most important- distance or time?

bonjour24
bonjour24 Posts: 1,119 Member
edited September 26 in Fitness and Exercise
hi everyone.
i'm currently in the last few weeks of the C25K programme- awesome programme that it is. today i jogged for 28 minutes without stopping! (it was supposed to be 25, but i was listening to a cool tune and just kept going!!).

so, distance wise i was supposed to run 2 1/4 miles in 25 minutes, but when i mapped how far i went i only did 2.1miles in 28 minutes. what's more important do you think? distance or time? should i keep pushing to get the distance, or shall i stick with the time? i'm only 5 foot 2, so my stride isn't that big!

Replies

  • mrphil86
    mrphil86 Posts: 2,382 Member
    Time will give you speed
    Distance will give you endurance.

    They are both equal to each other. Since your goal is a 5k, go for distance. Speed is something you can work on later.
  • hush7hush
    hush7hush Posts: 2,273 Member
    Heart rate and time.
  • Lollyvoddy
    Lollyvoddy Posts: 194 Member
    I think that really depends on your goals...I see you are planning to do a half marathon? In which case I'd think distance is the most important thing. I do 5km, 5 days a week, it takes me around 39 minutes, but it used to take me longer, and I hope to get it much quicker. Good luck!
  • Atlantique
    Atlantique Posts: 2,484 Member
    Time will give you speed
    Distance will give you endurance.

    They are both equal to each other. Since your goal is a 5k, go for distance. Speed is something you can work on later.

    Agreed.

    Also, new runners get faster simply by running more! Honestly, you'll increase your speed without trying to over that first year of running because your body just gets more efficient at the task!
  • lepper
    lepper Posts: 2
    I'm no expert, but I would say your time is more important and your distance was close enough given your height. If I were you, I would also use a heart rate monitor.
  • Schwiggity
    Schwiggity Posts: 1,449 Member
    Since distance is your ultimate goal, that's what I'd use for my smaller goals. Maybe invest in a pedometer or map out your route before you got for your run.
  • LarryPGH
    LarryPGH Posts: 349 Member
    Time will give you speed
    Distance will give you endurance.

    What you say, mrphil, is true. Yet, it doesn't seem to be the goal of the program. Even though the program is labeled "C25K", the goal, per se, isn't the distance of 5K. As it's outlined, the goal is *either* 5K or 30 minutes running.

    So, if your question, bonjour, is which is "more important", then the answer is *mu* (to steal a meme from Pirsig) -- that is, the answer is neither one nor the other, so re-ask the question (!). A different way to phrase the question is "should I be focusing on one or the other?". And the answer to that question, it seems, is "no" -- if you're achieving distance, great; on the other hand, if you're achieving time, that's awesome!

    So, don't get too hung up on how you measure success -- either one (time spent running or distance run) is a great way to find milestones. As long as you're able to meet one -- or the other -- you're doing great! According to your post, you're doing very well on the "time spent running" measurement. Congratulations! You're doing just fine!

    (As mrphil says, speed is something that you can work on later -- if that becomes a goal for you! in other words, if you're looking simply to be in shape, then speed is something you don't necessarily have to work towards. On the other hand, if you decide that you're all about racing and personal best records, then at some point, you're gonna want to focus on increasing your speed.)

    That time to focus on speed, though, isn't now. Stick to making sure you keep running for the prescribed amount of time, and you'll be on one of the paths that the C25K is set up as a measure of success!

    Happy Running!

    Larry
  • Macacadopai
    Macacadopai Posts: 183 Member
    I usually work on both, run for a specific amount of time on one speed, and once I do it I always up the minutes or the speed and keep going. Athough I don't really have time to do longer than 45min runs, so recently I've just been building on speed and incline.
  • Aylilth
    Aylilth Posts: 125
    I just go by distance really. I'm still quite heavy soso I would rather go the distance at a slower speed knowing I'll get quicker as time goes by.
  • yasiral
    yasiral Posts: 133 Member
    Both are important. but right now i think you should concentrate on distance. :smile:
  • suzycreamcheese
    suzycreamcheese Posts: 1,766 Member
    i go for distance first, and then work on speed later
  • bonjour24
    bonjour24 Posts: 1,119 Member
    thanks guys.... i really appreciate it. and i think you're all right. i'll get faster over time when i can run further, or maybe i'll just stay at the same plodding speed, but i'll get there in the end!
  • hellen72
    hellen72 Posts: 144 Member
    As someone else has said if u r new u will get quicker the more u do.
    So as u r new I would initially go on time. I assume your programme adds a minute or two every few runs so what u will find is that your distance will increase exponentially as u will be getting quicker as well

    If you are training for a half then you obviously need to build up to around 11 miles in whatever time that takes you

    Some people do this by adding 5-10 mins each week to the long run, others 0.5-1 mile. If you have a gps watch then distance is easy, if not time probably easier

    You need to choose one and stick to it
This discussion has been closed.

Categories