General Discussion Triathlon Talk » 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2009-09-15 8:11 AM

User image

Expert
1118
1000100
, North Carolina
Subject: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
I'm curious what ya'lls differences are in your pace in relation to the length of your run?

I think I'm becoming a lazy runner and getting slower; or maybe I just don't know what to expect as distance increases.

I just bought a forerunner so I need to start making sure I'm in the proper heart rate zone so I'll know if I'm pushing hard enough.  My first 10K is coming up and I can make the distance, but I can't seem to find a good 10K pace.

I guess the bottom line is that I won't know my proper pace until I know if I'm in the proper heart rate zone.


2009-09-15 8:19 AM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
If you know your pace/time for one distance, McMillan can help you estimate what would be the equivalent pace for another, regardless of "proper heart rate zone":

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm



Edited by the bear 2009-09-15 8:31 AM
2009-09-15 8:38 AM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Elite
3683
20001000500100252525
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
If you're going to be running according to HR, then you are probably going to want to stay in Z2 for a good portion of your runs. There are a few threads on how to do a LT test (which is quite uncomfortable) to determine your training zones.


Edited by tri_d00d 2009-09-15 8:54 AM
2009-09-15 8:40 AM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Elite
3315
20001000100100100
Miami
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
http://www.runbayou.com/jackd.htm

good calc for you, although the one that bear posted is very good also.

2009-09-15 9:57 AM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Expert
1049
100025
Burnaby, BC
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

The Bear posted the best resource, but a rule of thumb if you're not around a computer is that when you double the distance, you double the time and add 10%.

2009-09-15 9:59 AM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Cycling Guru
15134
50005000500010025
Fulton, MD
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

maria40nc - 2009-09-15 9:11 AM I guess the bottom line is that I won't know my proper pace until I know if I'm in the proper heart rate zone dump the HRM monitor in a race and just go as hard as I can maintain for that distance.



(And McMillan is the best place to start.  Your HR in races does not reflect on the same you get during training - there is variation).

Oh, and "racing" a 5k/10k/HM is all about mental effort management.Your 5 and 10k would be above the LT range that you find during field tests.  Staying above that is very uncomfortable so it is really determined by how much you can tolerate mentally, not how much your heart can take!



2009-09-15 10:59 AM
in reply to: #2407097

User image

Expert
721
500100100
Chenequa WI
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
Daremo - 2009-09-15 9:59 AM

maria40nc - 2009-09-15 9:11 AM I guess the bottom line is that I won't know my proper pace until I know if I'm in the proper heart rate zone dump the HRM monitor in a race and just go as hard as I can maintain for that distance.



(And McMillan is the best place to start.  Your HR in races does not reflect on the same you get during training - there is variation).

Oh, and "racing" a 5k/10k/HM is all about mental effort management.Your 5 and 10k would be above the LT range that you find during field tests.  Staying above that is very uncomfortable so it is really determined by how much you can tolerate mentally, not how much your heart can take!



(Sigh) So true.
2009-09-15 11:52 AM
in reply to: #2407097

Pro
4054
200020002525
yep,
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

Daremo - 2009-09-15 10:59 AM

maria40nc - 2009-09-15 9:11 AM I guess the bottom line is that I won't know my proper pace until I know if I'm in the proper heart rate zone dump the HRM monitor in a race and just go as hard as I can maintain for that distance.



(And McMillan is the best place to start.  Your HR in races does not reflect on the same you get during training - there is variation).

Oh, and "racing" a 5k/10k/HM is all about mental effort management.Your 5 and 10k would be above the LT range that you find during field tests.  Staying above that is very uncomfortable so it is really determined by how much you can tolerate mentally, not how much your heart can take!

 

Thats a pretty good point. I consider myself average for the run portions of a 5k or 10k of a tri (24mins 5k; 54ish for 10k)  So those paces are usually above LT for me.  Now going longer is all about pacing yourself and being able to run that pace consistently for the whole duration of the race. 

 

Good luck with your training and keep us posted on your results.

2009-09-15 12:01 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Expert
1123
1000100
Columbus
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
the aforementioned pace calculators are great for predicting your times IF you are putting in the training. If I enter my mile time or even my 5k time I should be doing a sub 3 hour marathon. My best marathon is 20 minutes off that mark. So, remember those predictions calculate times based on the idea you have trained equally for each distance. Also the closer the distances the more accurate the prediction. eg using my mile time to predict a marathon time is just not a good benchmark. Using a 10k to predict a half marathon is a pretty good estimate.
2009-09-15 1:28 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Expert
1118
1000100
, North Carolina
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

Bear and Trix - Thanks for the great websites and calculators!  And Bear, I love your avi.  It makes me smile every time I see it. Smile

Ron - Yes, I've read about those test. I've not worked much with HR yet other than to check it according to the standard tables and then say, "hmmmm, ok."

Rick - You're so right.  I need to work on that!  I know I don't push hard enough.  I need to kick myself out of "comfort running." 

Thank you for all the responses.  There's so much to learn.  But learning is fun!

2009-09-15 2:59 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Elite
3088
20001000252525
Austin, TX
Gold member
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
Ignore the HRM for now and do the 10k. Run hard. If you feel pretty close to puking for the last couple of miles, then you're pacing it about right.

At mile 2, hit the lap button on your HRM so you get an average over the last 4.2 miles. The average over the last 4 miles will be pretty close to your LT. If you were really in pain and digging deep, your LT will be a few beats lower than that average.

Use THAT to establish your training zones going forward and use the 10k time in the McMillan calculator to determine pacing efforts in other distances.

Edited by dgunthert 2009-09-15 2:59 PM


2009-09-15 3:39 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Pro
5169
50001002525
Burbs
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
to give you an idea of mine...
5K: 7:27/ mi
10K: 7:39/ mi
HM: 8:10/ mi

.... these are different, though, in tris

I would just go with a pace that feels comfortably hard for each distance.
2009-09-15 3:41 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
I think you should run faster with each longer distance.  You don't want to be out there forever you know.
2009-09-15 3:54 PM
in reply to: #2407994

User image

Champion
5781
5000500100100252525
Northridge, California
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
trishie - 2009-09-15 1:39 PM to give you an idea of mine...
5K: 7:27/ mi
10K: 7:39/ mi
HM: 8:10/ mi

.... these are different, though, in tris

I would just go with a pace that feels comfortably hard for each distance.


And mine:

5K: 6:24/mi
10K: 6:59/mi
HM: 7:20/mi

Haven't done a 10K in 11 months, though...I suspect I'd be at closer to 6:55/mi now.  Anyhow, if you look at my times and trishie's, you'll see a general progression there that's probably pretty typical.

(The "double the time and add 10%" thing works fairly well with my times for those distances, as it happens.)

In terms of pacing, as has been said already, most of it is mental, esp. for 5K and 10K...they hurt and it's been my experience that a lot of runners stop short of pushing past a certain level of discomfort for a sustained run.

Edited by tcovert 2009-09-15 3:56 PM
2009-09-15 9:10 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Master
2426
200010010010010025
Central Indiana
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
As a new (and middle-aged) runner this year I find some of those pace calculators to be way off at longer distances.  I can run 7min mi, and my PB 5k is 24min (very close to 24:15 predicted).  HOWEVER- my best 10k is 57min (50:23 pred), and best 13.1 is 2:14 (1:52 pred).  I freely admit I am not a well-conditioned runner, but my mile time has come down MUCH faster than my time for longer distances.  I have delusions of doing 1st mary this Fall, but will likely opt for half (since I know I can do that).  I could see myself surviving 26mi, but not at sub-4h pace predicted.


Edited by Oldteen 2009-09-15 9:13 PM
2009-09-15 9:57 PM
in reply to: #2408673

User image

Elite
3088
20001000252525
Austin, TX
Gold member
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
Oldteen - 2009-09-15 9:10 PM

As a new (and middle-aged) runner this year I find some of those pace calculators to be way off at longer distances.  I can run 7min mi, and my PB 5k is 24min (very close to 24:15 predicted).  HOWEVER- my best 10k is 57min (50:23 pred), and best 13.1 is 2:14 (1:52 pred).  I freely admit I am not a well-conditioned runner, but my mile time has come down MUCH faster than my time for longer distances.  I have delusions of doing 1st mary this Fall, but will likely opt for half (since I know I can do that).  I could see myself surviving 26mi, but not at sub-4h pace predicted.


I think most of the folks posting in this thread wouldn't find that unusual at all. The McMillan calculator assumes the significant base of fitness it takes to maintain those paces over those longer distances. Give it another year or so of solid training and you're likely to find the calcs much more accurate.

ETA: I'm 41 and find it to be pretty spot on. Like you, 3 or 4 years ago when I was still relatively new to training, I would have thought it insane that I could run the 3:35 marathon it predicted, despite having run a 46:00 10k. Last year, though, I did 3:32 and believe I can shave several more minutes off.

Edited by dgunthert 2009-09-15 10:02 PM


2009-09-16 7:23 AM
in reply to: #2407899

User image

Expert
1118
1000100
, North Carolina
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
dgunthert - 2009-09-15 3:59 PM Ignore the HRM for now and do the 10k. Run hard. If you feel pretty close to puking for the last couple of miles, then you're pacing it about right. At mile 2, hit the lap button on your HRM so you get an average over the last 4.2 miles. The average over the last 4 miles will be pretty close to your LT. If you were really in pain and digging deep, your LT will be a few beats lower than that average. Use THAT to establish your training zones going forward and use the 10k time in the McMillan calculator to determine pacing efforts in other distances.


I like this advice.... will do it! 

In terms of pacing, as has been said already, most of it is mental, esp. for 5K and 10K...they hurt and it's been my experience that a lot of runners stop short of pushing past a certain level of discomfort for a sustained run.


Yep... that would be me; always staying in a comfort zone.  But THAT is about to change!

Oldteen - 2009-09-15 10:10 PM As a new (and middle-aged) runner... 

I have delusions of doing 1st mary this Fall, but will likely opt for half (since I know I can do that).  I could see myself surviving 26mi, but not at sub-4h pace predicted.


LOL, I hear ya!  I'm a new and middle-aged runner too (43 yr old).  I graduated Couch to 5K in March.  I had similar delusions to do a full mary by spring, but decided to wait until next fall.  I have my first half mary this Dec.

Well, the interesting thing is that my first three 5Ks following the Couch to 5K program finished with very similar times. 

I have a 5K scheduled for the day after my 10K.  The 10K is at NC State where my son goes to school, so I really wanted to do that one.  Then I found the Monster Dash 5K is the day after and it's a 5K in a Holloween costume!  I could not resist the fun silliness of it.  As I was pondering what kind of costume I could run fast in, it hit me.... a cheetah!  So I'll put on cheetah ears and a cheetah tail and a cheetah print shirt with running shorts; then I'll run like a cheetah!!!

Anyway, it will be interesting to compare the 10K results to the next day 5K results compared to what I ran earlier in the year.

This is all really great advice and helps me menatally prepare to get out of the comfort zone and  push harder!

Edited by maria40nc 2009-09-16 7:24 AM
2009-09-16 9:21 AM
in reply to: #2406816

User image

Regular
73
2525
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
the bear - 2009-09-15 9:19 AM If you know your pace/time for one distance, McMillan can help you estimate what would be the equivalent pace for another, regardless of "proper heart rate zone":

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm



That is a pretty cool calculator that I have never seen before.  And its times are pretty close for my 5k, 10k, and 13.1.  I also like the suggested paces for different workouts.  Thanks for sharing
2009-09-16 1:10 PM
in reply to: #2406793

Master
2460
20001001001001002525
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

A tip for folks new to the calculators (like Mcmillan) - they are excellent resources but there is a BIG caveat:

You have to be adequately trained in terms of volume to RACE the distance at similar intensity. Thus, to use a 5k time to estimate your half marathon time, you must be adequately trained for the Half marathon.

You will fall flat for example, you only train low-mileage for a 5k, and then attempt to run the calculator speed at the HM.

This effect becomes extremely pronounced at marathon distances - for most folks, you should be running close to 70mpw to even approach the mcmillan estimate. Experienced marathoners generally use the marathon estimate as the upper limit of their race day, in ideal conditions, even with 70+mpw.

This is particularly important for low-running volume triathletes, who never approach the mileage requisite to race a pure marathon (or even HM).

2009-09-16 1:37 PM
in reply to: #2409854

User image

Elite
3088
20001000252525
Austin, TX
Gold member
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
I agree with the point about adequately training for the distance in order to even come close to the McMillan calc. The calc doesn't tell you what you're in shape to run, just an approximation of what you're capable of running after equivalent training.

However, I can't agree with the 70 miles per week statement at all. I used my lifetime PR for 10k in the calc and came in under the marathon prediction after training 35-40 mpw. I used the "advanced" version of Runner's World's "Ultimate Marathon Training Plan." Even if I had done the easy Saturday runs instead of long rides, the average would have been in the 40s. There isn't a single week in the plan that calls for more than mid to upper 50s.
2009-09-16 1:42 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Pro
3883
20001000500100100100252525
Woodstock,GA
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

If you are incorporating cross training (i.e. cycling and swimming twice per week) in addition to running 4 days per week there is no need to run 70mpw unless you are a glutton for punishment.



2009-09-16 1:43 PM
in reply to: #2409916

User image

Cycling Guru
15134
50005000500010025
Fulton, MD
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
Rocket Man - 2009-09-16 2:42 PM

If you are incorporating cross training (i.e. cycling and swimming twice per week) in addition to running 4 days per week there is no need to run 70mpw unless you are a glutton for punishment.



Or you want to train like a runner ...........

2009-09-16 1:47 PM
in reply to: #2406793

User image

Pro
3883
20001000500100100100252525
Woodstock,GA
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

Aerobic capacity is aerobic capacity no matter how you build it. Just because you aren't pouding your joints 7 days a week doesn't mean you aren't building the same aerobic capacity in the pool or on the bike.

2009-09-16 2:15 PM
in reply to: #2409854

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace
agarose2000 - 2009-09-16 1:10 PM

A tip for folks new to the calculators (like Mcmillan) - they are excellent resources but there is a BIG caveat:

You have to be adequately trained in terms of volume to RACE the distance at similar intensity. Thus, to use a 5k time to estimate your half marathon time, you must be adequately trained for the Half marathon.

You will fall flat for example, you only train low-mileage for a 5k, and then attempt to run the calculator speed at the HM.

This effect becomes extremely pronounced at marathon distances - for most folks, you should be running close to 70mpw to even approach the mcmillan estimate. Experienced marathoners generally use the marathon estimate as the upper limit of their race day, in ideal conditions, even with 70+mpw.

This is particularly important for low-running volume triathletes, who never approach the mileage requisite to race a pure marathon (or even HM).



I think the caveat is: you should do the adequate training load based on your specific physiological needs in order to realize the potential suggested by calculators like Daniels or McMillan.

Some athletes adapt faster to muscle fiber fatigue resistance hence they find it 'easier' to develop speed on longer distances (i.e. marathon) but struggle to run porportionally as fast(er) on shorter distances. OTOH some athletes adapt faster to pace @ maximum lactate steady state hence their speed during evens of 1 hr or shorter is very good but struggle to get close to their potential on longer distances (they fell of their speed curve).

The point is; an athlete with better muscle fiber fatigue resistance might benefit much more be focusing more on improving his mlss and/or VO2max while an athlete with great pace @ mlss but poor muscle fiber fatigue resistance should focus more on volume at lower intensities. The total training load (volume + intensity) will be different for every athlete.

Yes in general it is safe to assume untrained individuals will benefit from any training and since volume is the most popular approach suggested it is how many newcomers train and certainly improve, still that doesn't automatically mean they are indeed doing the optimal training given their physiological needs. That's why IMO it is hard to suggest what kind of mileage is necessary for an athlete to come close to the potential suggested by performance estimators; some might do so with lower load while others might require months/years of consistent training load.
2009-09-16 2:19 PM
in reply to: #2410013

Iron Donkey
38643
50005000500050005000500050002000100050010025
, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace

JorgeM - 2009-09-16 2:15 PM
agarose2000 - 2009-09-16 1:10 PM

A tip for folks new to the calculators (like Mcmillan) - they are excellent resources but there is a BIG caveat:

You have to be adequately trained in terms of volume to RACE the distance at similar intensity. Thus, to use a 5k time to estimate your half marathon time, you must be adequately trained for the Half marathon.

You will fall flat for example, you only train low-mileage for a 5k, and then attempt to run the calculator speed at the HM.

This effect becomes extremely pronounced at marathon distances - for most folks, you should be running close to 70mpw to even approach the mcmillan estimate. Experienced marathoners generally use the marathon estimate as the upper limit of their race day, in ideal conditions, even with 70+mpw.

This is particularly important for low-running volume triathletes, who never approach the mileage requisite to race a pure marathon (or even HM).



I think the caveat is: you should do the adequate training load based on your specific physiological needs in order to realize the potential suggested by calculators like Daniels or McMillan.

Some athletes adapt faster to muscle fiber fatigue resistance hence they find it 'easier' to develop speed on longer distances (i.e. marathon) but struggle to run porportionally as fast(er) on shorter distances. OTOH some athletes adapt faster to pace @ maximum lactate steady state hence their speed during evens of 1 hr or shorter is very good but struggle to get close to their potential on longer distances (they fell of their speed curve).

The point is; an athlete with better muscle fiber fatigue resistance might benefit much more be focusing more on improving his mlss and/or VO2max while an athlete with great pace @ mlss but poor muscle fiber fatigue resistance should focus more on volume at lower intensities. The total training load (volume + intensity) will be different for every athlete.

Yes in general it is safe to assume untrained individuals will benefit from any training and since volume is the most popular approach suggested it is how many newcomers train and certainly improve, still that doesn't automatically mean they are indeed doing the optimal training given their physiological needs. That's why IMO it is hard to suggest what kind of mileage is necessary for an athlete to come close to the potential suggested by performance estimators; some might do so with lower load while others might require months/years of consistent training load.

Heh heh Jorge typed "load" heh heh.

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » 5K pace vs 10K pace vs HM pace Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2