| Author |
Topic: Sub 20-Minute 5-K |
jtv
Cool Runner |
 posted May-22-2007 01:15 PM
  
The 5K is a different beast. I would have to agree with going out slightly faster than goal pace (~ 5-10 secs). Especially in my case - used run consistently in the 17's, but only in the 21's for the last several years. I am now trying to run in the 19's again. It is hard to judge exactly how fast I can go again. I just don't do 20-30 races a year like I used, nor the mileage or speedwork to know what i can/should run. In a race atmosphere, it is also tough to know the exact pace until you see that 1st mile marker. In a perfect world - yes 50-50 splits would yield the best results. But in a 5K who knows EXACTLY what time they will run on a given day. ------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 01:18 PM
When I PRed I went out fast, but not too fast. I think the first mile should be a bit faster than your overall place, if your running for time which most of you are since you aren't competitive in the sense of the way I am. If running for place, it's a whole nother story. Here were my splits for my PR.Mile 1: 5:16
Mile 2: 5:25
Mile 3: 5:21 Then something for the last .1. Don't go out TOO fast, but don't be conservative. It sounds unorthodox but it works.
IP: Logged |
Dakota Ridgerunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 01:23 PM
By the way, congrats JDF on your sub-20! That's a great run, stroller or not!------------------
My User Profile
Sub-40 10k Blog
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 01:30 PM
When I PRed I went out fast, but not too fast. I think the first mile should be a bit faster than your overall place, if your running for time which most of you are since you aren't competitive in the sense of the way I am. If running for place, it's a whole nother story. Here were my splits for my PR.Mile 1: 5:16
Mile 2: 5:27
Mile 3: 5:29 Then something for the last .1. Don't go out TOO fast, but don't be conservative. It sounds unorthodox but it works. Also, don't view the small time difference in the last miles as slowing down; trust me, most people are, and sustaining pace is much harder than it sounds. Also, you should save up for a kick because for it makes the finish more meaningful than if you just ran it in. It's a psychological thing.
IP: Logged |
joev9
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 01:36 PM
Yeah, Jim no apology necessary, I knew it was coming. I didn't mention that competive instinct thing but that is totally true. I always tend to hang with the people I end up near at about the 1 mile to 1/2 way point. Usually, I will pass one or two people and/or get passed by one or two people, but my race placement is generally decided by the 1/2 point. Thus, like what was said previously, if I am with faster people at that point, I will try as hard as I can to hang with them.I was also giving this some thought during my run this morning. Look at it this way, take a 15 second improvement (i.e., a 19:45 5K) on a perfectly ran, even split 20 minute 5K (6:27, 6:27, 6:27, 0:39) coming in two (MUCH) different ways. 6:27, 6:27, 6:27, 0:24 (4:00 mpm pace!!!) 6:12, 6:27, 6:27, 0:39 (6:27mpm pace) obviously these two examples are the two extremes but making up 15 seconds at the end of a short race seems way, way harder to me than gaining those same 15 seconds early in the race when I am still feeling good. and, to be clear, I'm not advocating starting a race like a wildman and burning yourself out. What I am shooting for is feeling like I am working hard by the 1/2 mile mark. I don't want to feel like I am running easy at the 1 mile mark, I wanna start working early and keep working it the whole race.
IP: Logged |
michaelsnelliam
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 01:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Jim24315:
It's ludicrous to think you'll run a faster time by going out at a much faster pace than you can hope to average for the entire race--absolutely ludicrous. It makes zero sense to go out at 6:06-6:10 when your goal is to break 20 minutes. A pair of 6:26's and a 6:25 will get the job done. "Recent male world record-holders in the 1OK have certainly tended to negative-split their races, although no one has actually reached a 51-49 division. As mentioned, Sigei's remarkable effort was attained with a 50.4-49.6 split, and five of the last record holders have negative-split their races, with Henry Rono's 50.5-49.5 breakdown being the most severe. Only Yobes Ondieki and Arturo Barrios violated the negative-split principle, and in each case the world-record race was composed of 49.9-50.1 parts, almost an equal apportioning of time." I didn't spend a lot of time looking, but I'm sure the same is true at 5k. I know that Haile Gebrselassie set his world records with near perfectly even splitting. And please don't tell me that it's different for slower runners. An elite runner actually has a better chance of recovering from a too fast early pace than we do.
Well, there was an article in Runners World recently that stated nearly that, saying that going out fast benefited less experienced runners (not slower runners). (http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-238-244-259-11404-0,00.html) -mds
IP: Logged |
Dakota Ridgerunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 02:20 PM
quote:
6:27, 6:27, 6:27, 0:24 (4:00 mpm pace!!!)6:12, 6:27, 6:27, 0:39 (6:27mpm pace) obviously these two examples are the two extremes but making up 15 seconds at the end of a short race seems way, way harder to me than gaining those same 15 seconds early in the race when I am still feeling good.
joev9, to be fair, you are comparing apples and oranges. You're comparing a ridiculously faster last tenth of a mile with a slightly faster first mile.
A better comparison would be the following: Fast start
6:12 mile 1, 6:27 mile 2, 6:27 mile 3, 0:39 last tenth (6:27mpm pace) Fast finish
6:27 mile 1, 6:27 mile 2, 0:39 mile 2.0 to 2.1 (6:27mpm pace), 6:12 last mile That seems a little more reasonable.
------------------
My User Profile
Sub-40 10k Blog
IP: Logged |
joev9
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 02:39 PM
i did say i was being extreme, didn't i???you are right though, your comparison is fairer (though less extreme and who doesn't like being extreme these days). i still think, that all else being equal, a 6:12 last mile is way harder than a 6:12 first mile.
IP: Logged |
joev9
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 02:50 PM
quote:
Originally posted by charlieeee:
if your running for time which most of you are since you aren't competitive in the sense of the way I am
i'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't really mean this the way it sounds...
IP: Logged |
mainers
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 03:45 PM
i spotted that one too Joe but didn't give the benefit of the doubt!
IP: Logged |
JasonsDrivingForce
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 04:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by charlieeee:
if your running for time which most of you are since you aren't competitive in the sense of the way I am.
We could put a stroller in your hands and see how competitive you are then? My guess is a few good hills would destroy your legs. But then again what do I know I am not competitive like you are?
------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
Tchuck
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:22 PM
Good job JDFI personally think someone who is a higher mileage runner and extremely fit can get by with a faster (perhaps 3% faster than goal) start but someone like me and most who aren't high mileage runners but moderately fit, are better with even pacing or even 5 sec. slower the first mile. My PR 5K 19:22 was last September on a flat course - no wind. My splits
6:23
6:16
6:14
.28 w/ an extremely hard sprint to finish I clearly remember the race moving from 18 - 20th place at mile one and passing many at mile 2 and 3 to finish 5th overall in a smaller 5K. I felt tired at mile 3 but had a gear for the final 800M and a bit left for a hard sprint. You can make up a lot on a hard 1/2 mile finish and a hard 100M sprint. If you are surviving to finish, you have no sprint. A faster start offsets some of this but I don't believe all of it. My opinion. Plus, it is a more rewarding race for me to feel like I am finishing strong passing people vs. surviving and getting passed. Again, my opinion. ------------------
Todd
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:23 PM
I meant in a high school way, you guys don't run for place to score points for your team in an invitational. i knew when I wrote that it sounded bad.
IP: Logged |
tuscaloosarunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by charlieeee:
I meant in a high school way, you guys don't run for place to score points for your team in an invitational. i knew when I wrote that it sounded bad.
I asked before on this thread how you went from a 20:00 to a 16:xx runner...where'd you PR; what meet? How did your training differ from then to now? I assume you've grown and matured during that time...not exactly a luxury for 30-45 yrs old men...
IP: Logged |
mainers
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:43 PM
ok charlie, benefit of doubt granted, sorry!
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:45 PM
Tusca: And I relpied
Mainers: It's okay, i did kind of sound like an ass. I'm sure some of you can destory me in a race over 5k. I cant even jog 10 miles.
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-22-2007 08:47 PM
Tusca: And I replied
Mainers: It's okay, i did kind of sound like an ass. I'm sure some of you can destory me in a race over 5k. I cant even jog 10 miles.
IP: Logged |
tuscaloosarunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 05:38 AM
quote:
Originally posted by charlieeee:
Tusca: And I replied
Mainers: It's okay, i did kind of sound like an ass. I'm sure some of you can destory me in a race over 5k. I cant even jog 10 miles.
And so you did. Missed it...my bad...
IP: Logged |
tuscaloosarunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 05:46 AM
quote:
Originally posted by JasonsDrivingForce:
We could put a stroller in your hands and see how competitive you are then? My guess is a few good hills would destroy your legs. But then again what do I know I am not competitive like you are?
Hey Jason, I'm a new dad myself, though the baby is still too little to put her in the stroller. Curious though: would you ever run a short race sans strolled to get a sense of where you're at...how to say..."unencumbered". I knew guy in Bham, AL who would race with a stroller occassionally--dude ran 33:xx 10k WITH the strolled. I wanted to puke with jealousy. Ack, he was a hard, hard worker. Sad to say, however, he had a stroke in the middle of a half and passed. He was a stand-up guy and it makes me sad thinking about it...
IP: Logged |
JasonsDrivingForce
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 08:18 AM
Damn, that story really pulls at your heart. That is a shame to hear about such a great runner passing on in the middle of a race. I guess he was doing what he loved though. Yes I run 1 5K a year without the stroller. It is the Race for the Cure. It is such a large event(20,000+ people) that it is not safe for the stroller.Funny thing is that I usually don’t do well at all in that race. I don’t know what it is. I ran in the upper 23’s last year a week after running a 21:00 on a crazy hilly course with the stroller. I am usually sick the week of the race for the cure so that doesn’t help. I am healthy this year and one of my co-workers just lost his wife to breast cancer so I have some real motivation this time. I plan on smoking this race sans stroller! I did run a flat fast 5K last weekend without the stroller. You would be surprised about the results. You can read about it here. http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/010165.shtml I would definitely recommend getting a good stroller once your daughter is more 3-6 months old(depends on how fast they develop head control). I use the Bob ironman strollers and they are great. There are others that are good also. Just make sure it has a fixed or lockable front wheel!
------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
MichiganFlyer
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 10:02 AM
I finally got my race report together from Sundays 5k.Splits 6:40, 6:42, 6:53 (approximate) http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/010170.shtml
IP: Logged |
charlieeee
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 11:09 AM
Can't you like not swing your arms with a stroller? That would suck.
IP: Logged |
joev9
Cool Runner |
posted May-23-2007 12:54 PM
you swing one arm at a time (alternating to keep from getting one arm too tired) while guiding the stroller with the other. it isn't that bad once you get used it. my oldest is too big for the stroller now and my youngest doesn't have the patience to sit in it for more than about 10 minutes, he has to be out running around on his own.
IP: Logged |
joev9
Cool Runner |
posted May-24-2007 01:27 PM
tchuck or tinman, got an interval question for you.i ran this set of 1/2 mile (not 800m because it is on a measured bikepath instead of a track) intervals today: 1.5 mile w/u: 11:15,
1st 1/2: 3:05, 1:00
2nd 1/2: 3:07, 1:00
3rd 1/2: 3:07, 1:00
4th 1/2: 3:07, 1:30
5th 1/2: 3:09, 1:30
6th 1/2: 3:09
1.5 mile c/d: 13:12 it was 80+ degrees and sunny today (i.e., effing hot!). the warmest i have ran intervals this year was about 60 degrees and cloudy. i was worried about the heat but the workout was going pretty well. i was starting to feel the effects of the heat after #4 and increased the rest period by 30 seconds before #5 and #6. Those last two 1/2s felt pretty hard but not quite all out. my goal was to go a bit faster on these than CV intervals which I think for me would be around 3:15 or 3:17 or so. my question is: do you think the extra rest before #5 and #6 compromised the workout at all? i am pretty sure the answer is no because that extra 30 seconds recovery allowed me to keep the pace of those last 2 almost in line with the first 4, but just wanted some input. thanks
IP: Logged |
JasonsDrivingForce
Cool Runner |
posted May-24-2007 02:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by joev9:
you swing one arm at a time (alternating to keep from getting one arm too tired) while guiding the stroller with the other. it isn't that bad once you get used it. my oldest is too big for the stroller now and my youngest doesn't have the patience to sit in it for more than about 10 minutes, he has to be out running around on his own.
Actually, I keep both hands on the stroller the whole race except for the few seconds when I drink from my water bottles. I have seen people run many different ways with a stroller(Run along beside it, push with just one hand, hold only the leash on downhills). All of those seem dangerous to me! Safety is always the first priority when it comes to the kids. I really don’t think I could have taken a hand off of the stroller on that 5:10 mile. We were doing a pretty good clip at the time. As far as “Can't you like not swing your arms with a stroller? That would suck.”. Yes that is true for me. I don’t get the benefit of using my arms at all with the stroller and yes that is a big handicap with the stroller. It wouldn’t be rewarding if it wasn’t hard though, right? The stroller will alter your stride drastically. That is hard to get used to also! One of the elite runners runs with one arm locked close to his body. He runs like that because he used to run carrying his school books in one arm. If he can set world records without swinging his arms I guess I can run without swinging my arms.
------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
Facebook 
Twitter
i