Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Pace relationship between distances
![[Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/ac5a25392f2771bddc91035e418fb838_100.png)
[Deleted User]
✭✭✭
in Training
There's been quite a few postings recently from people trying to work out target times for HMs and Marathons based on 5k and 10k pbs. People have referred to the McMillan calculator and other useful sites.
However, these assume that you are equally well trained across all distances, which many of us aren't.
I've read people with as diverse views on training as Hadd and Frank Horwill refer to the `16 second rule'. As I understand it, when you double a distance your pace per mile should slow by 16 secs if you are properly trained for the distance.
I think most people know what their `soft' pbs are but it might be interesting to put some numbers to these, so...
5k - 16:46 (5:24m/m)
10k - 33:41 (5:25m/m) - interesting!!
HM - 74:21 (5:41m/m) - perfect
Marathon - 2:42.35 (6:12m/m) - work to be done.
So from there it would seem most of my training has made me relatively better at races from 10k to HM, with work to be done on the others.
Any one else got any thoughts on their pbs?
However, these assume that you are equally well trained across all distances, which many of us aren't.
I've read people with as diverse views on training as Hadd and Frank Horwill refer to the `16 second rule'. As I understand it, when you double a distance your pace per mile should slow by 16 secs if you are properly trained for the distance.
I think most people know what their `soft' pbs are but it might be interesting to put some numbers to these, so...
5k - 16:46 (5:24m/m)
10k - 33:41 (5:25m/m) - interesting!!
HM - 74:21 (5:41m/m) - perfect
Marathon - 2:42.35 (6:12m/m) - work to be done.
So from there it would seem most of my training has made me relatively better at races from 10k to HM, with work to be done on the others.
Any one else got any thoughts on their pbs?
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
10K 33:34 hard
10M 56:00 medium
HM 76:16 soft
20M 1:57 hard
Marathon 2:49 soft!
Well here's mine
5km-20:40 (6:40)
10km-42:06 (6:47)
HM-94:24 (7:12)
Marathon-3:26:27 (7:53)
It seems I have some training to do for my longer distances!
5k - 25:23 (8:10)
5mile - 41:25 (8:17) - this running lifetime
10K - 60:10 (9:40)- this running lifetime and back in October
15 Miler 2;35:19 (10:21)wet windy and hilly
10k and over need reviewing obviously
5k 18.06 (5.50m/m(
5m 28.33 (5.43m/m) work that 1 out then?????
10k 35.43 (5.45m/m)
1/2m 1.18.07 (5.58m)
marathon 2.55.56 (6.43m/m)
yes my times are allover the place.
can anybody tell me why????
ok, enough waffling, let's get down to brass tacks ;-)
10k 35:47 (5:45 min / mile)
1/2M 1:19:49 (6:06 min / mile) - beginning to slip!
Mara 2:52:10 (6:35 min / mile) - kerBOOM!!!
5M 28:42 (5:44 min / mile)
10M 1:01:09 (6:07 min / mile) - not so good!
20M 2:09:29 (6:28 min / mile) - just ask Monique, she saw me right after this one ;-)
BT, what do those times equate to in terms of min / mile???
5k 16:58 5:28's (Today, Flat)
10k 35:43 5:44's (+16s) (<- undulating Richmond Park 2003)
1/2m 77:40 5:56's (+12s) (<- undulating Brentwood)
Mara 2:54:01 6:39's (+43s) (<- NYC)
5m 28:39 5:44'a (tough Finsbury Park)
10m 57:21 5:44 (+0s) (Sidcup, passing 5m in 28:01)
Specificty of training is the way forward. If marathon training, that means not farting around running 400s flat out, but rather concentrating at working just above and just below that pace and intensity.
So how have you done it where others are struggling?
- Race shorter distances frequently and longer ones up to 1/2m once in a while (though for me it doesn't matter, can run 1/2m every weekend). This will give you a better feeling in terms of what pace to apply to which distance.
- So far I have not done any interval training. However, I can't see improving further without working on basic speed. Maybe my natural speed is just good enough for my current level.
- In most cases I run at least for 1h, sometimes a bit slower sometimes faster. However, the pace is quite moderate, often not faster than 7:00's. A lot of 80-90 minutes runs, mainly time on feet sessions.
- Of course, I hit the treadmill 2-3 per week, this good for basic leg speed.
- I try to run as many miles as possible in December and January. December is usually the month I gain most weight, so have to train more as weight is the most important ingredient for a faster time. Those two months will give a good fundamental for the summer months. Have done the same last year and trained far less in summer (~50mpw).
5K: 17:19- 5:35m/mile
10K: 36:11- 5:50m/mile (spot on!)
Half: 1:21:31- 6:13m/mile (slower than expected- crappy conditions)
5m: 28:48- 5:45m/mile
10m: 58:51 5:53m/mile (faster than expected!)
Shows that I need to run a decent half this year.
Still don't know what happened with that 10 mile time- on all the comparison tables it ranks way ahead of anything else I've run.
5K don't care! [is actually over 17min!!!]
10K 33:34, 5:24m/mile - hard
10M 56:00, 5:36m/mile - medium
HM 76:16, 5:49m/mile - soft
20M 1:57, 5:51m/mile - hard
Marathon 2:49, 6:29m/mile - soft
All hilly, except the 10M one!!!!!!
& I hate hills :-)
Also run a 5min mile & 9:24ish for 3000m.
5k track: 17.12 (5.32)
5k road (altitude) 17.38 (4.38)
10k: 36.18 (altitude) 5.50 (hmmm...altitude)
10m: 59.04 (went faster in the marathon and 20 mile race) (5.54) - hilly course!
HM: 75.39 (5.46)
20m: 1.56.13 (5.48)
Marathon: 2.35.51 5.54/5.56
Well, as expected, I have a lot to gain from training for 10k! I guess it could be quite useful to see whether my targets then fall into the 16 second rule:-
5000m: 5.02
5k road: 5.18
10000/10k: 5.09 (7 seconds)
10: 5.18 (9 seconds)
half: 5.29 (11 seconds)
20: who knows?
marathon: 5.38 (9 seconds)
I am either setting my goals too high or the rule doesn't work for me!
3k: 16.30
5k: 29.50 (only done RFL)
10k: 57.57
10 mile: 1 hr 38. 40
half: 2 hrs 09. 30
marathon: 5hrs 11m 36secs.
Need to work on my marathon time. 16 sec rule not applying to me, guess I need to work on some aspect of my running.
5k-29.40-9.48
10k 65ish--10.48
half-2.23--10.9
mara--5.30--12.5
think thats why im doing base training
3k (8.51)
5k (9.36)
10k (9.20)
10mile (9.52)
Half (9.53)
Marathon (11.56)
must find a 5k race somewhere that isn't RFL.
5k-26 minutes-8.66 minute mile
10k 49.44 8.16 m/m
Half-1.49 8.38 m/m
Marathon 4.18 9.92 m/m
I intend to work on all those times especially that awful marathon time!!
All hilly courses except FLM
Miles makes smiles.
Progression
10K 51:35 (8.17)
Half 1:56:18 (8.53)
Eek. I suspect this means I am not going to run a spectacular first marathon time in 16 days
This does all lead me to belive I should stick to 10K but I've said I'll do 10 so 2 more to go! hope I nail it in Amsterdam :-)
Would 30 secs for every time the distance is doubled be more realistic for 60 min 10K'ers?
5K 17:38 (5:41min/mile)
10K 37:31 (5:58min/mile)
10M 62:31 (6:15min/mile)
1/2M To be arranged (later this year perhaps)
Many of you will have seen equivalence tables somewhere. Tables that give points per performance per distance and allow comparisons between (e.g.) 800m and marathon. The Hungarian Tables are one such example. Mercier tables are another.
But no-one suggests that a single person can be equally good at all distances across the board (apart from rarities like Rod Dixon). Your genetic strengths tend to weigh you more in one direction (speed) or the other (endurance). So, some people’s performances get better as the race gets longer (or shorter). And this is beyond/in excess of a training effect, they are just more gifted aerobically (or anaerobically).
BUT there should still be some form of relationship across distances, and this is what I look for when I hear someone’s PR’s.
Frank Horwill once defined this sort of relationship by saying that if a runner slowed up by 16 secs/mile at any distance (actually, I believe he said 4 secs per 400m lap), that runner could then keep going for twice the distance. (Note that better trained runners slow up LESS than 4 secs per lap to go twice the distance…)
So, according to Horwill, if you can run 5.00 for one mile, you can run at 5.16m/m for 3k/2 miles and 5.32m/m for 5k, and 5.48 for 10k, and 6.04 for 10 miles and 6.20 for marathon (plus or minus a second here or there). This is what I mean when there should be a “relationship” between race performances (assuming good/similar level of training for each event).
For better-trained runners, the relationship is even tighter. I have coached one runner like the example just given; has a 4.59 one mile PR. Who can run 5k at 5.20m/m (instead of Horwill’s 5.31). And 10k at 5.31, HM at 5.40 and marathon at 5.59m/m (instead of Horwill’s rule of thumb 6.20m/m). But this runner’s one mile to 5k distances are seldom trained for, or raced, so there might be some secs still to come off of both of them.
Think of it roughly like a clock face: Your one mile PR should be at 12, your 5k PR pace should be at quarter-past (+15 secs), your 10k PR should be at half-past (again, +15 secs), your HM PR should be at quarter-to (again + 15 secs), and your marathon PR should be once again at the top of the hour. (This also fits in with the old rule of thumb that your marathon PR pace should be mile PR pace + 60 secs/mile)
So what is wrong with our runners above? (remember, Horwill said slow up by 4 secs/lap to go twice the distance. We'll use his rule of thumb here.)
Young runner: 56.x (400), 2.09 (800), 4.37 (1500), 38.30 (10k)
400m = 56 secs
800m = 2.09 (should be 2.00 from 400 time)
1500m = 4.37 (should be 4.00 from 400m time or 4.16 from 800m time)
10k = 38.30 Fuggedabouddit…
So, our young guy gets rapidly worse as the race distance increases showing he is poor aerobically. Note that he gets worse even on the next distance up, showing how poor his aerobic conditioning/capacity is. He has NO relationship between his race performances.
Older runner: 17.02 (5k), 36.45 (10k), 1.24 (HM), 3.10+ (marathon)
5k = 17.02 (5.28m/m)
10k = 36.45 (5.55m/m – should be 5.44m/m from 5k time)
HM = 1.24 (6.24m/m – should be 6.00m/m from 5k time and 6.11 from 10k time)
Mar = 3.10 (7.15m/m – should be 6.40 from HM time and 6.27 from 10k time)
Like our young guy, this runner is also poor aerobically. He too has NO relationship between his performances. What we COULD have found is a relationship between 5k-10k-HM but NO relationship between HM-marathon (just meaning that he was not as well prepared for the longer distance as he was for the HM).
Now these times are all plus/minus a few seconds, not hard and fast. So we do not need to quibble on whether it should be +15 or +17 secs/mile. The point I want to stress is the existence of a relationship. I don’t hold hard and fast to Horwill’s 16 secs/mile (as I have shown, for better runners it might be 12-15 secs/mile or tighter still). But I do agree with his concept of a relationship between performances at all distances. I am always working towards it with runners I coach (at least within the range of events in which they wish to be competitive). This relationship can tell a lot about how well prepared a particular runner is for a given event.
Note that there can be two things “wrong” with your PR’s. One, as shown, there can be no evidence of a relationship (usually meaning your aerobic ability is wayyyyy poor). Or there can be a relationship, but it is too loose (instead of slowing up/adding 16 secs/mile to run double the distance, you slow up/add 20-24 secs/mile). In this second instance, your aerobic ability is less poor, but still needs work.
To sum up; if you are well trained aerobically, you do not fall apart (as in the earlier examples) when the race gets longer. And here some of you may like to do a quick check and see how your own performances compare…
So, on seeing these, or similar, numbers, I expect to hear at least one (and maybe both) of two things from the athlete concerned:
1. Low mileage background in training
2. Whatever mileage being done is being run “too fast” (for performance level)
Do you manage to give ALL your students get such comprehensive feedback??? ;-)
19:16 and 38:44 but I think you'd describe the 10k course as "aided"!!!
88'11 1/2 Marathon, 6'44/mile
I was running bang on 7 min miles up to 10k to go in the marathon-20 miles in 2'20'20!
38:44 10K, 6'14/mile
19:16 5k pb, 6'12/ mile
London to Brighton 8'36'51, 9'24/mile
10K 46:58 (7:33 min/mile)
10M 75:30 (7:33 min/mile)
1/2Mara 1:38:10 (7:30 min/mile)
16M 2:00:00 (7:30 min/mile)
Mara 3:43:59 (8:30 min/mile)
I missed my only scheduled 10k race so far this year due to illness - but I'm hopefully due a faster 10K time soon - I'll aim for 7:15 min/mile so that I can help prove the "add 16 seconds" theory.