It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I've followed these threads over the last few months and noted that this year, as in previous years, only a small proportion (1 out of 6 this year) hit their target. A few possible reasons why...
1. Of any given group, you expect injury / illness on the day / disrupted training / not a good day at the office, so a ratio of 1 in 6 is to be expected.
2. Runners are shoe horned into being a `sub 3' runner or `sub 5' runner with no account taken of how the training is progressing and whether goals need re-evaluatng along the way.
3. The schedules themselves are too light on miles at the faster end and therefore the super six project either becomes (a) altered as people do different sessions set by their club coach (as on JBFAR's sub 3 thread this year) or (b) not suited to the individual.
In principle the idea is a good one, and I've read some very informative and enlightening posts. I question whether the parameters set are the best ones for the individuals concerned. I wonder what other peoples' view are and whether RW might look at tweaking the concept for future events.