RunningAHEAD - Topic: What's realistic? Sub 4:30 mile. (page 6)

runner92

Just Be

posted: 1/9/2008 at 4:17 PM

Quote from XanaduStone on 1/9/2008 at 2:09 PM:

Who are you? Quenton Cassidy?

No, but thank's for that name. Smile

I read the description of the book and it looks like a very interesting read.

My Running Log | Blog of Running Lore

MikeJA89

posted: 1/9/2008 at 11:29 PM

Did you run a 4:01 1600 or 4:01 mile? Not that it really matters but I'm interested. And if you are trolling you are doing a very good job.

runner92

Just Be

posted: 1/10/2008 at 6:07 AM

Quote from MikeJA89 on 1/9/2008 at 11:29 PM:

Did you run a 4:01 1600 or 4:01 mile? Not that it really matters but I'm interested. And if you are trolling you are doing a very good job.

I said I wouldn't bring it up here in this thread anymore. Sad

Sorry. You can email me at runner9292 [at] gmail [dot] com and I'll let you know, if you really want. Smile

Haha, a compliment about quality trolling. Big grin

As far as that goes, no, I'm not trolling. Smile

I have better things to do than pretend to have some ability that I don't, nor would I want to, because doing something like that wouldn't accomplish anything except make me feel like a total loser, not to mention it contradicts the basic principles of good morals and ethics. Eventually, I hope to break the 4:30 mile, and when I do, I know 1 well respected forum member in my area and I'm sure he wouldn't mind filming me and vouching for me... and if I ever do run a sub 4, we'll repeat the same process. Smile

My Running Log | Blog of Running Lore

nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

posted: 1/17/2008 at 9:16 PM
modified: 1/17/2008 at 9:16 PM

http://www.flocasts.org/flotrack/speakers.php?sid=712 - Thisis an interview with John Walker fron NZ. 4:01 is pretty impressive. My advice run lots of miles, get some good coaching. 26 is still pretty young The training to run a 4:30 mile is pretty tough. Good luck

runner92

Just Be

posted: 1/18/2008 at 8:49 AM

Quote from nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn on 1/17/2008 at 9:16 PM:

http://www.flocasts.org/flotrack/speakers.php?sid=712 - Thisis an interview with John Walker fron NZ. 4:01 is pretty impressive. My advice run lots of miles, get some good coaching. 26 is still pretty young The training to run a 4:30 mile is pretty tough. Good luck

Thanks for that link! It was a sweet video. Smile

My Running Log | Blog of Running Lore

DeadMopoz

posted: 1/22/2008 at 10:14 PM

Hi, runner92, I found your thread and want to tell that I am in a very similar situation: I was running until I was 16, set bunch of PR that are really hard to beat. Well, I am 36 now. I tried to start running again couple times, but would kill myself in a first couple weeks - it is really hard to let go all that memories about how you used to train and start easy again. I started again last October, being able to run 800 at 3:00 once (could not do much after that), and running 12 to 20 miles a week at 6.5 to 7.5 mph. Now, on workout last monday I did 2x1 mile at 5:25 with 5 min jogging in between. My goal is to run under 18 min 5K by summer, longer this year goal - half-marathon at this pace. Now, instead of judging yuor goal, let me share with you the line of thoguht on mine. The main thing in running is a balance between heart and muscles. Heart puts oxigen into blood, mussles use it. Your muscles have slow and fast musle fibers. Slow ones use a lot of oxigen and not produce much lactic acid - so they could work long time, fast one produce a lot of lactic acid and don't use much oxigen - they are more powerfull, esier to train, but will shutdown in couple minutes. the longer run is, the less role fast fibers play in it. Different training required for slow and fast fibers. So, let say looking at my last mile time (5:25) we say ok, lets do 3 miles at 6 min - here it is, close to 18 min 5K. That would be wrong, because at a mile distance a big part of this effort are fast muscle fibers, that will shutdown after a mile or mile and a half. Therefore I am doing a lot of training targeting slow muscle fibers - and hopefully somewere this spring my 5K will be under 18 min. Now, if I would be targeting a mile run, I would be doing 600m intervals, hills and hit the gym twice a week with the following day off, working oh hip and knee flexors.

Cougar89

posted: 1/22/2008 at 10:54 PM
modified: 1/22/2008 at 10:56 PM

Where did you get that info? Just wondering? Lungs do the oxygen thing and the heart pumps it... but that is not the only thing I question with this post. However... I do agree with some points.

Runners around the state are getting better today ...are you one of them? TRAIN HARD

DeadMopoz

posted: 1/22/2008 at 11:12 PM

Cougar89, here is my understanding of it, I would say somewhat limited, but worked for me so far: blood delivers oxygen to your muscles, your heart pumps it - so you can say that there are 3 things that define delivery of oxygen:lungs, heart and hemoglobin level. I would not consider lungs and Hb level as something that should be specifically targeted unless you are a world class athlete. Heart at this context means 2 things: the power of heart musle and the volume of blood heart is able to push. On the other end, there are your muscles, that are trying to consume the oxygen delivered. Slow muscle fibers are the ones who works on oxygen and bodyfat, fast use glycogen and much smaller amount of oxygen. Ideally your training should target what is limiting out of the parts listed, i.e. if heart is not limiting factor and and slow fibers in your muscles are not able to consume all the oxygen your heart pumps, slow long runs (aka basebuilding) is not going to do you much good. If you feel like discussing it, please copy this post into a new thread - I don't wan't to mess up this one.

Cougar89

posted: 1/23/2008 at 9:00 AM

Quote from DeadMopoz on 1/22/2008 at 11:12 PM:

Ideally your training should target what is limiting out of the parts listed, i.e. if heart is not limiting factor and and slow fibers in your muscles are not able to consume all the oxygen your heart pumps, slow long runs (aka basebuilding) is not going to do you much good.

Again where are you getting this info??? I realize this is a friendy site so I will limit this by saying this is not true. Your science is correct but I question how you translate it to training. All three (as you put it) improve with proper training. Training for a specific event is done in phases and each phase of a training program is equally as important as the next. There are no shortcuts. and it's an honest question... where are you getting your information?

Runners around the state are getting better today ...are you one of them? TRAIN HARD

DeadMopoz

posted: 1/23/2008 at 9:11 AM
modified: 1/23/2008 at 9:20 AM

There is experimental sport lab in Russia. The guy who is leading this lab developed this theory and wrote couple books and articles on his vision of training methods for edurance sports. This is where i get the info. the guy's name is Seluyanov. I am not aware of any of his work being translated to other languages yet. his theory becoming very popular in Russia now, and a lot of things he is talking about corresponds very well with my personal experience. when you say "all three improve with the proper training" - you are correct. but if you target the specific aspects, your training is more effective. Take heart volume. The way to increase your heart volume is to stretch it. to stretch your heart should work so, that it expand to its max. The way heart works, it expands to max with HR about 130 (in some case up to 150) and than it does not have time to expand fully. so to increase heart volume you need to train at ~135HR (will vary for each person) at least 4 times a week about 2 hours a day. the more the better. And, it does not really matter what exactly you do. To increase heart muscle power you need to make your heart work at high HR for about 30-45 sec at a time. So for that you would do let say 400m sprints with rest interval allowing your HR to drop to 120-130. And you don't want to do it more than once a week.

MikeJA89

posted: 1/23/2008 at 3:18 PM

Quote from DeadMopoz on 1/22/2008 at 10:14 PM:

Hi, runner92, I found your thread and want to tell that I am in a very similar situation: I was running until I was 16, set bunch of PR that are really hard to beat. Well, I am 36 now. I tried to start running again couple times, but would kill myself in a first couple weeks - it is really hard to let go all that memories about how you used to train and start easy again. I started again last October, being able to run 800 at 3:00 once (could not do much after that), and running 12 to 20 miles a week at 6.5 to 7.5 mph. Now, on workout last monday I did 2x1 mile at 5:25 with 5 min jogging in between. My goal is to run under 18 min 5K by summer, longer this year goal - half-marathon at this pace. Now, instead of judging yuor goal, let me share with you the line of thoguht on mine. The main thing in running is a balance between heart and muscles. Heart puts oxigen into blood, mussles use it. Your muscles have slow and fast musle fibers. Slow ones use a lot of oxigen and not produce much lactic acid - so they could work long time, fast one produce a lot of lactic acid and don't use much oxigen - they are more powerfull, esier to train, but will shutdown in couple minutes. the longer run is, the less role fast fibers play in it. Different training required for slow and fast fibers. So, let say looking at my last mile time (5:25) we say ok, lets do 3 miles at 6 min - here it is, close to 18 min 5K. That would be wrong, because at a mile distance a big part of this effort are fast muscle fibers, that will shutdown after a mile or mile and a half. Therefore I am doing a lot of training targeting slow muscle fibers - and hopefully somewere this spring my 5K will be under 18 min. Now, if I would be targeting a mile run, I would be doing 600m intervals, hills and hit the gym twice a week with the following day off, working oh hip and knee flexors.

This is true but if someone wants the best results periodization should be used. The mile run is approximately 80% aerobic and 20% meaning a base phase is still very important. Yes some anaerobic work will be needed in order to run a fast mile but getting a good aerobic base after not running for a few years would be the most important thing, IMO. I do agree with hill work being very important for a miler. I think your training for the 5k is also pretty common knowledge. In order to run a fast 5k you need minimal anaerobic work. It should be focused on aerobic capacity (easy running), increasing the aerobic and lactate thresholds (progression and tempo runs) , and increasing v02 max (1k-2k repeats at 3k-5k pace with equal or less active recovery). Also how dated are these studies? From what I understand of exercise physiology it is now common knowledge between physiologist that the body doesn't produce lactic acid, it separately produces lactate and acidosis. The lactate is know seen as an aerobic fuel that helps prevent fatigue. If you have any links I wouldn't mind seeing some of these studies.

DeadMopoz

posted: 1/23/2008 at 3:43 PM

As I said, all materials are in Russian. here are links to some: http://roadcycling.spb.ru/lib/books/midrunners.zip http://roadcycling.spb.ru/lib/books/intuit.zip http://www.roller.ru/content/cat-181/article-1883.html

obsessor

posted: 8/7/2008 at 6:55 PM

Races count, that's about it. Train, race, and see what you can do.

bdags

posted: 8/7/2008 at 9:28 PM

Looks like you're down to 5:25! Lookin good. I ran a 5:30 as a sophmore in high school and got my ass kicked with that time. That's when I switched to the 400 & 800. I say you can get to sub 5 in the near future.

bdags

posted: 8/7/2008 at 9:31 PM

This guy from my town just ran a 4:01 mile. It was the 7th fastest time in national high school history. He's going to be one to watch. http://www.startribune.com/sports/preps/19963669.html?location_refer=Prep%20Sports

What's realistic? Sub 4:30 mile. (Read 3485 times)