Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

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

24567…11

Comments

  • #32
    donothoponpop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭donothoponpop


    ecoli wrote: »
    One point which people seem to have ignored when comparing with National masters is that its very different running 60 on an outdoor track in the middle of the summer season and 60 at the start of indoor season coming off winter training on a banked 200m track

    There's also the factor in loss in leg speed with age, and the disproportionate numbers of sprinters who retire from athletics from mid 30's. I know some old Irish Record holders for sprints from the 80's- they'd look at you with two heads if you suggest they should continue competing in the Masters.

    But even then the winning times weren't especially slow- you're talking in the range of a second slower than what dnaleri mentioned, nothing in comparison to your equating going from 10x90 secs reps to Masters 400m glory. Amadeus you will change your mind once you try to run a 70 sec lap.


  • #33
    ecoli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,762 ✭✭✭✭ecoli


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    But even then the winning times weren't especially slow- you're talking in the range of a second slower than what dnaleri mentioned, nothing in comparison to your equating going from 10x90 secs reps to Masters 400m glory. Amadeus you will change your mind once you try to run a 70 sec lap.

    Agreed I would do same session in sub 80s yet I am about 57ish at fastest (though hopefully quicker this year;) )


  • #34
    oldrunner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 173 ✭✭oldrunner


    Probably worth pointing out that the o55 400 was won in 60.59 and the o50 in 62.31 (by me - in the spirit of full disclosure). Of course, I had run an easy 2:16.6 800m 75 minutes before.

    Times in all distances improve on a steep curve. The closer you get to a faster time the harder the relative improvement. Going from 90 to 70 should be easy - going from 70 to 60 a lot harder.

    Edit: my point is that breaking 60 for the 400 for a young runner should be an easy enough target.


  • #35
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    ?!"$W"£%$

    Was expecting to be able to knock off the first of these times tonight but stupid race along a seafront with effectively constant head wind meant I missed out by 30'odd seconds on the five mile one. Everyone was well over a minute off their usual times on the course. :mad:


  • #36
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    Great thread idea and will watch with interest. I was wondering would any of you guys be willing to attempt the shorter sprints too like 100m and 200m to see how they compare to the longer distances.
    My pb's to date for 100m are 12.48 and 25.35 for 200m yet I really struggled in a 3k in the same year to get a time of 12:09
    I plan to try a 400m soon to see what I can do for curiousity.

    P.S it would also be nice to see some more interest in sprint distances or maybe just to see more people giving it a go for the fun of it.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    RandyMann wrote: »
    Great thread idea and will watch with interest. I was wondering would any of you guys be willing to attempt the shorter sprints too like 100m and 200m to see how they compare to the longer distances.
    My pb's to date for 100m are 12.48 and 25.35 for 200m yet I really struggled in a 3k in the same year to get a time of 12:09
    I plan to try a 400m soon to see what I can do for curiousity.

    P.S it would also be nice to see some more interest in sprint distances or maybe just to see more people giving it a go for the fun of it.

    With those PB's over 100 and 200 you have the potential to be hitting 56 I'd say. Just need to do a lot of speed endurance work. A guy at my club has runs high 25/ low 26's for 200m and cant run faster than 65 for 400m. He doesnt do the work for the event and gets punished as a result.


  • #38
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    04072511 wrote: »
    With those PB's over 100 and 200 you have the potential to be hitting 56 I'd say. Just need to do a lot of speed endurance work. A guy at my club has runs high 25/ low 26's for 200m and cant run faster than 65 for 400m. He doesnt do the work for the event and gets punished as a result.

    I am guessing that too, around 65 with with my current lack of speed endurance.
    As you know yourself its hard to fit in many speed endurance sessions in a week(to factor in recovery days) so my attempt will be just for to see how I do without actually training for it this year.
    Maybe next year, I might train for it depending if I plateau at the 100/200
    I see what some of the 400 guys do at my club and the training looks daunting. All of them are late teens/early 20s and their recovery between intervals really shows while I am on my knees between sets :)


  • #39
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    I've decided to keep this challenge as simple as possible- these are all "10 Round Numbers" that a common-or-garden 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. We'll try and organize a few mile and 1k races during the year, to help runners get those times.

    The idea came from last years "Big 8 Challenge", hopefully we'll get a bit more banter on this thread. Otherwise, it's nice and simple, see if you can run under:

    400m - 1 minute
    1 kilometer- 3 mins
    1 mile - 5 mins
    3k - 10 mins
    5k - 20 mins
    5miles - 30 mins
    10k - 40 mins
    10miles - 1 hour
    Half Marathon - 90 mins
    Marathon - 3 hours.

    How many of these 10 Round Numbers can you run in a year? Let us know how you ran, each time you tick one off.:)

    Name|400m<60 secs|1 kilometer<3:00|1 mile<5 min|3k<10min|5k<20min|5mile<30min|10k<40m|10miles<1hr|Half Marathon<90mins|Marathon<3hrs

    AN Other||||||||||

    So any chance of adding in another 2 headings for 100m and 200m? I was thinking <13.5secs and <27sec respectively.


  • #40
    donothoponpop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭donothoponpop


    RandyMann wrote: »
    So any chance of adding in another 2 headings for 100m and 200m? I was thinking <13.5secs and <27sec respectively.

    Sorry RandyMann, no chance. The reason being they aren't round numbers- its as unscientific as that. One you start putting in figures like 27 etc, you open it up to changing all the others to comparatively equivalent times.

    However, it would be a shame *not* to start a similar type challenge for purely track-based events in another thread. Something like a decathlon (or heptathlon) challenge, based on IAAF scoring tables? Best 5 T&F scores? Something to be started in another thread.


  • #41
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    RandyMann wrote: »
    So any chance of adding in another 2 headings for 100m and 200m? I was thinking <13.5secs and <27sec respectively.

    How many people run those distances? Recreational runners not at all, I'd guess, and even very few club runners. I get the impression, though I could be wrong, that there's an enormous drop-out rate from sprinting when people hit 20ish. It's much more specialised than other running - I do training sessions that are useful down to maybe 400m races, but nothing shorter, and I think (?) that's fairly typical. So I guess I'd wonder what the point is in even having targets at that distance - are they times that a good club runner would aspire to run?

    (it's dp's table though, completely up to him)


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    Sorry RandyMann, no chance. The reason being they aren't round numbers- its as unscientific as that. One you start putting in figures like 27 etc, you open it up to changing all the others to comparatively equivalent times.

    However, it would be a shame *not* to start a similar type challenge for purely track-based events in another thread. Something like a decathlon (or heptathlon) challenge, based on IAAF scoring tables? Best 5 T&F scores? Something to be started in another thread.

    Ok fair enough. I did think of that idea but decided not to as it seems that most of the posters here are long/distance to marathon runners with a middle distance minority.
    I am guessing that there only 2 posters here in A/R/T competing/interested in sprinting (myself included) so I was trying to gather more interest in these distances. Worth a try but no problem, I can take rejection :(


  • #43
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    However, it would be a shame *not* to start a similar type challenge for purely track-based events in another thread. Something like a decathlon (or heptathlon) challenge, based on IAAF scoring tables? Best 5 T&F scores? Something to be started in another thread.

    Well, the 'Best of 2012' thread doesn't have to be just running, of course, it could also record best jump distances and heights, best throws, highest points recorded in decathlon and heptathlon. But there's an obvious problem with that idea.


  • #44
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    RayCun wrote: »
    How many people run those distances? Recreational runners not at all, I'd guess, and even very few club runners. I get the impression, though I could be wrong, that there's an enormous drop-out rate from sprinting when people hit 20ish. It's much more specialised than other running - I do training sessions that are useful down to maybe 400m races, but nothing shorter, and I think (?) that's fairly typical. So I guess I'd wonder what the point is in even having targets at that distance - are they times that a good club runner would aspire to run?

    (it's dp's table though, completely up to him)

    Not many at all it seems. It would also depend on the club you run for but I would estimate for my own club the sprinting group represents roughly 5% of the total.
    I only took it up last year when I turned 38 so I would be the 2nd oldest there and the rest would be in their early 20s.
    I picked those times as I hit them without sprint training but off the back of 5 months of middle distance training. I think they would be very achieveable for most of the runners here that are able to hit the other targets stated in the OP.
    Also I thought it would be a bit of fun too and it wouldnt take much out of someone's time to try it on a track some day.


  • #45
    donothoponpop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭donothoponpop


    RandyMann wrote: »
    Ok fair enough. I did think of that idea but decided not to as it seems that most of the posters here are long/distance to marathon runners with a middle distance minority.
    I am guessing that there only 2 posters here in A/R/T competing/interested in sprinting (myself included) so I was trying to gather more interest in these distances. Worth a try but no problem, I can take rejection :(

    You don't get off that easy:D If you want to increase exposure and interest on shorter track distances, I'm 100% behind you. I set up a thread here that is just track and field based- best 5 performances at different distances/events in 2012, ranked using the IAAF tables.

    Personally I'd love to see more T&F chatter on the forum, so be all means use that thread as you wish, or set up a better one as you see fit. :)


  • #46
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    You don't get off that easy:D If you want to increase exposure and interest on shorter track distances, I'm 100% behind you. I set up a thread here that is just track and field based- best 5 performances at different distances/events in 2012, ranked using the IAAF tables.

    Personally I'd love to see more T&F chatter on the forum, so be all means use that thread as you wish, or set up a better one as you see fit. :)

    Jazus, that was quick !


  • #47
    donothoponpop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭donothoponpop


    RandyMann wrote: »
    Jazus, that was quick !

    Well. we had discussed doing something T&F, and ranking based, earlier in this thread, your post was the catalyst. I want to try some T&F myself this summer, so will be putting up some scores hopefully.

    Anything that gets the majority distance road runners trying a few new things, that might end up suiting them better than road running, is good in my book. I'm the anti-Gerry Keirnan; Haile should move down to 1500m George, I'll give you 10/3 that Fionnula is a 100 high hurdler gone astray, and that Enduro fellow will be a 60m dash specialist yet.


  • #48
    RandyMann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭RandyMann


    donothoponpop wrote: »
    Well. we had discussed doing something T&F, and ranking based, earlier in this thread, your post was the catalyst. I want to try some T&F myself this summer, so will be putting up some scores hopefully.

    Anything that gets the majority distance road runners trying a few new things, that might end up suiting them better than road running, is good in my book. I'm the anti-Gerry Keirnan; Haile should move down to 1500m George, I'll give you 10/3 that Fionnula is a 100 high hurdler gone astray, and that Enduro fellow will be a 60m dash specialist yet.

    Well I look forward to some friendly competition! T&F is great fun and it would to good to bring back some of the older generation of athletes into it and not leave it just for the younger guys.


  • #49
    drquirky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭drquirky


    I've run two so far but don't know how to add them to a table... Cavan X-Mas Dash- 5k 17:39 Eircom BHAA XC 5 mile 29:57 can someone tell me how to add them?? Thanks! DQ


  • #50
    Sandwell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭Sandwell


    I was considering adding my 5 mile time from todays BHAA race but it came up as 4.9 miles on my Garmin. I guess that's par for the course with XC races. The question is, should they be included here?


  • #51
    Krusty_Clown
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,530 ✭✭✭✭Krusty_Clown


    Name|400m<60 secs|1 kilometer<3:00|1 mile<5 min|3k<10min|5k<20min|5mile<30min|10k<40m|10miles<1hr|Half Marathon<90mins|Marathon<3hrs

    04072511|59.44|||||||||
    drquirky|||||17:39|29:57||||


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Diamondmaker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Diamondmaker


    I love the idea of this thread,

    This morning I ran my 1st ever half marathon distance in training as I had a beer moment on Fri that I want to do a HIM.

    I ran it in 1.40.02. Now it must be noted that I did 5k of that up a mountain ( grad 8-12% consistently ) that I train on, when I run this circuit as a standalone 10k its about 8 mins slower than my regular 10k.

    The last 5k was ran on a fast purpose built track along the river here - my usual 5k tri training stretch. That clocked in sub 19 and I felt good so I reckon I have a great chance of attacking that half time in a few weeks at an official event ? My calfs really ached however I imagine my muscles just need more conditioning to being out this long ?? My fitness however is used to this duration through triathlon, but my legs never had a pounding on road for that long :mad:

    I have ran sub 20 consistently on the 5k, but my best 10k ( prior to my improvements this season ) was 41.07.

    My 5k times would indicate to me I can make the 1k and 3k goals.

    So Im curious to know more on the sprint times or imperial distances. Could I attack them without specific training that interferes with my other as mentioned by others.

    Is it fair to say the 3hr Marathon is by far the hardest of the goals ?? Or is the miler and 400m more deceptive ? I dont think I will hit that Marathon time for sure and right now I dont plan on being able to dedicate any marthon training time.

    Great idea for a thread cheers guys.


  • #53
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    When there were only 8 targets, I think we agreed the order of difficulty was
    10 miles
    1 mile
    3k
    5 mile
    marathon
    1/2 marathon
    10k
    5k

    I don't know where 400m and 1k would fit in. Obviously, the more short, fast running you do the better positioned you'll be to attack the 400m, mile, 1k and 3k times, while the more long-distance running you do the less you'll have to change to attempt the marathon and half-marathon.


  • #54
    donothoponpop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭donothoponpop


    Sandwell wrote: »
    I was considering adding my 5 mile time from todays BHAA race but it came up as 4.9 miles on my Garmin. I guess that's par for the course with XC races. The question is, should they be included here?

    No, a 4.9mile distance 5 mile race shouldn't be included here!:)

    For the same reason, no Garmin measured times should. Time trials on a track are fine though (stand back 9.7m from the finish line for the mile, +4 laps.)
    Diamondmaker wrote: »

    So Im curious to know more on the sprint times or imperial distances. Could I attack them without specific training that interferes with my other as mentioned by others.

    Is it fair to say the 3hr Marathon is by far the hardest of the goals ?? Or is the miler and 400m more deceptive ? I dont think I will hit that Marathon time for sure and right now I dont plan on being able to dedicate any marthon training time.

    Great idea for a thread cheers guys.

    One of the nice things about finding out the difficulty for the shorter ones, you can try them at any stage in your training. Whereas a short distance runner might injure themselves finding out from scratch how hard a sub3 marathon is, anyone can try and sprint a 400m to see how hard it is.

    IAAF ranks the times in order of difficulty:

    10 miles
    1 mile
    3k
    5 mile
    marathon
    400m
    1k
    1/2 marathon
    10k
    5k


  • #55
    Diamondmaker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Diamondmaker


    Damn Im only on top of the bottom 3 ha ha !

    Im on that 3k now, as I can work it into training sessions for the 4k super sprint tris and the 5k sprint tris.


  • #56
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    Name|400m<60 secs|1 kilometer<3:00|1 mile<5 min|3k<10min|5k<20min|5mile<30min|10k<40m|10miles<1hr|Half Marathon<90mins|Marathon<3hrs

    04072511|58.68|||||||||
    drquirky|||||17:39|29:57||||


    Updating my 400m time on this table, and giving this thread a necessary bump. There surely has to have been some people who have broken some of these targets at this stage? Get entering the data guys! :)


  • #57
    Krusty_Clown
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,530 ✭✭✭✭Krusty_Clown


    Name|400m<60 secs|1 kilometer<3:00|1 mile<5 min|3k<10min|5k<20min|5mile<30min|10k<40m|10miles<1hr|Half Marathon<90mins|Marathon<3hrs

    04072511|58.68|||||||||
    drquirky|||||17:39|29:57||||
    krusty_clown||||||28:59||58:37||


    I presume I can use the 5 mile split from my 10 mile time, as it was chipped, measured and official?


  • #58
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    Name|400m<60 secs|1 kilometer<3:00|1 mile<5 min|3k<10min|5k<20min|5mile<30min|10k<40m|10miles<1hr|Half Marathon<90mins|Marathon<3hrs

    04072511|58.68|||||||||
    drquirky|||||17:39|29:57||||
    krusty_clown||||||28:59||58:37||


    I presume I can use the 5 mile split from my 10 mile time, as it was chipped, measured and official?

    I don't see why not.


  • #59
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    I presume I can use the 5 mile split from my 10 mile time, as it was chipped, measured and official?

    Yeah, official race splits are fine, taking a reading from your Garmin isn't.

    Are there any 1000m races anywhere? I don't see the point in listing a distance if donothoponpop has to organise a race specially to get entries.


  • #60
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    RayCun wrote: »
    Yeah, official race splits are fine, taking a reading from your Garmin isn't.

    Are there any 1000m races anywhere? I don't see the point in listing a distance if donothoponpop has to organise a race specially to get entries.

    It's a rare distance but the target is good, and roughly in line with most of the Big 10 here. You'd need to be in 2:16-2:17 shape for 800m to get under 3 mins for 1Km. I understand your thoughts on having a rarely run distance in this challenge, but it is a good target, with a round number, and besides, there is nothing stopping somebody going down to the track and giving it a bash.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Not just rare, seems to be non-existent. I don't see it in the Graded Meets, the BHAA races, or anywhere else I can think of. Sure, you could go up to a track yourself and do it, but where's the fun in that?


Advertisement