Correlation between 5K ,10K, HM and Marathon times

average_runner · 26-09-2018 9:35pm

Safiri wrote: »

It's not undermining the importance of sessions, sessions are important for sharpening if you have a goal race, they will make you faster. I'm probably coming across all anti-workout here but that's not really the case. I think the cake analogy is probably the best methaphor for this. Endurance makes up the cake and race specific intervals provide the icing. Race pace workouts polish your endurance. But if you've got no real endurance, you are only polishing a turd for lack of a better analogy.

This is brilliant stuff. But when should the icing start?

When you say easy how far are you talking about? Same for med long and long runs?

Are we saying intervals every week might not be a good thing but instead the mileage is more of a benefit?

Swashbuckler · 26-09-2018 9:45pm

Safiri wrote:

It's not undermining the importance of sessions, sessions are important for sharpening if you have a goal race, they will make you faster. I'm probably coming across all anti-workout here but that's not really the case. I think the cake analogy is probably the best methaphor for this. Endurance makes up the cake and race specific intervals provide the icing. Race pace workouts polish your endurance. But if you've got no real endurance, you are only polishing a turd for lack of a better analogy.

Haha great analogy. OK I'm a little less confused. So when people reference runners overcomplicating their plans its because they're trying to fine tune but with very little base endurance. So for the majority of people, simply building the base endurance will show big gains.

This running craic is complicated.

Murph_D · 26-09-2018 10:06pm

There are loads of runners who pile on miles and have tons of endurance but no speed at all because they neglect the ‘icing’. It doesn’t matter how many miles some of these guys do, they will never get beyond a certain level, which isn’t very high (measured by race times). Mileage is probably the most important single factor, but a cake with no icing isn’t very exciting.

Sacksian · 26-09-2018 10:36pm

Murph_D wrote: »

There are loads of runners who pile on miles and have tons of endurance but no speed at all because they neglect the ‘icing’. It doesn’t matter how many miles some of these guys do, they will never get beyond a certain level, which isn’t very high (measured by race times). Mileage is probably the most important single factor, but a cake with no icing isn’t very exciting.

I realise I'm in a minority here but I've always felt running form and efficiency is massively undervalued amongst people taking up the sport later in life. IMO, good economy makes it easier to build endurance and I think you can get that from practising running quickly. Kipchoge had pretty good 3000m & 5000m pbs before he turned to the marathon - and John Travers ran a decent half-marathon last week, less than two months after winning the 1500m national title...

Having said that, I'm currently doing just one session a week and lots of easy miles as I attempt to work on my endurance over the winter!

Lazare · 27-09-2018 11:10am

I'm one of those late in life runners. Higher mileage was/is definitely the answer for me.

Average mileage now is double what it was this time last year and 4x what it was outside of marathon training. Last year's MP is now the quick end of my easy pace. Have shaved chunks off 10 mile and half times which were hard got themselves. Last year's 10k pace is now 10m pace, and current half pace is quicker than last year's 10m pace.

Peaking at 40 mpw which isn't even that much and I've seen massive gains in fitness. Large majority of it is easy stuff.

Miles miles and more miles is the key to the door.

Safiri · 27-09-2018 3:59pm

Murph_D wrote: »

There are loads of runners who pile on miles and have tons of endurance but no speed at all because they neglect the ‘icing’. It doesn’t matter how many miles some of these guys do, they will never get beyond a certain level, which isn’t very high (measured by race times). Mileage is probably the most important single factor, but a cake with no icing isn’t very exciting.

I'm not disagreeing with that by any means. But I think you will find that the vast vast majority of people are doing more race specific intervals than focusing on endurance. Exhibit A is the presence of race pace intervals all year round in most peoples training. They should only be used sparingly at certain times of the year as they are a peaking mechanism and can only sharpen your endurance to a certain extent as it is directly tied to aerobic fitness. When you focus on these all year round, endurance starts to suffer and your peak falls with it. For many of those, the problem isn't that stopped improving from mileage, it's the structure of their training that caused the plateau. That's why it's called peaking, it goes up to a certain point but falls again after.

Race pace intervals are not the answer for those endurance monsters or older runners. It's pure speed workouts along with good structured training. When I say pure speed workouts carried out during base period along with endurance workouts. Examples would be:

8-12 second Hill sprints
Strides
100's &200's
Flying 30's and 60"s
Plyometrics
Weights

Anything that improves explosive power basically. These should done at the same time as you are building mileage during base phase. That's how you improve speed.

Sacksian wrote: »

I realise I'm in a minority here but I've always felt running form and efficiency is massively undervalued amongst people taking up the sport later in life. IMO, good economy makes it easier to build endurance and I think you can get that from practising running quickly. Kipchoge had pretty good 3000m & 5000m pbs before he turned to the marathon - and John Travers ran a decent half-marathon last week, less than two months after winning the 1500m national title...

Having said that, I'm currently doing just one session a week and lots of easy miles as I attempt to work on my endurance over the winter!

I never got the slant that high mileage destroys your form. High mileage is proven to improve both running economy and form as economy is basically how much energy it takes you to run a certain pace. No doubt that fast running improves technique and economy as well. Look at the kenyans for instance, Beautiful strides and incredible running economy despite the fact that most of them never get any formal coaching until their late teens and have been running high mileage for years at that point.

It's not simply a case of one is the only way, both high mileage and pure speed work improve economy and technique and neither should be fully ignored. They can both co-exist.

John Travers for instance is also coached by Gerry Kiernan, a high mileage endurance advocate if there ever was one

Testosterscone · 27-09-2018 4:32pm

ultrapercy wrote: »

I think runners at our level, serious recreational, are most guilty of greatly over complicating things. It happens at elite level too with coaches like Salazar but I think that may be a diversionary tactic on his behalf.
Running is simple more miles =faster running. This is an uncomfortable truth in a society that constantly seeks the magic bullet. Id bet my house that if every single person in this forum upped their mileage gradually over a medium to long period of time they would be faster accross every distance even if those miles were at a very easy pace.
All runners feel they lack speed but almost universally what they lack is endurance.
Im not saying speedwork and coaching and all that technical knowledge is useless but there is a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Looking ar Eliud Kipcohge training in the lead up to last years Berlin marathon what stood out was how basic it was. High mileage, a lot of it easier than MY easy pace, a hard long run each week and some fast running. He wouldnt have needed much explaination or clarification from his coach, he may well have said "just run"
20 mins running is far more benelicial than 20 mins wondering how to run.

It's funny I am guessing that there are a few who would see some of the sessions that I prescribe as overly complicated yet despite that I would very much agree with alot of what you say.

The only caveat I would put is that if everyone upped there mileage many would break down and others would run with such poor form (effectively a shuffle) that would taper off the gains made through the increase in volume as a stressor.

We are a sedentary society and many coming into the sport have never learned how to run fast. It becomes broken down into race specific reps/ easy running many running too long in the first but very little of the latter. The Kenyan example for base building in younger life is a bit of a misnomer as well just because there is lots of running doesn't mean it is easy. Kids will be kids and run fast when they can, as such it would be more akin to fartlek being a diet of Kenyan kids over easy base building. Irish/UK kids did this back in the day to when you were booted out of the house for the day armed with a football/hurl etc and you spent hours in a cycle of sprinting and recovering. Nowadays majority come to the sport late and never experience running fast (5k paced being bottom) as such form

Magic bullets are certainly sought after to the point where sometimes coaches have to dress up basic stuff to convince people. Sometimes a complicated session is simply broken down to prevent someone running too hard for too long for there level.

Volume should never be ignored but simply throwing miles at underlying problems won't fix it either.

Safiri · 27-09-2018 4:52pm

Testosterscone wrote: »

It's funny I am guessing that there are a few who would see some of the sessions that I prescribe as overly complicated yet despite that I would very much agree with alot of what you say.

The only caveat I would put is that if everyone upped there mileage many would break down and others would run with such poor form (effectively a shuffle) that would taper off the gains made through the increase in volume as a stressor.

We are a sedentary society and many coming into the sport have never learned how to run fast. It becomes broken down into race specific reps/ easy running many running too long in the first but very little of the latter. The Kenyan example for base building in younger life is a bit of a misnomer as well just because there is lots of running doesn't mean it is easy. Kids will be kids and run fast when they can, as such it would be more akin to fartlek being a diet of Kenyan kids over easy base building. Irish/UK kids did this back in the day to when you were booted out of the house for the day armed with a football/hurl etc and you spent hours in a cycle of sprinting and recovering. Nowadays majority come to the sport late and never experience running fast (5k paced being bottom) as such form

Magic bullets are certainly sought after to the point where sometimes coaches have to dress up basic stuff to convince people. Sometimes a complicated session is simply broken down to prevent someone running too hard for too long for there level.

Volume should never be ignored but simply throwing miles at underlying problems won't fix it either.

Why can't fartleks be used in an Irish base building? Why can't the structure of young Kenyans be implemented into late to life runners? Many already try to replicate high volume/high intensity of training, why can't they replicate the easier training that got the Kenyans in a position to do that high volume/high intensity training in the first place. Looking at young Kenyans is not a misnomer, it's exactly what people should be doing.

Typical Irish late to life runner training goes like this:

Add mileage and intensity at the same time. Both mileage and intensity peaks are reached at the same time. When people are marathon training, they hit pea k mileage of the whole training cycle 4 weeks out(for most, the most mileage they have run in their lives) and this also coincides with the time intensity is highest. This is much more of an injury concern than higher mileage at lower intensity. You can still run fast at low intensity and that should be the starting point for everyone.

Theres a reason proper training is structured like it is with volume being highest during base training when intensity is low. And then mileage being cut back when intensity is added. It's common sense. You don't run 30k before you can walk 20.

Sacksian · 27-09-2018 4:56pm

Safiri wrote: »

I never got the slant that high mileage destroys your form. High mileage is proven to improve both running economy and form as economy is basically how much energy it takes you to run a certain pace. No doubt that fast running improves technique and economy as well. Look at the kenyans for instance, Beautiful strides and incredible running economy despite the fact that most of them never get any formal coaching until their late teens and have been running high mileage for years at that point.

It's not simply a case of one is the only way, both high mileage and pure speed work improve economy and technique and neither should be fully ignored. They can both co-exist.

John Travers for instance is also coached by Gerry Kiernan, a high mileage endurance advocate if there ever was one

Hi Safiri - I'm not having a go at high mileage (I know better at this stage than to poke the volume bear!). Just making the point that, generally, efficiency and running as a skill seems to be undervalued amongst people taking up running later in life.

It's just another dimension to think about and I think it's useful for anyone reading to hear other perspectives (especially if they find high mileage mentally or physically difficult, as I do).

Ultimately, whatever gets someone out the door consistently and keeps them engaged and enjoying their running is the best approach, even if it is sub-optimal or theoretically imperfect.

p.s. John was floating around a track before he was coached by Jerry!!

Safiri · 27-09-2018 5:01pm

Sacksian wrote: »

Hi Safiri - I'm not having a go at high mileage (I know better at this stage than to poke the volume bear!). Just making the point that, generally, efficiency and running as a skill seems to be undervalued amongst people taking up running later in life.

It's just another dimension to think about and I think it's useful for anyone reading to hear other perspectives (especially if they find high mileage mentally or physically difficult, as I do).

Ultimately, whatever gets someone out the door consistently and keeps them engaged and enjoying their running is the best approach, even if it is sub-optimal or theoretically imperfect.

p.s. John was floating around a track before he was coached by Jerry!!

I know, it just seems like we are all completely discounting others opinions when that's not really the case:). We are basically arguing which way the prioties should be shifted.

Testosterscone · 27-09-2018 5:14pm

Safiri wrote: »

Why can't fartleks be used in an Irish base building? Why can't the structure of young Kenyans be implemented into late to life runners? Many already try to replicate high volume/high intensity of training, why can't they replicate the easier training that got the Kenyans in a position to do that high volume/high intensity training in the first place. Looking at young Kenyans is not a misnomer, it's exactly what people should be doing.

Typical Irish late to life runner training goes like this:

Add mileage and intensity at the same time. Both mileage and intensity peaks are reached at the same time. When people are marathon training, they hit pea k mileage of the whole training cycle 4 weeks out(for most, the most mileage they have run in their lives) and this als o coincides with the time intensity is highest. This is much more of an injury concern than higher mileage at lower intensity. You can still run fast at low intensity and that should be the starfing point for everyone.

Theres a reason proper training is structured like it is with volume being highest during base training when intensity is low. And then mileage being cut back when intensity is added. It's common sense. You don't run 30k before you can walk 20.

Not saying it can't but through that interpretation you have gone from high volume low intensity to suddenly incremental increase in volume and intensity as the athlete progresses so it diverges from the typical interpretation of base which again there is nothing wrong with my point.

But there is so much more than an aerobic base to make a runner.

Factor in the sedentary lifestyle and you are basically trying to fit a square into a circular hole.

Teach people to run hard, Run easy, run with good form, run smart, run aggressive, tolerate discomfort.

If you never run hard or put yourself under discomfort you aren't suddenly gonna be able to do it in a race.

Kids make mistakes in there running and learn from them (hopefully) but the hyper structure means that often adults don't learn these fundamental mistakes which help them grow as an athlete. Very few athletes see the value of failing in a session (not dropping out but it not going to plan)

Running is simple (to get back to UP's point) however it is in this simplicity and the inadvertent mistakes that come from it that people develop. Runners should run more but they should run as much as there body allows while still allowing to develop overall as a runner until they can tolerate more.

To add the the analogy of the cake, it may be topped with icing but unless the balance is right within the cake then no amount of icing is gonna hide the bland substance less base.

Safiri · 27-09-2018 5:38pm

Testosterscone wrote: »

Not saying it can't but through that interpretation you have gone from high volume low intensity to suddenly incremental increase in volume and intensity as the athlete progresses so it diverges from the typical interpretation of base which again there is nothing wrong with my point.

But there is so much more than an aerobic base to make a runner.

Factor in the sedentary lifestyle and you are basically trying to fit a square into a circular hole.

Teach people to run hard, Run easy, run with good form, run smart, run aggressive, tolerate discomfort.

If you never run hard or put yourself under discomfort you aren't suddenly gonna be able to do it in a race.

Kids make mistakes in there running and learn from them (hopefully) but the hyper structure means that often adults don't learn these fundamental mistakes which help them grow as an athlete. Very few athletes see the value of failing in a session (not dropping out but it not going to plan)

Running is simple (to get back to UP's point) however it is in this simplicity and the inadvertent mistakes that come from it that people develop. Runners should run more but they should run as much as there body allows while still allowing to develop overall as a runner until they can tolerate more.

To add the the analogy of the cake, it may be topped with icing but unless the balance is right within the cake then no amount of icing is gonna hide the bland substance less base.

I'm not sure what you mean by diverging from high volume low intensity training to non-typical base building? I would say what I described over the last few posts would be typical basebuilding:

High Mileage
Fartleks
Some pure sprintwork
Tempo's
Easy runs
Steady runs etc

If you mean where I said cut back mileage when intensity was added; I meant when changing frrom base to specific training. All of the above workouts would be low to moderate effort and aerobic in nature. Base building wouldn't just be a lot ofg mileage at easy pace and that's it unless you are talking about someone just getting up off the couch for the very first time.

Testosterscone · 27-09-2018 6:04pm

Safiri wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by diverging from high volume low intensity training to non-typical base building? I would say what I described over the last few posts would be typical basebuilding:

High Mileage
Fartleks
Some pure sprintwork
Tempo's
Easy runs
Steady runs etc

If you mean where I said cut back mileage when intensity was added; I meant when changing frrom base to specific training. All of the above workouts would be low to moderate effort and aerobic in nature. Base building wouldn't just be a lot ofg mileage at easy pace and that's it unless you are talking about someone just getting up off the couch for the very first time.

Fartlek is a very catch all term, for a kid (be they American, Irish, Kenya etc) majority of times this will constitute running as hard as you can for as long and you can and they stopping and recovering or slowing down. As a result of this Fartlek can mean absolutely anything so by extension means nothing (which is fine as it will work for some and not for others depending on how each person implements it)

FWIW I am not against what you are saying here and those components are fine in a general sense for training but those included in base and an increase beyond someones level could be just as detrimental as running fast. A 7 mile tempo could be much more detrimental to training that mile paced 300m's depending on the recovery.

The main goal should always be to get a runner to maximize work capacity but no point having a 4 hour marathon running a 100 mpw till they are efficient enough to handle that volume without shuffling through for the sake of hitting a number. A bit like trying to fill a leaky bucket, the effort outweighs the rewards at some point. I am not saying try to reduce work I am saying make sure everything is in place to get the most out of the work you put in so that you can build on it.

Safiri · 27-09-2018 6:47pm

Testosterscone wrote: »

Fartlek is a very catch all term, for a kid (be they American, Irish, Kenya etc) majority of times this will constitute running as hard as you can for as long and you can and they stopping and recovering or slowing down. As a result of this Fartlek can mean absolutely anything so by extension means nothing (which is fine as it will work for some and not for others depending on how each person implements it)

FWIW I am not against what you are saying here and those components are fine in a general sense for training but those included in base and an increase beyond someones level could be just as detrimental as running fast. A 7 mile tempo could be much more detrimental to training that mile paced 300m's depending on the recovery.

The main goal should always be to get a runner to maximize work capacity but no point having a 4 hour marathon running a 100 mpw till they are efficient enough to handle that volume without shuffling through for the sake of hitting a number. A bit like trying to fill a leaky bucket, the effort outweighs the rewards at some point. I am not saying try to reduce work I am saying make sure everything is in place to get the most out of the work you put in so that you can build on it.

I feel as if we are debating over such extreme hypotheticals and specifics at this point that we are missing the middle ground where we probably agree hugely. Just reading back on our posts on this thread where we are not picking holes on the single points we disagree on, there is a huge overlap on what we agree with.

TFBubendorfer · 28-09-2018 7:30am

<mod>I've cleaned up the latest nonsense. Please stop your playground bickering</mod>

quick feet · 04-10-2018 8:51pm

Here's my mixed bag
Slow n steady !
5k - 19.50
5 mile - 33.07
10k - 40.57
10 mile 1.08.13
Half 1.31.30
Marathon - 3.15.39

MrMacPhisto · 04-10-2018 9:49pm

Name|5k|5m|10k|10m|HM|Mara|Target Race
McMillan |18:28|30:28|38:22|1:04:07|1:25:32|3:00:00|Ref Times
TbL |19:27|31:xx|39:30|1:04:xx|1:25:xx|3:05:xx|TBC 2016
FBOT|17:42|29:59|38:42|1:00:34|1:26:02|3:00:59|TBC
AMK|17:38|29:13|37:40|1:02:30|1:27:xx|3:00:36|DCM 2016
Tomwaits48|19:17|32:00|39:xx|1:05:45|1:28:xx|3:17:xx|TBC 2017
Duanington|17:35|29:17|36:36|1:01:42|1:23:22|3:03:xx|Berlin 2016
MrMacPhisto|17:02|28:35|35:44|1:01:55|1:19:35|2:47:17|Valencia 2016
snailsong|19:06|31:49|39:11|N/A|1:28:20|3:06:52|TBC 2017
rooneyjm|19:35|N/A|39:20|1:08:xx|1:29:37|3:23:xx|DCM 2016
davedanon|18:34|31:34|39:51|1:06:21|1:30:30|3:14:18|Berlin 2016
Itziger|17:50|29:52|36:48|N/A|1:22:04|3:03:28|TBC 2016
Sandwell|17:24|28:57|37:10|0:59:29|1:22:xx|6N/A|TBC 2016
Tomred1N |19:01|32:25|41:40|1:05:57|1:28:30|3:12:41|TBC 2020
Ainsyjnr |18:32|30:07|36:50|1:02:24|1:24:04|3:01:46|TBC
Averagejoe123|17:47|30:26|38:41|1:04:45|1:27:xx|3:17:xx|TBC 2017
Kemboi|18:00|29:50|38:00|1:05:50|1:25:30|3:07:xx|DCM 2016
CR 7|17:45|30:30|37:21|1:04:50|1:23:25|5:04:xx|TBC 2016
El Caballo|18:34|31:15|39:46|1:05:xx|1:26:26|3:15:29|TBC 2017
Bulmers74|18:54|31:46|39:33|1:06:00|1:26:27|3:08:36|TBC 2016
ger664|19:45|N/A|41:11|1:09:33|1:35:56|3:18:12|TBC 2017/18
Jahaco|19:22|31:08|39:07|1:04:19|1:26:23|3:03:19|DCM 2016
SlowTwitch|19:00|31:08|39:31|1:05:09|1:26:00|3:00:22|BetterLongDist
MediumTwitch|18:40|30:40|39:01|1:04:31|1:26:13|2:59:46|BetterMedDist
FastTwitcher|18:22|30:16|38:34|1:03:57|1:25:45|2:59:36|BetterShortDist

Stole this from the SUB 3 thread for reference.

yaboya1 · 04-10-2018 10:15pm

quick feet wrote: »

Here's my mixed bag
Slow n steady !
5k - 19.50
5 mile - 33.07
10k - 40.57
10 mile 1.08.13
Half 1.31.30
Marathon - 3.15.39

Fairly solid across the board, although you ran 5m faster than your pb during the 10k race

quick feet · 04-10-2018 10:25pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

Fairly solid across the board, although you ran 5m faster than your pb during the 10k race

Never noticed that, 3 second pb according to Strava!! Cheers

Itziger · 05-10-2018 6:30am

MrMacPhisto wrote: »

Name|5k|5m|10k|10m|HM|Mara|Target Race
McMillan |18:28|30:28|38:22|1:04:07|1:25:32|3:00:00|Ref Times
TbL |19:27|31:xx|39:30|1:04:xx|1:25:xx|3:05:xx|TBC 2016
FBOT|17:42|29:59|38:42|1:00:34|1:26:02|3:00:59|TBC
AMK|17:38|29:13|37:40|1:02:30|1:27:xx|3:00:36|DCM 2016
Tomwaits48|19:17|32:00|39:xx|1:05:45|1:28:xx|3:17:xx|TBC 2017
Duanington|17:35|29:17|36:36|1:01:42|1:23:22|3:03:xx|Berlin 2016
MrMacPhisto|17:02|28:35|35:44|1:01:55|1:19:35|2:47:17|Valencia 2016
snailsong|19:06|31:49|39:11|N/A|1:28:20|3:06:52|TBC 2017
rooneyjm|19:35|N/A|39:20|1:08:xx|1:29:37|3:23:xx|DCM 2016
davedanon|18:34|31:34|39:51|1:06:21|1:30:30|3:14:18|Berlin 2016
Itziger|17:50|29:52|36:48|N/A|1:22:04|3:03:28|TBC 2016
Sandwell|17:24|28:57|37:10|0:59:29|1:22:xx|6N/A|TBC 2016
Tomred1N |19:01|32:25|41:40|1:05:57|1:28:30|3:12:41|TBC 2020
Ainsyjnr |18:32|30:07|36:50|1:02:24|1:24:04|3:01:46|TBC
Averagejoe123|17:47|30:26|38:41|1:04:45|1:27:xx|3:17:xx|TBC 2017
Kemboi|18:00|29:50|38:00|1:05:50|1:25:30|3:07:xx|DCM 2016
CR 7|17:45|30:30|37:21|1:04:50|1:23:25|5:04:xx|TBC 2016
El Caballo|18:34|31:15|39:46|1:05:xx|1:26:26|3:15:29|TBC 2017
Bulmers74|18:54|31:46|39:33|1:06:00|1:26:27|3:08:36|TBC 2016
ger664|19:45|N/A|41:11|1:09:33|1:35:56|3:18:12|TBC 2017/18
Jahaco|19:22|31:08|39:07|1:04:19|1:26:23|3:03:19|DCM 2016
SlowTwitch|19:00|31:08|39:31|1:05:09|1:26:00|3:00:22|BetterLongDist
MediumTwitch|18:40|30:40|39:01|1:04:31|1:26:13|2:59:46|BetterMedDist
FastTwitcher|18:22|30:16|38:34|1:03:57|1:25:45|2:59:36|BetterShortDist

Stole this from the SUB 3 thread for reference.

Well, 'Phisto, as well as mangling the poor bleedin' table, I'd like to point out that it's out of date!! That Itziger fella is now Half 1.21.06 and Full 2.59.10 (For those who point out that the full is poor, A) I know and

it was done after the 2.59) And C) I'm not too good at 42k

healy1835 · 05-10-2018 6:46am

Itziger wrote: »

Well, 'Phisto, as well as mangling the poor bleedin' table, I'd like to point out that it's out of date!! That Itziger fella is now Half 1.21.06 and Full 2.59.10 (For those who point out that the full is poor, A) I know and it was done after the 2.59) And C) I'm not too good at 42k

Time for a new table? (Surreptitiously waiting for someone who knows about those dark arts to make one

)

Murph_D · 05-10-2018 9:49am

Name|5k|5m|10k|10m|HM|Mara|Note
McMillan|18:28|30:28|38:22|1:04:07|1:25:32|3:00:00|Ref Times
TbL |19:27|31:xx|39:30|1:04:xx|1:25:xx|3:05:xx|
FBOT|17:42|29:59|38:42|1:00:34|1:26:02|3:00:59|
AMK|17:38|29:13|37:40|1:02:30|1:27:xx|3:00:36|
Tomwaits48|19:17|32:00|39:xx|1:05:45|1:28:xx|3:17:xx|
Duanington|17:35|29:17|36:36|1:01:42|1:23:22|3:03:xx|
MrMacPhisto|17:02|28:35|35:44|1:01:55|1:19:35|2:47:17|
snailsong|19:06|31:49|39:11|N/A|1:28:20|3:06:52|
rooneyjm|19:35|N/A|39:20|1:08:xx|1:29:37|3:23:xx|
davedanon|18:34|31:34|39:51|1:06:21|1:30:30|3:14:18|
Itziger|17:50|29:52|36:48|N/A|1:21:06|2:59:10|
Sandwell|17:24|28:57|37:10|0:59:29|1:22:xx|N/A|
Tomred1N |19:01|32:25|41:40|1:05:57|1:28:30|3:12:41|
Ainsyjnr |18:32|30:07|36:50|1:02:24|1:24:04|3:01:46|
Averagejoe123|17:47|30:26|38:41|1:04:45|1:27:xx|3:17:xx|
Kemboi|18:00|29:50|38:00|1:05:50|1:25:30|3:07:xx|
CR 7|17:45|30:30|37:21|1:04:50|1:23:25|5:04:xx|
El Caballo|18:34|31:15|39:46|1:05:xx|1:26:26|3:15:29|
Bulmers74|18:54|31:46|39:33|1:06:00|1:26:27|3:08:36|
ger664|19:45|N/A|41:11|1:09:33|1:35:56|3:18:12|
Jahaco|19:22|31:08|39:07|1:04:19|1:26:23|3:03:19|
Murph_D|19:48|33:53|43:19|1:11:33|1:34:17|3:22:11|
SlowTwitch|19:00|31:08|39:31|1:05:09|1:26:00|3:00:22|BetterLongDist
MediumTwitch|18:40|30:40|39:01|1:04:31|1:26:13|2:59:46|BetterMedDist
FastTwitch|18:22|30:16|38:34|1:03:57|1:25:45|2:59:36|BetterShortDist

Here you go so. Fixed Itziger. Changed 'target race' col as out of date. Changed autosort to 5k time because it makes the fast/slow twitch differences stand out more...

Sheep1978 · 05-10-2018 11:29am

I'll throw my in because....well, why not. Most have only been ran once but here they are anyway:

5k - 19.35
5 mile - n/a
10k - 41.54
10 mile 1.10.03
Half 1.29.03
Marathon - 3.28.29

Singer · 05-10-2018 12:08pm

Name|5k|5m|10k|10m|HM|Mara|Note
McMillan|18:28|30:28|38:22|1:04:07|1:25:32|3:00:00|Ref Times
TbL |19:27|31:xx|39:30|1:04:xx|1:25:xx|3:05:xx|
FBOT|17:42|29:59|38:42|1:00:34|1:26:02|3:00:59|
AMK|17:38|29:13|37:40|1:02:30|1:27:xx|3:00:36|
Tomwaits48|19:17|32:00|39:xx|1:05:45|1:28:xx|3:17:xx|
Duanington|17:35|29:17|36:36|1:01:42|1:23:22|3:03:xx|
MrMacPhisto|17:02|28:35|35:44|1:01:55|1:19:35|2:47:17|
snailsong|19:06|31:49|39:11|N/A|1:28:20|3:06:52|
rooneyjm|19:35|N/A|39:20|1:08:xx|1:29:37|3:23:xx|
davedanon|18:34|31:34|39:51|1:06:21|1:30:30|3:14:18|
Itziger|17:50|29:52|36:48|N/A|1:21:06|2:59:10|
Sandwell|17:24|28:57|37:10|0:59:29|1:22:xx|N/A|
Tomred1N |19:01|32:25|41:40|1:05:57|1:28:30|3:12:41|
Ainsyjnr |18:32|30:07|36:50|1:02:24|1:24:04|3:01:46|
Averagejoe123|17:47|30:26|38:41|1:04:45|1:27:xx|3:17:xx|
Kemboi|18:00|29:50|38:00|1:05:50|1:25:30|3:07:xx|
CR 7|17:45|30:30|37:21|1:04:50|1:23:25|5:04:xx|
El Caballo|18:34|31:15|39:46|1:05:xx|1:26:26|3:15:29|
Bulmers74|18:54|31:46|39:33|1:06:00|1:26:27|3:08:36|
ger664|19:45|N/A|41:11|1:09:33|1:35:56|3:18:12|
Jahaco|19:22|31:08|39:07|1:04:19|1:26:23|3:03:19|
Murph_D|19:48|33:53|43:19|1:11:33|1:34:17|3:22:11|
Singer|18:39|31:47|38:55|1:06:12|1:27:33|3:14:11|
SlowTwitch|19:00|31:08|39:31|1:05:09|1:26:00|3:00:22|BetterLongDist
MediumTwitch|18:40|30:40|39:01|1:04:31|1:26:13|2:59:46|BetterMedDist
FastTwitch|18:22|30:16|38:34|1:03:57|1:25:45|2:59:36|BetterShortDist

Sure who doesn't love a good table. All my entries are from 2017.

HelenAnne · 05-10-2018 12:59pm

PS could some more experienced type cast their eye over my this years -- i'm hoping that when I up my mileage a bit (as I'm currently running about 10 miles a week fewer than last year) my 5 mle / 10k etc times will come down:

1 mile: 6.05
2 mile: 12.38
5k: 20.08
4 mile: 26.22
5 mile: 33.52
10k: 43.24

BeepBeep67 · 05-10-2018 1:16pm

]Name|5k|5m|10k|10m|HM|Mara|Note
McMillan|18:28|30:28|38:22|1:04:07|1:25:32|3:00:00|Ref Times
TbL |19:27|31:xx|39:30|1:04:xx|1:25:xx|3:05:xx|
FBOT|17:42|29:59|38:42|1:00:34|1:26:02|3:00:59|
AMK|17:38|29:13|37:40|1:02:30|1:27:xx|3:00:36|
Tomwaits48|19:17|32:00|39:xx|1:05:45|1:28:xx|3:17:xx|
Duanington|17:35|29:17|36:36|1:01:42|1:23:22|3:03:xx|
MrMacPhisto|17:02|28:35|35:44|1:01:55|1:19:35|2:47:17|
snailsong|19:06|31:49|39:11|N/A|1:28:20|3:06:52|
rooneyjm|19:35|N/A|39:20|1:08:xx|1:29:37|3:23:xx|
davedanon|18:34|31:34|39:51|1:06:21|1:30:30|3:14:18|
Itziger|17:50|29:52|36:48|N/A|1:21:06|2:59:10|
Sandwell|17:24|28:57|37:10|0:59:29|1:22:xx|N/A|
Tomred1N |19:01|32:25|41:40|1:05:57|1:28:30|3:12:41|
Ainsyjnr |18:32|30:07|36:50|1:02:24|1:24:04|3:01:46|
Averagejoe123|17:47|30:26|38:41|1:04:45|1:27:xx|3:17:xx|
Kemboi|18:00|29:50|38:00|1:05:50|1:25:30|3:07:xx|
CR 7|17:45|30:30|37:21|1:04:50|1:23:25|5:04:xx|
El Caballo|18:34|31:15|39:46|1:05:xx|1:26:26|3:15:29|
Bulmers74|18:54|31:46|39:33|1:06:00|1:26:27|3:08:36|
ger664|19:45|N/A|41:11|1:09:33|1:35:56|3:18:12|
Jahaco|19:22|31:08|39:07|1:04:19|1:26:23|3:03:19|
Murph_D|19:48|33:53|43:19|1:11:33|1:34:17|3:22:11|
Singer|18:39|31:47|38:55|1:06:12|1:27:33|3:14:11|
BeepBeep67|16:52|28:24|36:00|0:59:45|1:19:55|2:55:51|
SlowTwitch|19:00|31:08|39:31|1:05:09|1:26:00|3:00:22|BetterLongDist
MediumTwitch|18:40|30:40|39:01|1:04:31|1:26:13|2:59:46|BetterMedDist
FastTwitch|18:22|30:16|38:34|1:03:57|1:25:45|2:59:36|BetterShortDist

All Master's times in recent years so late M45 - early M50, up to the HM probably correlates, never quite nailed a marathon.

Swashbuckler · 05-10-2018 1:17pm

Sheep1978 wrote:

I'll throw my in because....well, why not. Most have only been ran once but here they are anyway:

Hang on... You've run most of those times on a first attempt at the given distance!? If so, that's great going.

Sheep1978 · 05-10-2018 2:09pm

10k, 10m and marathon yes. Have done a few 5k races and 3 HM's

Swashbuckler · 05-10-2018 2:28pm

Sheep1978 wrote:

10k, 10m and marathon yes. Have done a few 5k races and 3 HM's

Great stuff. Lots more to come from you in that case. Must follow your log

MrMacPhisto · 05-10-2018 2:48pm

Itziger wrote: »

Well, 'Phisto, as well as mangling the poor bleedin' table, I'd like to point out that it's out of date!! That Itziger fella is now Half 1.21.06 and Full 2.59.10 (For those who point out that the full is poor, A) I know and it was done after the 2.59) And C) I'm not too good at 42k

Ah sure it gives lots of data points and lets ya see how much better or worse you are now.... Is that the 'downhill' half time?

I need to run a ten mile race, thats an old one.

Correlation between 5K ,10K, HM and Marathon times

Comments