Login

Goal of sub 19 minute 5k (Read 2820 times)

Quote from mikeymike on 7/22/2008 at 10:27 PM:
.

Aside from a few workouts over the last few weeks I'm convinced that for most recreational racers, 5K training and marathon training should be basically identical.


Lydiard said the same thing, and he didn't just apply it to recreational racers. All his runners did months of marathon training whether their race distance was 800 meters or 26 miles. It was only after completion of this phase that they began doing workouts tailored to their specific distances.
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
Quote from Jeff on 7/22/2008 at 11:07 PM:
You don't know the pace you should run until you are finished with the run.

Recipe for a 20 minute tempo run:

1. Start out faster than your easy day pace, at a pace that you feel you can conservatively manage to hold strongly for 20 minutes.
2. 10 minutes in, if you're feeling comfortable but not fast or hard, pick it up a bit. If you're feeling like you're going to have to struggle to make it, then back off a bit.
3. When you're finished with your run, calculate your pace by dividing the total time by the distance. That's the pace you should have run on that day.

It really is that simple. If you want a mikeymike 40 minute tempo, then do it for 40 minutes at a manageable pace.


Oh my I like this way of training alot better than clock watching.

Last night I went down to the local track to run 4 x 1km in around 4 minutes with 2 minutes rest. This is based on the Tinman CV pace that is being preached often. I did it 5 days before my record 5k race last month so since it was 5 days before my next 5k I put it on my calendar.

I ran my 1st 1000 meters in 3:59...Tinman probably suggests I should run it in 4:05-4:07 but I haven't done any fast stuff in a while and am a fool so I hit it harder than I should have. I took 2 minutes rest then ran the next kilometer in 3:56. Now I was sweating and wanting to quit so after my next 2 minutes rest I went off the track and ran 4 minutes at a comfortably hard pace on the grass...that felt alot better. I finished up with another 4 minute effort on grass....then 3 X 45 seconds on the road at my perceived mile pace.

The 45 second efforts were effortless. I was gliding at 6 minute per mile pace. Running without distance markers is really nice. I am agreeing that runs should not be timed so much but should be run by feel. I am a stat geek though as you probably all know by my reporting mile splits.
Quote from mikeymike on 7/22/2008 at 10:27 PM:
...I am so not a marathoner...


Sorry mikey, I gotta call BS on this one...your race reports say otherwise.



Quote from mikeymike on 7/22/2008 at 10:27 PM:
The training we hobbyists are doing is never ideal but I think the reason most of us run our best 5Ks and 10Ks off of marathon training is that when we do marathon training we get closer to ideal 5K training.

Aside from a few workouts over the last few weeks I'm convinced that for most recreational racers, 5K training and marathon training should be basically identical.


This finally dawned on me this Spring, I was running the Frozen Shamrock three miler in February and thought my Garmin was FUBARed when I saw my pace. Wearing down the soles of your running shoes with varied marathon training really can translate to faster times at shorter race distances.

My PR last fall was 20:40, and I was pretty doubtful about breaking 20:00 this year. I managed to take five seconds off my current PR last night with a 19:05 finish. I'd like to knock that 5 seconds off, and I think I'll be able to do it but my primary focus remains my marathon plan.
Ed

Tuesday Good Times 5K series in Lowell, MA

HTFU

"The truth is that there is nothing noble in being superior to somebody else. The only real nobility is in being superior to your former self."
Whitney Young
Quote from MichiganFlyer on 7/23/2008 at 12:03 PM:
Oh my I like this way of training alot better than clock watching.

Last night I went down to the local track to run 4 x 1km in around 4 minutes with 2 minutes rest. This is based on the Tinman CV pace that is being preached often. I did it 5 days before my record 5k race last month so since it was 5 days before my next 5k I put it on my calendar.

I ran my 1st 1000 meters in 3:59...Tinman probably suggests I should run it in 4:05-4:07 but I haven't done any fast stuff in a while and am a fool so I hit it harder than I should have. I took 2 minutes rest then ran the next kilometer in 3:56. Now I was sweating and wanting to quit so after my next 2 minutes rest I went off the track and ran 4 minutes at a comfortably hard pace on the grass...that felt alot better. I finished up with another 4 minute effort on grass....then 3 X 45 seconds on the road at my perceived mile pace.

The 45 second efforts were effortless. I was gliding at 6 minute per mile pace. Running without distance markers is really nice. I am agreeing that runs should not be timed so much but should be run by feel. I am a stat geek though as you probably all know by my reporting mile splits.


Michigan,

I am stats geek also but after doing so many CV paced work outs, Tinman tempos, races etc. you just know what a pace feels like or should feel like, and you will know if you are pushing beyond this effort. It is nice to have confirmation with the Garmin or time though. My Garmin had to be sent in so I am trying to run my Tinman tempos (only quality I am doing currently) by feel. I did 30 min this morning and just knew the effort I needed to be at. Felt great.

Reminds me of a 5K race last year that I went out of town and did. I forgot my damn Garmin. Ran the fastest in 3 years at that 5K. You just know your paces/effort. But I do like the pacing feature of Garmin at start of races. Keeps the speed in check.
Those who try, fail! Those who do what it takes to succeed, succeed!!
Scout7
CPT Curmudgeon
What is a Tinman tempo, and how is it any different than a regular tempo?
Amat victoria curam.

Sine labore nihil.

Dulcius ex asperis.
Longer and slower.
Non ducor, duco.
Quote from mikeymike on 7/23/2008 at 1:24 PM:
Longer and slower.


Boy, that sounds familiar. Wink

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
In search of trouble.
Scout7
CPT Curmudgeon
Quote from mikeymike on 7/23/2008 at 1:24 PM:
Longer and slower.


Than what?
Amat victoria curam.

Sine labore nihil.

Dulcius ex asperis.
Quote from Scout7 on 7/23/2008 at 1:46 PM:
Than what?

The traditional "20-minutes at LT" definition of a tempo run.

mta: and I'm pretty sure Tinman didn't invent the concept.
Quote from Scout7 on 7/23/2008 at 1:18 PM:
What is a Tinman tempo, and how is it any different than a regular tempo?


http://www.therunzone.com/BasicTerms.html

Tinman Tempo Running – A training pace that optimally develops aerobic endurance. It lies at the high end of moderate (effort). I’ve defined it as the pace that typically lies between 80 and 83% of your maximum aerobic pace. This means running at a pace you can hold in an all-out 2.5-3.5 hour race if you are well conditioned. If you have not been running much distance, then such a time frame has little meaning to you. No worries just use Tinman’s rule of thumb for determining tempo pace – add 1 minute per mile to your 3k-pace! To play it safe, add 1 minute per mile to your 5k race-pace.

For several years the running community used Dr. Jack T. Daniels’ “tempo” pace which was approximately equal to 1-hour race pace. In 2002-2004, I made it known on letsrun.com, a famous running website, that tempos could be run at other paces, and I clearly defined a way to find the other paces.

With no intention to discredit Jack’s method, I offered information about 3 different tempo-running paces I used in my own running and coaching since the 1980s: long, medium, and short tempos. Further, I shared my method of finding those paces: divide 5k-pace by .87, .90, or .93. Long tempos, I said, could be run 60-80 minutes, medium 40-60 minutes and short 20-40 minutes, depending upon one’s ability and training level.

Right away, many people discussed the idea of having various length and speed tempos. Many successful runners shared the fact that they had, during their own careers, often run at a moderate to somewhat strong paces for several miles. Indeed, if one looked back to the late-great runners who set records from decades gone by, one could find several examples of runners who were running in so-called “no-man’s” land and reaping benefits, none-the-less. They ran at or close to marathon pace or slightly slower because it produced results – and they didn’t even have a fancy term for it like “tempo run.”

My first coach, Mr. Mick, in the late 1970s, was a huge promoter of tempos –though he called them fast distance runs. We ran them at least once a week. Even as a 12-year old, I was running a 5-6 mile tempo run every Monday. My coach did not want us to run long and slow – saying it is fine for joggers, but not for real runners. He told us often that running at 1-1.5 minutes a mile slower than one’s 1-mile race pace will do more for endurance than any other running pace. I believed him. He was nearly 40 years old and he could still run a mile in under 5 minutes – and he only ran 3 times per week – about 4-5 miles, during the warm months.

In high school, I had the privilege of talking with him and learning more – he was our academic guidance counselor. During my junior and senior years I scheduled appointments to talk about what colleges and careers. Invariably we strayed to the subject of running and training.

Mr. Mick talked about how his best racing resulted from two specific workouts: a long, fast distance run and 1-mile repeats. He ran in the mid-19s for 4-miles over cross-country terrain in the early 1960s, so I was very impressed. And, the important thing is he never ran faster than 60 seconds for the quarter-mile nor faster than 4:23 in the mile in his life, despite running 20 x 440 yards as fast as possible on a regular basis during track season. He simply lacked natural speed!

At the end of each summer, after doing his two key workouts, the long tempo and repeat miles, Mr. Mick could run 7 x 1 mile in 4:50 on grass with a 1 minute recovery. During his first month of cross-country his senior year, he ran 19:48, 19:32, and 19:28 for 4-miles, only finishing second once – to an Olympic caliber runner from Southern Illinois University’s team, by way of South Africa.

Tinman
Scout7
CPT Curmudgeon
That's a lot of words to say that a Tinman tempo run is just a tempo run.

Too much science talk.

Run at a pace faster than your easy pace. Hold it for a period of time. Then stop.
Amat victoria curam.

Sine labore nihil.

Dulcius ex asperis.
Tinman also says that 20 min of Tinman tempo running is equivalent to 40 min of slow/comfortable running or a 1:2 ratio depending on time spent at that pace. He generally defines the pace as 60 sec slower than current 3K race pace but 1 min slower than current 5K race pace is close enough. Personally, these have been very very beneficial to me in place of the very hard tempos I used to do. In fact, just about everything I have tried from Tinman and recommend and tried with the runners I coach provide very strong results.
Those who try, fail! Those who do what it takes to succeed, succeed!!
Bundle up, it's cold
Quote from Scout7 on 7/23/2008 at 2:19 PM:
That's a lot of words to say that a Tinman tempo run is just a tempo run.

Too much science talk.

Run at a pace faster than your easy pace. Hold it for a period of time. Then stop.


This is a free preview of the upcoming book from the Chia Running Institute.
Drew

Hyperbole is the best.
Scout7
CPT Curmudgeon
Quote from Tchuck on 7/23/2008 at 2:22 PM:
Tinman also says that 20 min of Tinman tempo running is equivalent to 40 min of slow/comfortable running or a 1:2 ratio depending on time spent at that pace. He generally defines the pace as 60 sec slower than current 3K race pace but 1 min slower than current 5K race pace is close enough. Personally, these have been very very beneficial to me in place of the very hard tempos I used to do. In fact, just about everything I have tried from Tinman and recommend and tried with the runners I coach provide very strong results.


So, you run somewhat harder than your easy runs, right?
Amat victoria curam.

Sine labore nihil.

Dulcius ex asperis.
Scout,

I am with you on simplifying things. I think we do overcomplicate things. Somewhat harder is a broad term though. If I run a 5K at 6:30 pace and do most training runs at 8:30 pace. Well, 8:05 would be somewhat harder. Probably wouldn't yield much of an additional training stimulus unless a long run held at this pace, but me personally I can notice this 8:05 pace being somewhat harder than 8:30 pace. Today I ran around 7:20 - 7:30 for 25 minutes and last 5 minutes a bit harder. This is more than "somewhat harder". It is work but not straining like a sustained hard tempo may be.

I get your point though and think the progressive tempo is an awesome work out and great way to do the tempos. If one can go 30 - 40 min and start comfortably hard and progress a bit - they have nailed it and prevent that initial potential anaerobic stimulus and overload that can basically ruin the purpose of the work out.
Those who try, fail! Those who do what it takes to succeed, succeed!!