Easy run pace relative to 5k pace discussion

90-120 seconds works for me, but it doesn't work for many speed-based runners. I've noticed that true aerobic runners have a much easier time running faster on their easy days than speedy ones (800-1500 types). A mid-distance woman I know who runs 4:50 in the 1500 and 18:high (~6:00 pace) in the 5k runs most of her easy runs close to 10:00 pace. Forcing oneself to run within a certain range of 5k pace should not be the priority of most easy days. The risk of injury and burnout from running too fast outweigh the fitness building brought about by daily faster runs.

Also, there's a difference between picking it up in the last 20% of a run when you're feeling good, and running that pace the whole run. Sometimes I'll finish a run with a mile or two that's about a minute off my 5k pace. But I wouldn't do that for, say, 8 miles straight.

I'm 90 sec - 3 minutes, but probably 80% of it is 2:00 - 2:30.

Henry Rono:

5k pace: 4:12

Easy pace: slow AF

Easy is a feel, NOT A PACE.

Consider using your heart rate as the standard for how fast your pace should be on easy runs. I found in both swimming and track/cc that athlete's with similar race times can have very different pace times at lower heart rate efforts. I have my runners target their HR on easy runs at about 120 bpm. This is more effective than "pace speed" as different factors affect the pace (environment, athlete health/fatigue, etc.) but the HR related to effort stays about the same.

Recoveries - no pace target

Easy "normal" Runs: 5k+60/75" (/km) or +90/120" (/mile). Anything faster you are getting into steady territory. This is what get most of the people overtrained...

The faster the runner, the further from race pace you should be. Guys who can run 13 minutes or 4:10 pace should not run 90-120 seconds slower. 6:10 is too fast. If you race 5k at 9 minute pace, 10:30 pace is probably fine for easy runs.

I think it changes (difference grows) as you get older. When I was 20 and ran 15:40 (5:03) my easy days were 6:30-7:00 (1:30-2:00 slower). When I was 35 and ran 16:20 (5:16) my easy days were 7:00-7:30 (1:45-2:15 slower). I'm now 45 and 17:10 shape (5:32) and I run easy days 7:45-8:15 (2:15-2:45 slower). I don't know if this is just because I don't feel as good as often as I used to or if I am just wiser now, but it seems the spread between race pace and easy pace grows as you age.

retired swimming coach wrote:

I have my runners target their HR on easy runs at about 120 bpm. This is more effective than "pace speed" as different factors affect the pace (environment, athlete health/fatigue, etc.) but the HR related to effort stays about the same.

Unless they are true beginners that's insane. Salazar would say that at 120 bpm or ~2.5 min/mile slower than 5k pace you are just burning some carbohydrates for nothing. That's not enough of a stimulus to improve the aerobic system. Salazar's cap is 90 sec/mi slower than 5k time, with most easy runs getting to around 5:30/mi after a slightly slower start for Farah and Rupp. In terms of HR, Salazar would like you to run easy runs in the 140's (direct quote).

Salazar says we have to destroy the idea that we need to be 100% fresh for each workout. He rather wants to get additional aerobic benefit on every single easy run, than to just use them for recovery with zero effects on fitness and feel a bit better on the workout day.

Salazar's easy pace usually equals the "fastest" easy pace as per Jack Daniels vDot calculator.

Tinman would have you train a lot slower, the Tinman elite are doing their easy runs and long runs at 7:30 pace (on altitude, but that's still incredibly slow for 13:40 5k runners). They feel more fresh for workouts, but what's the point of feeling fresh for CV workouts and Tinman Tempos anyway? Salazar athletes feel less fresh for harder workouts and still get away with it.

I recently increased my easy run pace (as fast-twitch guy) and I actually feel better and the aerobic system gets stronger and stronger as now it's not just what I call "junk miles" (and your 120 HR would be junk miles).

Faster is better wrote:

The faster the runner, the further from race pace you should be. Guys who can run 13 minutes or 4:10 pace should not run 90-120 seconds slower. 6:10 is too fast. If you race 5k at 9 minute pace, 10:30 pace is probably fine for easy runs.

Farah and Rupp start their easy runs around 5:40-5:50/mi and after 1-2 miles get down to 5:30/mi which they keep at the end. So 80s slower than their 5k race pace. That's not easy jogging or "kenyan shuffling", but it's also not a highly intense pace for these guys. A 13 min 5k runner is gonna get 0 benefit if he jogs around at 7 min pace, like Farah did before he joined Salazar. Like half of Farah's weekly mileage was done at 7 min/mi not doing anything for his fitness. What happened after he joined? He massively improved and became a champion.

To add to what people have already said, mine changes seasonally as well. In the hot, humid summers I run ~2:45-3:15 / mi. slower than my 5k pace - sometimes even slower if I ran a race or hard workout the prior day. In the cooler winters I might run 2-2:30 / mi. slower.

But, I never look at a watch thinking "I should speed up" on my easy days. I use my watch to say "I must be tired and recovering" or "the weather is really killing me today" or "I'm feeling really good today." I also often use my easy days to run somewhere scenic and just zone out and enjoy the run and scenery.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

[quote]Faster is better wrote:

A 13 min 5k runner is gonna get 0 benefit if he jogs around at 7 min pace,

Point taken, but I disagree that it's literally 0 benefit. Serious question: In your estimation, if Farah felt like he couldn't hold a sub 6 pace on a given day for whatever reason, should he call it a day and not run, or should he slow down and finish his time at whatever pace felt comfortable? Similar question: If he felt like he was having to press to be sub 6, should he call it a day or just press through at the faster 'easy' pace and risk not being fully recovered for the real workout session?

In his books, Meb used to say "the biggest mistake is running easy runs too hard." However, I heard him in a podcast say "the biggest mistake of elites is running easy days too easy." I'm not sure if he was distinguishing elites from non-elites, but I suspect you are right that there is some line where the incremental benefit isn't worth the effort.

retired swimming coach wrote:

Consider using your heart rate as the standard for how fast your pace should be on easy runs. I found in both swimming and track/cc that athlete's with similar race times can have very different pace times at lower heart rate efforts. I have my runners target their HR on easy runs at about 120 bpm. This is more effective than "pace speed" as different factors affect the pace (environment, athlete health/fatigue, etc.) but the HR related to effort stays about the same.

This is what I do and it’s the only time I wear my HRM. I’m no expert and I’m not fast, but this makes the most sense to me. Mentally it’s easy too. HR gets over the limit? Slow down until you are within range. Doesn’t matter if there are hills, wind, heat or whatever. just keep the HR under the limit.

I agree, there might still be benefits for jogging easy. One, for sure is accelerated recovery - since jogging easy gets the blood flow going. Daniels is famous for saying that stroke volume maxes out at around 60% of max HR, so your heart would pump as much blood as it can already at 120 HR. This would indicate even aerobic benefits, but I still doubt an elite/well trained runner is getting much out of very easy runs, such as the mentioned 120 HR.

Farah was allowed to run slower than his 5:30/pace, but only when he really needed a recovery run, like after a race or hard workout. This might be 6:15/mi, but it's not the pace he is aiming at just that on that day he either couldn't go faster or it would have been detrimental.

Still, Salazar's and my point is many runners do their easy days TOO easy. Just as many do them TOO fast (like going above threshold or turning every easy run into hammering the last few miles wasting precious glycogen). I think the Daniel's easy pace is quite good, since it goes from one extreme (Salazar's fast easy runs) to a pace that's quite a bit easier, but still solid for a runner of that vDOT level (on the slow range of his easy pace).

And yea, Meb is totally right. It's not about elites vs non-elites, but about new runners vs seasoned runners. New runners need to run very slow on purpose or they won't develop the right system, each of their runs could have a large anaerobic component if they just go a little too fast. But well-trained runners with a highly developed aerobic system (might be 14 min, 16 min or 18 min 5k depending on the talent) can definitely run a bit faster on easy days, for example in the 140s instead of 130s HR roughly.

It’s important to first define what you mean by easy run.

If it means: everyday running when not doing a specific workout and not including warming up, then yes 2:00-1:30 slower than 5K pace is appropriate on terrain similar to where you ran that 5K PR.

When I was running 5K's around a 5:38 to 5:45 pace, my easy runs were about 7:25 to 7:50 pace.

I got older and slower and my 5K pace dropped to 6:00-6:05 and my easy runs are about 7:55-8:10 pace now. It is a real effort to drop down to 7:25 pace but it is also a real effort to run 8:30 pace (which feels really slow).

As I said in the earlier post, different athletes have different paces at the same HR. Currently, one ~16:00 5K runner goes about 6:10 per mile pace at 120 bpm while another goes about 7:00 pace at 120 bpm. So I take issue with Salazar's cap of 90 seconds that you reference, and would point out that 120 HR is not "junk miles" but actually is a pace that increases capillary development (1970s research). I must also point out that my distance swimmers "easy pace" was done at a 132 bpm heart rate, but I think runners need a slower HR for their easy runs due to the vertical position of their body. I do agree with Salazar about training while tired and so have my runners do their training runs at higher heart rates as well, but this original post was about "EASY" running.

Have you actually tried running at a specific HR pace? Have you ever taken your HR on your Easy Runs or your currently harder runs to know what Heart Rate your current run paces are producing? My runners' paces in training at 140 HR vary from 5:05 to 5:50 per mile (runners with 5K PRs ranging from 14:20 to 16:20) which I call "SMOOTH" efforts, rather than Easy Effort.

Interestingly I've found that my easy runs have stayed the same in the last few years as my race times have improved. I don't have the HR data for that whole time period but I would imagine that it's been the case that the same pace has become easier. In fact I tend to find that the fitter I've become, my easy runs have become slightly slower.

My 5k pace is 4:59 at the moment, and most easy runs will be in the range of 6:50-7:15, depending on the day. Certainly don't monitor it, just go by feel.

For reference that puts me (34, male) at between 140-145 BPM for easy runs, with my last 5k being a 174 avg (154 first mile, 181 second, 184 third, 188 last 200m).

I normally go between 2:15-3:30 slower than 5k race pace, so occasionally as slow as 8:45 on easy days. If I’m running 7:00 pace everyday, I just don’t feel recovered and my race times usually get worse.

I’ve found my heart rate is surprisingly high even at 8 min pace.

retired swimming coach wrote:

Consider using your heart rate as the standard for how fast your pace should be on easy runs. I found in both swimming and track/cc that athlete's with similar race times can have very different pace times at lower heart rate efforts. I have my runners target their HR on easy runs at about 120 bpm. This is more effective than "pace speed" as different factors affect the pace (environment, athlete health/fatigue, etc.) but the HR related to effort stays about the same.

Geez I bet I’d have to go 10:00+ pace to get down to 120 hahaha