00 pace).

I think that the ideal training pace to racing pace ratio varies on the person. A 5k specialist should probably train fewer miles at a faster pace than a marathoner. Someone who has limited time to train should make a larger percentage of their miles high quality, than someone with a more flexible schedule.

NO, I mean what percent of your 10k pace is your easy pace. 135% is 1.35 times that pace. I don't mean 135% faster.

4 is 200% of 2. Taking a percent of something larger than 100 results in a larger, not smaller, number.

malmo wrote:

Brian wrote:

I was thinking about this in a meeting today (bored) remembering an old Malmo post where he ridiculed the idea of running 7:00 pace for easy days and said he always ran 6:00 pace or faster.

Get your facts straight. I've never ridiculed the idea of running 7:00 pace unless it was in the context of my own training. On the contrary I've ALWAYS stated that easy isn't the same to all runners and can be quite a large range. I've certainly run slower than 6:00 pace so "always" cannot be attributed to me either. Perhaps you heard the words "generally" or "almost always" and decided to run with whatever characterization that makes your post more evocative?

I shouldn't have use the word "ridicule". It was loaded in a way I didn't intend it to be.

EZRUN wrote:

I have run 29.20 10k - most of my 'easy' runs are watch less, but when someone I jog with wears a Garmin we would often be outside 7 min/mile. It all depends on the phase of training, mileage block etc but my attitude is simple - remember the purpose of the run/session you are doing and the pace takes care of itself.

I didn't mean to get Malmo all wound up, because I am interested in his genius math/conceptual skills to chime in - but I suspect that elites probably tend to run slower relative to their race paces than us slower people do and I have always wondered if that is because that "getting in shape" means having an "effort curve" with a gentler slope rather than an effort curve that is higher across the board than the slower runner.

For example, could it be that two runners with significantly difference 5k paces may experience a much more similar pace at a given percent of max HR at slower paces, but it takes relatively little extra effort to speed up every :10/mile for the faster runner and relatively more effort to speed up every :10 a mile for the slower.

The increasingly rare occasions where I run with people slower than me, I swear we aren't all that different at slower paces, but if we do a progression run, each increment of speed increase doesn't result in the same amount of increased effort so that my curve might be shallow and their steeper.

To phrase it another way (and to use heart rate as a proxy for effort as it is objective - whether this is internally valid, it demonstrates my point):

Lets say Runner A is a 14:00 5k runner and Runner B is a 14:40 5k runner. We happen to know that both have the same max HR.

Could it be that at 7:20 pace, Runner A and Runner B are both at, say, 60% of max HR and feel similar subjective efforts, but with every :10/mile speed increase, Runner A's HR only rises 1% of max HR and Runner B's HR rises 1.5% of max HR. S0 their curves intersect at 7:20, but Runner A's Max HR percent to pace curve is much gentler?

I should probably mention I am injured and have been doing hours of elliptical this week, giving me time to think about this weird s**t.