A question for the experts

An environment where you can be open & frank about your quest for speed

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Mon May 28, 2012 11:42 am

Two months ago, I did a test run and my 5 K time was around 27 minutes. With some speed work but a lot more just go out and run, I took off 5 minutes to run an actual race is a little over 22 minutes. The first two kilometers were around a 4:05 pace that was the extreme edge of comfortably hard but then I slowed down to make sure I would not crash and burn as I did on one time trial. Given the 5 K race time, the very rough marathon time with proper training should be around 3:30 and that turns out that given my age, a perfect time to go for.

I am up to around 30-50 K a week of running and when it is 30, bike and elliptical will substitute with some weight training through in. 12 - 15 K runs with a slow or slowish pace are my favorite but I know that I have to slowly work my way to 32 K. My work schedule is such I can do three or four of the 12-15 k runs, one long or longish run and I was going to focus on that. If things went well, I would go to Victoria and decide whether to race it October 7 or use it as a long and hard training run. If things do not go well, run a fall half marathon and maybe an early spring one with the true goal the Calgary marathon at the end of May 2013.

If I were to add speed work, what would you recommend. From my past experience when I do a minimum of 50K per week and max out at around 80 I run my best so I am also trying to figure out a way to maximize those miles.

User avatar
jamix
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby jamix » Mon May 28, 2012 11:10 pm

HIIT of 3-5 minutes with equal recoveries are popular.

I've recently fallen in love with incline running/sprints, but thats just me :)

Given the 5 K race time, the very rough marathon time with proper training should be around 3:30 and that turns out that given my age, a perfect time to go for.


Unless you think you could potentially drop your 5km time much lower than 22 minutes with more training, you might want to aim for 3:45-3:55. Others here might disagree, but my belief is that slower runners (I'm sorry but......) can't hit they're McMillan predicted potential very often even with proper training, and this is your first marathon, yes?
2013 GOALS:

- Compete in the "Early Bird Sprint Triathlon" in May
- Run a 5km pb during the "Bushtukah Canada Day Road Race"
- Complete an Olympic distance triathlon
- Cycle > 33 km / hr during the cycle portion of a Sprint Triathlon.
- Stay healthy and happy

Races

April 28th: Manotick 10km (40:16)
May 18th: Ottawa Early Bird Sprint Triathlon (DNF)
June 8th: Riverkeeper SuperSprint (2nd overall)
July 1st: Bushtukah Canada Day 5km (18:37)

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Tue May 29, 2012 11:18 am

jamix wrote:HIIT of 3-5 minutes with equal recoveries are popular.

I've recently fallen in love with incline running/sprints, but thats just me :)

Given the 5 K race time, the very rough marathon time with proper training should be around 3:30 and that turns out that given my age, a perfect time to go for.


Unless you think you could potentially drop your 5km time much lower than 22 minutes with more training, you might want to aim for 3:45-3:55. Others here might disagree, but my belief is that slower runners (I'm sorry but......) can't hit they're McMillan predicted potential very often even with proper training, and this is your first marathon, yes?


It will be my sixth - three Calgary and two Boston.

When I qualified for the two Boston Marathons (3:17 and 3:18) it was with insane training techniques that eventually caught up with me. So I am looking for advice with regards to a less risky way to get to the same destination.
Last edited by Dstew on Tue May 29, 2012 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
HCcD
Donovan Bailey
Posts: 60022
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:05 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: A question for the experts

Postby HCcD » Tue May 29, 2012 11:20 am

Dstew wrote:
jamix wrote:HIIT of 3-5 minutes with equal recoveries are popular.

I've recently fallen in love with incline running/sprints, but thats just me :)

Given the 5 K race time, the very rough marathon time with proper training should be around 3:30 and that turns out that given my age, a perfect time to go for.


Unless you think you could potentially drop your 5km time much lower than 22 minutes with more training, you might want to aim for 3:45-3:55. Others here might disagree, but my belief is that slower runners (I'm sorry but......) can't hit they're McMillan predicted potential very often even with proper training, and this is your first marathon, yes?


It will be my sixth - three Calgary and two Boston.


Though, that was a life time ago, so, you are like a Born Again Runner/Marathoner, so to speak ... :shifty: :lol: :wink:
Race Results: http://itsmyrun.com/index.php?display=p ... unner=HCiD

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Tue May 29, 2012 11:41 am

HCcD wrote:
Dstew wrote:
jamix wrote:HIIT of 3-5 minutes with equal recoveries are popular.

I've recently fallen in love with incline running/sprints, but thats just me :)

Given the 5 K race time, the very rough marathon time with proper training should be around 3:30 and that turns out that given my age, a perfect time to go for.


Unless you think you could potentially drop your 5km time much lower than 22 minutes with more training, you might want to aim for 3:45-3:55. Others here might disagree, but my belief is that slower runners (I'm sorry but......) can't hit they're McMillan predicted potential very often even with proper training, and this is your first marathon, yes?


It will be my sixth - three Calgary and two Boston.


Though, that was a life time ago, so, you are like a Born Again Runner/Marathoner, so to speak ... :shifty: :lol: :wink:


I hear that. I ran Boston ... FIVE YEARS AGO :what:

Went from Love/ Love to Love/ Hate to HATE/ HATE with my relationship with the marathon. Enjoyed the experience of the first marathon. Really enjoyed the journey to qualifying for Boston. Boston was beyond words so did it all over again and the wheels fell off in attempting to push that boundary and do so in a very short period of time.

Now I am I have a real sense that my potential is around 3:30 but I am willing to build that over a one year period of time and if it is not there, it is not there. Or to put it another way, it was Boston or Bust and strangely enough both happened. Now it is I would like to do this endurance running thing for some time to come.

User avatar
Joe Dwarf
Bill Crothers
Posts: 2183
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Saskatoon, SK

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Joe Dwarf » Tue May 29, 2012 12:53 pm

Dstew wrote:Now I am I have a real sense that my potential is around 3:30 but I am willing to build that over a one year period of time and if it is not there, it is not there. Or to put it another way, it was Boston or Bust and strangely enough both happened. Now it is I would like to do this endurance running thing for some time to come.
Well you have more experience than me as I've only run one but... I fell into the trap of thinking my shorter race times would predict my marathon time but it didn't work out. Unless you're logging a lot of miles in training it seems the endurance just isn't there. I peaked at 80 km/week during that cycle and that wasn't enough.

User avatar
jamix
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby jamix » Tue May 29, 2012 1:03 pm

Hopefully Andy or others can give you better advice, because I'm not a marathoner either :) . If it were me, I'd prolly just Time-trial 32-36 km a couple times over 10 days and then enter a marathon a week or so later (assuming my legs weren't trashed from the TT's :lol: ) .

You mentioned you dropped your 5km from 27 mins to 22 minutes in just two months of training, yes? Maybe you'll want to keep working on that (20 minutes ?). FYI; when I entered my one and only marathon in 2001 (11 years ago :shock: ), it took me 3 hrs 32 minutes, despite the fact that I could probably run 5km in under 20 mins at the time :? .
2013 GOALS:

- Compete in the "Early Bird Sprint Triathlon" in May
- Run a 5km pb during the "Bushtukah Canada Day Road Race"
- Complete an Olympic distance triathlon
- Cycle > 33 km / hr during the cycle portion of a Sprint Triathlon.
- Stay healthy and happy

Races

April 28th: Manotick 10km (40:16)
May 18th: Ottawa Early Bird Sprint Triathlon (DNF)
June 8th: Riverkeeper SuperSprint (2nd overall)
July 1st: Bushtukah Canada Day 5km (18:37)

User avatar
fingerboy
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:41 pm
Contact:

Re: A question for the experts

Postby fingerboy » Tue May 29, 2012 1:09 pm

Just a few questions - what was the "insane training techniques" used before? What was your prev weekly mileage, and what was your 5k time back then?

User avatar
Robbie-T
Jerome Drayton
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:44 am
Location: Awesome World
Contact:

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Robbie-T » Tue May 29, 2012 1:34 pm

I'm no expert, but for that goal and some what knowing your history I'd say don't do any specific speed/interval training.

Mileage, up to 80-100k per week, and a tempoish run on tired legs of marathon race pace or a bit faster of various distances. 5k-12k

Marathon aren't about running fast it is about running at a steady pace for 42.2 km.
Mississauga Marathon - 2:52
Around the Bay - 1:58
Click>> Race History
ItsMyRun.com

"If I'm running, it will be a good run" - Robbie-T

"I just hope that people look at it and say, 'Hey if this yahoo can do it, then I can do it too.' That'd be cool if people thought that. It's just a matter of putting the miles in and working. It's not so much how much talent you have. I hope." - Brian Sell.

"To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the Gift." - Pre

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Tue May 29, 2012 4:08 pm

fingerboy wrote:Just a few questions - what was the "insane training techniques" used before? What was your prev weekly mileage, and what was your 5k time back then?


Mileage was around 50 -80. A typical week might be a 6 K warm up run, 10 X a rather long and nasty set of stairs with as little recovery time as possible between the reps and then 6 K at marathon pace. 24 K with hills and 600 meters of elevation gain at 5:00 per kilometer pace. End the week with a 40 k run with the last 5 K at marathon pace. The weeks without the insane long run, 5 K at race pace and at that time, I was 19:35 - 21:00 in races and around the 21 minute mark in training runs. Add in a hard 10 K at slightly less than 10 K race pace.

Another time it was 30 K every Saturday with as many hills as I could find. A 15- 20 K marathon pace run and other runs depending upon how I felt.

The only time my legs did not hurt was when I was running. As noted, it was push as hard as I could and then harder and it did get me to Boston, twice but it ripped the hell out of my legs. If I can do it in a slow and reasonable way, I would love to get to under 3:30 for an unspoken reason. But, this time I am not willing to go over board and so a 3:45 or even a sub 4:00 marathon is something I can live with.

User avatar
MichaelMc
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:07 pm
Location: Calgary

Re: A question for the experts

Postby MichaelMc » Tue May 29, 2012 8:20 pm

McMillan's chart is not built to tell you what you can achieve with the right training plan. It is a chart based on high mileage experienced distance runners comparing their long distance and short distance races. If you have the endurance of a high mileage (120km+ per week AVERAGE), experienced marathoner and run a 5k in 22 minutes then your marathon time will be roughly 3:30.

It does not know what YOUR endurance is, or will be on race day. It does not know how much your 5k time might improve with training. It really doesn't have much to say about your result.

My suggestion is forget about figuring out what you think you will run. As Robbie suggests: build your mileage up gradually and do a LITTLE faster running. Lets say 90% or more EASY paced, the balance hard enough to actually challenge you. And lets figure out actual mileage numbers, not "50 to 80": that is a WIDE range. Peak mileage is nearly irrelevant, average weekly mileage built at a pace your body can adapt to is the important factor in endurance. Bear in mind, the object is not to abuse your body the most, it is to encourage the most improvement (adaptation) in the time available. Work only as hard as you need to to get the proper reaction: any more is a negative.

When you are three weeks out from the race and know how fit (and healthy) you are, THEN choose a goal time. Figure out your AVERAGE weekly mileage over the past 12-16 weeks: that is what your body is "used to". Build on that at a 5-8% average weekly increase (listen to your body).

User avatar
fingerboy
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:41 pm
Contact:

Re: A question for the experts

Postby fingerboy » Tue May 29, 2012 8:40 pm

I mean I'll tell you what I do and you can take it from there... marathon running is about periodization. You can't successfully keep yourself in 'top marathon' shape the whole time and run 42km gmp runs every day. I think you understand that. You're prev volume was pretty good, but as you saw, it was lumped a little too heavy on the long runs. In my first mara attempt, I was running 45-50km a week, with 32 of that coming from the long run. It had its merits to be able to run that far every week, but I wasn't improving the way I should.

Now I run 6x a week, with M, W, S easy - from 8-12km, with possibly some strides depending on the day
T - VO2 type day repeats
Th- For mara training this is LT - longer 3-5k long repeats, now post mara its shorter higher intensity 5k type workout 400-1000m repeats
Su - LR 16-19km - with some picking up speed in the last 5k or so


The point being - my MWS are recovery/easy to balance out the rest of the week's tough workouts, while keeping my mileage.

User avatar
fingerboy
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:41 pm
Contact:

Re: A question for the experts

Postby fingerboy » Tue May 29, 2012 9:06 pm

I also want to emphasis other aspects of recovery - Active isolation stretches - before and after runs, foam rollers, and massages

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Tue May 29, 2012 10:36 pm

MichaelMc wrote:McMillan's chart is not built to tell you what you can achieve with the right training plan. It is a chart based on high mileage experienced distance runners comparing their long distance and short distance races. If you have the endurance of a high mileage (120km+ per week AVERAGE), experienced marathoner and run a 5k in 22 minutes then your marathon time will be roughly 3:30.

It does not know what YOUR endurance is, or will be on race day. It does not know how much your 5k time might improve with training. It really doesn't have much to say about your result.

My suggestion is forget about figuring out what you think you will run. As Robbie suggests: build your mileage up gradually and do a LITTLE faster running. Lets say 90% or more EASY paced, the balance hard enough to actually challenge you. And lets figure out actual mileage numbers, not "50 to 80": that is a WIDE range. Peak mileage is nearly irrelevant, average weekly mileage built at a pace your body can adapt to is the important factor in endurance. Bear in mind, the object is not to abuse your body the most, it is to encourage the most improvement (adaptation) in the time available. Work only as hard as you need to to get the proper reaction: any more is a negative.

When you are three weeks out from the race and know how fit (and healthy) you are, THEN choose a goal time. Figure out your AVERAGE weekly mileage over the past 12-16 weeks: that is what your body is "used to". Build on that at a 5-8% average weekly increase (listen to your body).


I do appreciate the lack of applicability of calculators as I have run faster in some races than predicted and slower in others. Faster marathons and slower 10 k but that is an tangent. But more to the point, I know with good training and luck that I can run a 3:30 but the object of this new approach is not to do anything and everything to achieve that goal but to do it "right" and if I run 3:30 or 4:00, it does not matter. Before it was the destination of a sub 3:20 and now the focus is on the journey. Having said that, I asked for advice because if 3:30 is achievable I am not going to look the other way. The 3:30 is something I am looking at in a year from now so I am also attempting to be more patient.

The range is because of life. My job can involve a lot of travel and busy days. I also have other pursuits such as golf that at times will take precedent. In two weeks I will spend a day driving to Kelowna and spending time with friends. Then I have a buddy living there and I am playing a couple of rounds with him. There is going to be some down time and I will get in a couple of runs but I am going to fit runs into my schedule and not the other way around. I hear what you are saying with regards to a consistent approach but part of my new found love of running is to not always have the run as a priority. I figured my dad would always be there and we would always have time to hike and part of the reason I left running was that I put runs ahead of those hikes. I lost a friend who was on a short visit to Calgary but that was the same day as a long and important run. I admire people who will get up hours early to get in runs but then this stops becoming a fun hobby to embrace for years and a job or a chore.

I do appreciate the reinforcement of the slow running mantra. I was raised with the no pain, no gain attitude and I am slowly coming to appreciate it does not necessarily have to be that way and in fact can be quite counter productive.
Last edited by Dstew on Tue May 29, 2012 10:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Tue May 29, 2012 10:39 pm

fingerboy wrote:I also want to emphasis other aspects of recovery - Active isolation stretches - before and after runs, foam rollers, and massages


I have a foam roller and hate doing it but do love the results.

I also appreciate the advice with regards to the length of the long run. I really enjoy doing 12 K plus I can sneak out and do that sort of run over my lunch hour and then eat at my desk. I am also attempting to embrace the slow 16 K run. I was pleased to see the results you had with those sort of runs.

User avatar
scrumhalfgirl
Lynn Williams
Posts: 19368
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:50 am
Location: Ottawa

Re: A question for the experts

Postby scrumhalfgirl » Wed May 30, 2012 5:42 am

I would just also add that in a year, with some focused training, you might be surprised by how much your body will remember. I'm not as fast as you, but my marathon on Sunday was a 7 minute PB after only being back at running for a year following 10 months with zero running at all and another year before that with much reduced training. I was physically active during that time with other types of activity. I think it's pretty safe to assume that you didn't have a baby while you were away from running :) but the impacts of the break are probably similar. I did not find it was being right at beginner level again - it took my three years of running to run my previous marathon PB and then only a year to get back at it.
Jesse's 2017 Plans
April - Boston Marathon
May - Sporting Life Ottawa 10K
May - Ottawa Half Marathon

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Jwolf » Wed May 30, 2012 9:22 am

MichaelMc wrote:McMillan's chart is not built to tell you what you can achieve with the right training plan. It is a chart based on high mileage experienced distance runners comparing their long distance and short distance races. If you have the endurance of a high mileage (120km+ per week AVERAGE), experienced marathoner and run a 5k in 22 minutes then your marathon time will be roughly 3:30.

It does not know what YOUR endurance is, or will be on race day. It does not know how much your 5k time might improve with training. It really doesn't have much to say about your result.

My suggestion is forget about figuring out what you think you will run. As Robbie suggests: build your mileage up gradually and do a LITTLE faster running. Lets say 90% or more EASY paced, the balance hard enough to actually challenge you. And lets figure out actual mileage numbers, not "50 to 80": that is a WIDE range. Peak mileage is nearly irrelevant, average weekly mileage built at a pace your body can adapt to is the important factor in endurance. Bear in mind, the object is not to abuse your body the most, it is to encourage the most improvement (adaptation) in the time available. Work only as hard as you need to to get the proper reaction: any more is a negative.

When you are three weeks out from the race and know how fit (and healthy) you are, THEN choose a goal time. Figure out your AVERAGE weekly mileage over the past 12-16 weeks: that is what your body is "used to". Build on that at a 5-8% average weekly increase (listen to your body).


This is excellent advice. Thanks.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
jamix
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby jamix » Wed May 30, 2012 2:16 pm

Does anyone know what the algorithm(s) are for calculating race performance in one distance based on performances in another?
2013 GOALS:

- Compete in the "Early Bird Sprint Triathlon" in May
- Run a 5km pb during the "Bushtukah Canada Day Road Race"
- Complete an Olympic distance triathlon
- Cycle > 33 km / hr during the cycle portion of a Sprint Triathlon.
- Stay healthy and happy

Races

April 28th: Manotick 10km (40:16)
May 18th: Ottawa Early Bird Sprint Triathlon (DNF)
June 8th: Riverkeeper SuperSprint (2nd overall)
July 1st: Bushtukah Canada Day 5km (18:37)

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Jwolf » Wed May 30, 2012 2:38 pm

jamix wrote:Does anyone know what the algorithm(s) are for calculating race performance in one distance based on performances in another?


All of the calculators essentially add 10 sec/km to the pace as the distance doubles. They assume "equivalent training", which tends to be much higher for marathon than most people do.

As Michael has described before, they aren't intended to "predict" a future race time but that's how people like to use them. They are intended to indicate how fast you could currently do a different distance based on your fitness (as indicated by the race).
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
Joe Dwarf
Bill Crothers
Posts: 2183
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Saskatoon, SK

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Joe Dwarf » Wed May 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Jwolf wrote:All of the calculators essentially add 10 sec/km to the pace as the distance doubles.
It's more complicated than that. For example, if you enter a 20 min 5K into a Daniels calculator, you'll get a 41:28 10k. Put a 30 min 5K and get a 1:02:23 10K. The 10K pace is 8.8 sec and 14.3 seconds slower respectively. So as is intuitive, the additional time/pace increases as the overall pace slows. In other words, the faster a runner you are the smaller the differences between your various paces.

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Jwolf » Wed May 30, 2012 3:45 pm

Joe Dwarf wrote:
Jwolf wrote:All of the calculators essentially add 10 sec/km to the pace as the distance doubles.
It's more complicated than that. For example, if you enter a 20 min 5K into a Daniels calculator, you'll get a 41:28 10k. Put a 30 min 5K and get a 1:02:23 10K. The 10K pace is 8.8 sec and 14.3 seconds slower respectively. So as is intuitive, the additional time/pace increases as the overall pace slows. In other words, the faster a runner you are the smaller the differences between your various paces.


That's interesting-- I hadn't checked before I guess and from earlier discussions I had assumed it was fairly linear. I stand corrected.

I happen to be right between those two times where the "10-second rule" seems to apply pretty well.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Wed May 30, 2012 4:08 pm

scrumhalfgirl wrote:I would just also add that in a year, with some focused training, you might be surprised by how much your body will remember. I'm not as fast as you, but my marathon on Sunday was a 7 minute PB after only being back at running for a year following 10 months with zero running at all and another year before that with much reduced training. I was physically active during that time with other types of activity. I think it's pretty safe to assume that you didn't have a baby while you were away from running :) but the impacts of the break are probably similar. I did not find it was being right at beginner level again - it took my three years of running to run my previous marathon PB and then only a year to get back at it.



I am carrying an extra 20 pounds so that has to count of something . :)

I do appreciate the words of encouragement. It is also very nice to see what can happen. I have a 3:30 left in me but this time, if I do not train enough forward to get there, so be it.

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3457
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Dstew » Wed May 30, 2012 4:26 pm

Jwolf wrote:
Joe Dwarf wrote:
Jwolf wrote:All of the calculators essentially add 10 sec/km to the pace as the distance doubles.
It's more complicated than that. For example, if you enter a 20 min 5K into a Daniels calculator, you'll get a 41:28 10k. Put a 30 min 5K and get a 1:02:23 10K. The 10K pace is 8.8 sec and 14.3 seconds slower respectively. So as is intuitive, the additional time/pace increases as the overall pace slows. In other words, the faster a runner you are the smaller the differences between your various paces.


That's interesting-- I hadn't checked before I guess and from earlier discussions I had assumed it was fairly linear. I stand corrected.

I happen to be right between those two times where the "10-second rule" seems to apply pretty well.


The calculators give one a ball park but there would seem to be a number of interactive factors as it applies to the individual. How many kilometers was the person running when they ran a 5K. Did they burst a lung and puke crossing the finish line and could not take another step or was it a comfortably hard race. The genetic make up as to be a factor - fast v slow twitch muscles. I do well running 5 K races, really crappy at the 10 K distance and the half marathon is all over the map. Which one will be the best at predicting a marathon time? I can tell you that in the Running times calculator, a 5 k race time of 20 minutes which was about my average over 4 races = 3:19 marathon. My actual marathon was 3:17 and that was with a max of 80 kilometers but many weeks at 50 kilometers. So when I noted the calculator for 22 minutes was roughly 3:30 - the actual is 3:34 it was more towards confirming in my own mind that the speed would come on its own and for the 10%, what sort of speed work was recommended. Given the experience here, it also seems very clear that I need to drop most of my speed work and increase the miles per week and I am in a good mental place to do that as I am quite happy to see where the journey takes me rather than focus on the destination.

User avatar
Joe Dwarf
Bill Crothers
Posts: 2183
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Saskatoon, SK

Re: A question for the experts

Postby Joe Dwarf » Wed May 30, 2012 4:41 pm

Dstew wrote:The calculators give one a ball park but there would seem to be a number of interactive factors as it applies to the individual. How many kilometers was the person running when they ran a 5K. Did they burst a lung and puke crossing the finish line and could not take another step or was it a comfortably hard race. The genetic make up as to be a factor - fast v slow twitch muscles.
The calculators are based on a maximal effort for that distance only. As Michael pointed out, the endurance factor for the marathon is a big factor. That applies to a lesser degree for all the distances, I believe. It's easier to put in max effort over 2 k than 21.1 k. Of course if you train to run 5 ks but not halfs you are not going to hit your prediction if you try a half on a lark.

I don't think slow twitch vs fast twitch comes into it as very few of us are trying to extrapolate a distance race out of a sprint time or vice-versa.

User avatar
jonovision_man
Bill Crothers
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Whitby, ON

Re: A question for the experts

Postby jonovision_man » Wed May 30, 2012 4:59 pm

jamix wrote:Does anyone know what the algorithm(s) are for calculating race performance in one distance based on performances in another?


McMillan uses this... I won't say how I found it! ;) But it's very figure-out-able.

This is for the pace based on marathon distance - so they expect your 30k pace to be 97.7% of your 42.2km pace, your 5k pace to be 86.6% of your marathon pace, etc.

Code: Select all

42.2      100.0%               
30          97.7%
25          96.3%
21.1       94.8%
15          92.9%
10          89.9%
5 miles   89.2%
5            86.6%
4            84.8%
3            82.7%
2            79.2%
1 mile     77.6%
1.5         77.3%
1            73.6%
Visit my blog!

"If you want to be functional at 80, you better damn well pay attention at 40" -- Lew Hollander


Return to “The Speed Zone”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests