Is sub 20 5k possible for me?

Uhh, sure?  Sorry, but no way to tell with the info at hand.  Frist though - congrats on starting running and seeing great improvement!   Sounds like you have a good short term goal and a plan to get there.  I can tell you, however, moving from 30 min for a 5k to 24 mins is probably quite a bit easier than moving from 24 to sub 20.  Somehere around 21 min it starts to get much harder and more painful to improve.  Sub 20 is a 6:30 pace basically - that is fast, especially with no running background and in one year.  Good luck though!

jsut want to tell you that from 6-8 miles per week to 17-18 per week is quite a bit.  unless you are just running. 

just by running slow and getting to that milage you should get very close to your goal.  i started at about 28 min / 5k now i run very close to 20 but it has been a while since i have done a 5k or sprint and can tell you where i am.  however my last LT test i ran 6:50 and a 6:45 for the first 2 miles. 

if you look at my volume last 2 months i am about 20 mpw.  

MY BEST advice lots of running BUT take it very slow.  DON't do any tempo / intervals for the first 2 months.  my gf went from about 6 miles per week and went to about 12 - 2 weeks later her knee is in some serious pain.  take it slow you will see the results.

Edited by trix 2009-11-06 2:12 PM

It really depends on the intensity of those 2 runs each week.  I won't say it's impossible to do, but I'd personally be extremely hard pressed to be able to drop to 6:27/mile on only two runs a week.  Personally I'd need to be solely focused on 5ks and those 2 runs would have to be either 100% effort level or interval sessions to get me there.  It would be a fine balance between putting in the mileage needed to not stress my body into injury and stressing my body enough to make the speed gains needed.  But again, it's not impossible, each person's ability varies greatly.  But it's a good goal if you want to work towards it, but make sure you're also happy with a 'near miss' as well since 24-21s is even awesome on 2 runs/week.

Edited because I missed the 'building up to 17miles'.  In that case, over the course of the year I think you can do it.

Edited by zionvier 2009-11-06 2:15 PM

Took me from December 2005 to April 2009 to get from 20:57 to 19:49.  Along the way, PR went 20:52 (6/06)-20:31 (6/07)-20:02 (6/08), before I finally got to sub-20.  YMMV...

(My wife, f'rinstance, went from a 30:02 in December 2005 to a PR of--IIRC--25:52 in June 2007...and has never gone below 27:01 since.)

Building it up until you are running 30+ a week, every week, year round.  Then do that for about a year and come back and ask the question again.

There's a thread in the Challenge forum about going sub 20 for a 5k. You might find some ideas in there.

I struggled to go sub 30 for quite a while when I first started running but could get under 23 minutes last spring. I don't think I want sub 20 enough to ever get there though.

I ran my first 5k on May 16th.  Time?  23:11
This was with minimal training.  2-3 mile runs 3-4 times a week.

On Oct. 31 I ran a 5k in 20:33

IMO -- you can do it.

If it was me, I'd run more days each week.  3-4 miles a day x 5 days is 15-20mpw.  Once I hit that, I'd start adding miles one day a week to make a long run.  (but, as I've stated on other threads, I'm new to the run science)

Good luck!

Just to clarify, 2x per week is what I have been doing to get down to 24mins. I don't believe I can get down to 20mins by running 2x per week. I am now doing 3x per week, and my current 10k program will have me doing three runs of 6,6,5 by January.

I think you're probably right though. I could probably get to 21 or 22 by running 3x per week, but I think to get sub 20 I would need to be more like 4-5x per week.

Along my line of thinking. When you get down to about 20 minutes and under, ability becomes more of a factor. Training will take you so far. Your times will need to continue to consistently drop. When those times gaps become smaller and smaller, you are likely getting to your peak area.

Edited by TriJedi 2009-11-06 3:17 PM

If you're a young stud and train right, going under 20 for a 5k in a year is possible.  Otherwise it ain't gonna happen in a year -- you'll need more time.

Brian 

Unfortunately I think you are right - I don't think I can rely too much on natural ability. My athletic ability is average at best. I think good old training is going to have to be the way forward.

Sorry, basically, what I was trying to say is that>

a. one can run with with athletic ability
b. one can run faster with training.
c. running faster times requires a combination of both.
d. some times may not be acheivable if one doesn't have the naturaly ability
e. if one has the right combination of both, the goal is acheivable
f. consistent improvement in times is postive feedback that the goal is more acheivable.

Edited by TriJedi 2009-11-06 3:48 PM

I'm with Rick; run 4-7x/week for 30mpw over a year and see where you are.

FWIW, I ran a 5k in ~23 in summer 05.  In February 08, after several periods of focused running and consistent year round running, I broke 20 for a 5k on a track.  Since then I have reset my 5k best a few times and it currently sits at 18:50.

Shane

Just curious how you are defining "ability". By that do you mean genetic potential for VO2 max and/or LT? (because that's typically what is referred to with "genetic potential").

Or are you referring to running form and efficiency? (similar to the way Phelps has a 'natural ability' with swimmign)

All of the above are trainable. IMO there is no aspect of running which can't be improved with training and coaching.

Even 'natural ability' can go wasted if it is not harnessed and directed properly.

I"m not trying to be antagonistic, I'm just wondering what you are referring to with letter a and d.

I agree with needing a good amount of natural athletic ability.  A sub-20 5k is very fast, it can be achieved through training...but no matter how excellently you train, that alone won't get you there. 

I ran a large all-women's 5k this season (the only 5k standalone I've done in a long time)...the top female finished in 20:36, I was 14th overall in 22:59.  Granted, the course was about 1/3 up hill, but even taking that out, I think probably only the top two women could have run under 20:00.

Well, others seem to have given you good advice on how to get faster.  But, I think you should consider your first question more carefully.



Botton line:  You need previous race experience in order to know how fast you can run the next race. 

So, unfortunately, there is no answer to the question until you race the distance a few times.  It seems you are working towards that experience, which is great, except you are limited to your race tactics.

There are essentially three ways to run a race:  RPE, HRM, and pace.  For your first few races, you should run by RPE.  That is, run by how you feel.  Don't set a time limit.

Wow, that's a great result! Good job.

I think sub 20 is possible for you.  I think you'll see big gains just by spending a few weeks running 3x a week, a few weeks running 4x a week, and then moving up to running 5x a week.  I think that if it's your first year of training you'll see much better results adding frequency rather than per-run mileage.  Also, I think you'll be happiest if you're mindful of your recovery days and you avoid injury and those six-week/three-month layoffs that so many new runners get when they ramp up their mileage too quickly.  I hope you're not planning to move up to 17 miles per week on two runs a week...

I was a track/ cross country runner in high school.  This summer, at 29 years of age, after several years without running, I ran/walked a 25:26 during a sprint tri on about three months of training during which I never ran more than six miles in a week or two miles in a session.  I'm planning to put in 21:XX and 20:XX run splits in a pair of sprints next July and August, and I'm confident I can go 19:XX in an open 5k next September.  Running's historically been a strength for me, but I've also been prone to injury in the last five years as I'm inclined to ramp up my mileage too quickly.  My training plan for next year has me running between three and five times a week during different periods.  Since I'm ramping up my mileage super-slowly this time around, I'm probably not going to exceed five miles in a run or eighteen miles in a week in the next year.  If I don't make sub 20 this next season, I won't be unhappy and I'm confident I'll get it the year after that--are you dead set on sub 20 this year?  Sub 21 is also very respectable and I have a feeling that you'll ultimately break into the teens if you're patient and consistent.

Anything is not possible, but I think sub 20 is possible for you.  It'll be tough, but if you get to runners volume (40+ miles per week) it could happen.  With the limited information I'd say you're going to have a tough time and stall at 21:00ish, lets hope I'm wrong.

Just be sure to use the 10% rule and don't run when your body tells you not to.

In April of '05 I ran my first 5k in 13 years.  Did just over 24.

Trained for a marathon from then until October.

Middle of November I ran a 20:30.  A week later on a totally flat course I ran a 19:30.

So again, going back to what I said earlier ....... get some real mileage built up in a smart and consistent manner and it will give you a much better opportunity at achieving your goal.

Oh, and getting that 19:30?  I did maybe 3 sessions during that entire 8 months that could be even remotely considered "speed work."  Almost all general aerobic and recovery paces during the training runs.  "Go slow to go fast."