Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
A confused runner
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
this is getting interesting.
fair play to the lad for giving it a go in such a public fashion. if he breaks 19 mins then he must be naturally gifted given his er...radical training regime!!
Let's hope so about the 16:07.
I really want to make sure that I can improve as much as I can, and have been reading some threads about Garmin products. There are four options here and I was wondering on which is better to get:
Garmin f 50 with distance monitor and usb stick for £101
Garmin f 50 just the watch - £59
Garmin f 60 just the watch - £72
Garmin f 205 just the watch/some acessories - £100 - which would mean an extra £30-40 for the shoeclip/footpod, or is that not necessary?
Thanks for the sprint training guide. So may something like sprint for 8 secs, rest for 11, and do this for a minute and then a minute rest? And do this for 10 minutes?
I want to do sprint training to lose an extra 1-2 stone and because I like playing football. Or is it not really possible to train for both - football and running?
And thanks Dash, let's see what happens!
A Garmin Forerunner 305 is the sort of thing you're after at about £108 on Amazon I believe.
Sprint training will not kickstart any weight loss and so is a terrible reason to do it. You probably get sufficient sprint training in your football so I wouldn't worry.
A sprint session which focused on pure speed development would be more like 50m float into a 30m sprint || 3:00 rest. Do about 8 of them at the very most but build up to that.
But again, I can't stress enough that it's not what you want to do for weight loss and it's not necessary for the 5k if you're also playing football.
Thanks. Will I need one of these to go with the 305 to get the most accuracy?
I'm sorry to be asking yet more questions (it's funny how things have turned since my original question was all about weight loss), but I thought sprint training speeds up metabolism? If it's not sprint training I should do, what would you suggest?
No, you won't need the footpod.
Thanks very much! I'm going to honest though, I went to an athletics training session last night and got 19 minutes - so let's just say I'm not as fit as I was! Hope you are all delighted that my tiffin diet isn't the key to getting 16 minutes!
I'm still going to do the park run on Saturday so who knows - a miracle may happen
It was good while it lasted!
That's the problem with pedometers, I guess, not very accurate.
19 minutes is still pretty impressive considering you haven't done a lot of training. You should stick to some structured training for a few months and see what you are capable of.
Yes, a 19 minute 5k is still very impressive for someone with little running experience. Be careful targeting to run too fast too soon as you could end up injured. You should follow a structured 5k training schedule that you can find online or go to a local running club.
Good to see you taking a long term(ish) view. It takes longer to make real fitness gains than it can do to pick up injuries from hammering it too much. So you're obviously no slouch, but I'll tweak my original advice by saying that you shouldn't be running any quicker than 8:00m/m for most of your training, including a long run, and maybe a tempo effort each week - e.g. 1M warm-up, 3-4M @ 6:30-6:40, 1M cool-down - to temper your frustrations at having to run so slowly.
Anyway, good luck with the Parkrun, tomorrow is it?
I don't think he even turned up!
One of them did 1:29:xx the other 2 came in under 1:40, one of them having a cigarette as his post race reward...
With respect, there's a huge gulf between a 15 mins 5k and a 1:29 half. (Equivalent performance in a half would be around 70 minutes.) A generally fit young male with a bit of talent could go under 1:30 off little training but 15 mins 5k would take a LOT of dedicated training from anyone who isn't an utter freakzoid.
Masstsnk - pull your finger out, son!
Good thread
Nothing quite gets runners goats more than people claiming certain times in training with no race evidence.
Reminds me of a bit of a body builder guy at my work, who reckoned on a 10mile run he'd done the last mile in 5minutes. He did a half marathon a few weeks later, in over 2hours.
Fair play though...he did a lot better at running than I would at weights!
This will be quite interesting, to do 19mins...presumably a low 19mins, and aiming for 17mins again presuming a low 17mins and in a few months?
Seems a pretty big ask to me. I went from 1818 to 1710...over 4 years...and expanding from 25 miles to 50-60. Not designated 5k work necessraily but not sure the OP is doing that either.
I go 18.55 for the park run
Fascinating thread! It would surely be possible for someone with a lot of natural fitness but only very light training to knock out a few miles quite fast but be quite incapable of handling an HM? Still, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Not sure what the training session in 19m was all about but the ParkRun should be interesting (unless its a slow hilly one like my local one in Glasgow which I reckon adds at least a whole minute to my times
)
I read that as "fantasy thread", which is probably more appropriate.
Been reading with interest.
I'll say 19.00
19:19.
20:11
(Brighton parkrun is not the easiest of courses, but not really tough either)