Login

Forums  > Racing  > Goal of sub 19 minute 5k


Goal of sub 19 minute 5k (Read 2820 times)
Jim24315
posted: 7/11/2008 at 1:42 PM
"Jim,

I don’t think breaking the 19:00 mark is as difficult as you made it sound. From my experience I found it much easier to break 19:00 than it was to break 20:00. When I was trying to break 20:00 I had to increase my mileage dramatically. I went from 3 mpw to about 15 mpw. When I broke 19:00 my mileage was still about 15 mpw. What’s funny is that when I hit ~50 mpw all I could muster was a 19:10 on an easy course."

I ran my first 5k at age 33. My time was 18:18. Progress is quick in the beginning but you have to work harder and harder to knock off the seconds as the years go by. Make hay while the sun shines!
Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, 10m 56:25, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33
Jim24315
posted: 7/11/2008 at 2:41 PM
Hi John "norrin_radd"

I will never forget that morning. It has been one the highlights of these past couple years for me. This year they cancelled the race due to budget constraints. They had run it for 25 straight years or something like that. What a shame.

I have mixed feelings about goals creating artificial barriers but think there could be something to it. Does it mean when we start consistently running in 19's after being stuck in the 20's for several months that it is because we have broken through a psychological barrier? Or is it just because we have moved up to another level with our fitness? I suspect that it is some of both, but that fitness probably has more to do with it. In my own experience I know that I have broken through a couple barriers but did not continue to run at that level for very long. I was only or one or two-time thing. If it was just psychological I would have been able to keep doing it once the barrier had been broken.

Anyway, its something to think about. A good target for us sub-19 hopefuls would be 18:35, which is a 5:59 pace. If we keep our eye on it then 18:59 doesn't seem as tough.

Nice going on the string in the 18's that you put together, and escpecially for breaking sub-6 barrier. Jim
Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, 10m 56:25, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33
JDF
Non-Stroller-Still Crazy
 posted: 7/11/2008 at 3:00 PM
Quote from mikeymike on 7/11/2008 at 1:16 PM:
MichiganFlyer,

My unsolicited two cents:

2.) Your comments to JDF abut talent are misguided. Someone for whom 56 miles represents a big week has no idea how much talent he or anyone else has. Don't impose artificial limits on your potential.

All in all though I enjoy following this (and the 20 minute) thread. It's motivating.

Cheers


So what exactly is “A big week” in your mind? Is it 80mpw, 100 mpw, 120 mpw? Do you think that someone can reach their full potential on less than 80 mpw? Do you think that someone has to put in at least 80 mpw to really know what they can achieve?

I for one could run a single ¼ mile sprint and know that I have more speed than endurance. And what is funny is that I was always known as the “Long distance” guy in school. I didn’t realize I had speed until I went out and just tried it.

I really think that Mich can do the sub 19:00 even at the same level of training he is at now.
http://runningahead.com/profiles/69d214e40d824ad0b0a73c925d655a13
mikeymike
posted: 7/11/2008 at 3:16 PM
Quote from JDF on 7/11/2008 at 3:00 PM:
So what exactly is “A big week” in your mind? Is it 80mpw, 100 mpw, 120 mpw? Do you think that someone can reach their full potential on less than 80 mpw? Do you think that someone has to put in at least 80 mpw to really know what they can achieve?

It's different for everyone isn't it? I guess 80 would be a big week for me. I used to say 70 but I've strung together enough of those now that they feel normal. I don't think I'm close to knowing what my potential at 5K is (or was). I'd guess it would take a bunch of years of 120+ for me to figure it out and that's not going to happen. Which is why I think its counterproductive to focus on how much talent I or anyone else has.

I really think that Mich can do the sub 19:00 even at the same level of training he is at now.

So do I it just might not be the most efficient way to go about it.
Jim24315
posted: 7/11/2008 at 3:28 PM
modified: 7/11/2008 at 3:30 PM
Quote from JDF on 7/11/2008 at 3:00 PM:
So what exactly is “A big week” in your mind? Is it 80mpw, 100 mpw, 120 mpw? Do you think that someone can reach their full potential on less than 80 mpw? Do you think that someone has to put in at least 80 mpw to really know what they can achieve?

I for one could run a single ¼ mile sprint and know that I have more speed than endurance. And what is funny is that I was always known as the “Long distance” guy in school. I didn’t realize I had speed until I went out and just tried it.

I really think that Mich can do the sub 19:00 even at the same level of training he is at now.


I agree with Mike and will let him speak from himself but felt compelled to butt in. I don't think anyone has said that they don't believe that MichiganFlyer can't break 19. I know I didn't. In fact, I am sure he can if he continues to train consistently like he has. It just might take longer for him than...let's say...someone like you. If he were to run 70-80 miles a week and could do so without being injured I believe it would be a certainty, but it probably won't take that much. I think you are taking some of these statments out of context.

You will continue to make progress and so will Mich, just by continuing to run--at least for another few years you should. After that progress will be tougher to come by unless you do more. I am virtually certain you will never come near your potential if you continue to train at the same level you have now. And while I'm at it I will be the first to admit that I have never been a high mileage runner. I've had a handlful of years when I've averaged low 50's for the full year, which included several weeks in 60's-70's. All I know is what a huge difference it made over those years when I averaged in 20's-30's. If there is any one thing I could do over again running wise it would be to run more miles--50's and 60's isn't even enough for a hard taper for a true high mileage runner.

Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, 10m 56:25, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33
MichiganFlyer
posted: 7/11/2008 at 3:57 PM
Quote from Jim24315 on 7/11/2008 at 3:28 PM:
I agree with Mike and will let him speak from himself but felt compelled to butt in. I don't think anyone has said that they don't believe that MichiganFlyer can't break 19. I know I didn't. In fact, I am sure he can if he continues to train consistently like he has. It just might take longer for him than...let's say...someone like you. If he were to run 70-80 miles a week and could do so without being injured I believe it would be a certainty, but it probably won't take that much. I think you are taking some of these statments out of context.

You will continue to make progress and so will Mich, just by continuing to run--at least for another few years you should. After that progress will be tougher to come by unless you do more. I am virtually certain you will never come near your potential if you continue to train at the same level you have now. And while I'm at it I will be the first to admit that I have never been a high mileage runner. I've had a handlful of years when I've averaged low 50's for the full year, which included several weeks in 60's-70's. All I know is what a huge difference it made over those years when I averaged in 20's-30's. If there is any one thing I could do over again running wise it would be to run more miles--50's and 60's isn't even enough for a hard taper for a true high mileage runner.


Yes 25 miles a week used to be considered a normal week for me. Now I consider 30 miles a dissapointing low mileage week. I have read mileage studies before. Your Olympians will typically cover 100 miles or more per week. But it seems like I have read that once you go above 70 miles per week your return on investment is very small. I would consider 40-50 miles a week enough for most of us 5k goal chasers (probably because that is what I have been running) but 60-70 would be better.

JDF I don't know how many miles you have ran this year. If you are running 30-40 miles a week now that is great. The thing is you need to keep running 30+ miles a week for a year or two as the running total of miles also seems to be very important. At 15 miles per week I don't think a runner gets any faster at all after the 1st couple months of fitness improvements are reached.

Is sub 19 worth training hard to me? Not as much as the round sub 20 goal. I have a flat fast course coming up but I really doubt that I could go sub 19 which is an important piece to breaking 19. I am confident I can break 20 and if I train hard the next 2 weeks I do believe a PR could be had....I suppose 19:30 is a good goal to shoot for....but sub 19? sorry to be doubtful but I don't see how I could get the time down so quickly from a PR that was 20:17 just 2 months ago.

Sub 19 could be possible in the fall as others have noted. There are only so many hard workouts before one peaks - I believe that so I may focus on October racing to go to the next level.
MichiganFlyer
posted: 7/13/2008 at 1:45 AM
modified: 7/13/2008 at 1:45 AM
I didnt run yesterday. I am really falling behind now... 6 miles today which I called a tempo run even though it was slow for a tempo. 25 miles for the week a yearly low I believe.

Mile splits

7:39
7:36
7:35
7:37
7:26
6:50

44:43 for 6 miles in 80 degree temps...nice run I think I am way too rested.
JDF
Non-Stroller-Still Crazy
 posted: 7/13/2008 at 3:01 AM
Quote from MichiganFlyer on 7/11/2008 at 3:57 PM:


JDF I don't know how many miles you have ran this year. If you are running 30-40 miles a week now that is great. The thing is you need to keep running 30+ miles a week for a year or two as the running total of miles also seems to be very important. At 15 miles per week I don't think a runner gets any faster at all after the 1st couple months of fitness improvements are reached.


To tell you the truth, I have never run more than about 52 miles in a week. I have only done more than 40 mpw about 4 times in my life. I typically average about 9 mpw with an occasional 20 mpw.

I know I am no where near my potential for the 5K or the marathon for that matter. It just isn't important enough to me at the moment to dedicate myself to it like my friends have(They are sub 17's guys now).

However, I have really started to focus on a single distance for the first time in my life recently. I am training specifically for a single mile road race. My goal is to hit 4:35.

I have been training hard for the last two weeks and I will continue the mile specific training for the next 2 months. I am confident that if I continue the training I can hit my goal. I have already seen huge improvement by just increasing my mileage to 20 hard mpw.

Just today I ran a very hard, hilly, and fast 12 miles. I mixed in 3 short(.2-.25 mile) sprints in the workout also. That is definitely helping my closing speed. I was able to do a 49 second(Down a steep hill) .2 miles at mile 9 of my run today.

Who knows what would happen if I ever put a string of 70 mpw in?

Anyway, Mich I think you should take it easy on your next race. You deserve it. Throw in a nice easy 19:50 and just sit back and enjoy it. There is plenty of time to break 19:00. You will be surprised how if you just relax during a few races you will suddenly get faster and faster.
http://runningahead.com/profiles/69d214e40d824ad0b0a73c925d655a13
MichiganFlyer
posted: 7/13/2008 at 11:53 PM
modified: 7/13/2008 at 11:55 PM
JDF..Its hard for me to find time to run too with a 3 year old daughter. I thought I wasn't going to get the chance to run today and was really bummed out. But then my wife said she was going shopping and taking our daughter with her! So I set my sights on an easy 10 miler. It is 75 degrees and humidity was 40%! The low humidity made this one of my best runs ever.

I was looking for 8 minute pace but after the 1st two miles I knew that this was going to be an outstanding run.

Splits
7:33, 7:39, 7:46, 7:51, 7:50

7:47, 7:40, 7:44. 7:29, 6:48

Total time 76:07
I have run 10 miles before all at sub 8 pace (last September I think) but it was a painful death run. Tonights run was a joy. Maybe I should get into some longer races. I think I have some nice endurance that I am wasting on 5k efforts.
Jim24315
posted: 7/14/2008 at 6:57 AM
Michigan,

I think that even though your focus is on 5k it would probably help to run an occasional longer race. However, I wouldn't get too carried away and start running against the clock on too high a pct of normal daily runs.
Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, 10m 56:25, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:00, 10k 38:35, 10m 1:05:30, HM 1:24:09, 30k 2:04:33
RunAsics
Person of Interest
 posted: 7/14/2008 at 1:56 PM
Quote from MichiganFlyer on 7/13/2008 at 11:53 PM:
JDF..Its hard for me to find time to run too with a 3 year old daughter. I thought I wasn't going to get the chance to run today and was really bummed out. But then my wife said she was going shopping and taking our daughter with her! So I set my sights on an easy 10 miler. It is 75 degrees and humidity was 40%! The low humidity made this one of my best runs ever.

I was looking for 8 minute pace but after the 1st two miles I knew that this was going to be an outstanding run.

Splits
7:33, 7:39, 7:46, 7:51, 7:50

7:47, 7:40, 7:44. 7:29, 6:48

Total time 76:07
I have run 10 miles before all at sub 8 pace (last September I think) but it was a painful death run. Tonights run was a joy. Maybe I should get into some longer races. I think I have some nice endurance that I am wasting on 5k efforts.


Nice run. I'm not sure how you can be wasting anything without a goal to race longer... your training was to do well in the 5k.

I recall mentioning on a prior occasion that you should consider training for a 10k or 10 miler (with perhaps a few speedwork tweaks) as it'll naturally help your 5k time. Note that pacing becomes a larger factor at longer race distances.
"Only a few more laps to go and then the action will begin, unless this is the action, which it is."

5k PR: 18:15 (06/08); 8k PR: 30:19 (03/08); 5M PR: 30:27 (06/08); 10k PR: 37:58 (10/08); 15k PR: 57:34 (11/08); 10M PR: 1:04:18 (05/08); HM PR: 1:28.03 (02/08); M PR: 3:11.51 (11/08)
JDF
Non-Stroller-Still Crazy
 posted: 7/14/2008 at 2:31 PM
Quote from MichiganFlyer on 7/13/2008 at 11:53 PM:
JDF..Its hard for me to find time to run too with a 3 year old daughter. I thought I wasn't going to get the chance to run today and was really bummed out. But then my wife said she was going shopping and taking our daughter with her! So I set my sights on an easy 10 miler. It is 75 degrees and humidity was 40%! The low humidity made this one of my best runs ever.

I was looking for 8 minute pace but after the 1st two miles I knew that this was going to be an outstanding run.

Splits
7:33, 7:39, 7:46, 7:51, 7:50

7:47, 7:40, 7:44. 7:29, 6:48

Total time 76:07
I have run 10 miles before all at sub 8 pace (last September I think) but it was a painful death run. Tonights run was a joy. Maybe I should get into some longer races. I think I have some nice endurance that I am wasting on 5k efforts.

Nice run! Keep it up and I am sure sub 19:00 is in your grasps. I ran a really hard 11 miler on Saturday. Most of it was on some VERY hilly single track and the group I was running with was hammering it.

I typically see 123-124 calories per mile if I am running fairly hard. I have seen 126 calories per mile on my Garmin only a few times during races and that was when I was running “VERY” hard. My Garmin showed 127 and 129 calories per mile for miles 3 and 4(Single Track) on Saturday! Even though the calorie per mile value is not entirely accurate it is definitely a good estimation of “level of effort”. Trust me we were running very hard up a steep hill.

Mich have you ever considered getting a Garmin? I know it has done wonders for my pacing and just my overall awareness of how I run. I am still no where close to “Running smart” yet but I know that with the Garmin I can do it if I set my mind to it.

I know other people don’t give them any credit but after running with mine for 1 year I don’t run without it. Just a thought.
http://runningahead.com/profiles/69d214e40d824ad0b0a73c925d655a13
MichiganFlyer
posted: 7/14/2008 at 6:46 PM
Quote from JDF on 7/14/2008 at 2:31 PM:
Nice run! Keep it up and I am sure sub 19:00 is in your grasps. I ran a really hard 11 miler on Saturday. Most of it was on some VERY hilly single track and the group I was running with was hammering it.

I typically see 123-124 calories per mile if I am running fairly hard. I have seen 126 calories per mile on my Garmin only a few times during races and that was when I was running “VERY” hard. My Garmin showed 127 and 129 calories per mile for miles 3 and 4(Single Track) on Saturday! Even though the calorie per mile value is not entirely accurate it is definitely a good estimation of “level of effort”. Trust me we were running very hard up a steep hill.

Mich have you ever considered getting a Garmin? I know it has done wonders for my pacing and just my overall awareness of how I run. I am still no where close to “Running smart” yet but I know that with the Garmin I can do it if I set my mind to it.

I know other people don’t give them any credit but after running with mine for 1 year I don’t run without it. Just a thought.


Seems like last year you ran a 10 miler in 72-73 minutes and you were only running 10 miler per week. I would hate to hear how fast you ran Saturdays 11 miler! Man I think you are skinnier than me. I dropped below 140 pounds a couple times this summer and am 5'10" It really helps in races I guess being thin!

I have thought about getting a Garmin 305. Maybe my Christmas present this year.
JDF
Non-Stroller-Still Crazy
 posted: 7/14/2008 at 8:53 PM
Yea I had trouble in both of the 10 milers I ran last year. I think I had a 1:11 and a 1:13 for those. It was pretty hot for both of them(~80 degrees and VERY SUNNY). Our run Saturday was not quite that fast but it was close. It was also MUCH hillier and we were running most of that on single track!

As far as the weight goes. Yes it does make a huge difference. I pigged out over the fourth and I have actually put on 11 pounds since then. Man, 163 feels a whole lot heavier than my racing weight of 152. At 6 foot 4 it also helps to be light and have long legs. That is most of the reason why I can run fast downhill. When I “stride it out” I can hold some pretty good speed. However, I struggle going up steep hills with my long stride.

I would definitely say get the 305 if you find it for around $150 again(Amazon had it for that last fall). I tried the new 405 the other day and it SUX! The new touch/drag control is too awkward and it is bigger than it looks in the pictures. Just stick with the 305. It is a quality piece of equipment.
http://runningahead.com/profiles/69d214e40d824ad0b0a73c925d655a13
JDF
Non-Stroller-Still Crazy
 posted: 7/16/2008 at 3:53 PM
modified: 7/16/2008 at 3:54 PM
Here is a nice little workout that I have been doing 3 times a week over the last two weeks. This is in preparation for several 5K races and a 1 mile road race.

I can already see a huge difference in my ability to sustain my closing speed. Basically the workout is a 2 mile tempo run down to the track. 4 quarter mile sprints with 2-5 minute breathers, and then a 2 mile jog back to the house.

The only problem is that I have to switch to 10 mile training soon. I have only two weeks after the mile race to get ready for the 10 mile race!

http://tinyurl.com/5zmrax

I hope to break 19:00 in everyone of the 8 5k races I will run in this fall.
http://runningahead.com/profiles/69d214e40d824ad0b0a73c925d655a13


Forums  > Racing  > Goal of sub 19 minute 5k

Feedback  |  Help
© 2005 – 2009 RunningAHEAD.com. All rights reserved.