Hello folks, as the handle might suggest, I'm primarily a miler. I am entered in a two mile road race this july and hoping to go sub 10 there.
So my question is: What mile time converts to a sub-10 minute 2 mile for you?
I've looked up different online race conversion calculators and such, just looking for personal experiences in the real world.
Also, any advice for a miler running his first two mile road race would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
4:44 and below.
My best mile was 4:58, best two mile 10:58. Run within a month of each other. That's a 32 second per mile decrease from the mile to the two mile. I guess the world class guys do a 3:50 mile and about a 8:10 two mile. That's about 15 second per mile slowdown.
try to be around 4:30ish
In high school, before I had substantial mileage under my belt, and therefore significantly better at the shorter, I was in 4:28 shape before I could break 10:00. Now, a few years out of college and with the benefit of years of higher mileage, I'd say if I'm in shape to break 4:40, I can also break 10:00. My advice for a summer two-miler? Have fun.
Over/under for endurance/speed is 4:40. If you are in HS and primarily a miler chances are you need 4:35 or better. If you are an older 10K guy 4:45 might do it.
For advice on first two miler I say, break it into fourths as you would a mile or 1600 meter on the track.
First half mile, don't go out too fast, establish position.
Second half mile, get into a rhythm and cruise by the 15 year olds who went out too fast. Don't fight them if they surge, they won't last.
after passing the one mile marker, fight the natural tendency to slow down. Depending on the race, you can pick off a lot of people here. If you arent catching the runner in front of you in this segment, you are probably slowing down.
The last half mile, grit your teeth and fight for your position. The pecking order is 90% complete now, only finishing kicks will resort the final ranks. Get a mental boost from the fact that you are nearly done and everyone else is hurting just as bad (or worse) as you.
Don't start your final all out kick any sooner than you would for the mile or you will rigg up in the last 75 meters.
If you are in the 4:30s for your mile PR, you've got a good chance. I would say 4:48 would be the slowest mile shape you could be in to realistically shoot for sub 10 in the two mile.
I was pure distance in that I wasn't competitve at anything short than the two mile (my times still weren't that great anyway). However, I ran 16:00 for 5k cross country with a 2-mile PR of 9:47 and 1-mile PR of 4:41. I never broke 60 in the 400m, so it really depends on the person.
anomalous wrote:
I was pure distance in that I wasn't competitve at anything short than the two mile (my times still weren't that great anyway). However, I ran 16:00 for 5k cross country with a 2-mile PR of 9:47 and 1-mile PR of 4:41. I never broke 60 in the 400m, so it really depends on the person.
Was that a hilly 5K or something? Because the 2 mile time is better than the 5K time yet you claim to be a pure distance guy. Or are you one of those runners that is much faster on the track than the grass? I do concede that your mile time is pretty weak relative to the 9:47 two mile. My guess is that you went out too hard in the mile race or that you mentally psyched yourself out for it. Or, simply that you were in better fitness across the board for the 2 mile compared to when you ran the 1 mile.
5K time of 16:00 on an average XC is worth about 15:30 on the track, which stacks up very stout against 9:47. Dude is very slow-twitch.
Confussed wrote:
anomalous wrote:I was pure distance in that I wasn't competitve at anything short than the two mile (my times still weren't that great anyway). However, I ran 16:00 for 5k cross country with a 2-mile PR of 9:47 and 1-mile PR of 4:41. I never broke 60 in the 400m, so it really depends on the person.
Was that a hilly 5K or something? Because the 2 mile time is better than the 5K time yet you claim to be a pure distance guy. Or are you one of those runners that is much faster on the track than the grass? I do concede that your mile time is pretty weak relative to the 9:47 two mile. My guess is that you went out too hard in the mile race or that you mentally psyched yourself out for it. Or, simply that you were in better fitness across the board for the 2 mile compared to when you ran the 1 mile.
Politburo wrote:
Over/under for endurance/speed is 4:40. If you are in HS and primarily a miler chances are you need 4:35 or better. If you are an older 10K guy 4:45 might do it.
Nailed it.
440
Politburo wrote:
5K time of 16:00 on an average XC is worth about 15:30 on the track, which stacks up very stout against 9:47. Dude is very slow-twitch.
I got the impression that 16:00 was his XC 5K PR. Usually XC PRs are run on short courses. So I doubt that if his XC 5K "PR" is 16:00 that he is a 15:30 guy. I can't tell you how many kids around here have 5K "PRs" from XC that are better than anything they've run on the track or the roads.
Most kids have better 5K XC PRs because they run them 8-10 times/year and do so seriously, compared to 0-2 times "whatever" 5K on a random road race or all-comers track meet. Sure, a few short courses slip through, but it's a good enough reference point.
I'm also using his 60+/400, 4:41, 9:47 line which makes 15:30-ish very believable. This kid is a slow-twitch endurance guy all the way.