6 X 1 mile repeats -- avg 5:39/5:40 -- half-marathon race coming up

Several things are going on here, but below is my take:

1) You ran your workout too fast for a 17:40 5k runner; however,

2) You are in better shape than you were in July (or you had a bad 5k race, and/or you had a tremendous 6 x 1-mile workout)

3) You are new to running and that will hold you back in a first half-marathon attempt; however,

4) You seem eager and ready to get after it, unlike many other runners who will be more jaded at the start of your race

Some runners train better than they race, some race better than they train. I think I could be on the bubble for running 80 minutes, but there is no way I could run your 6x1-mile workout. I couldn't run 4x1-mile at that pace by myself in training, and I can run a 17:40 5k. I race much better than I train. The longer you run, the more you'll learn that you need to pick your moments. Racing is a moment to let it all hang out. Your workout was fine, but you need to treat the recovery from a workout like that the same as you would for a hard 6 mile race.

I personally think that you completed 6x 1-mile at 10k race pace, at best. With a 90 sec recovery, that is a race-like effort. Make sure you recover from it as you would from a hard 10k race.

Ez Marz wrote:

-I agree with this. I was looking back to when I ran a 1:19:00

-I ran 6x1mi (60 sec rest) 12 days out, and averaged 6:02/mi

-I was averaging about 55 mi/week and ran a 14 mi @ 7min/mi 2 days before the workout

Why on earth would you run a 14-miler at 7:00/mile?

Too slow to cause any real adaptation, just a too-hard easy run.

Thanks everyone for your feedback; it's much appreciated.

As for long runs and tempos. I regularly do long runs of 26-30k and have been including some progression long runs -- last one was 28.5k at 6:40 (with a fair bit left in the tank at the end). I do struggle a bit with longer tempos.

NERunner053, I don't do a lot of the tempos (e.g. 2 X 4 or 5 miles) that you've asked about. I did run 15k tempo in just over 57 minutes, which works out to about a minute off of a 16 miler in 60 minutes.

I think folks are right; it's possible, but the challenge will be my lack of running experience/base. I'll give it my best shot anyway.

There's a big difference between racing your workout and running wimpy intervals. If you can't run faster than HM pace for 6 x mile then you should sack up because you're hardly working out.

[quote]jgc551Tashacole5 wrote:

Hi there,

I ran 6 X 1 mile repeats today with 90 seconds rest: 5:46; 5:31; 5:38; 5:42; 5:38; 5:42. I am curious to know if a sub 1:20 half in three weeks is a reasonable goal based on my fitness.

Some other details:

-I'm 29 and am new to running as of November 2018. At that time I ran my first 5k with virtually no training in 20:51.

-I ran a 17:41 5k on July 1, 2018.

-I've gradually increased my mileage since starting in November from around 30 miles a week to an average of about 75/80 miles over the last two to three months.

-I run easy 15-18k three times a week; two workouts (e.g. 6 X 1 miles repeats; 12 X 800m; etc.); two easy 10k runs (doubles); and one long run of 25-30k.

Thanks!

You are doing way too many workouts, even an elite runner wouldn't do 6 x 1 mile and 12 x 800 in the same week, let alone every week. You are neglecting your aerobic development which is the most aspect of training. Search Malmo's favorite half marathon workouts for some suggestions. Don't worry about pace so much, learn to run by feel.

It seems that the only thing that would sink your attempt at a sub 1:20 half would be going out too fast (or weather or hills.) If it is a fairly flat course with decent weather I would just run mile to mile targeting a 6 minute pace. You'll probably finish thinking you could have run faster. I ran a 1:19:51 on a flat course with workouts not quite as fast as yours.

I'm going to call BS on this post unless you can provide us with links to your certified race results. For someone who just took up running last November, that is a hell of a workout. Not saying it's impossible, but Highly unlikely.

If what you say is true, then you can go under 1:20. my PB for the half was 1:23, and I couldn't come near that 6 x 1 mile workout. But I have never seen anyone post those workouts with less than a year of running, UNLESS you were someone who played college soccer or lacrosse and then just transitioned into running. But for someone to just jump into the sport, NFW!

jgc551Tashacole5 wrote:

Some other details:

-I'm 29 and am new to running as of November 2018. At that time I ran my first 5k with virtually no training in 20:51.

Thanks!

Wow so in a three month span humanity has discovered time travel. That's awesome!

jgc551Tashacole5 wrote:

I do struggle a bit with longer tempos.......

I think folks are right; it's possible, but the challenge will be my lack of running experience/base. I'll give it my best shot anyway.

That will be your achilles heal as a HM requires holding a certain effort for the 80 minutes. But you have the right attitude going in it so go for it. Is it a big race or a small local run? Because if it is a big city race with large participation you can get into the slipstream of a pack running at 6:00 pace. A lot easier to do than if you are on your own running 6:00 pace.

July 1, 2018 5k (17:41) --

http://www.resultscanada.com/results/Moose_Jawg18_RESULTS_05k#.W32Ntvnwbct

Sep 30, 2017 (20:51) --

http://www.resultscanada.com/results/2017_Flatlanders_Road_Race_05k#.W32OYvnwbct

The September race was once month before I started training. And yes, I played soccer and basketball before taking up running.

And Positive Contribution -- it's a fairly small local race (about 2000 half marathoners with only a handful going under 1:25).

Thanks again!

what an odd thing to do wrote:

Ez Marz wrote:

-I agree with this. I was looking back to when I ran a 1:19:00

-I ran 6x1mi (60 sec rest) 12 days out, and averaged 6:02/mi

-I was averaging about 55 mi/week and ran a 14 mi @ 7min/mi 2 days before the workout

Why on earth would you run a 14-miler at 7:00/mile?

Too slow to cause any real adaptation, just a too-hard easy run.

I will disagree here, I am not a fan of long slow runs, they are mostly boring. So, as a recreational runner, enjoying the training is important. When I looked back at the data, it started out at about 7:15 which would be on the quick end of easy pace, and progressed down to about 6:40, which is the slow end of MP. The benefit is getting a solid effort in your legs that won't kill you, but there will be some fatigue when you run 6x1mi 2 days later. Also, this was in late Nov and I ran a 6 mi turkey trot as a tempo 2 days after that as my last workout before a taper. So, when you string these together you are getting benefits.

"Training for the marathon is somewhat unique compared to training for shorter distances. Mainly, this is because you have to train specifically for two additional things – running on tired legs and learning to burn fuel more efficiently.

Steady runs help increase the total amount of quality miles (quality miles being miles run at or near marathon pace) an athlete can run during a marathon training block. In addition, steady runs can be used to add a slight amount of fatigue to the legs before a longer tempo run, which better simulates and practices the tired feeling at the end of a marathon.

If you are looking for more helpful information on how to set up your own marathon training schedule, we have a free 9 part guide that may come in useful to you."

jgc551Tashacole5 wrote:

Thanks everyone for your feedback; it's much appreciated.

As for long runs and tempos. I regularly do long runs of 26-30k and have been including some progression long runs -- last one was 28.5k at 6:40 (with a fair bit left in the tank at the end). I do struggle a bit with longer tempos.

NERunner053, I don't do a lot of the tempos (e.g. 2 X 4 or 5 miles) that you've asked about. I did run 15k tempo in just over 57 minutes, which works out to about a minute off of a 16 miler in 60 minutes.

I think folks are right; it's possible, but the challenge will be my lack of running experience/base. I'll give it my best shot anyway.

I mean that's pretty good stamina to already being able to hit 25km-30km long runs under 7:00/mile comfortably. The workout just indicates that you're way more fit than the 17:40 5k. Daniels' VDOT calculator would give that 5k a 1:21-flat half marathon but the 6 x mile workout shows potential for the 1:15-1:19 range for sure.

I agree with the poster who said to treat the 6 x mile like a race effort. If that was super recent I would say don't work out hard for a few days. I say stick with running, in general, and you can make some major improvements over the next several years. Once you get a few years in a row of logging 3000+ miles/year you'll be cranking out some fast fast times.

I think you should target sub-1:20. Try to hold 6:00 pace as long as possible. If you fall off there is always another race, if you feel great at the end, there's always anothe race. Good luck!

I ran 1:19 in May. The workout you posted would have been challenging for doable for me three weeks out (5:31 is faster than your 5k pace...). I wouldn't be able to run a 1:19 in early September where I live in the Northeast because of humidity.

ugh so lame wrote:

There's a big difference between racing your workout and running wimpy intervals. If you can't run faster than HM pace for 6 x mile then you should sack up because you're hardly working out.

What's your problem "ugh so lame"? WHF are you to judge someone like that. 6 X 1 Mile is a rough work out. And since you are not paying attention, his 6 X 1 work out was faster then HM Goal pace. Can't you do running math?

Now, I did a lot of HM/Marathon training and feel if you can do 6 X 1 Mile (with 90 sec rest) in 5:40+ or -, you should run your HM in just about 1:20; but---you need to run your HM race to "an effort" and you will get your answer.

Shame on anyone who says someone only having been running (at age 29 and now running 75-80 MPW) since November makes 6 X 1Mile at 5:40 impossible without knowing the talent level....

Yea...even if you ran that workout going deep to the well you're still in better than 17:30 shape. If that was just a normal, but challenging workout with a rep left in the tank then you're in close to 35:00 10k/17:00 5k shape. You're half target is like 6:20 pace, well beyond the typical 1:17-1:19 that those times would predict.

If you go out sensibly you shouldn't have much trouble provided decent weather and a reasonable course. You might not have the strength and fatigue resistance to hold near threshold pace, but with your mileage you should be fine with true threshold +15-20s

the mile repeats in 540 short recovery, means you can start out the race at 615 min miles for the first 5 miles and adjust from there, then you get what you get.

don't do anything hard 10 days out.

basically if you don't over train and keep doing what you're doing, you'll be fine.

jgc551Tashacole5 wrote:

Hi there,

I ran 6 X 1 mile repeats today with 90 seconds rest: 5:46; 5:31; 5:38; 5:42; 5:38; 5:42. I am curious to know if a sub 1:20 half in three weeks is a reasonable goal based on my fitness.

Yes this workout would normally say that you could run a 1:17-1:19 half.

-I ran a 17:41 5k on July 1, 2018.

Well this is where I am confused. Are you in way better shape than you were in July? Because a workout for me right now would be 6x1 mile with 2 minute rest @ 5:40 pace. However, the difference is I can run a 15:55ish 5k, whereas 17:41 is tiers and tiers slower. So either you ran that workout WAY too hard, you are in way better shape now, or your numbers are off.

Based on the 17:41, I would guess 1:23 to 1:25

Based on the workout, I would guess 1:18

So maybe meet in the middle? 1:20? 1:21?

Ill beleive it when I see it wrote:

I'm going to call BS on this post unless you can provide us with links to your certified race results. For someone who just took up running last November, that is a hell of a workout. Not saying it's impossible, but Highly unlikely.

If what you say is true, then you can go under 1:20. my PB for the half was 1:23, and I couldn't come near that 6 x 1 mile workout. But I have never seen anyone post those workouts with less than a year of running, UNLESS you were someone who played college soccer or lacrosse and then just transitioned into running. But for someone to just jump into the sport, NFW!

Calm down. It's not as if OP said he did: 6 x 1 mile in 4:39 or 4:40! It's not as if OP said he plans on racing a 65 minute 1/2 Marathon. As I type there are ninth grade boys with no prior anything, showing up at high school XC practice and doing (3 or 4) x one mile averaging 5:20. OP's workout is above average, it's not impossible.

Ill beleive it when I see it wrote:

I'm going to call BS on this post unless you can provide us with links to your certified race results. For someone who just took up running last November, that is a hell of a workout. Not saying it's impossible, but Highly unlikely.

If what you say is true, then you can go under 1:20. my PB for the half was 1:23, and I couldn't come near that 6 x 1 mile workout. But I have never seen anyone post those workouts with less than a year of running, UNLESS you were someone who played college soccer or lacrosse and then just transitioned into running. But for someone to just jump into the sport, NFW!

I coached female runner that couldn't quite have done close to the 6x1mile workout after a year of training but she ran ~1:17:45. Her 5k best was only 17:40 because she only ran a couple and had no speed, but had 10k's at `35:20 range.

I have a hunch he'll be 1:17:45-1:18:15.