How realistic is a sub 5 minute mile on the track?

Pisco Sour

PVincent wrote: »

still maintain that you need good athletic and aerobic ability ....what do you set the bar at for Average ??? but I do agree with you bout working hard and committment

15 years ago the 5mins may have been the Average and the stats of race times proves that , because in those days we had less choices in life , we were less busy , we valued our sport more , we worked harder at our chosen sport and that was just you and me the average guy ....nowadays the average guy is so far removed from that , they wont committ , they are afraid of pain , they look for excuses to miss a session , they want their pints after work etc etc ,so average is now a lot more average than 15years ago

And Ireland was full of pioneers in 1995??

Some of what you say is true though. Too many kids playing PS3's and XBoxes these days. When I was 9 or 10 all I did was spend the entire day outside! That feeds into their adulthood.

myflipflops

PVincent wrote: »

I'm sorry to tell you that sub 5 is not very very average as you suggest ...your comment I would say offends a lot of very good runners who work hard week in week out ....4 laps at 75 seconds sounds OK but when you try that its a totally different proposition

It shouldn't offend anyone.

Firstly, I believe it's an very average athletics feat for a certain type of person that trains properly for it - a healthy male between the ages of 17 and 34 maybe. That in itself rules out plenty of runners.

I also wouldn't degrade it as a personal achievement for people. If i manage it, I will be proud to have gotten there from my currrent state. I will have to work hard and will consider it a considerable achievement for me. I will probably boast about it!! That won't make it any higher quality of an athletic accomplishment in relation to what is possible.

PVincent

And Ireland was full of pioneers in 1995??

agreed we weren't saints ...the point in those days was that the pints occurred after you had played the match or run the race etc ...you took it easy during the week because you were training ...and it probably was just pints anyway ...a little different to the stuff these kids are putting thro their system now

PVincent

I will watch your progress with great interest ....your comments about it being an average achievement would be very much in the minority amongst people involved in the sport or any sport for a long time ...the average healthy male is not athlete and I think that is the point you miss ...to achieve that target you MUST have a certain capacity and ability ...and I think that is what all of us who disagree with you are saying ....

myflipflops

PVincent wrote: »

I will watch your progress with great interest ....your comments about it being an average achievement would be very much in the minority amongst people involved in the sport or any sport for a long time ...the average healthy male is not athlete and I think that is the point you miss ...to achieve that target you MUST have a certain capacity and ability ...and I think that is what all of us who disagree with you are saying ....

I see what you're saying. It's a fair arguement, just one that i disagree with.

The average male is not an athlete.

The average male after 6 months of proper training can be.

TheRoadRunner

Pherekydes wrote: »

The 4:32 in the Universities' road relays was done in Maynooth. The distance is NOT accurate. It may be as short as 1500m.

I agree with a lot you say before but this is sacrilege on the holy grounds of St Patrick's Maynooth. That loop is bang on a mile. I train on it at least twice a week and my Garmin 405 says its accurate .

I'm lying, the loop is actually 1604 metres. Has been measured multiple independent times

TheRoadRunner

Jesus this thread has gone way OT regarding what the average Joe can do etc. Yes sub 5 will be easier for some than others. Yes training and natural ability are factors.

Haven't read all the threads fully but regarding Michael Johnson running 5.10 miles. I'm sure he was doing reps. On a one off flat out mile he could probably go faster.

Getting back to the OP. He has run 67 seconds for 400 metres. Assuming he doesn't pile on the pounds while off traveling, any fecker who has a clue about athletics could give him an 8-10 week program that would allow him to run sub 5 minutes at a canter. In my opinion the OP wouldn't even have to do track sessions. With basic leg speed like that an increase in aerobic training would go a huge way to getting close to 5 minutes.

@04072511 when you hit Australia send me a PM and I'll give you a program and we can end this debate definitively. The proof of the pudding is in the eating !

RandyMann

Great thread this and A1 posts. It has got me interested now in what I could do with this mile distance. I may even start a log for a sub 5 min mile also and feck the 5k distance
I just ran 300m in 43 secs as a time trial with a mate, after 6 weeks training done from scratch. Will strive to dip under 5 mins before year is out, watch out for log !

myflipflops

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

Getting back to the OP. He has run 67 seconds for 400 metres. Assuming he doesn't pile on the pounds while off traveling, any fecker who has a clue about athletics could give him an 8-10 week program that would allow him to run sub 5 minutes at a canter. In my opinion the OP wouldn't even have to do track sessions. With basic leg speed like that an increase in aerobic training would go a huge way to getting close to 5 minutes.
!

The. Nail. Head. Hit. On. The.

BeepBeep67

I'd put sub 5 for the mile in the same category as sub 3 for the marathon - achieveable with the right focus, dedication, effort and a sprinkle of talent. Let's kick off a sub 5min mile mentored thread to add a bit of balance to the marathon weighting on the forum - would be good to launch in the spring when training should become more specific to your target and with the BHAA trinity and Aviva races for the East Coast folks not AAI reg'd, there's a nice 6 week gap between those along with the graded meets, plenty of opportunity to shoot for it.
Could be a little project for our newest Mod (Ecoli) with plently of current and previous experience on here to chip in.
It was a target of mine this year, having run around 4:30 aged 17 and 4:48 aged 30, ran 5:10 off HM training in May which was a 10 sec improvement from last year, but injury has pushed that out until next year.

Gringo78

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

I'd put sub 5 for the mile in the same category as sub 3 for the marathon - achieveable with the right focus, dedication, effort and a sprinkle of talent. .

Ability wise yes, but would be much harder to get the average Joe to do the long runs required without getting injured so more likely to have a high success rate of getting average joes running 5min miles.

thirtyfoot

PVincent wrote: »

your comments about it being an average achievement would be very much in the minority amongst people involved in the sport or any sport for a long time

It is average. What sport are you talking about that says it wouldn't be, athletics? There is too much average around now and we accept it. Lets call a spade a spade, a 5 min mile is decidedly average running for a healthy male in his 20s. You can dress it up whatever way you want through lifestyle issues or changes in demographics but if it was average 20 years ago, its still average now. Those things you talk about that have changed are due to laziness. Such laziness shouldn't be allowed to lower the bar.

If an athlete gets insulted by someone saying a 5 min mile is merely average, they need to take a hard luck at themselves. Lets stop making excuses for mediocrity. This is going to be my new pet project, not celebrating mediocrity:D I'm off to do some 4:05 mile repeats.

Speedy44

That was the best breakfast read I've had for a long time

Now, the only problem is, trying to remember all the comments that I want to respond to :rolleyes:

Let's see, poster who said he is 45 so his days of running sub 5 are behind him, bulls**t ! I'm also at that wonderful age and hope to do it in a few weeks.

Glad origional post covered the fact that the guy who wantd to run sub 4 and 'only' did 4:59 had a large support team behind him, not to mention that he also put in the training.

Re can it be done, I agree with the general consensus that seems to have came out of all this. It can be done, but it is very hard work for most people. The average Joe cannot do it. I run regularly with lads who came from a footy or GAA background and considered themselves fit, but once they stepped onto a track for an interval sessions they were left clutching their knees. But there is a lad now who has trained hard for the past 2 years and has gone sub 5 ml, sub 17 5K, sub 36 10K & sub 3 marathon, and he turned 40 last December. On the flip side of this, I also know of lads who have trained equally hard and have not got near those times. Spot the difference :rolleyes:

Personally, I think that the best way to go about it is to get a good base in of a few months of good build up of mileage, once you've got the base start throwing in tempo runs and some hills, then hit the track for your 400m intervals. Last winter we were doing 16 x 400m off 30secs/rec in 80-82secs. This spring we changed it to 8 x 400m off 75secs in 72/73secs.

Would definitely be interested in getting onto a sub 5min thread though, I am also battling the sub 3 marathon so this should be fun

Speedy44

Tingle wrote: »

It is average. What sport are you talking about that says it wouldn't be, athletics? There is too much average around now and we accept it. Lets call a spade a spade, a 5 min mile is decidedly average running for a healthy male in his 20s. You can dress it up whatever way you want through lifestyle issues or changes in demographics but if it was average 20 years ago, its still average now. Those things you talk about that have changed are due to laziness. Such laziness shouldn't be allowed to lower the bar.

If an athlete gets insulted by someone saying a 5 min mile is merely average, they need to take a hard luck at themselves. Lets stop making excuses for mediocrity. This is going to be my new pet project, not celebrating mediocrity:D I'm off to do some 4:05 mile repeats.

Let's define average. Take 100 or a 1000 random people in their 20's and see how many of them can at the moment run a sub 5. I think it would be a very, very small percentage.
Take a group of them who are willing to put in the training for 6mts-1yr and now check the results. The number will have gone up or course.

If you had done the same test 20-30yrs ago, your initial results would have shown a higher percentage due to lifestyle etc.

I think all the guy was saying is that unfortunately in this day & age, with all the distractions that are out there, people are not prepared to put in the work. When I was a kid I was one of the slowest in our training grour from our parish, and I could get under 4:40 for the mile at 17.

RandyMann

Speedy44 wrote: »

That was the best breakfast read I've had for a long time

Now, the only problem is, trying to remember all the comments that I want to respond to :rolleyes:

Let's see, poster who said he is 45 so his days of running sub 5 are behind him, bulls**t ! I'm also at that wonderful age and hope to do it in a few weeks.

Glad origional post covered the fact that the guy who wantd to run sub 4 and 'only' did 4:59 had a large support team behind him, not to mention that he also put in the training.

Re can it be done, I agree with the general consensus that seems to have came out of all this. It can be done, but it is very hard work for most people. The average Joe cannot do it. I run regularly with lads who came from a footy or GAA background and considered themselves fit, but once they stepped onto a track for an interval sessions they were left clutching their knees. But there is a lad now who has trained hard for the past 2 years and has gone sub 5 ml, sub 17 5K, sub 36 10K & sub 3 marathon, and he turned 40 last December. On the flip side of this, I also know of lads who have trained equally hard and have not got near those times. Spot the difference :rolleyes:

Personally, I think that the best way to go about it is to get a good base in of a few months of good build up of mileage, once you've got the base start throwing in tempo runs and some hills, then hit the track for your 400m intervals. Last winter we were doing 16 x 400m off 30secs/rec in 80-82secs. This spring we changed it to 8 x 400m off 75secs in 72/73secs.

Would definitely be interested in getting onto a sub 5min thread though, I am also battling the sub 3 marathon so this should be fun

I like this post. Positivity is the way to go for this endeavour. I'm sure I will do it and I am in the same age group.
I am a believer in The Pygmalion Effect and this is what will get results.

Speedy44

04072511 wrote: »

Today I ran 5:56 off no training really (the odd run on the track here and there. About 3 days on the track spread over the last 2 weeks or so). I used spikes and a garmin to help with my pacing. If I was in a race with faster runners around me I'm sure I could shave another 10-15 seconds off that time, but what do I have to do to get a sub 5 minute mile? How realistic is it to achieve?

Not sure where your located, but meant to tell you that there is an accurately measured graded mile meet in Galway this evening. Its a fast course as well so if you were able to make it you may be able to shave some more seconds off your time. There will be lots of company to pull you through.

BeepBeep67

Gringo78 wrote: »

Ability wise yes, but would be much harder to get the average Joe to do the long runs required without getting injured so more likely to have a high success rate of getting average joes running 5min miles.

Probably more likely to get injured doing 2-3 interval/rep sessions per week.

kennyb3

04072511 wrote: »

And Ireland was full of pioneers in 1995??

Some of what you say is true though. Too many kids playing PS3's and XBoxes these days. When I was 9 or 10 all I did was spend the entire day outside! That feeds into their adulthood.

Am i the only one who kind finds it a bit hilarious that you are adding to PVincents comments on hard work, dedication, giving up a bit of their life etc when in your log which i quoted before you were the person saying - im 24, i dont wanna train more as im not prepared to give up my social life..... alot must have changed in last year. and like others said backpacking and the like seems more a priority.

Id add to the above that i think you can do it tho, as im sure a majority could with 6months- year of very dedicated training. the problem is how many are prepared to do the dedicated training and how many will survive it without getting injured. To me they are the real questions.

Id happily stick up a log and go for it myself, but unfortunately id know my achilles would get in the way

Pisco Sour

kennyb3 wrote: »

Am i the only one who kind finds it a bit hilarious that you are adding to PVincents comments on hard work, dedication, giving up a bit of their life etc when in your log which i quoted before you were the person saying - im 24, i dont wanna train more as im not prepared to give up my social life..... alot must have changed in last year. and like others said backpacking and the like seems more a priority.

Ah here for god sake. I'm 25 going on a trip of a lifetime. Give me a break! I'll be settled in this rip-off country for long enough, and will have all the time to run 'average' sub 5 minute miles for the next whatever years of my life. Dont make me feel guilty for enjoying a few months travellin the world :rolleyes:

And I was referring to kids not doing any exercise AT ALL! We actually have the fattest kids in Europe now (according to an article from Ian O'Riordan). They sit around on the couch playing PS2's all day. Back when I was a kid, we played football all day long on the street. Thats the point I'm making. If yu think I'm lazy (probably am a little at the moment, but I'm sure that will change as I get older) then wait till you see the next generation in 20 years time. They wont be able to do sub 10 minute miles, not to mention sub 5!

gerard65

Speedy44 wrote: »

Let's see, poster who said he is 45 so his days of running sub 5 are behind him, bulls**t !

Me. Am a well known bulls**ter:D I don't really think I could do it now but I had planned to focus solely on the track next year and have planned to start a new log after xmas for this purpose.
Its great that this thread has gained legs and we have a few posters up for it. I hope it can continue to grow, we've seen the top notch advice that's here for the longer distance events but as an athletes forum we've lacked descussion on the shorter distances.
I wondered if those new to the sport and find themselves here often think the only way you can claim to be a real runner is to run marathons.
You never know, we might even have some of the marathon and mountain running diehards turning up for a track race next year;)

shels4ever

gerard65 wrote: »

Me. Am a well known bulls**ter:D I don't really think I could do it now but I had planned to focus solely on the track next year and have planned to start a new log after xmas for this purpose.
Its great that this thread has gained legs and we have a few posters up for it. I hope it can continue to grow, we've seen the top notch advice that's here for the longer distance events but as an athletes forum we've lacked descussion on the shorter distances.
I wondered if those new to the sport and find themselves here often think the only way you can claim to be a real runner is to run marathons.
You never know, we might even have some of the marathon and mountain running diehards turning up for a track race next year;)

Go for it

Then we can set up a couple of mile races next year, I only know of 2-3 races and not too many track miles aroind for us . Run the chrismas day mile then get a target for the year.. might join you on that as hope to run some track next year.

misty floyd

kennyb3 wrote: »

Am i the only one who kind finds it a bit hilarious that you are adding to PVincents comments on hard work, dedication, giving up a bit of their life

I'm afraid that no your not on your own there kenny.

Sorry 04xxxx but I've seen so many threads/posts about stats and excuses. In the 'do you train hard enough' thread, you mentioned you could have run a faster marathon by 20minutes but whats the point if it becomes less fun, you said. What? and now your commenting about kids these days and kids in 10 years time? Come on dude. Its hard to ignore stuff like that.

As for VR's comments in your log. I did think it was rude, but he meant well.

I think you'll break sub 5 if you have consistant training (after your holidays), stay injury free but most of all, get hungry and toughen up.

Oisin11178

misty floyd wrote: »

I'm afraid that no your not on your own there kenny.

Sorry 04xxxx but I've seen so many threads/posts about stats and excuses. In the 'do you train hard enough' thread, you mentioned you could have run a faster marathon by 20minutes but whats the point if it becomes less fun, you said. What? and now your commenting about kids these days and kids in 10 years time? Come on dude. Its hard to ignore stuff like that.

As for VR's comments in your log. I did think it was rude, but he meant well.

I think you'll break sub 5 if you have consistant training (after your holidays), stay injury free but most of all, get hungry and toughen up.

Couldnt have said it better myself.
I find it mind boggling your times for shorter races (op) and your times and attitude towards marathon training. I think you sold yourself massively short. Thats just my opinion though.

shels4ever

Oisin11178 wrote: »

Couldnt have said it better myself.
I find it mind boggling your times for shorter races (op) and your times and attitude towards marathon training. I think you sold yourself massively short. Thats just my opinion though.

I think it couldbe the case of people wanting to race shorter races but caugh up in the whole marathon buzz, there is a veiw that if your not running marathons your not running maybe the op's heart wasnt 100% in the marathon I can understand that.

ecoli

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

I'd put sub 5 for the mile in the same category as sub 3 for the marathon - achieveable with the right focus, dedication, effort and a sprinkle of talent. Let's kick off a sub 5min mile mentored thread to add a bit of balance to the marathon weighting on the forum - would be good to launch in the spring when training should become more specific to your target and with the BHAA trinity and Aviva races for the East Coast folks not AAI reg'd, there's a nice 6 week gap between those along with the graded meets, plenty of opportunity to shoot for it.
Could be a little project for our newest Mod (Ecoli) with plently of current and previous experience on here to chip in.It was a target of mine this year, having run around 4:30 aged 17 and 4:48 aged 30, ran 5:10 off HM training in May which was a 10 sec improvement from last year, but injury has pushed that out until next year.

Now there is an idea and i would be open after the DCM and the sub 3 mentoring thread though mind you people are probably sick of hearing my preaching at this stage:D as i feel it is a very doable task for the majority of people with commitment and specific training.
Went 4.26 in a 1500m TT two weeks before the HM and 4.46 in mile during season without specific training and i am not a miler so i honestly do believe that it is achieveable for about 80% of males in there twenties .

shels4ever

You could set up a training group and then target the track season...oh wait thats what clubs do

Pisco Sour

Oisin11178 wrote: »

Couldnt have said it better myself.
I find it mind boggling your times for shorter races (op) and your times and attitude towards marathon training. I think you sold yourself massively short. Thats just my opinion though.

Or maybe I have fast twitch fibres and am better over shorter distances. This isn't just about the marathon. ALL my PB's get worse the more I move up a distance.

400m - 1.07 (hopefully go under that today)
800m - 2:42 (Time Trial)
1500m - 5:16
Mile - 5:56 (Time Trial)
5K - 21:02
10K - 45:32
HM - 1:49:06 (Hilly enough)
Marathon - 4:07:25 (pan flat course)

It was my first marathon after all. My goals were moderate, but they were the goals I set for myself and I enjoyed the training I did. I now have a base from which I can improve when I do my next one. I know what my training got me, and I know that more is required to go sub 3:45 or sub 3:30. And on the day I couldnt have run a better race. A 4 minute positive split is good in anyone's books!

I have to say I much prefer the buzz of running a good time on the track than on the road though. Maybe that is my fanatacism of the sport coming out in me. I just love track and field more than any sport. I even enjoy a bit of Long Jumping, and jumped 4.60 the other day off no training and no real technique!

TheRoadRunner

04072511 wrote: »

Hitting the track tomorrow to test out the spikes over 400m. Hopefully I can go below that 67 I did last weekend without the spikes.

Only seeing this post now. Probably too late but instead of a 400 time trial maybe you should do an 800 time trial today

Pisco Sour

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

Only seeing this post now. Probably too late but instead of a 400 time trial maybe you should do an 800 time trial today

Too late now. I will do an 800 some day though. I did a 2.42 a couple of weeks ago without spikes and a garmin (I dont have one at the moment. I got a lend of it for my 5:56 mile). I think 2.30 is possible.

Went down to the track today and tested myself out over a few events.

Did a 400m in the 66 seconds (low 66). A 1.5 second improvement on my high 67 from last week. The wind was a little strong and I feel I probably lost a bit more on the backstraight than I gained coming back down the home straight. But sure you cant control the weather so what can you do. On a still day I think I'd have gone 65.

Did a 100m in 13 seconds (low 13's) a little after. Was racing a mate so that pushed me on a little.

Did a 200m in 30 seconds (low 30's). A little dissappointed I didnt go 28 or 29 but was at the very end of the session and was a bit tired maybe.

I think my natural stride might be a little short.

Also did a 4.75m long jump. My best being my last of 7-8 jumps.

What all that tells me about my mile potential (and indeed my potential over those other 4 events mentioned above), well thats where you guys come in!

Pherekydes

04072511 wrote: »

Did a 400m in the 66 seconds (low 66).

Did a 100m in 13 seconds (low 13's) a little after. Was racing a mate so that pushed me on a little.

Did a 200m in 30 seconds (low 30's). A little dissappointed I didnt go 28 or 29 but was at the very end of the session and was a bit tired maybe.

Also did a 4.75m long jump.

Interesting figures there.

Reading off the IAAF tables we have:

100m 402 for 13.2
200m 172 for 30.0
400m 219 for 66.0
Long Jump 459 for 4.75m

And we already have:

800m 90 for 2:42
1500m 188 for 5:17 (at age 17)

and a 4-hr Marathon is worth 88pts.

You are a fast-twitcher. Anything longer than 1500m/Mile is not going to suit you. High mileage training programs will not suit you. You need to keep those fast-twitch fibres alive while working on your weaknesses.

These are just my opinions, and not categorical fact.

Particularly, the Long Jump, with no specific training, technique or coaching, shows a high proportion of explosive material in those legs.

jailhouse_dave

Pherekydes wrote: »

Interesting figures there.
High mileage training programs will not suit you. You need to keep those fast-twitch fibres alive while working on your weaknesses.

enjoying this thread and have a quick question

I dont get too technical about running, I am running about 2 years now and am starting to get to know what i do and dont react well to. Do you really think that high mileage training is not suitable to all runners? its a very interesting concept, i always find the longer i run the more it reduces the quality of my sessions. I also find that when i reduce mileage i can do back to back quality daily runs over say 5 miles (between 31-33) without taking much out of me.

I actually enjoy running (and consequently life ) more when i am keeping the mileage low and fast. It just seems so wrong to get more from less.

gerard65

jailhouse_dave wrote: »

enjoying this thread and have a quick question

I dont get too technical about running, I am running about 2 years now and am starting to get to know what i do and dont react well to. Do you really think that high mileage training is not suitable to all runners? its a very interesting concept, i always find the longer i run the more it reduces the quality of my sessions. I also find that when i reduce mileage i can do back to back quality daily runs over say 5 miles (between 31-33) without taking much out of me.

I actually enjoy running (and consequently life ) more when i am keeping the mileage low and fast. It just seems so wrong to get more from less.

Its whatever works for you. Some runners do very well when they up the long, steady miles while other do better on the short sharp stuff. You don't need to be putting in big weekly mileage to run well. An exception is the marathon, if you want to do well at that distance you have to put in the miles.
Most coaches recommend a period of easy/ steady miles before tackling the faster stuff, at least 4 weeks but as long as possible, this prepares the body as faster running which without a base will eventually break you down.
You read about periodization in the coaching manuals. It means your seasion starts with base building- long(ish) slow/steady miles, then after a few weeks you start adding the faster stuff, tempo and interval runs, adding more quality as you get towards your goal race.
Its an ever ending debate quality or quantity, what works for you?

Pisco Sour

Pherekydes wrote: »

Interesting figures there.

Reading off the IAAF tables we have:

100m 402 for 13.2
200m 172 for 30.0
400m 219 for 66.0
Long Jump 459 for 4.75m

And we already have:

800m 90 for 2:42
1500m 188 for 5:17 (at age 17)

and a 4-hr Marathon is worth 88pts.

You are a fast-twitcher. Anything longer than 1500m/Mile is not going to suit you. High mileage training programs will not suit you. You need to keep those fast-twitch fibres alive while working on your weaknesses.

These are just my opinions, and not categorical fact.

Particularly, the Long Jump, with no specific training, technique or coaching, shows a high proportion of explosive material in those legs.

Thats quite interesting. You never know what you figure out about yourself. So would you recommend me focusing on 1500m/Mile or do you think I would be more suited to 100/200/400/LJ?

Pisco Sour

gerard65 wrote: »

.
Its great that this thread has gained legs and we have a few posters up for it. I hope it can continue to grow, we've seen the top notch advice that's here for the longer distance events but as an athletes forum we've lacked descussion on the shorter distances.
I wondered if those new to the sport and find themselves here often think the only way you can claim to be a real runner is to run marathons.
You never know, we might even have some of the marathon and mountain running diehards turning up for a track race next year;)

I fully agree with this. Yes the marathon is a great event and has a lot of historical value to it but it certainly is over-represented on this forum. The marathon is after all less than 5% of all events at Major Athletics Championships, and all the long distance distance events combined (5000m, 10000m and Marathon) make up 6 of the 47 events.

There is a hell of a lot more to this sport than those distances/ events and they barely ever get a mention here.

Why is there not more of an emphasis on people running under 5 minutes for the mile? Why is there not more emphasis on people running sub 60 seconds for 400m? Why is running a Marathon sub 3 hours seen as better than these?

Mods, is there any chance that this thread could be stickied for people wanting to discuss the mile, just like the "Just started running-Can I run the Dublin Marathon in October? " has been stickied for people who want to run and discuss the marathon?

If the answer is no then I think that shows a lot of bias towards the marathon :D

donothoponpop

04072511 wrote: »

Mods, is there any chance that this thread could be stickied for people wanting to discuss the mile, just like the "Just started running-Can I run the Dublin Marathon in October? " has been stickied for people who want to run and discuss the marathon?

If the answer is no then I think that shows a lot of bias towards the marathon :D

<mod> I don't see any point in stickying this thread. The marathon one is stickied because we usually get a heap of first timers who consider running the Dublin marathon as the build-up to it increases- stickying this thread probably limits the amount of DM threads you'll see on the frontpage.</mod>

ecoli

<Mod>Here is a compromise its been moved and stickied without taking up the extra space on the main page </Mod>because i do feel this is an important step forward to show people that it is just as easy to try track running as it is a marathon or road race.

Goal Mile on x mas day could even be a short term target for people wanting to try it and is open to evryone all around the country

Woddle

Right I'm in, the goal mile sounds like a great idea.

Krusty_Clown

04072511 wrote: »

I fully agree with this. Yes the marathon is a great event and has a lot of historical value to it but it certainly is over-represented on this forum. The marathon is after all less than 5% of all events at Major Athletics Championships, and all the long distance distance events combined (5000m, 10000m and Marathon) make up 6 of the 47 events.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the mile isn't even an event at 'Major Athletics Championships', right? The reason that 10k runs and marathons make up the large part of the discussions on this forum as it is what the majority of the posters on this forum participate in and post about. It's not over-represented, it is represented in the manner specified by the contributors (whether that be right or wrong).

On a separate note, I look forward to seeing how you get on 0405.. Time to walk the walk.

Brianderunner

^ Krusty the 1500 is known as the "metric mile", its essentially the same thing.

Good idea to to sticky this thread. I know i was one of the big naysayers but if me and others have inspired others to break 5 mins i'll be delighted for each and everyone that does it. Good luck to everyone in their attempts, i may even go for it myself!!

robinph

Brianderunner wrote: »

^ Krusty the 1500 is known as the "metric mile", its essentially the same thing.

It's just short by 109.34 meters, I guess they put the start line in the wrong place.

Woddle

Brianderunner wrote: »

^ Krusty the 1500 is known as the "metric mile", its essentially the same thing.

Well it can be the 4'59 mile or the 4'37 1500 meter thread
I'm 37 seconds short of the 1500 meter time

ecoli

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the mile isn't even an event at 'Major Athletics Championships', right? The reason that 10k runs and marathons make up the large part of the discussions on this forum as it is what the majority of the posters on this forum participate in and post about. It's not over-represented, it is represented in the manner specified by the contributors (whether that be right or wrong).
On a separate note, I look forward to seeing how you get on 0405.. Time to walk the walk.

I think this is down to the fact that alot of people see athletics as more an elitist sport, one which beginners cant take up as easy as say mass participation marathon or road races. Why not encourage people to participate in these and make people aware it doesnt have to be just road races or marathons there are non championship track races open to people who wish to pursue them

Krusty_Clown

ecoli wrote: »

I think this is down to the fact that alot of people see athletics as more an elitist sport, one which beginners cant take up as easy as say mass participation marathon or road races. Why not encourage people to participate in these and make people aware it doesnt have to be just road races or marathons there are non championship track races open to people who wish to pursue them

Absolutely agree. All events should be encouraged equally. But people will post what they will, and most new threads tend to be of the variety 'I want to run my first 10k' or 'I'm thinking of doing my first marathon', rather than 'I want to run a mile'. So the reality is that 10k and marathon are not over-represented. Over-discussed possibly, but not over-represented.

shels4ever

ecoli wrote: »

<Mod>Here is a compromise its been moved and stickied without taking up the extra space on the main page </Mod>because i do feel this is an important step forward to show people that it is just as easy to try track running as it is a marathon or road race.

Goal Mile on x mas day could even be a short term target for people wanting to try it and is open to evryone all around the country

Yep the goal mile would be a good one, but people would need to be in good shape to make sub 5 by then. I'd give this a crack too but going to be doing easy miles until this side of christmas.

Would look for the graded or maybe the 1mile in rahey for that. At the moment if i could run a sub 5:20 by next summer i'd be really happy.

How many mile races were there this summer?

ecoli

shels4ever wrote: »

Yep the goal mile would be a good one, but people would need to be in good shape to make sub 5 by then. I'd give this a crack too but going to be doing easy miles until this side of christmas.

Would look for the graded or maybe the 1mile in rahey for that. At the moment if i could run a sub 5:20 by next summer i'd be really happy.

I agree that ideally next summer would prob be best but given that would mean over 6 months of training without a target might be a bit much for the average runner some options which would be suitable to keep people interested that would benefit their mile training would be

XC season (strength)
Indoor season

And maybe even organise Boards mile races maybe? Again just throwing ideas around for people (more thinking out loud)

shels4ever

ecoli wrote: »

I agree that ideally next summer would prob be best but given that would mean over 6 months of training without a target might be a bit much for the average runner some options which would be suitable to keep people interested that would benefit their mile training would be

XC season (strength)
Indoor season

And maybe even organise Boards mile races maybe? Again just throwing ideas around for people (more thinking out loud)

Yep always need to race, I hope to run lots of the Raheny winter league so 1-3mile races.

Woddle

So what are you thinking here ecoli, a list of names for the goal mile? and maybe pbs for the 1500m and mile. I'm up for being a guinea pig in the whole sub 5 mile, I need sth to help me get some focus again.
Time trials in UCD?

ecoli

Woddle wrote: »

So what are you thinking here ecoli, a list of names for the goal mile? and maybe pbs for the 1500m and mile. I'm up for being a guinea pig in the whole sub 5 mile, I need sth to help me get some focus again.
Time trials in UCD?

I guess this is a nomination for me to mentor a sub 5 thread? I would be willing to unless there are others out there who feel they would be more suited as i know there are a few with better PBs from their younger athletic career
I think a little more is needed as i feel there are two types of milers those of a 800/1500 runner and the strength 1500/5k runner so hopefully this table should give enough info. Again if anyone wants to jump in and mentor or what ever go right ahead as i said i am not a miler by nature and the races i have run would be more down to my strength

Name|800m PB|1500m PB|Mile PB|5k PB|

Pisco Sour

Woddle wrote: »

So what are you thinking here ecoli, a list of names for the goal mile? and maybe pbs for the 1500m and mile. I'm up for being a guinea pig in the whole sub 5 mile, I need sth to help me get some focus again.
Time trials in UCD?

I'm not off travelling until the 13th Sep and finish exams next thursday so I'd definetely be up for Time Trials in UCD the following week if thats what people want to do.

gerard65

shels4ever wrote: »

How many mile races were there this summer?

Only two I know of on the track that whould be open to non-elites. The BHAA Trinity track meet in mid june and Irishtown at the end of July. Don't know about the rest of the country.