Discussion
A new PB of 18:59 at Netley parkrun this morning. 5 and a bit laps of the cricket pitch course as the usual one was in use. Boring but flat so plenty of PBs in the results.
First mile was 5:57 which is also a new record for me (5:59 being the previous best). It didn't actually feel that bad (relatively) until half way round then you really had to dig deep to keep the pace up once the impact of the quick first mile kicked in.
Didn't check the watch until after I finished so the sub 19 was a surprise as I was expecting low 19s at best (previous best on that course was 19:20).
First mile was 5:57 which is also a new record for me (5:59 being the previous best). It didn't actually feel that bad (relatively) until half way round then you really had to dig deep to keep the pace up once the impact of the quick first mile kicked in.
Didn't check the watch until after I finished so the sub 19 was a surprise as I was expecting low 19s at best (previous best on that course was 19:20).
smn159 said:
Halb said:
Yeah, people can go faster if they don't go slower. 
If you don't stagger around at the finish feeling ill and groaning then you are not trying hard enough
Well everybody 'wants' to go faster. 
It just a weigh-up between having the will to push the body into that 90% and past barrier, knowing what the payback will be in a few seconds. I know I could have denied a few late sprinters by t
tting that last 100 metres myself, I normally do, but today I weighed the pros and cons (happens ins seconds) and today, the body won out, saving myself that near feinting-puking sensation while I wait for my time.
I'm usually melting at the end, I can't believe some of these types who look like they've just stepped out!
It just a weigh-up between having the will to push the body into that 90% and past barrier, knowing what the payback will be in a few seconds. I know I could have denied a few late sprinters by t
tting that last 100 metres myself, I normally do, but today I weighed the pros and cons (happens ins seconds) and today, the body won out, saving myself that near feinting-puking sensation while I wait for my time. I'm usually melting at the end, I can't believe some of these types who look like they've just stepped out!
I follow the 3:15 marathon plan from the runners world website on a 16 week rotation.
I don't do the super long distance runs but each week there are intervals - rotating around 200s, 400s, 800s, 1 mile repeats, 2 miles repeats etc. - and am now hitting the target times.
Before I used to run 6 or 7 miles pretty much all the time at a fast pace but since adding intervals and some slower runs into the mix, my times have really come down on all distances.
I don't do the super long distance runs but each week there are intervals - rotating around 200s, 400s, 800s, 1 mile repeats, 2 miles repeats etc. - and am now hitting the target times.
Before I used to run 6 or 7 miles pretty much all the time at a fast pace but since adding intervals and some slower runs into the mix, my times have really come down on all distances.
KTF said:
A new PB of 18:59 at Netley parkrun this morning. 5 and a bit laps of the cricket pitch course as the usual one was in use. Boring but flat so plenty of PBs in the results.
First mile was 5:57 which is also a new record for me (5:59 being the previous best). It didn't actually feel that bad (relatively) until half way round then you really had to dig deep to keep the pace up once the impact of the quick first mile kicked in.
Didn't check the watch until after I finished so the sub 19 was a surprise as I was expecting low 19s at best (previous best on that course was 19:20).
Congrats! That's a bloody massive improvement. Somebody once said to me that true fitness should sneak up on you and just come out of nowhere when you've put in the hard training graft.First mile was 5:57 which is also a new record for me (5:59 being the previous best). It didn't actually feel that bad (relatively) until half way round then you really had to dig deep to keep the pace up once the impact of the quick first mile kicked in.
Didn't check the watch until after I finished so the sub 19 was a surprise as I was expecting low 19s at best (previous best on that course was 19:20).
Cybertronian said:
Congrats! That's a bloody massive improvement. Somebody once said to me that true fitness should sneak up on you and just come out of nowhere when you've put in the hard training graft.
Thanks. I always check the mile splits on the watch but was so broken towards the end it didn't even occur to me to see what time I was looking at 
There is a junior that has me pegged as a target to beat each week. He was ahead all the way round but I was gaining on him as we came up to the last corner. However, he heard me coming, had a quick check over his shoulder then put a sprint on to the finish. New PB for him and me chasing him down did no harm either :P
Cybertronian said:
1,016 runners at Cannon Hill this morning!
Flipping Heck (to put it politely ). We had 457 and I thought that was a lot! Our park really isn't big enough for many more.Mob match sounds a good way to commemorate a runner. My ambition is to die after crossing the finishing line and setting the V100-104 course record wearing my 'If I collapse please scan my barcode' T shirt
john2443 said:
Flipping Heck (to put it politely ). We had 457 and I thought that was a lot! Our park really isn't big enough for many more.
Mob match sounds a good way to commemorate a runner. My ambition is to die after crossing the finishing line and setting the V100-104 course record wearing my 'If I collapse please scan my barcode' T shirt
I ran around in 19:04, and I passed the tail-runners just before 2km (normally don't pass them anymore on our new course), but apart from that, the park was just about able to cope with the numbers. Of course, those finishing around the 25 to 27 minute mark will have found it very congested. The larger club with slower runners won in the end, but the smaller club with faster runners raised more money for the British Heart Foundation when it came to donations. ). We had 457 and I thought that was a lot! Our park really isn't big enough for many more.Mob match sounds a good way to commemorate a runner. My ambition is to die after crossing the finishing line and setting the V100-104 course record wearing my 'If I collapse please scan my barcode' T shirt
I know this is very much a personal thing based on loads of factors. But after no fitness stuff at all for 4 years (due to a dicky heart, all clear now, although I was never fit before that anyhow) I went along to Parkrun and ran a 34:11. I note the average is 27:39 so I've decided that's my long term target.
If you're doing exercise 3 times per week (including Parkrun), what's a vaguely viable target in terms of number of weeks to hit 27:39, or the best part of 7 minutes trimmed from my initial time?
If you're doing exercise 3 times per week (including Parkrun), what's a vaguely viable target in terms of number of weeks to hit 27:39, or the best part of 7 minutes trimmed from my initial time?
If you look at the results e-mail you get percentage rating which is age related, targeting 50% on that is a good marker. Took me about a year from starting with C25K and doing my first parkrun in 34:28*, to beating 50% (which was around 27:30 for me aged 42). However I've got a lot slower since due to lack of training over the winter.
There's a PH Parkrun Wiki with everyone's best percentage scores if you want to join in.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
ETA: *Looked at my past results and I took almost 4 minutes off over the course of the next 3 weeks, so while that 7 minute gain you're after looks like a lot, you can probably remove several minutes surprisingly easily. It gets harder after that though
There's a PH Parkrun Wiki with everyone's best percentage scores if you want to join in.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
ETA: *Looked at my past results and I took almost 4 minutes off over the course of the next 3 weeks, so while that 7 minute gain you're after looks like a lot, you can probably remove several minutes surprisingly easily. It gets harder after that though
Edited by RizzoTheRat on Monday 9th May 15:03
Edited by RizzoTheRat on Monday 9th May 15:04
This plan gives you an idea of the number of runs/variety/distance per week to get your time down:
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_4/142.shtml
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_4/142.shtml
34:11 and feeling like I'm at deaths door, to 29:19 three weeks later (today) with gas still in the tank at the end. Fair to say I've loved my first 4 Parkruns. If I was confident enough to start further upfield (tended to start about 200 back so far in the same spot) I could go significantly quicker, but I like the consistency when comparing my times week to week.
Incredible what just 6 weeks of regular (3 times per week, 30 minutes a time) exercise can do for your body if you're starting from absolute scratch (4 years of nothing after serious illness). Feeling so much better and my resting heart rate has dropped from 78 to around 64 in that time.
Incredible what just 6 weeks of regular (3 times per week, 30 minutes a time) exercise can do for your body if you're starting from absolute scratch (4 years of nothing after serious illness). Feeling so much better and my resting heart rate has dropped from 78 to around 64 in that time.
Edited by ukaskew on Saturday 14th May 23:17
We got invaded by a local running club on Saturday, which made parking difficult, but it was really good to have them there. They kindly provided pacers for every minute from 20 minutes to I think 30 minutes. I usually run about 26 minutes so I thought I'd aim high and try to keep up with the 25 minute guy. With 400ish meters left to go he suggested that to get a good time to really push for the finish. Previous PB was 25.44, new PB 24.28!
I really need to push myself more. It's amazing how much difference it made to have a physical target to aim at. With any luck they will all turn up again!
I really need to push myself more. It's amazing how much difference it made to have a physical target to aim at. With any luck they will all turn up again!
craig r said:
I really need to push myself more. It's amazing how much difference it made to have a physical target to aim at. With any luck they will all turn up again!
For my midweek runs I struggle to even keep going for 30 minutes solid and take at least 35 minutes to cover 5k with a few walks in there (I'm only 4 weeks in from absolutely no fitness work at all), yet I rock up at Parkrun and breeze around in 29 minutes.Amazing how much your mind plays a part. I also think running in the morning makes a huge difference for me, really don't feel comfortable in the evening at all.
Halb said:
Yip, my best times have been running against a mate last year when he ran regularly.
We are competitive...
My best times have been when I'm running with a mates 9 year old daughter We are competitive...
It's just too embarrassing to know I'm slowing her down so I push myself a bit harder.It's all in the mind, but my mind's weak.
Did the parkrun wave of the Westminster Mile on Sunday. Ran it with my 7 year old lad (new mile PB for him of 7:07 following up his Orpington parkrun PB of 26:48 of the day before). Great run and the big difference between the parkrun wave and the earlier wave that I ran in solo was that most participants stood just past the finish and applauded everyone else in. True reflection of parkrun.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff