(Women) 10 Round Numbers- how many of these can you run in 2012?

RayCun

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

a||||| |||||
b||| |||| |||



These are all "10 Round Numbers" that a common-or-garden female club runner should be able to hit at some stage in their career. Rather than go with ranking, or points, or multiple tables, or whatever, this thread is primarily about hitting these targets, and a bit of comment on what it took for you to hit them.

Pisco Sour

RayCun wrote: »

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

a||||| |||||
b||| |||| |||



These are all "10 Round Numbers" that a common-or-garden female club runner should be able to hit at some stage in their career. Rather than go with ranking, or points, or multiple tables, or whatever, this thread is primarily about hitting these targets, and a bit of comment on what it took for you to hit them.

Yeh probably a good idea if it gets more women trying the shorter distances.

The marathon target here is certainly far far softer for women than the respective target is for men. The 400 target would also be softer, with a 59 for a man roughly equivalent to a 66 for a woman.

The 800m, 5k and 10k are obviously harder for women though so that balances it out. Still though, that 800 target is easy and most people should pick off that at least.

EDIT: I misread the marathon target here to be 3hrs40. Scratch what I said above so about that.

rainbow kirby

Serious question - why are the 3k, 5k and 10k goals at the same pace?

RayCun

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Serious question - why are the 3k, 5k and 10k goals at the same pace?

12 minutes is rounder than 11

Same as in the men's list - 5k and 10k are the same pace, 1/2 and full marathons, 5 mile and 10 mile. It just means the 3k target is easier than the 10k.

pconn062

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Serious question - why are the 3k, 5k and 10k goals at the same pace?

Hmmm, it's a tough one, I think a 20 minute 5k is very achievable for most decent women runners, not as sure about the 10k, what do you think?

Pisco Sour

The real restriction with all of this is the criteria of "round numbers". D'Pop got the original targets fairly close together, with the exception of the 5K and the 800m (which would be a recovery jog to most people reaching the other targets). But on these tables it seems to be done just by guess work, and no real knowledge has gone into it.

In an ideal world, these would be my targets:

Men:

400m: 60 secs
800m: 2:15
Mile : 5 mins
3000m : 10 mins
5000m : 18 mins
5 Mile : 30 mins
10000m : 40 mins
10 Mile : 60 mins
Half : 1:20
Full : 3 hours

Women:

400m: 70 secs
800m: 2:30
Mile : 6 mins
3000m : 12 mins
5000m : 21 mins
5 Mile : 35 mins
10000m : 45 mins
10 Mile : 70 mins
Half : 1:40
Full : 3:30

Obviously some are stronger targets than others, but they are much more in line with each other.

However, the Round Number thing really restricts us here a bit.

RayCun

04072511 wrote: »

However, the Round Number thing really restricts us here a bit.

Round numbers are milestones. A 19 minute 5k is a better performance than a 20, but I don't think I'll care about it as much as I did about breaking 20 minutes. Same with you and a 60 second 400m - you're not going to name your log "aiming for a sub-59 400m" because it's not such a big deal. Same with all the marathon runners who set themselves the challenge of going sub-3 or sub-4.

Pisco Sour

RayCun wrote: »

Round numbers are milestones. A 19 minute 5k is a better performance than a 20, but I don't think I'll care about it as much as I did about breaking 20 minutes. Same with you and a 60 second 400m - you're not going to name your log "aiming for a sub-59 400m" because it's not such a big deal. Same with all the marathon runners who set themselves the challenge of going sub-3 or sub-4.

Funny you should say that, I was thinking of getting it changed from "Sub 60 400m" to "From 58 to 55" or something like that.

A milestone is a target somebody sets in their head. Sub 59 was a bigger deal for me in the end than Sub 60, and it became very important to me after getting the sub 60, and indeed it took a few failed attempts to get it right.

What ever way you look at it though, 3 minutes is not a milestone for 800m, men or women.

pconn062

^^^^

I think some of your targets are still flawed though, 45 mins for a 10k, 7.15 pace and then 70 minutes for 10 mile? To be honest I think the round numbers are fine, if some of them are a bit soft it doesn't really matter, there is nothing to stop you running well under the targets.

* In relation to 0407xxxx post.

Pisco Sour

pconn062 wrote: »

^^^^

I think some of your targets are still flawed though, 45 mins for a 10k, 7.15 pace and then 70 minutes for 10 mile? To be honest I think the round numbers are fine, if some of them are a bit soft it doesn't really matter, there is nothing to stop you running well under the targets.

* In relation to 0407xxxx post.

Yeh as I said some are easier than the others, but they'd be a lot more in line with each other. As it stands we currently have some big outliers.

robinph

04072511 wrote: »

As it stands we currently have some big outliers.

But that is good, in both tables of targets.

If none of them appear even vaguely achievable why would you bother. No point in having them all at the same level as that defeats the whole purpose, these threads are not about figuring out equivalent performances, it's about running round number target times.

HelenAnne

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
b||| |||| |||



OK, since I sort of requested this (and thanks very much) I'm putting my name in. I actually don't think I'll hit any this year, but they're something to aim for!

RayCun

HelenAnne wrote: »

OK, since I sort of requested this (and thanks very much) I'm putting my name in. I actually don't think I'll hit any this year, but they're something to aim for!

Where do you think you'll go closest? What races are you targeting, and what kind of training are you doing?

HelenAnne

I don't do much targeted training at all, but I race 1-3 miles pretty regularly, so that's sort of like speed training!

Last spring mile race time was 7.23 (my first mile race), this year my best time so far is 6.29, so I MIGHT get that down to 6 within another 12 months ... (maybe). In the 5k, i did the St Patrick's MBS one in 2011 in 26.30 and this year I did 22.41, so I'm a long way from 20 mins, but my times are coming down gradually!

menoscemo

HelenAnne wrote: »

I don't do much targeted training at all, but I race 1-3 miles pretty regularly, so that's sort of like speed training!

Last spring mile race time was 7.23 (my first mile race), this year my best time so far is 6.29, so I MIGHT get that down to 6 within another 12 months ... (maybe). In the 5k, i did the St Patrick's MBS one in 2011 in 26.30 and this year I did 22.41, so I'm a long way from 20 mins, but my times are coming down gradually!

Are you based near dublin?
There are a lot of flat, fast 5 mile races coming up (BHAA races in RTE and Duboyne, and the terenure 5 miler). Your 5k times indicates that you are at a level to target a sub 35 min 5 miler. IMO that is the easiest of the targets in the ladies list. You should give it a go!!

HelenAnne

Hmm, I was over 38 minutes in the Raheny 5 this year, so don't know if I'll do sub 35 any time soon! But will aim for it. Thanks!

menoscemo

HelenAnne wrote: »

Hmm, I was over 38 minutes in the Raheny 5 this year, so don't know if I'll do sub 35 any time soon! But will aim for it. Thanks!

well it's defnitely the softest of the 'womens' times . Your 5k time is not far off 7 min/mile so with a little training/practise it should be the easiest for you to achieve.

Pisco Sour

menoscemo wrote: »

Are you based near dublin?
There are a lot of flat, fast 5 mile races coming up (BHAA races in RTE and Duboyne, and the terenure 5 miler). Your 5k times indicates that you are at a level to target a sub 35 min 5 miler. IMO that is the easiest of the targets in the ladies list. You should give it a go!!

No way. The 800m time is the softest.

caseyjones1

I'd like to join in for this. What do I need to do?

Krusty_Clown

caseyjones1 wrote: »

I'd like to join in for this. What do I need to do?

Run!

pconn062

caseyjones1 wrote: »

I'd like to join in for this. What do I need to do?

Yeah just as Krusty says, try and hit the targets over the different distances in the table and slot them in when you do! Some of them should be quite easy for you.

caseyjones1

I never stop fecking running! What I meant was how do I edit the table

caseyjones1

I'm aiming for sub 35 in the BHAA 5 mile race next weekend so I'll come back on after that.

pconn062

caseyjones1 wrote: »

I never stop fecking running! What I meant was how do I edit the table

Ah I see, just click quote on the opening post and you will be able to stick your name and you time into the table, and click post. Just remember to remove the quote tags and all of Ray's text before you post as well.

caseyjones1

pconn062 wrote: »

Ah I see, just click quote on the opening post and you will be able to stick your name and you time into the table, and click post. Just remember to remove the quote tags and all of Ray's text before you post as well.

Thanks
I should have said above 'all going well' I'll be back on next week, talk about getting ahead of yourself lol

Krusty_Clown

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||


Too late. You're committed now.

Just quote the latest version of the table, add your info, and delete the opening [ quote ] and [ / quote] tags. Good luck next weekend.

ladytri

Good luck with the targets ladies! I'll be watching this with envy interest!

caseyjones1

Thanks for that! (I think)
We've a track opening in town here in a couple of weeks, so can't wait to try some of the shorter ones down there. Love a bit of healthy competition I do

Marthastew

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew

I'm delighted to discover that I have run one of these but I'm table-challenged and I can't figure out how to write in my result in the correct column as the table looks jumbled when I quote it (sorry:o, I know this is very bascic stuff). Can somebody (sorry Ray:)) tell me how to put in 1.38.37 in the Half marathon, or should that be 98.37?

My last three 5 mile races have all been 35.XX so this will also help give me the push I need to get under 35

Marthastew

Marthastew wrote: »

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew
I'm delighted to discover that I have run one of these but I'm table-challenged and I can't figure out how to write in my result in the correct column as the table looks jumbled when I quote it (sorry:o, I know this is very bascic stuff). Can somebody (sorry Ray:)) tell me how to put in 1.38.37 in the Half marathon, or should that be 98.37?

My last three 5 mile races have all been 35.XX so this will also help give me the push I need to get under 35

I just rechecked my results from the Irish Runner 5 Mile last year and joy of joys my chip time was..... 34.59:D,
at this rate I should have that table full before I cook the dinner this evening....

(Note to self, learn what my PBs are)

RacoonQueen

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew||||||34:59|||98:37|

RayCun

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew|||||||||98:37|


You have to run the time this year.
Every Jan 1st the slate is wiped clean, and you have to prove yourself all over again...

Marthastew

RayCun wrote: »

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew||||||||||
You have to run the time this year.
Every Jan 1st the slate is wiped clean, and you have to prove yourself all over again...

Oops....well then I have a completely empty slate.....
It was fun while it lasted:)...
Off out for a run to console myslef now.....

claralara

Name|400m<70 secs|800m<3min|1 mile<6 min|3k<12min|5k<20min|5mile<35min|10k<40m|10miles<70min|Half Marathon<100mins|Marathon<200min

HelenAnne||||| |||||
caseyjones1||| |||| |||
Marthastew||||||||||
claralara||||||34:47||||

claralara

Awesome!! Attempting sub 20 for 5k this Saturday, and sub 1:40 for HM the following weekend. Not sure how successful I'll be but this might give me a kick up the bum...:D

Marthastew

claralara wrote: »

Awesome!! Attempting sub 20 for 5k this Saturday, and sub 1:40 for HM the following weekend. Not sure how successful I'll be but this might give me a kick up the bum...:D

I think we may need to move you over to the "(Men) 10 round numbers..." to give the rest of us a chance on this chart:D:D:D. If you weren't such a gorgeous super-model I'd be wondering......

Best of luck this Saturday (you'll easliy break 20:)) and we'll see you in the distance in Kildare

hot to trot

Well I wont be on this table any time soon , or ever.
But good idea. Perhaps I could set an equivalent table for my standard( or lack thereof) and age

caseyjones1

hot to trot wrote: »

Well I wont be on this table any time soon , or ever.
But good idea. Perhaps I could set an equivalent table for my standard( or lack thereof) and age

To be honest I'm hopeful for the sub 35 five mile but not sure I'll get any of the others but sure I'll give it a go. What age are you? Is that question allowed? I'm 35.

hot to trot

Nearly 47. late starter and had long time out with recent injury. But chomping at the bit to get back

HelenAnne

Give it a go, hot to trot! I really don't think I'll make any this year. I did 48.35 in the samsung 10k the other night, WAY slower than the 40 min target BUT I did 58 mins in my 2nd ever 10k in May 2011, so I'm improving all the time.

The only one I think I could MAYBE do this year is the sub-35 5 mile, but in the next year or so I'd like to try for the sub 20 5k and so on.

I really just have my name in the table to show willing, but also it gives me targets to aim for. Join us!!

(I'm nearly 37, running a bit since 2010, running more regularly and with a running group since Feb 2011)

RayCun

hot to trot wrote: »

But good idea. Perhaps I could set an equivalent table for my standard( or lack thereof) and age

If we had tables for all the standards and age groups on boards... we would have a lot of tables. If you want to set yourself some different targets that's fine, but I don't want 'M40' threads and 'W50' threads, and 'beginners' threads and 'experts' threads, and so on... The other table has times that an average (or good) male club runner should be able to run (or aspire to). This table has times that a female club runner should target. Two is enough.

There is a Best of 2012 thread that everyone can post in (and more people should). There are no qualifying standards for posting a time there, and everyone gets to enter their category. When you run a time you're pleased with, post it up there. Give other people a time to try and beat, and pick targets for yourself from the times already there...

hot to trot

HelenAnne wrote: »

Give it a go, hot to trot! I really don't think I'll make any this year. I did 48.35 in the samsung 10k the other night, WAY slower than the 40 min target BUT I did 58 mins in my 2nd ever 10k in May 2011, so I'm improving all the time.

Well will try to get something written down but wont humiliate myself by putting name down on a table LOL

Kurt Godel

RayCun wrote: »

If we had tables for all the standards and age groups on boards... we would have a lot of tables. If you want to set yourself some different targets that's fine, but I don't want 'M40' threads and 'W50' threads, and 'beginners' threads and 'experts' threads, and so on... The other table has times that an average (or good) male club runner should be able to run (or aspire to). This table has times that a female club runner should target. Two is enough.

There is a Best of 2012 thread that everyone can post in (and more people should). There are no qualifying standards for posting a time there, and everyone gets to enter their category. When you run a time you're pleased with, post it up there. Give other people a time to try and beat, and pick targets for yourself from the times already there...

:D

Krusty_Clown

RayCun wrote: »

but I don't want 'M40' threads and 'W50' threads, and 'beginners' threads and 'experts' threads, and so on...

Surely what 'you' want is not very relevant? I thought we were all about the 'we'.

digger2d2

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

RayCun wrote: »

but I don't want 'M40' threads and 'W50' threads, and 'beginners' threads and 'experts' threads, and so on...

Surely what 'you' want is not very relevant? I thought we were all about the 'we'.

Pisco Sour

Good to see this challenge taking off. Anyone have any aspirations of doing the shorter distance events, the 400 and 800?

The 400 time is challenging, but I think everyone here should be able to knock off that 800 time.

Marthastew

04072511 wrote: »

Good to see this challenge taking off. Anyone have any aspirations of doing the shorter distance events, the 400 and 800?

The 400 time is challenging, but I think everyone here should be able to knock off that 800 time.

Presumabaly these have to be run in a race, you can't just head down to a track on your own with your Garmin and then pop your time in after?

I'd definitely give the 800 a shot, but that's only because you keep saying it should be easy:)

RayCun

BHAA have a track evening in Trinity next month, an 800 and a mile. Ideal opportunity to tick off the 800 time.

It's only official race times for the table. If you run a marathon and get a split at halfway, that's fine to use. But you can't just take your Garmin reading, they're not accurate enough.

rainbow kirby

Marthastew wrote: »

I'd definitely give the 800 a shot, but that's only because you keep saying it should be easy:)

Seriously, you'd have no problem with running under 3 minutes for it. I'm slow as hell and I ran 3:10 for the first 800 of my mile PB, with a massive headwind down the home straight...

Kurt Godel

Marthastew wrote: »

Presumabaly these have to be run in a race, you can't just head down to a track on your own with your Garmin and then pop your time in after?

Course you can. Nothing wrong with a stopwatch and a track. Timetrials are fine. It's all about getting runners to try a few more distances, rather than just ticking a box.

hot to trot

Ray I said I should do table for myself , Didnt suggest I would put it up here. Relax man :cool: