RunningAHEAD - Topic: Goal of sub 20 5k (page 11)

JimHowe

posted: 4/14/2008 at 10:42 PM

Quote from JimR on 4/14/2008 at 10:31 PM:

That's in excess of his 10k race pace if you go by McMillan's calculator. That's a tall order for 5-6 miles.

Agree--6:40 is much too fast for tempo based on 20:17 5k.

Age 60 plus best times: 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33

mainerunnah

posted: 4/15/2008 at 7:24 AM

I'll join this thread at least until I can get that sub 20 5K back this year. Roll eyes

I'm just a week out from running the Boston Marathon and after that I'll be putting more speed work in and concentrating much more on the shorter distances...at least for the next few months anyways! I'll be doing the following races in May and hope to improve my times from last year: May 4th - Hot Pursuit 5K - Brunswick - last year - 19:43 - 6:21 pace (Very flat & certified course) May 11th - Sea Dogs 5K - Portland - last year - 19:43 - 6:21 pace (Little tougher course with a great downill at around mile 2 that you can use to your advantage - certified course) May 18th - Sugarloaf 15K - Eustis - last year - 1:03:39 - 6:48 pace (certified course - mostly downhill with a few rolling hills) May 25th - Boston's Run to Remember 5 Miler - last year - 32:50 - 6:34 pace (one of my favorite races and for a great cause) I know I've sacrificed some faster times by running the Boston Marathon just two weeks before the 1st in this series of races but I still can't resist the pull of running Boston and marathons in general...hopefully I can get my 5K time back down below 20:00 and go from there this year with an ultimate goal of sub 19 someday, who knows...maybe! Wink

MichiganFlyer

posted: 4/15/2008 at 8:11 AM

Quote from RunAsics on 4/14/2008 at 10:22 PM:

Some general comments after reading your posts: IMHO, your tempo pace seems slow here. Sounds more like steady state. I'd expect ~6:40 mpm t-pace. Do that for 5 to 6 miles. Also, get your long run around 12 miles with fast finishes. For intervals, 8-12 * 400 starting at 90 secs and move to 86s. Throw in some 82s with longer recoveries. With your mileage build up, I'd expect you to peak in May. You must have seriously crappy crappy shoes if you cadence varies that much. For a given pace, I run about the same no matter the shoe. Finally, I think you should train for a 10k, and dovetail in a 5k or two. You need to switch it up a little.

The fastest I have ever ran a 5k was 6:32 per mile pace. I think 6:40 for 6 miles is a wee bit fast. Regarding your other advise....I probably should try some 10k stuff but I have three 5ks coming up in the next 3 weeks so it will have to be put on hold. Agree my 9 mile long run should be lengthened. I always run around 168 cadence on the treadmill unless I am racing something hard. I just cannot get the legs turnover going. Last night...put on the racing flats and ran my 5k loop....went out at a 5k race pace clip to see what kind of times I would do in my flats...hit 1/2 mile in 3:09. The gist of the run was to run 5 minutes at race pace then take 4 minutes at easy pace. I repeated this 3 times. So this was long interval running as opposed to the short 2 minute faster intervals I have been doing the past 5 weeks. 3:09 is probably too fast for my 5k on Sunday but it didn't feel terribly fast so I think a 6:30 mile isnt out of the question for Sunday. I will aim for mid 6:30s as adeel suggested but no telling what I will do in flats they could easily shave 5 seconds off my mile pace and I can hit 6:30.

OnceADCV

posted: 4/15/2008 at 10:35 AM

Someone who is a 20:30 5k runner should have a Tempo pace of around 7:02/mile. This is for 20-minute Tempos (3 miles) for 5-6 miles. Tempo pace should be around 7:15/mile...

sjutton

posted: 4/15/2008 at 12:10 PM

Quote from OnceADCV on 4/15/2008 at 10:35 AM:

Someone who is a 20:30 5k runner should have a Tempo pace of around 7:02/mile. This is for 20-minute Tempos (3 miles) for 5-6 miles. Tempo pace should be around 7:15/mile...

This sounds about right. I ran 20:33 last Saturday. I've done several 3 mile tempos in the last 5 months and that's the pace I shoot for. I don't usually hit it since mile 3 of my favorite tempo course starts with a brutal climb about .5 mile long, but I'm close before the climb.

2014 - Get 5k back under 20:00. Stay healthy!

Dakota RR

Right on Hereford...

posted: 4/15/2008 at 12:33 PM
modified: 4/15/2008 at 1:10 PM

Quote from MichiganFlyer on 4/15/2008 at 8:11 AM:

Agree my 9 mile long run should be lengthened. I always run around 168 cadence on the treadmill unless I am racing something hard. I just cannot get the legs turnover going.

MichiganFlyer, I was pretty active on the Sub-20 5k thread at Coolrunning.com last year around this time. I'm certainly no expert, but here's what worked for me... 1. Long run of around 12-13 miles 2. Taking days off (I ran a max of 4 days per week) 3. Cadence of ~~190-192~~ at all times [edit: 180-182] 4. Tempos, Intervals, and Reps (Daniels' Running Formula) It looks like you're doing #4, but not the first three. Long Run - I can't think of any reason not to increase the length of your long run. Just do it! Smile

Days Off - It looks like you're running 7 days a week, every week. You could easily decrease that to 5 days and still get in around 40 miles by doing the following, for example: 13 long, 9 with some striders thrown in somewhere, 7 with 3-4 at tempo, 6 easy, 5 with 5x1000 at I-pace. This would give you 2 days off each week for recovery. Cadence - I increased my cadence to 180 by counting my steps for 30 seconds several times on each run. It felt like I was taking short, choppy steps at first, but then I got used to it. Now it feels normal. After a while I was only counting once per run. Now I only check my cadence on a rare occasion just to make sure I'm still where I want to be. I feel like I've improved my running economy significantly since increasing my turnover. As a side note, last year I was training for a sub-40 10k (even though I still hadn't run a sub-20 5k yet) and decided to follow Daniels' Running Formula religiously. The problem was that DRF doesn't seem to map very well to a lower-mileage runner like myself (30 mpw). Since I was only running 4 days per week, I found myself doing speed work of some sort on 3 days, and my long run on the 4th day. That meant every workout was fairly hard. I believe I was overtraining a bit. I did get my sub-20 5k, but my sub-40 goal at the end of May didn't happen. I matched my PR of 40:39 (to the second) from 2005, even though in '05 I was training much less. It left me with the impression that I wasn't getting enough recovery between hard workouts. A month later, after drastically cutting back my running schedule, I ran a 39:54 10k. This year, I've gotten faster just doing a simple schedule of 4 days a week, including one long run and one tempo run, and the rest easy. That's it! And I need to increase the length of my long runs, too, by the way...I've only been running 10-11 mile long runs this year (not counting the half marathon that I ran last week, lol). Anyway, just some things to think about. Maybe they will work for you, maybe not. But good luck this Sunday!

MichiganFlyer

posted: 4/15/2008 at 12:40 PM
modified: 4/15/2008 at 12:42 PM

Quote from Dakota RR on 4/15/2008 at 12:33 PM:

MichiganFlyer, I was pretty active on the Sub-20 5k thread at Coolrunning.com last year around this time. I'm certainly no expert, but here's what worked for me... 1. Long run of around 12-13 miles 2. Taking days off (I ran a max of 4 days per week) 3. Cadence of 190-192 at all times 4. Tempos, Intervals, and Reps (Daniels' Running Formula) It looks like you're doing #4, but not the first three. Long Run - I can't think of any reason not to increase the length of your long run. Just do it! Days Off - It looks like you're running 7 days a week, every week. You could easily decrease that to 5 days and still get in around 40 miles by doing the following, for example: 13 long, 9 with some striders thrown in somewhere, 7 with 3-4 at tempo, 6 easy, 5 with 5x1000 at I-pace. This would give you 2 days off each week for recovery. Cadence - I increased my cadence to 190 by counting my steps for 30 seconds several times on each run. It felt like I was taking short, choppy steps at first, but then I got used to it. Now it feels normal. After a while I was only counting once per run. Now I only check my cadence on a rare occasion just to make sure I'm still where I want to be. I feel like I've improved my running economy significantly since increasing my turnover. !

I like the days off part. You are right I am running almost every day...maybe 29 days in 30...but most of my miles are about 9:30 per mile pace on treadmill. I am serious about hitting the 40 mile weeks so its hard to take a day off unless I up my long run as you suggested. I remember you I was impressed at how quickly you knocked off the sub 20...you have a bit more talent than the average runner. I don't know that I could hit 192 for cadence. That seems fast. 180 I can do that. I have yet to find the magic formula to break 20 but I should be close right now. Here are 5ks I am planning on racing the 1st part of this year. April 20 April 27 May 2 May 18 June 6 June 28 July 27 August 10

RunAsics

The Limping Jogger

posted: 4/15/2008 at 1:03 PM

Quote from JimHowe on 4/14/2008 at 10:42 PM:

Agree--6:40 is much too fast for tempo based on 20:17 5k.

My bad - I thought MichiganFlyer's 5k PR was closer to 20mins than that. Embarrassed

"Only a few more laps to go and then the action will begin, unless this is the action, which it is."

Dakota RR

Right on Hereford...

posted: 4/15/2008 at 1:08 PM

Quote from MichiganFlyer on 4/15/2008 at 12:40 PM:

I don't know that I could hit 192 for cadence. That seems fast. 180 I can do that.

Oops, sorry...I did mean 180-182, not 190-192!

Geo Runner

posted: 4/15/2008 at 3:12 PM

Quote from Dustin on 4/13/2008 at 10:59 AM:

Thanks guys. Michigan- that's a picture of Ryan Hall in my profile. Must have got set to that while trying to update my avatar. But I do have bird-legs if that counts.

I wish I were like you guys. Unfortunately, I have short and think legs. Was a high school and college soccer player and I am definitely not built for distance running.

JimHowe

posted: 4/15/2008 at 9:44 PM
modified: 4/15/2008 at 9:45 PM

Quote from Dakota RR on 4/15/2008 at 12:33 PM:

MichiganFlyer, I was pretty active on the Sub-20 5k thread at Coolrunning.com last year around this time. I'm certainly no expert, but here's what worked for me... 1. Long run of around 12-13 miles 2. Taking days off (I ran a max of 4 days per week) 3. Cadence of ~~190-192~~ at all times [edit: 180-182] 4. Tempos, Intervals, and Reps (Daniels' Running Formula) It looks like you're doing #4, but not the first three. Long Run - I can't think of any reason not to increase the length of your long run. Just do it! Days Off - It looks like you're running 7 days a week, every week. You could easily decrease that to 5 days and still get in around 40 miles by doing the following, for example: 13 long, 9 with some striders thrown in somewhere, 7 with 3-4 at tempo, 6 easy, 5 with 5x1000 at I-pace. This would give you 2 days off each week for recovery.

Hey Dakota, I remember you from the old sub-40 thread. You've done pretty well, but I'll never buy the argument that 4-5 days are better than 7. That's a nice workout schedule you've outlined there and I agree with you about the long run. However, if you handed it to me I'd thank you and then add 2 easy 5-milers on those 2 rest days to make it 50 mpw instead of 40 Smile

I don't think they would make me the least bit more tired than if I were to take the days off, and over the long haul I believe they would help my ability to recover rather than hinder it. Those few extra miles probablly would keep me a pound or 2 lighter too, and help me to better maintain fitness level. Maybe not much, but every little edge counts--just enough to beat the guy of equal ability who takes those 2 days off.

Age 60 plus best times: 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33

MichiganFlyer

posted: 4/16/2008 at 8:25 AM
modified: 4/16/2008 at 8:27 AM

Quote from JimHowe on 4/15/2008 at 9:44 PM:

Hey Dakota, I remember you from the old sub-40 thread. You've done pretty well, but I'll never buy the argument that 4-5 days are better than 7. .

Jim...I trust your advise because you have been running so long...I think Dakota is trying to say IF I am limiting myself to 40 miles I should try to do it over 5 days rather than 7. That way my runs will be longer. I agree the longer runs are better for me but I also agree with you in that missing 2 days a week is not particularly helpful unless I really need a day off. I think running 4 very easy miles is better than a day of rest. I actually plan on taking tomorrow off with no running so that will be my rest day - I probably will take a day off every 2 weeks from now on. Here is a question for fellow posters, however. I am 35 years old and wonder if it would be possible to run three hard 5k efforts over a 12 day period? In high school 2 races a week was doable but now that I am older I wonder if I could fully recover enough to hit all 3 races hard?

tcerda

Supa Dupa Fly

posted: 4/16/2008 at 8:43 AM

Quote from MichiganFlyer on 4/16/2008 at 8:25 AM:

Here is a question for fellow posters, however. I am 35 years old and wonder if it would be possible to run three hard 5k efforts over a 12 day period? In high school 2 races a week was doable but now that I am older I wonder if I could fully recover enough to hit all 3 races hard?

I say just do it...even if you can't hit one of them as hard as you like. Less talk, more action. Wink

~TC --There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who don't--

adeel

posted: 4/16/2008 at 9:23 AM

Quote from MichiganFlyer on 4/16/2008 at 8:25 AM:

Here is a question for fellow posters, however. I am 35 years old and wonder if it would be possible to run three hard 5k efforts over a 12 day period? In high school 2 races a week was doable but now that I am older I wonder if I could fully recover enough to hit all 3 races hard?

It's possible, you wouldn't do too well in at least one of them (so prioritize) and you'd need a fair bit of recovery afterwards.

JimR

posted: 4/16/2008 at 9:42 AM
modified: 4/16/2008 at 9:43 AM

I doubt you would recover 'completely' but you would recover enough to handle it. I did 3 hard 5k's a few years back (at 44) within 14 days and was fine. They went something like 20:59, 20:18 and 20:31. 10x400 this mornning with half-lap recovery. Not pushing, just comfy hard from 1:41 down to 1:35.

Goal of sub 20 5k (Read 13664 times)