Going for Sub-40min 10k

[Tarsals]

Hmm, seems to be a variety of experiences about this.

At this rate, how about I make sure that I can 90 the half and 20 in the 5k? That should make guarantee i can 40 the 10k.

[Dstew]

I would be careful about a focus on breaking the 5 K 20 minute barrier to get past the 40 minute 10 K barrier because in my personal experience, those are two completely different beasts. My 10 K times actually went up after breaking the 20 minute barrier twice in races and a few times in training runs. I would start to crash and burn around the 9 K mark so I would agree with the suggestions to get a good 10 K plan and stick with that. If you look closely, the mileage for a good 10 k program is equal to that of many half marathon plans. And such, endurance first - pile up the miles over the winter when the paths are snowy and icy and it forces you to run slower.

I would suggest one of the many races that seem to go along the bow river and start in the down town. Calgary Roadrunners is a great site to find races: http://www.calgaryroadrunners.com/sched.php


And as an after thought, trying to break 90 minutes in the half is closer to breaking 40 minutes in the 10 K than breaking 20 in the 5 K is to 40 at the 10 K distance. When I broke 90 minutes in the half, at age 42 I should add, it was the one time in my "racing" career where I ran more than 3 or 4 times a week. I was averaging 5 - 7 times a week but as noted, it was over the winter and it was cold, snow and ice that year. I had so many layers on and paths were so bad I had no choice but to merely build my base. I ran so much I burnt out and the Police Half that was to be a test of my training looked to be a wash out. I was merely hoping to see if I could not run too much slower than my previous best, 1:35 at the Last Chance half but the goal had been the July Calgary full and to qualify for Boston. I put myself about half way in the middle of the pack. I started slow but the pace started to drive me crazy after a mile so I slowly picked that up. Had a great middle of the race as it seemed almost too easy. Ran too hard up the hill from the Weaselhead but somehow managed to hold on and in the last 500 meters, the race director was screaming at me like some mad man to push it and glad I did as I finished 1:29:XX.

You have a point about Calgary winters. I may very well have no choice but to build mileage over the winter, which would be fine by me. I'm getting a little tired out from intervals these days.

How many km would you say you were running a week or month back then?

50-60K on average and maxed out around 80K.

Just had one of the those old Nike thingys that measured distance and pace and given how cold and icy that winter was, never paid attention to pace. Although on occasion, to teach myself a constant pace, I would run out for 30 minutes and try and make it back just under 30 minutes. Did that at a comfortable pace but generally it was go out and just run. If I did a "tempo" run, start slow and warm up, run fast and then cool down, that was by accident or because I was feeling good after the warm up.

I really believe one can over think and so the train forward method, get some miles under you, be as consistent as you can the let a very slow and gradual and natural progression happen. When I did intervals or whatever, it was more because I was bored than because of a schedule. So you may not see any results of months or even a year or more but it seems when there is a break through, it can come without warning.


And having said all of this, your results may vary. I truly believe we are all an experiment of one and that if we truly listen to what our bodies are saying, we can tell if we are making progress or not. So when you say you are getting sick of intervals, is that your body telling you to do something else or a different sort of interval? Or to put this a different way, if whatever you do gets you faster, continue to do it and if not, try some different stuff.

When I qualified for Boston, one thing that worked great for me and find this in ANY training schedule was to run 6 K as a jog. Then do 10 repeats of the curling club stairs to a point of pure exhaustion where one person asked if I needed an ambulance. Rest for about 2 minutes and then force myself to run the 6 K back to my home at marathon pace. I figured I had to teach my mind and body I could run at the pace I needed to qualify for Boston if I was tired and my brain shut down. Same sort of idea with the 20 minute barrier at the 5 K mark - first step was to run one kilometer in less than 4 minutes and then go from there. But that is me and for others, it would not only be wrong but stupid and cause injuries.

In my personal opinion, breaking 20, 40, 90 and qualifying for Boston as a male in your 40s makes one a good but not a great runner. If you were to run 39:59, that would put you 51st in this years Mother's Day run and 9th in your age group. In the smaller races, somewhere around 11 - 16th. It is an accomplishment beyond me as I never got it below 41 minutes but I believe we can make it a lot more complicated when it is miles and time. Just my humble opinion. And as such and this is a fun hobby, try to make sure whatever you choose to do that it brings some joy.

[Jwolf]

At this rate, how about I make sure that I can 90 the half and 20 in the 5k? That should make guarantee i can 40 the 10k.

No guarantee a 20-minute 5K will get you there... try for 19:00.

Seriously-- there's a lot of overlap in training for a 90-minute half and a 40-minute 10K, which are both about "equivalent" to a 19-minute 5K. There's no reality to the claim that there's "no good training you can do for a fast 5K beyond running till you puke" and many people would advise you to work on speed at this distance before moving on, but you don't have to.

But if you can't do 5K at 4:00/km, there's no way you're gonna do 10. Even my math is good enough for that one.

[Ironboy]

I can understand that a sub 20min 5km isn't a guarranttee for a sub 40min 10km. If your VO2max permits holding 4:00/km for 5km, that doesn't mean your lactate threshold will allow you to hold it for 10km.

But I would think it's a prerequisite. Unless there are other factors holding you back at the 5km distance, in order for your VO2Max not to prevent you from even reaching your lactate threshold it would have to allow you to run faster than 4:00/km before hitting it.

I'm not sure that came out right.

[mcshame]

Hi Tarsals, I'm not an expert on anything, I can only speak to my experience. As you can see in my sig, I have not cracked the 20min, 40min or 90min. But I want to

What I'm going to do over the winter is maintain mileage in the 60-70k/week range with a speed work per week, start marathon training to up the mileage to peak at 100k/week. After the marathon training, I'm going to run lot's of 10k, 5k in the summer which I have never done before, the goal is to go sub 40, 20. I have had great success on getting improvements on my 1/2M and 10k following or during marathon training so I believe I will be able to deliver on these targets. It must have to do with the endurance development that others have spoken of. Then, starting in the summer build on those to run a sub 1:30 half marathon. So by the fall, I hope to have the 20, 40, 90 PBs all beat.

Good luck!

[SteveF]

I've never targeted a 5 or 10k specifically but my vote is to work on endurance first. Run alot. And then run tempos at least once a week. IMO you don't need real speed work to run a 3:59/km. A lot of people can go out and run 1 km at that speed. It's putting together 5 or 10 of those that makes it tough. The thing that got me to sub 20 was tempo runs. I ran at least 2 runs a week of 10k at about 4:30/km or better and once a week 6-7k with as many of those at sub 4 as I could. This was also after doing the hill training phase of a marathon plan, which really helps to toughen you up both physically and mentally. You have to teach your body to run near redline. 5ks hurt and you need to be prepared for that. I can't imagine a 10k would be any easier

[Pat Menzies]

I've never targeted a 5 or 10k specifically but my vote is to work on endurance first. Run alot. And then run tempos at least once a week. IMO you don't need real speed work to run a 3:59/km. A lot of people can go out and run 1 km at that speed. It's putting together 5 or 10 of those that makes it tough. The thing that got me to sub 20 was tempo runs. I ran at least 2 runs a week of 10k at about 4:30/km or better and once a week 6-7k with as many of those at sub 4 as I could. This was also after doing the hill training phase of a marathon plan, which really helps to toughen you up both physically and mentally. You have to teach your body to run near redline. 5ks hurt and you need to be prepared for that. I can't imagine a 10k would be any easier

A lot of people can run a 4:00 minute km? I would agree with everything except that.
A certain amount of speed cushion helps for sure. I would think that the average runner aspiring to race at 4:00 pace or better might need the ability to run much faster for a single km.
A minute faster would be a safer amount.
It's obviously not totally necessary to break 20 first. There are quite a few people who have no idea that 20:00 is some sort of holy grail for recreational runners and they may run well under 40:00 for their first 10km just based on a higher level of natural ability.
Anyone on here who has done close to 20:00 could reasonably aspire to just going for sub 40:00 without breaking 20:00 officially first.

[SteveF]

You're right Pat. What I mean is, a lot of people who target a sub 40 can already run 4:00/km but briefly. I don't think running intervals at a much faster pace is necessarily going to get them to their goal. Building endurance and the ability to run at threshold will. That said if you have a hard time reaching 4:00/km then yeah, some drills to increase foot speed are in order.

[Tarsals]

50-60K on average and maxed out around 80K.

Just had one of the those old Nike thingys that measured distance and pace and given how cold and icy that winter was, never paid attention to pace. Although on occasion, to teach myself a constant pace, I would run out for 30 minutes and try and make it back just under 30 minutes. Did that at a comfortable pace but generally it was go out and just run. If I did a "tempo" run, start slow and warm up, run fast and then cool down, that was by accident or because I was feeling good after the warm up.

I really believe one can over think and so the train forward method, get some miles under you, be as consistent as you can the let a very slow and gradual and natural progression happen. When I did intervals or whatever, it was more because I was bored than because of a schedule. So you may not see any results of months or even a year or more but it seems when there is a break through, it can come without warning.

And having said all of this, your results may vary. I truly believe we are all an experiment of one and that if we truly listen to what our bodies are saying, we can tell if we are making progress or not. So when you say you are getting sick of intervals, is that your body telling you to do something else or a different sort of interval? Or to put this a different way, if whatever you do gets you faster, continue to do it and if not, try some different stuff.

When I qualified for Boston, one thing that worked great for me and find this in ANY training schedule was to run 6 K as a jog. Then do 10 repeats of the curling club stairs to a point of pure exhaustion where one person asked if I needed an ambulance. Rest for about 2 minutes and then force myself to run the 6 K back to my home at marathon pace. I figured I had to teach my mind and body I could run at the pace I needed to qualify for Boston if I was tired and my brain shut down. Same sort of idea with the 20 minute barrier at the 5 K mark - first step was to run one kilometer in less than 4 minutes and then go from there. But that is me and for others, it would not only be wrong but stupid and cause injuries.

In my personal opinion, breaking 20, 40, 90 and qualifying for Boston as a male in your 40s makes one a good but not a great runner. If you were to run 39:59, that would put you 51st in this years Mother's Day run and 9th in your age group. In the smaller races, somewhere around 11 - 16th. It is an accomplishment beyond me as I never got it below 41 minutes but I believe we can make it a lot more complicated when it is miles and time. Just my humble opinion. And as such and this is a fun hobby, try to make sure whatever you choose to do that it brings some joy.

Thanks for the wisdom. I'll be 30 by the 2011 Mother's Day Run, and I think 39:59 is the first step. Then I have to admit that I'd be a sneaky and try to find a very small race so that I can try to top 3 age group +/- overall.

Beyond that, I'd certainly want to keep gradually improving my times.

RE: intervals. I'm thinking I need to add more variety to my intervals. Right now I'm running some long intervals (2.5k), and once the Last Chance Half is over, I'll be moving back down into shorter distances.

I'm actually looking forward to winter now. More mileage, less intensity sounds pretty relaxing.

[Tarsals]

At this rate, how about I make sure that I can 90 the half and 20 in the 5k? That should make guarantee i can 40 the 10k.

No guarantee a 20-minute 5K will get you there... try for 19:00.

Seriously-- there's a lot of overlap in training for a 90-minute half and a 40-minute 10K, which are both about "equivalent" to a 19-minute 5K. There's no reality to the claim that there's "no good training you can do for a fast 5K beyond running till you puke" and many people would advise you to work on speed at this distance before moving on, but you don't have to.

But if you can't do 5K at 4:00/km, there's no way you're gonna do 10. Even my math is good enough for that one.

Your post just gave me an "oh snap" moment. I keep forgetting that 20-min 5k is not equiv to 40-min 10k for some reason. It'll take a lot of work, but once I cross 40, it'll be a great feeling.

[Tarsals]

Hi Tarsals, I'm not an expert on anything, I can only speak to my experience. As you can see in my sig, I have not cracked the 20min, 40min or 90min. But I want to

What I'm going to do over the winter is maintain mileage in the 60-70k/week range with a speed work per week, start marathon training to up the mileage to peak at 100k/week. After the marathon training, I'm going to run lot's of 10k, 5k in the summer which I have never done before, the goal is to go sub 40, 20. I have had great success on getting improvements on my 1/2M and 10k following or during marathon training so I believe I will be able to deliver on these targets. It must have to do with the endurance development that others have spoken of. Then, starting in the summer build on those to run a sub 1:30 half marathon. So by the fall, I hope to have the 20, 40, 90 PBs all beat.

Good luck!

Thanks man. Your most recent marathon finish has me inspired. There's quite a few of us going for 20/40/90 for 2011. Once 2011 starts, we'll need to fire up a thread and push each other along! I've managed the 70k/week range before, and will see how it goes. Mileage beyond that though, my body was not ready for yet in the past...

I'm contemplating signing up for the Vancouver "First Half" in February, but part of me is thinking that it is too soon... as it would require a 2 week taper, and 2 week recovery... essentially losing a month of training.

[Tarsals]

I've never targeted a 5 or 10k specifically but my vote is to work on endurance first. Run alot. And then run tempos at least once a week. IMO you don't need real speed work to run a 3:59/km. A lot of people can go out and run 1 km at that speed. It's putting together 5 or 10 of those that makes it tough. The thing that got me to sub 20 was tempo runs. I ran at least 2 runs a week of 10k at about 4:30/km or better and once a week 6-7k with as many of those at sub 4 as I could. This was also after doing the hill training phase of a marathon plan, which really helps to toughen you up both physically and mentally. You have to teach your body to run near redline. 5ks hurt and you need to be prepared for that. I can't imagine a 10k would be any easier

A lot of people can run a 4:00 minute km? I would agree with everything except that.
A certain amount of speed cushion helps for sure. I would think that the average runner aspiring to race at 4:00 pace or better might need the ability to run much faster for a single km.
A minute faster would be a safer amount.
It's obviously not totally necessary to break 20 first. There are quite a few people who have no idea that 20:00 is some sort of holy grail for recreational runners and they may run well under 40:00 for their first 10km just based on a higher level of natural ability.
Anyone on here who has done close to 20:00 could reasonably aspire to just going for sub 40:00 without breaking 20:00 officially first.

It seems the consensus is for a strong mileage base. When I talk with some of my more casual running friends, they all think I am doing too much mileage for "only a 10k" - but it is good to hear (for better or worse) that it takes more marathon-type mileage as a background. Mileage then speed it is. It should make for an interesting 6 months.

[mcshame]

Hi Tarsals, I'm not an expert on anything, I can only speak to my experience. As you can see in my sig, I have not cracked the 20min, 40min or 90min. But I want to

What I'm going to do over the winter is maintain mileage in the 60-70k/week range with a speed work per week, start marathon training to up the mileage to peak at 100k/week. After the marathon training, I'm going to run lot's of 10k, 5k in the summer which I have never done before, the goal is to go sub 40, 20. I have had great success on getting improvements on my 1/2M and 10k following or during marathon training so I believe I will be able to deliver on these targets. It must have to do with the endurance development that others have spoken of. Then, starting in the summer build on those to run a sub 1:30 half marathon. So by the fall, I hope to have the 20, 40, 90 PBs all beat.

Good luck!

Thanks man. Your most recent marathon finish has me inspired. There's quite a few of us going for 20/40/90 for 2011. Once 2011 starts, we'll need to fire up a thread and push each other along! I've managed the 70k/week range before, and will see how it goes. Mileage beyond that though, my body was not ready for yet in the past...

I'm contemplating signing up for the Vancouver "First Half" in February, but part of me is thinking that it is too soon... as it would require a 2 week taper, and 2 week recovery... essentially losing a month of training.

looks like it will be a 19:XX/40/90 We'll need to discuss the details in a new thread...

[Jwolf]

That was a great workout today, Tarsals.

I highly recommend the First Half-- it's a great course for a fast half-marathon. You can train through it with minimal downtime. My coach has recently convinced me of the merits of using racing while training-- a good race can easily substitute for two or three hard workouts so you gain more than you lose. You certainly won't lose a month of training. (Sign up anyway, because you can easily sell your entry closer to the race if you decide not to use it.)

[RyanConroy]

I would train for the 1/2 and not worry about the 10K (race it but as part of your training for the 1/2).

If you do a weekly tempo run somewhere around 4:15 per kilometre, starting out at about 8 km at tempo pace and building up to 14 km, you will be in a good position to achieve both goals.

A lot of times you get your shorter distance PR's when you are training for a longer race, because of increased fitness and reduced body weight.

[richie-rich]

I've never targeted a 5 or 10k specifically but my vote is to work on endurance first. Run alot. And then run tempos at least once a week. IMO you don't need real speed work to run a 3:59/km. A lot of people can go out and run 1 km at that speed. It's putting together 5 or 10 of those that makes it tough. The thing that got me to sub 20 was tempo runs. I ran at least 2 runs a week of 10k at about 4:30/km or better and once a week 6-7k with as many of those at sub 4 as I could. This was also after doing the hill training phase of a marathon plan, which really helps to toughen you up both physically and mentally. You have to teach your body to run near redline. 5ks hurt and you need to be prepared for that. I can't imagine a 10k would be any easier

A lot of people can run a 4:00 minute km? I would agree with everything except that.
A certain amount of speed cushion helps for sure. I would think that the average runner aspiring to race at 4:00 pace or better might need the ability to run much faster for a single km.
A minute faster would be a safer amount.
It's obviously not totally necessary to break 20 first. There are quite a few people who have no idea that 20:00 is some sort of holy grail for recreational runners and they may run well under 40:00 for their first 10km just based on a higher level of natural ability.
Anyone on here who has done close to 20:00 could reasonably aspire to just going for sub 40:00 without breaking 20:00 officially first.

don't know. i have a hard time thinking i can run a sub 40 10K without cracking a sub 20 5K. i am way closer to going under 20 for 5k than i am going under 40 for the 10k

[Ironboy]

I'm thinking what we have here is an issue of semantics.

No, you would not have to actually break 20:00 in a 5km to go sub 40:00 in a 10km, but you would have to be fit enough to do it if you tried.

That has to be what people are saying. You don't need the accomplishment of a sub 20:00 5km under your belt, but you need the fitness.

Otherwise it makes no sense, if I can run sub 4:00/km for 10km and can certainly run half that distance at least at that pace.

So you don't need to do it, you simply need to be able to do it.

[Jwolf]

I'm thinking what we have here is an issue of semantics.

No, you would not have to actually break 20:00 in a 5km to go sub 40:00 in a 10km, but you would have to be fit enough to do it if you tried.

That has to be what people are saying. You don't need the accomplishment of a sub 20:00 5km under your belt, but you need the fitness.

Otherwise it makes no sense, if I can run sub 4:00/km for 10km and can certainly run half that distance at least at that pace.

So you don't need to do it, you simply need to be able to do it.

Good summary!

The idea of doing it vs. being able to do it also relates to the question in the General forum about what it is that makes us run faster on race day.

I guess the relevant question is whether you should train for the equivalent 5K time before stepping up to 10K. Many people don't, and it is true that 10K training is more similar to half-marathon training than 5K training. That's what I think others were trying to say before.

[jamix]

According to a VDOT chart created by US coach Jack Daniels. To be capable of running a 10 km in the range of 39:40 - 40:18, you should be able to run a 5 km in the range 19:08 - 19:25.

[jamix]

I'm thinking what we have here is an issue of semantics.

No, you would not have to actually break 20:00 in a 5km to go sub 40:00 in a 10km, but you would have to be fit enough to do it if you tried.

That has to be what people are saying. You don't need the accomplishment of a sub 20:00 5km under your belt, but you need the fitness.

Otherwise it makes no sense, if I can run sub 4:00/km for 10km and can certainly run half that distance at least at that pace.

So you don't need to do it, you simply need to be able to do it.

I would further add that its not possible to run a sub 40 min 10 km run without running a sub 20 min 5 km in the process!

[SteveF]

According to a VDOT chart created by US coach Jack Daniels. To be capable of running a 10 km in the range of 39:40 - 40:18, you should be able to run a 5 km in the range 19:08 - 19:25.

And like all the calculators, they assume a certain amount of base mileage, and they still don't mean as much when moving up the distances. I can run low 18's but I'm not sure I can do sub 40 right now.

[jamix]

According to a VDOT chart created by US coach Jack Daniels. To be capable of running a 10 km in the range of 39:40 - 40:18, you should be able to run a 5 km in the range 19:08 - 19:25.

And like all the calculators, they assume a certain amount of base mileage, and they still don't mean as much when moving up the distances. I can run low 18's but I'm not sure I can do sub 40 right now.

It depends on how much you move up the distance. But the OP has already trained and run the 10 km distance.

In your case, for low 18's, you should be able to run a sub 40 min 10 km, if only after a few practice sessions running the 10 km distance.

[10not42]

+1 to Ironboy's caution.

I think the big thing is to stay consistent through a Calgary winter where it might be easy to let your fitness lapse. If you can get the runs in, even if they're mostly easy ones, you'll be in a great position to put up some low numbers next summer. Whether that means sub-40 by mid-May is a detail that will sort itself out.

+2,
but,
it can be difficult to do quality training in Feb-April, when it can be cold/snowy/icy, not to mention dark in the evening, so several Calgary running clubs do their winter speed workouts in the Olympic Oval.