Why am I such a shitty miler?

Cubism Cubed wrote:

gdgdfgdfg wrote:

No wonder. You're speed sucks

Even though you have lackluster speed you should be able to run under 4:30 given your 800 meter time. My guess is that you have not had an 1600 meter race in which you "put it all together"

this is right -

but sometimes hs runners never put it together.

few will believe this, but in my 3 yrs of hs running, my best mile was 4:54. My best 2 mile was 9:58

it makes no sense but thems the facts.

Part of the problem was that I had to double virtually every meet and the 2 mile came first, but still...it happens.

I would recommend to the OP that he do whatever it takes to get in a good mile, because there are two distances regular people will ask you about the rest of your life - your mile and your marathon. Take care of the mile now.

Maybe if you start training rike a Japanese HS runner you courd be a rot better in the mire.

real man here wrote:

Because you're not a real man.

This post if funny and has some truth to it.

The mile (more than the adjacent events) requires a runner to dig in hard and early on, and stay there.

As shown on this thread, many runners underperform n the mile compared with their 800 AND their two-mile, which doesn't make sense from an endurance-vs-speed perspective but DOES make sense from a toughness/balls perspective.

800 hurts like hell for 30 seconds or so but anyone can put their nose in hard and get it done. It's two minutes. 3000/two-mile is a sustained effort at VO2 max. Hard, but nobody describes their 3000 PR as being their most painful race.

The mile, though? Takes courage to get in deep and hold it if you're going to get your best effort out.

If a HS kid has raced three 800s in a season with a best of 2:06, that's probably his ability or very close. The mile? Not so much.

Ayylmao wrote:

So I have a 9:30 3200m pr this season but only have a 4:37 1600m pr. This doesn't add up. All the guys I beat in the 3200 beat me by 7 to 10 seconds in the 1600. Can someone explain?

I was the same way in high school - I was a 59/2:12/5:06/10:19 runner - I could just never put together a solid performance in the 1600. I probably should have run 4:55 at the very least, but it didn't happen because I didn't know how to race it, and also because I almost always ran the 3200 first.

However, this can change dramatically - my freshman year of college I ran a mile indoors in 4:42, along with a 2:08 800 and 9:36 3000 (so, much more improvement in the mile). As time has gone on, I have continued to improve much more in the mile than many other events, getting down to 4:17.

I would run 10 x 200 with 2 min rest@ 3/4 ... rest 7-10 min then

5 x 200 w 2 min 3/4 with last 2 full speed. Warm-up and cool down.

Get somebody to run with you - even if they can only run every other one. Do this 2 x week.

Follow Coach's wkouts per trumping this - but wouldn't hurt (I don't think) to share this with him. Plus there can be many variations

#1: Some people, depending on their muscle fiber makeup are pre-disposed to running certain events better than others. A guy on my team in high school could run in the low 4:30's for the mile, but couldn't break 62 in the quarter no matter how hard he tried. It could just be that your ratio of slow/fast-twitch muscle fibers is slanted towards slow-twitch which puts you at a bit of a disadvantage in the faster events. See what kind of speedwork your coach might want to do, like 150's or 200's for instance. Don't sweat it if your 2-mile improves and your mile doesn't, it just gives you a better idea of what type of runner you are.

I think the title of your post tells you why. You now think you are bad at it so therefore you are.

Regardless of how you got to the mental state (only doing mile after the 3200 or a relay, etc and then when focusing on mile can't do better), you need to get out of that mind frame.

JD and McMillan conversion charts have a 9:30 3200m being equivalent to about a 4:28-4:29 1600m. So that's about 8-9 sec (~2 sec/lap) faster than your current best. 2 sec/lap is easily mental. Let's say you start at 67/lap, but if in your head (conscious or not) you believe you "suck" you aren't going to hold the goal pace, especially as guys you run with for the 3200 are pulling away. Or maybe you think you're in 4:23 shape and start out at 65, you'll blow yourself up.

Sit down with your coach, maybe you could focus on the 800 this coming season and work more on speed. Or just focus on the mile, whatever. Give it some time and you may surprise yourself (it may just take longer than you'd like).

As someone else said, you may just be the 10k/marathon type. Great, work on as much speed as you can now, have patience, and in 8-10 years rock it at 10k/marathon.

If these are your true 800/400 times i.e. you have a sufficient sample size of races to say you are not much faster than 2:06, then you definitely lack leg speed, which is what the mile is really all about. If this is the case, then you have your answer, although 4:37 is by no means $hitty - seems about right for a 2 miler who can turn 9:30 but can barely crack a minute in the quarter. Stick with the 2 mile and race miles to develop speed for the 8 lap event.

Having said that, I doubt that you have raced enough 800s to truly say that 2:06 is a legit PR, and I speculate that you are faster than 59 for 400. You've got the strength part covered and the mile certainly calls on that, but in the end, the mile is a speed-based event. More true speed work, 300's, 200's, 400's, 800 races and jumping in mile-relays will summon the fast twitch that you've got. You also need to race a bunch (6-10) of miles to find out how fast you can realy go. It is such a different pace than the 2 and it takes time to acclimate to the fast turn-over.

Get your 800 down to the low to 2:02ish, your 400 to 56ish and your will see the mile mark fall to 4:30 or lower with your strength. And BTW - don't be suprised if you uncork a 9:1x along the way. Large luck.

What's your training like? As others have said, your speed is a bit lacking. Do you do any intervals at faster mile pace?

As someone who can basically only run the mile, I usually do a mix of fast stuff (200-600m reps) and long stuff (tempo 800+). If you're not doing strides regularly, start now. This should help your speed at least a little. Also, try to even split or go out a little bit fast.

no one wrote:

I would run 10 x 200 with 2 min rest@ 3/4 ... rest 7-10 min then

5 x 200 w 2 min 3/4 with last 2 full speed. Warm-up and cool down.

Get somebody to run with you - even if they can only run every other one. Do this 2 x week.

Follow Coach's wkouts per trumping this - but wouldn't hurt (I don't think) to share this with him. Plus there can be many variations

That workout is not a good workout for sprint speed. He needs to do 50s and 100s at full speed with several minutes of rest.

improve your running form wrote:

it stinks wrote:

[quote]improve your running form wrote:

I smell an armchair hobby jogger.

Ha, that might describe me now, but once upon a time I had some success as a competitive runner. The secret to running fast, besides putting in the miles, is to use hip extension and not over-stride. Not rocket science.

Please tell us how he is able to run a 9:30 then?

...he needs to do hill reps and oddball reps

meaning things like 10 x 10 seconds up a hill

and clearly he has mental issues with the mile - he needs to face up to those problems. Not sure what would work for him.

for me, things like 2 x 1000 at goal mile pace with 3 minutes rest - then go do a long run.

that would be a mostly mental workout - so he knew in his mind that he can run 1000m at goal mile pace and it won't kill him.

He's scared of the race - he needs to do some workouts that will ease that fear.

Apologies for long post in advance.

For a high school runner with limited leg speed hoping to run a sub 4:30 mile, I would recommend the following workout to build up tolerance to race pace.

3 sets of 3x400 in 67 secs with 45 secs rest followed by 1200 in 3:50 with 5 mins rest.

If you're all by yourself, you can cut the long interval down to 800 in 2:30 and the set rest down to 3 or 4 mins. Whatever your long interval, keep the rest short between the 400s and your set breaks no longer than 5 minutes. If you can hit all nine 400s in goal mile pace you will be able to maintain pace from 600m-1400m where most people lose concentration and rhythm.

It may be necessary to start off with only two work sets but with your 9:30 2 mile I am assuming you can handle the volume. It is important to hit consistent 400 meter times AND cover the long interval at pace. The long interval doesn't need to be track fast but it needs to be sub tempo pace to maximize aerobic training effect and keep the 400s honest. If the 400s are too easy, (they won't be if you keep the rest short) you can always run the last set faster.

IMO, this workout has three benefits not necessarily offered by speed intervals or partial distance time trials.

1. The short rest 400s force you to run evenly at mile race pace rather than surging through the start or finish of each interval. (This ability to maintain an even but fast pace is particularly important for someone with limited leg speed who cannot handle dramatic pace changes)

2. The moderately paced mile interval forces you to rely on your aerobic system after you’ve already built up some lactic acid. However, unless you bonk, the long interval actually gets easier as you clear the lactic acid from the 400s out of your system. This is a big confidence booster and with a decent set break your body has a chance to reset before the 400s start again.

3. The last set of 400s is a bear and requires concentration. Although it is not a race-simulation type workout, this set does teach your body to run fast when you are experiencing both lactic acid burn and overall fatigue. The rest is still short so you don’t have time to whine or psyche yourself out. After your last 400, then it is time to stride out one last long interval.

In hs, I ran too short of intervals too fast with too much recovery. I never really learned how to relax at race pace. Not surprisingly, after a growth spurt and performance jump between soph and junior year, my times stagnated senior year and I wound up with very marginal hs prs of 54, 2:00, 4:30, and 9:39.

I walked onto a college program that ran moderate base miles and decent amt of mixed intervals. By the end of indoor track, I dropped my mile time from 4:30 to 4:16 while training primarily for 5k.

The workout above is based on an indoor workout where the 5k group ran:

3 sets of 3x400 in 63 secs with 30 secs rest followed by a 5:00 mile after 30 secs rest. 5 mins rest between sets after the mile.

A week later during a tune-up race, I felt like the workout helped me pull a decent third lap even though I did not feel that great en route to a new mile pr.

In terms of speed, I would work on coordination and agility drills over the winter and through the season. However, be sure to keep your base up as I imagine that is how you got to a 9:30 2 mile in the first place.

Good luck and keep at it. For now, lowering your mile time should just be part of improving your overall performance.

To clarify long post recommended workout is 3 sets of :

3 x 400 at goal mile pace with 45 secs rest followed by 45 sec rest then 1200 m at sub tempo pace then a 5 min set break.

The key thing is short rest and even splits-

Everyone on here keeps talking about "leg speed" and speed work. Sorry, it's more about different energy system demands for the events. The ratio of anaerobic to aerobic demands differ between each of these races, and even more based on the effort and fitness of these systems. For example, people said you just be a "strong" runner, which is more a testament to your aerobic capabilities based on training. I would imagine you do very little intense anaerobic (glycolytic) work that stresses this system. So when you try to go out "faster" to get a faster 400/800/1600 time the stresses on this energy system is too much to handle for the remainder of the race. It is not simply running faster or doing repeats, but stressing the glycolytic system to like demands of the 1600 (which is not accomplished in long runs or specific 3200m training). I learned all of this after high school obviously which is why my times sucked so bad then as well. I make it a focus to train my div 1 athletes specifically based on their deficiencies instead of just throwing them all into the same program. Hope this helps you get on the right track!

Ayylmao wrote:

So I have a 9:30 3200m pr this season but only have a 4:37 1600m pr. This doesn't add up. All the guys I beat in the 3200 beat me by 7 to 10 seconds in the 1600. Can someone explain?

UPDATE:

I had a meet today and ran 4:31 for 1600m so I guess I just didn't have the best race when I ran that 4:37.