Active Community: Message List - Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Thu, 18 May 2006 15:07:00 GMT

5K 20:04 (6:28/mile ~)
4M 27:45 (6:56/mile +0:28)
5M 35:11 (7:02/mile +0:06)
10K 44:30 (7:10/mile +0:08)
10M 1:15:09 (7:31/mile +0:21)
HM 1:44:15 (7:58/mile +0:27)
M 3:41:49 (8:26/mile +0:29)

I have been running a little over 5 years, 25 to 30 miles per week (peaked at 50 miles per week while training for the marathon.)

My 4-mile to 10-mile races seem to fall in line with calculators. The reason the 5K is so much "better" than the other races is that it is on the easiest (flattest) course. The half marathon is old; I think I can take almost five minutes off from it. As for the marathon, I do not think I will be able to improve it. Due to family, I cannot train the number of miles necessary to get the marathon time down.

Profile[/URL" target="_blank">

[http://This message has been edited by MaineRunner2001 (edited May-18-2006).|http://This message has been edited by MaineRunner2001 (edited May-18-2006).]

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Sat, 03 Jun 2006 19:39:00 GMT

I'm in the same boat as some of the above posters; I suffered from a lack of overall endurance in my first marathon. My other times mostly follow my VDOT predictions (~ 48.5) from Daniels' formula:

1 mile - 5:58
2 mile - 12:40
5k - 20:38
10k - 42:44
10 mile - 1:11:09
20k - 1:28:54
25k - 1:54:00
30k - 2:17:53
Marathon - 3:30:48

I should have run a 3:17:00 marathon, according to the charts. I dropped off at mile 19 when I tried to catch back up with my 3:20 pace group after a bathroom break at mile 15.

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Sat, 27 May 2006 03:48:00 GMT

3km - 9:53 - 3:16/km
5km - 16:41 - 3:20/km - +04sec
10km - 34:22 - 3:26/km - +06sec
15km - 55:19 - 3:41/km - +15sec
42.2km - 2:56:39 - 4:11/km - +30sec

start falling off the pace in the marathon although it was a negative split so I hope one day to lower that time significantly if I can only string a decent period of time of high milage together without injury.

----

My Profile[/URL" target="_blank">

Never, never, never give up.

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Wed, 24 May 2006 17:17:00 GMT

5K: 18:56 6:05.6
10K: 39:06 6:17.6 +12.0
10m: 66:10 6:37.0 + 0:19.4
1/2: 1:27.28 6:40 +3.0
m: 3:11:04 7:17.2 +37.2

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Wed, 24 May 2006 17:06:00 GMT

1Mile- 5:58 (1999)
5K- 21:03 (2005)
HM-136:07 (2005)
Marathon 3:38:32 (2005)

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Wed, 24 May 2006 15:37:00 GMT

All within last 18 months...

5M: 5:51/Mile (2005)
10M: 6:06 ; +0:15 (2006)
Half: 6:23 ; + 0:17 (2005)
Full: 6:57 ; +0:34 (2006)

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Tue, 23 May 2006 22:45:00 GMT

(All 2006, not ancient history)

5k: 19:51
10m: 65:35
1/2 marathon: 1:26:35
marathon: 3:08:45 (Boston)

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Tue, 23 May 2006 21:01:00 GMT

Within the last year, relative to mile pace.

sec/mile slower than a mile race pace:
5k, +16sec.
10k, +43sec. (very soft)
10mi. +46sec.
1/2mar. +53sec.
20mi. +61sec.
mar +64sec.
66k +152sec. (ugly)

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Tue, 23 May 2006 20:09:00 GMT

5K: 5:33/Mile (2006)
10K: 5:47 (2006)
15K: 6:06 (2005)
Half: 7:51 (2001)
Full: 7:02 (2005)

Re: Forget Calculators: Actual Results?

guest — Mon, 22 May 2006 15:59:00 GMT

Yeah. I think I could run a 3:07:15 on a flat course. But those other times are wayyyyyyyy out of my reach.

I think the 3:07 PR is a bit on the soft side. I ran it at Boston last year in the heat. I think I was in sub 3:05 shape for Boston. Perhaps better on a flatter course. Who knows.

BTW, I wouldn't say the other times are out of your reach. You aren't that far away. You're only :18/mile off the 1/2 mar & :30/mile off the 5 mile.

Keep workin' it.