6 min. mile

Support | Event Directors & Organizers

Search Cool Running Community

Browse Cool Running

CoolRunning.com > Cool Running Community > Basic Training >

1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Go to original post

dg12002

622 posts since
Aug 26, 2003

60. Aug 16, 2007 1:23 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by dpar:
While you very well may be right, very few Soldiers can run 2 x 6 minute miles for the PT test. More realistically, the norm for a male is more like 7:00-7:30 putting average times for the two mile in the 14:00ish range.

<HR>

You're right! As a Marine we always ran 3 miles. There were about a dozen of us up front in the sub 6mm running group.

Jim Sullivan032

516 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

61. Aug 16, 2007 2:02 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by MichiganFlyer:
I was 27th place out of 225 runners in a recent 5k with a pace of 6:34 per mile. Now figure that less than 5% of people ever take place in a road race so I was racing the top 5% of Americans basically.<HR>

The sport's in trouble if we're giving ourselves credit for beating non-runners.

obsessor

488 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

62. Aug 16, 2007 2:42 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by MichiganFlyer:
I am glad that you can run fast but you must realize that you are a freak of nature. (because of all the hard work you put in of course)

I was 27th place out of 225 runners in a recent 5k with a pace of 6:34 per mile. Now figure that less than 5% of people ever take place in a road race so I was racing the top 5% of Americans basically.

A 6 minute pace for one mile is difficult let alone multiple miles of them in a row.

<HR>

In a recent 5k I ran, less than 300 guys, you had to run about 18 minutes to be in the top 100. All local runners. 27th was 16:01. 54th was 16:51. I'm not saying it isn't difficult, but it is far from impossible.

qtownrunner

68 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

63. Aug 16, 2007 2:50 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by obsessor:

In a recent 5k I ran, less than 300 guys, you had to run about 18 minutes to be in the top 100. All local runners. 27th was 16:01. 54th was 16:51. I'm not saying it isn't difficult, but it is far from impossible.<HR>

Could you post a link for this race's results?

obsessor

488 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

64. Aug 16, 2007 3:02 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by qtownrunner:
Could you post a link for this race's results?

<HR>

http://www.raceberryjam.com/kraft5k.html[/URL" target="_blank">

hope that works.

qtownrunner

68 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

65. Aug 16, 2007 3:22 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by obsessor:
http://www.raceberryjam.com/kraft5k.html[/URL" target="_blank">

hope that works.<HR>

Wow, the results of that race are amazing. Though far, far from typical. Even if you look at the recent 5Ks from that site and you'll see that 6:00 mile pace will put you in the top 5-10% and even win a race. For whatever reason, a ton of talent came out for the race you linked to.

exciton

317 posts since
Nov 2, 2004

66. Aug 16, 2007 3:45 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by obsessor:
http://www.raceberryjam.com/kraft5k.html[/URL" target="_blank">

hope that works.<HR>

It is interesting to see Patrick Russell in the lead pack. Just goes to show that running fast ultras really is compatible (even synergistic) with running fast short races.

obsessor

488 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

67. Aug 16, 2007 4:00 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by qtownrunner:
Wow, the results of that race are amazing. Though far, far from typical. Even if you look at the recent 5Ks from that site and you'll see that 6:00 mile pace will put you in the top 5-10% and even win a race. For whatever reason, a ton of talent came out for the race you linked to.

<HR>

I would not call it amazing. I know these guys, and they are regular guys. It's not typical, either, sure. And yes, most of the better local runners came to that one race, but note: they are all locals. There's no super-amazing times. Thing is, we are not in a huge market, yet we have a LOT of races... more than anywhere else I know of, in relation to our population.

For example, the same site, you will see that this weekend there are 25 local races (maybe 5 are farther away) and 10 of them are 5k's. Someone will probably win a 5k in 18 something this weekend, that doesn't make it an amazing time. Not that it's bad, either, but just keep things in perspective. Whenever I win a race, I feel very humble, because I know the only reason is that ... no one (of the many) better than me showed up! That race I linked is not really rare, there are probably 20+ races a year in our area with that kind of quality.

And, for the record, (to fred) I would not call a 6min mile a good warmup. Too short, and too fast for most anyone. Guys running 1:05 HM's ... not warming up that fast. Excepting a few strides, perhaps.

exciton

317 posts since
Nov 2, 2004

68. Aug 16, 2007 4:06 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by fredurie:
A 6 minute mile is what you do for a warmup before you race.<HR>

It's extremely arrogant to expect everybody to have the same talent and commitment that you do--to expect people to run as fast as you do, or did.

You still don't understand the argument. Six minutes for the mile is not fast. I agree. For that very reason, it's a common goal for a recreational runner. For many of us, working full time, having kids, and trying to be an involved member of the family just has to take precendence over 100 mile weeks. You have very high standards and you are at the same time very conceited, so it may be difficult to get your head around this concept.

You may think that people like me (a 200 lb lummox who will have to fight tooth and nail to get under 17:00 for 5K) bring shame to the sport. That's your prerogative, but it's a very bad attitude.

Personally, when I see an overweight mommy trying to change her life, pounding out a 5K at 10:00 per mile, sweating, finishing, proud that she's a little faster than last time--I see a person with guts and I'm proud to be associated with her. I'll congratulate her just like those little fast fellas up front (well maybe not you) will congratulate me. Maybe it's just a southern redneck thing?

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

ToddDubya

212 posts since
Jan 26, 2006

69. Aug 16, 2007 4:08 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by fredurie:
A 6 minute mile is what you do for a warmup before you race.

<HR>

The 6 minute mile is what I run just long enough to be out front in the "Starting Line" pictures in the local paper, then back off to a more appropriate pace after I pass the cameras.

A buddy of mine always says "It's not how you finish, it's how you look in the paper."

------------------
-Todd
Check Me Out[/URL" target="_blank">
There's plenty of time for rest when you're dead.

joev9

490 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

70. Dec 26, 2007 5:11 AM

in response to: melistic

obsessor that is a very impressive race, especially with 484 total finishers. the 2006 CVS 5K here in RI, the national championship for road 5K, had 114 finishers under 18 minutes and your local race had 91!!!

http://www.cvsdowntown5k.com/results/2006_5k.php[/URL" target="_blank">

even more interesting is that there are two Minnesota guys that ran under 15 minutes (Carlson and Lowery) who weren't in your race. ****, Minnesota is a hot bed of fast 5K guys...

http://This message has been edited by joev9 (edited Aug-16-2007).

MichiganFlyer2

160 posts since
May 13, 2007

71. Aug 16, 2007 4:35 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by obsessor:

In a recent 5k I ran, less than 300 guys, you had to run about 18 minutes to be in the top 100. All local runners. 27th was 16:01. 54th was 16:51. I'm not saying it isn't difficult, but it is far from impossible.<HR>

Yes but these are runners running for teams (see right column) as it shows they are members of some running team.

Even so about 67% of these team runners could not run 3 straight 6 minutes miles.

This does sound interesting though. How do you find races to run in like this with so many good runners?

obsessor

488 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

72. Dec 26, 2007 5:11 AM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by joev9:
obsessor that is a very impressive race, especially with 484 total finishers. the 2006 CVS 5K here in RI, the national championship for road 5K, had 114 finishers under 18 minutes and your local race had 91!!!

http://www.cvsdowntown5k.com/results/2006_5k.php[/URL" target="_blank">

even more interesting is that there are two Minnesota guys that ran under 15 minutes (Carlson and Lowery) who weren't in your race. ****, Minnesota is a hot bed of fast 5K guys...

http://This message has been edited by joev9 (edited Aug-16-2007).<HR>

Don't say 5k. Last week ... it looks like a 6:00 pace would get you 47th place out of 128 guys (sorry, ladies, only talking about the guys, here.).

That was a 15k, not a 5k. You can look it up on your own. I don't care about the distance.

In fact, I will maintain that the Twin Cities area has the greatest concentration of ... pretty good runners... (I don't even know how to say it) than any area in country. I mean, run of the mill runners who try hard and want to compete. I am not talking olympic contenders... just people who want to compete. So - you can come here and feel like a total hack (like me) ... but you will not lack an opportunity to compete.

Jim24315

1,988 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

73. Aug 16, 2007 4:59 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by obsessor:
In fact, I will maintain that the Twin Cities area has the greatest concentration of ... pretty good runners... (I don't even know how to say it) than any area in country. I mean, run of the mill runners who try hard and want to compete. I am not talking olympic contenders... just people who want to compete. So - you can come here and feel like a total hack (like me) ... but you will not lack an opportunity to compete.<HR>

Twin Cities definitely has my respect, but the Bay Area is not too shabby. You have more sub 15's but we have higher % of sub-18 with 88 of 208 in this one. I'll put our overall masters strength up against anybody:

http://www.pausatf.org/data/2007/RR5Kz2007.html[/URL" target="_blank">

P.S. My big brother can beat up your big brother

obsessor

488 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

74. Aug 16, 2007 5:04 PM

in response to: melistic

quote:<HR>Originally posted by MichiganFlyer2:
Yes but these are runners running for teams (see right column) as it shows they are members of some running team.

Even so about 67% of these team runners could not run 3 straight 6 minutes miles.

This does sound interesting though. How do you find races to run in like this with so many good runners? <HR>

Yeah. I am running on a team, too. You can be on my team, if you like. Most of these teams are open. What's your point on that one?

Did you check out the ages, too?

It's not a challenge to find races like that around here. Hit all the local team circuit races, and it's a good race. Find a race that pays out, and it's a good race. Ask your freinds... there's no lack of good races here. Currently, our whole area is really taking off. I continue to get faster each year, and my place is getting worse! People train together, push each other, trade ideas... we are cultivating a culture of competition.

1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Go to original post

New Runners

Training

Competition

Age Groups

Fitness

The Lighter Side

Feedback

Related Links