Sub- 17 5K?

If you're running that kind of tempo, then you are way under-performing for 5k. Either that or it's way harder than tempo effort. That would only be about 5s/mile off 10k pace for a 17 flat runner.

Since you're only 19 and built to 70 quickly, I would say hold that for around 6-8 weeks with maybe one recovery week in there. At the end of 6-8 period, take another big recovery week and start building from 70 to 80, holding for 6-8 weeks again before reevaluating. Don't be in a rush to build quickly. In the short term, you may feel like you've adapted quickly to the new workload, but it may take a month or two to really know how it is affecting you. At 19, you have plenty of time, especially with already training at 70 mpw. Running healthy for a while at 70 mpw is better than jumping too quickly, getting hurt, and then training only 50% of the time.

TheSpaz wrote:

Should I keep upping my mileage if I can handle it, or should I just try to get a few months of 70 mile weeks under my belt? Will my endurance increase enough to give me a shot at 16 flat?

yes, Tora!, that's what i wrote. is it really that amazing? the entire point of my post was to show: (1) i only run 3 times a week (about 20 miles total) and could still be around 17 flat (2) i have no aerobic base, unlike the OP who is running between 50-70 miles a week (he has a better chance than me). (3) i DID in fact underachieve in the race and went out in about 5:40 for my first mile, therefore causing me to pick up the pace at the end and chase someone downI ran 48 flat in college. Even now as a 30 year old, running a 27 second 200m is not challenging. i was an 800m runner, so 5k endurance was never my focus. closing faster than rupp is irrelevant because i wasn't running 4:10 miles like he does before the last 200m

Tora! Tora! Tora! wrote:

5kays wrote:

the last 200m was probably around 27.5

LOL. So you close faster than Galen Rupp in the mile?

In.The. Bag.

TheSpaz wrote:

Hey LRC,

I just ran a 4 mile tempo averaging 5:43, with splits of 5:49, 5:49, 5:42, and 5:37. I felt relaxed and not all that winded the whole way and only pushed the last half mile, otherwise I would have probably averaged around 5:45. Could have gone at least another mile at pace, maybe even 2.

Can I break 17 in the 5K?

(Just bumped up mileage from ~50 to ~60/70 a week)

TheSpaz wrote:

Update: I just did a solo timetrial 5k on the road in 32 degree weather and ran 17:03.

In a solid race, preferably on a track with lots of others to work with, you should be targeting 16:30 sooner rather than later. With proper development (sensible buildup, stay on softer surfaces in light shoes, drills/hills/strides, yada yada) you could be knocking on the door of sub 16 by years's end.

[quote]Bullet the Blue Sky wrote:

Since you're only 19 and built to 70 quickly, I would say hold that for around 6-8 weeks with maybe one recovery week in there. At the end of 6-8 period, take another big recovery week and start building from 70 to 80, holding for 6-8 weeks again before reevaluating.

Don't be in a rush to build quickly. In the short term, you may feel like you've adapted quickly to the new workload, but it may take a month or two to really know how it is affecting you. At 19, you have plenty of time, especially with already training at 70 mpw.

Running healthy for a while at 70 mpw is better than jumping too quickly, getting hurt, and then training only 50% of the time.

[quote]

So while I am at 70mpw, should I start doing actual workouts? Like V02 max pace stuff along with a tempo each week?

Sure. Go for it!

dude im almost sub 16 and thats pretty much my tempo runs, for sure you got it. Heck! i dont think you need to worry about sub 17 you need to worry about like sub 16:20 or even sub 16

I say yes. I've broken 17 in the 5K, but never could have done that 4 mile tempo run.

Update: Just did an 8-mile tempo at 5:58 pace, could have kept going for at least another mile, maybe two if the weather was better.

4 weeks ago(two weeks before my 17:02), I did a 7-mile tempo at around the same effort, but at 6:13 pace. Could my endurance have really improved that much in such a short timeframe?

your endurance can improve or worsen that much in one day, never mind 4 weeks.

There are too many factors, such as time of day, temperature, what you ate, when you ate, what your metabolic rate happened to be, and a thousand things nobody knows about, that could make your times faster or slower without altering your fitness. And tempo runs are just an approximation by perceived effort, there's no way to know whether you were making the same exact effort as before.

That's why benchmarks should be set with races and time trials, or all out repeats of shorter distances.

But if you can maintain 6:13 for 7 miles, without being able to race sub-17, you should work on speed not endurance.

I have plenty of speed for sub-17 - I can run sub-60 for a 400 right now and have a 2:08 800m PR from a few years ago.

So if I can run 5:58 for 8 miles, I should be easily under 17 next time I race right? Plus the 8 miler I did today was in MUCH crappier weather then the 7 at 6:13.

Bad Wigins wrote:

your endurance can improve or worsen that much in one day, never mind 4 weeks.

I'm sure that's possible, but I have always had terrible endurance and the last two and a half months I have been steadily building up to double my previous mileage so I doubt it is coincidental that I am faster now

bump - Just ran a 4 mile tempo at 5:39 pace, legs felt tired from earlier in the week but still had a lot left at the end