23 replies to this topic

[SlingRunner]

What do you think?

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120...t+Fast+For+A+PR

GO OUT FAST IN YOUR NEXT 5K
To run your best 5-K, new research suggests a more aggressive approach
By Ed Eyestone

The surest way to blow a 5-K is to start too fast. But just how fast is too fast?

Researchers from the University of New Hampshire examined the effect of different pacing strategies on 5-K performance. Their subjects were 11 female runners from the school's cross-country team, who trained an average of 35 miles per week and had 5-K PRs ranging from 18 to 21 minutes. After running two 5-K time trials to establish a baseline pace, the subjects then completed three more 5-Ks using decidedly different pacing strategies: The subjects ran the first mile of each race either equal to, three percent faster, or six percent faster than their established baseline pace per mile. After the first mile, the subjects could change their pace to finish as quickly as possible.

The results surprised everyone familiar with the go-out-easy approach. Eight of the 11 women ran their best 5-K times (averaging 20:39) when they ran the first mile six percent faster than their baseline pace. The other three subjects posted their best times (20:52) going out three percent faster than baseline pace. The even-paced runners produced the slowest times, averaging 21:11. The faster-starting women did slow down more during the race, but the even-paced runners simply couldn't make up the time lost in a slower start.

So how is it that these runners achieved their best times by logging their first mile a seemingly suicidal 26 seconds faster than their predicted 5-K pace? According to the study, at the end of the first mile, the even-paced runners were at only 78 percent of their VO2 max, an effort level more akin to a tempo run than a 5-K race--below their potential. The three-percent and six-percent faster starts put the subjects at 82 and 83 percent of VO2 max after the first mile, which is closer to the intensity you'd expect from an experienced runner racing the first mile of a 5-K.

So should we all go out as fast as possible in every race? Not exactly. Moderately trained runners may benefit from a faster start because they're probably not starting fast enough in the first place. The researchers suggest that their study findings are probably most applicable to competitive open and master's division runners, not elites who already know how best to push themselves right from the gun or beginners who totally lack a sense of pacing. And even competitive runners shouldn't try the go-out-fast strategy in longer races, when other variables become more important than first-mile pace--like, say, finishing another 25.2 miles.

[HillsAths1]

I guess what I would like to see is more about the methodology used. What exactly are they talking about when they mention baseline pace, how close is that to the individuals pr. when were the prs set, what was the training regieme that the athlethes were in etc?
Having said that, I think most athletes would agee that in most races they would try and get a good start so that they can stay with leaders get dragged along etc and hope they dont lose too much at the back end.
You have to ensure that for a distance such as 5km that by going faster than your normal pace that you do not get your self into oxygen debt, which will result in slower times.

[glenda]

I don't know about baseline pace or that technical stuff but I think a reasonably well trained runner can go out a little harder in a 5km because it's not such a big distance that a massive blow out is likely. I tried it only 1 and a bit weeks ago, I decided I would treat it as a 3km race and went thru 3km in my 3km Pb (10.11) (not a plan just happened that way) and managed to hang on for a 10 second Pb 17.05 down from 17.15 about 6 weeks prior. Some may say a better pacing job would have resulted in a better time but for me the only way is to go hard from the start.

[Chelli]

5km is a fast pace so if you aren't warmed up properly and ready to run fast at or near maximum VO2 max pace you are going to run slow or not in PB territory. It is proven that the best trained runners can run at or around 97-100% of their Vo2 max pace. This is because they are only running for 12:30-15:00. Whilst VO2max pace for the average endurance athlete is around 9-11 minutes of all out running.

To run you best 5 kilometre race you need to be motivated and ready to run hard at the start. By 3 kilometres if you are feeling comfortable you have run out too easy. You should be breathing relatively hard and keeping focus on form, leg turn over and stride length and block everything else out.

Edited by Chelli, 17 November 2007 - 10:56 AM.

[MizukiNoguchi]

I think it makes sense, the first part is anaerobic and will have minimal if any impact on the rest of the race if it is controlled. If an athlete capable of running 60sec for 400m and 20min for 5km's (96sec/400m) runs the 1st 400m 6% quicker in 90sec (or even quicker in my opinion) i highly doubt this will stop the athlete running the next 11.5 laps in 96's.

[Tony123]

Congrats on your 5km PB Glenda. !7:05 is a fantastic time.

Tony

[Chelli]

AllysonFelix, on Nov 17 2007, 08:31 AM, said:

I think it makes sense, the first part is anaerobic and will have minimal if any impact on the rest of the race if it is controlled. If an athlete capable of running 60sec for 400m and 20min for 5km's (96sec/400m) runs the 1st 400m 6% quicker in 90sec (or even quicker in my opinion) i highly doubt this will stop the athlete running the next 11.5 laps in 96's.

I have to second that as with my pace for around 16:40 for 5km (80sec/400m). When I run at this pace I would usually run the 1st and the 5th kilometre the fastest. As a result the first 400m in 76 seconds and 1km in 3:16 near my top speed. Then I do the next 3km in 3:22 so I am around 13:22- 13:25 for 4km which you should feel gradual fatigue and breathing heavy. Then hold form and hang in there until around 4.5km Once you know you have around 60-90 seconds of hard running to go just go all out and run as fast as your legs will take you knowing that the quicker you get there the quicker you can recover and you can burn off your challengers if there is anyone around.

Thats my perspective to running a good 5km. The secret is to run out slightly faster without accumalating too much lactic acid. Hold a hard pace in the middle whilst focusing on form. This is equally important as this is the fitness or strength part of the run as you do not want to slow down too much. Then launch a final assualt in the final kilometre with nothing to spare in tank. You could break it down like a VO2 max interval session whilst racing a 5km.

Edited by Chelli, 17 November 2007 - 11:32 AM.

[blair]

I'm going to give this a go at BRRC 5km Championships tomorrow. I'll let you know how it goes.

[lactatehead]

If people spent more time running 1500s, 3ks etc on the track as well as the longer races, then the right pace for a 5k would just come to them instinctively. I think many people only know one race pace and find it hard to adapt just because the distance becomes shorter.

[DrJH]

6% faster than my PB is 12.40. That means 60.8 per lap. My mile PB is only 4.03, so I would basically run a PB mile then expect to keep running.

I don't think so.

[YumHallucinogens]

I agree with DrJH, if a runner well attuned to racing ran positive splits like those, they wouldn't run a PB. Most WRs are run at a consistent pace.

I wonder if the girls were running at the same time? Maybe for sub-elite athletes, it's better to be the rabbit than the wolf .

[blair]

Well, my 5k PB was 22:36 so I planned on running the 1st k in 4:15 and going from there. Instead I ran the 1st k in 4:06, somehow managed to hold on and crossed the line in 21:57.

My k splits were 4:06, 4:26, 4:29, 4:33, 4:23.

So, in my experiment of 1, it works.

[Chelli]

DrJH, on Nov 17 2007, 09:54 PM, said:

6% faster than my PB is 12.40. That means 60.8 per lap. My mile PB is only 4.03, so I would basically run a PB mile then expect to keep running.

I don't think so.

I don't know what you are getting at but are you saying you can run 5km in 12:40.

[Hugh Thyer]

Also agree with DRJH. My 5k pace is around 80s per lap, so 6% faster is 75s laps for the first 4 laps. That would be too much for me.

Maybe it drops off from 6% as the article says, once you become a faster athlete. 6% more effort may be more like it, but not translate to 6% quicker times.

[Steve 'The Footman']

I unintentionally tried this strategy today at the BRRC 5km. Being very unfit and lacking recent race experience I had no idea what I could do. I figured I would go out strong and try to hold on and see what happens. I had a rough goal of 20 to 21 minutes. My splits were 3:57, 3:53, 3:59, 4:13, 4:08 for 20:10. I think this strategy works best if you have less pace judgement. You are going to hurt anyway and by going out fast it makes sure you at least run hard.

Having said that my 5000M PB uses this strategy going out in 8:38 for 3000M and finishing in 14:51. In retrospect I still believe that I would have run a faster overall time if I had gone out at a more reasonable pace. These sort of start fast pace stratagies work OK for 3km and 5km but I think they backfire for anything longer.

[Chelli]

Steve'The Footman', on Nov 18 2007, 04:41 PM, said:

I unintentionally tried this strategy today at the BRRC 5km. Being very unfit and lacking recent race experience I had no idea what I could do. I figured I would go out strong and try to hold on and see what happens. I had a rough goal of 20 to 21 minutes. My splits were 3:57, 3:53, 3:59, 4:13, 4:08 for 20:10. I think this strategy works best if you have less pace judgement. You are going to hurt anyway and by going out fast it makes sure you at least run hard.

Having said that my 5000M PB uses this strategy going out in 8:38 for 3000M and finishing in 14:51. In retrospect I still believe that I would have run a faster overall time if I had gone out at a more reasonable pace. These sort of start fast pace stratagies work OK for 3km and 5km but I think they backfire for anything longer.

You need the fitness base to hold the pace in the middle 3kilometres from the 2nd kilometre to the 4th kilometre which means having a high anaerobic threshold and not to going too lactic in the first kilometre. This requires running near or above VO2max pace at the start and the end of the race. This logic only works if you are in peak condition. The 1st kilomatre can be run 5 seconds quicker than the total race pace due to the low lactic levels as it takes time for lactic acid and the aerobic system to catch up. Also being totally fresh with no soreness from the previous hard sessions the day or two before helps as well

Edited by Chelli, 18 November 2007 - 06:25 PM.

[walshy2]

lactatehead, on Nov 17 2007, 08:15 PM, said:

If people spent more time running 1500s, 3ks etc on the track as well as the longer races, then the right pace for a 5k would just come to them instinctively. I think many people only know one race pace and find it hard to adapt just because the distance becomes shorter.

i agree totally, I seem to run the same 4 min km's regardless of distance....I thought more speed work may help?

[lactatehead]

walshy2, on Nov 18 2007, 03:46 AM, said:

i agree totally, I seem to run the same 4 min km's regardless of distance....I thought more speed work may help?

More speed work may help but regular track races teach you that you can push harder than you think.

[superflake]

I'll find out tomorrow when I run a 5k on the track at ES Marks. Intend to start at 3k pace and then hang on.

[Fossil]

superflake, on Nov 23 2007, 10:27 PM, said:

I'll find out tomorrow when I run a 5k on the track at ES Marks. Intend to start at 3k pace and then hang on.

I'm doing the opposite! Setting my Garmin to beep at regular intervals equivalent to 100m at my hoped-for speed - That should really annoy anyone running around my pace!

[superflake]

I'm not sure if starting fast was a good idea on Saturday. It did feel very easy running 3:23 for the 1st k which was 16:55 5k pace.
Then it was 3:40, 3:46, 3:53 and a 3:34 finish. Whilst I did get a 7 second PB maybe I would have done better running 3:35 pace per k and getting a 17:55 instead of 18:19.

I'll have to see how I run at my next track 5k in January.

[Fossil]

superflake, on Nov 26 2007, 12:06 PM, said:

I'm not sure if starting fast was a good idea on Saturday. It did feel very easy running 3:23 for the 1st k which was 16:55 5k pace.
Then it was 3:40, 3:46, 3:53 and a 3:34 finish. Whilst I did get a 7 second PB maybe I would have done better running 3:35 pace per k and getting a 17:55 instead of 18:19.

I'll have to see how I run at my next track 5k in January.

Congrats Superflake - a great effort on what I thought was not an easy run.

My steady-pace run went pear-shaped - I went for 15:50 (PB pace) and was struggling soon after 3K - having reached 3K in 9:36, 6 seconds off pace, I lost loads more in the last 2 K; struggled to finish - the legs got so tired, so quickly and the breeze on the home straight wasn't helpful either. Eventually finished in 16:20, largely due to the tremendous support from Long Arms and CR/Squad members (thanks guys). I Picked up a leg injury too and am trying to sort that now :-(

But i'll stick to the same plan next time as it usually works for me.

Edited by Fossil, 26 November 2007 - 12:22 PM.

[Chelli]

Fossil, on Nov 26 2007, 01:20 PM, said:

Congrats Superflake - a great effort on what I thought was not an easy run.

My steady-pace run went pear-shaped - I went for 15:50 (PB pace) and was struggling soon after 3K - having reached 3K in 9:36, 6 seconds off pace, I lost loads more in the last 2 K; struggled to finish - the legs got so tired, so quickly and the breeze on the home straight wasn't helpful either. Eventually finished in 16:20, largely due to the tremendous support from Long Arms and CR/Squad members (thanks guys). I Picked up a leg injury too and am trying to sort that now :-(

But i'll stick to the same plan next time as it usually works for me.

Still a good run fossil you definately have alot of speed on the track. I would stuggle to run under 16:40 or run under 80 seconds a lap.

Edited by Chelli, 27 November 2007 - 08:30 AM.

[moby]

I gave this approach a crack in a 5km run yesterday and it ended up working well, although perhaps more by good luck or accident than anything.

Now I’m a very average runner, without a great deal of training since a stress fracture in June and have never run a 5km event before.

So I was hoping that I might give 20mins a nudge if all went well but really didn’t know what was likely to happen.

My splits were 3:45, 3:52, 4:02, 4:00 and 4:00 for 19:40. The 3rd km had a shortish hill and both it and the 4th were into a bit of a headwind so holding pace there was tough.

So the first km wasn’t quite 6% faster than the final average pace but was 6% faster than 20min pace.

Thanks to those who posted their experienced thoughts here as I think there is a lot of truth in the above posts about that fact that inexperienced runners (like me) don’t really know what their race pace should be and will most likely benefit in a short event from getting out a bit harder than might seem prudent and then work damn hard to hold on.