Run a 6 min mile
1989lukemyers
Posts: 158 Member
good morning, to show you a ballpoint figure I just ran 4.34 miles in about 38 minutes averaging 8.58 min a mile... Note was my first run in such a longtime and was going for distance overspeed but mind got the better of me and quiet sadly
But anyways
The question is how can I get my run time down to a 6 minute a mile and could it be done in two months?
But anyways
The question is how can I get my run time down to a 6 minute a mile and could it be done in two months?
0
Replies
-
Are you looking for a single mile in 6 minutes or a sustained 6-min pace over several miles?0
-
Well first of all you should build a base of steady less intense running for several months before attacking speed. It will greatly reduce your chance of injury.
Increasing your speed is simply about running faster. Warm up for a mile at an easy pace. Then do several intervals at a very intense pace. In between these intervals walk or jog slowly until you recover completely (rest should be at least as long as the work interval). Over time increase the length of the work intervals. I would start with 200-400 meters and maybe work up to a mile (depending on your goal)
Other forms of workouts that build speed.
Hill repeats (build strength which can help with speed. They should be done at an intense pace with a 'bounding" motion)
Tempo runs (40 minutes or so of steady very hard effort ~ your 10K race pace)
Long slow runs build aerobic fitness which will help you hold that faster pace longer and build injury resistance for speed work.
Don't do speed work more than 2-3 times per week.0 -
Is the goal is to put down a single mile PR of 6:00?
Based on a 4 mile run at 8:34 (or is it 8:58? I can't tell by your notation) I would say you could *probably* do it. Warm up for a couple of miles at an easy pace, do your 1mi TT, make sure to run a mile to cool down. Even just making a single attempt at it would make for a better bench mark than a random 4 mile run that didn't have a specific goal pace.
If you are asking about running sustained 6:00 pace for any particular distance, then we need more info. I would also say it is highly unlikely you could do more than a single mile at that pace. Or maybe 5k at that pace, given some focused training.0 -
Choose your parents carefully.
You may never run a 6 minute mile. Genetics play a huge role in athletic performance.
Age also plays a huge role in athletic performance. Since your profile is set to private, we know nothing about you. You might be 70 years old and might be 18 years old.
Running LSD (long slow distance) teaches your body to run long slow distance but does establish a base. In order to run fast, you must have that base and then train hard and fast such as doing intervals.0 -
As others stated. The goal to run a single 6:00 min mile or to run a 10K with an average of a 6:00 min/mi are 2 different animals. Either way, you have to build your ability to efficiently use oxygen. 2 benchmarks are used to measure your progress and pinpoint your training. V02Max and Lactate Threshold.
VO2Max is the maximum amount of oxygen your body can take in and process. If you sprinted 800 meters, chances are you will be reaching your VO2 max and your body cannot take in or process any more oxygen. You are basically running at your maximum capacity.
Lactate Threshold technically is the pace at which your lactate accumulation no longer steady states and continually rises. It's a benchmark that says that you are now exhausting your aerobic system in such a way that it cannot clear lactate fast enough (a byproduct of your anerobic system). A trained athlete can race exactly at their threshold pace for about an hour.
The goal to improve is 2 fold. One, train your aerobic system to improve. This allows you to take in oxygen better, transport that oxygen to your muscles, and then train your muscles to utilize oxygen better. Pysiologically speaking this includes making your heart stronger, improving your blood hemoglobin count, increasing the number of capillaries branching off your main blood vessels to your working muscles, and increasing the size and number of mitochrondria in your muscles. The way to do this is lots and lots and lots of easy "conversational" paced miles. The more easy miles you can run in a week the better.
Improving your aerobic system will mean that you can run faster and not worry about running out of oxygen. once you tax your aerobic system, thereby creating what we call an "oxygen debt" because you created a demand for energy by running too hard of an intensity. When you go into oxygen debt, this causes the anaerobic system "called Glycolysis" to run harder than your aerobic system ("Krebs Cycle and ETC") can handle. When Glycolysis is forced to work harder, lactate and hydrogen ions become waste products and begin to accumulate in your muscles and blood. This lowers the PH level and causes your muscles and blood to become acidic. Thus the old term "lactic acid" comes into play. When this happens, your body sends signals to your brain causing you to slow down. The hydrogen ions rub react against the nerve endings which causes that burning sensation in your muscles.
When this happends, your body has to learn to clear lactate and ions better. This is where Threshold Training comes into play. The body becomes more efficient at lactate clearing. To improve this, you run some of your runs at a threshold or tempo pace. A 20-30 minute tempo run at threshold pace is a popular workout. Running 2 mile intervals X3 with a short 5 minute rest in between at a pace slightly faster than threshold pace (called cruise intervals) is another popular workout. You can maybe do one of these threshold training workouts once maybe twice at most a week.
Then you have VO2max workouts. These are interval runs at say 800 meter repeats around a track at 95-98% of your maximum heart rate. These are more nuerological development workouts that work on running form efficiency and tunrover rate.
The chances of you going from a 9:00 min pace down to a 6:00 min pace in 2 months is not very probable. Most recerational runners would love to see that kind of improvement with 2 years worth of dedicated hard training.
I would say, for you... First work on improving the amount of miles you can run in a week at nothing but an easy conversational pace. If you can build up to 40 mile weeks in 6 months, I would say that is a huge accomplishment. Once you can do that, then throw in some tempo runs and repeats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veAQ73OJdwY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxJVtPT6rHo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dQEwJhHWXk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGQKlSU4HQM 0 -
As others have said - a 6:00 mile, or a 6:00 pace?
I don't think either are doable in your time frame though.
6:00 mile will be easier. You could probably do it in a year if you are under 35. 200-400-800-400-200 repeats at race pace.
6:00 pace is difficult. If you are young and a decent athlete with good genes, 20 mpw for a number of months will get you into the 7's, maybe even 6:59. Then months of speedwork on top of the 20+ mpw.0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »Choose your parents carefully.
You may never run a 6 minute mile. Genetics play a huge role in athletic performance.
Disagree with this statement. When I started running, I was doing 10k runs in a hour, then got it down to 52 minutes and now run it consistently at about 43 minutes. Same with my half marathons. Started at about anywhere from 1:49:00 to 1:53:00 and now run a half in about 1:35:00. If you work hard and train you can do what your mind tells you to do. Going from 8:58 pace per mile to 6 is really tough though. It would take a lot of training to cut it down that much. That's almost 3 minutes a mile. Good luck to you.0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »Choose your parents carefully.
You may never run a 6 minute mile. Genetics play a huge role in athletic performance.
Disagree with this statement. When I started running, I was doing 10k runs in a hour, then got it down to 52 minutes and now run it consistently at about 43 minutes. Same with my half marathons. Started at about anywhere from 1:49:00 to 1:53:00 and now run a half in about 1:35:00. If you work hard and train you can do what your mind tells you to do. Going from 8:58 pace per mile to 6 is really tough though. It would take a lot of training to cut it down that much. That's almost 3 minutes a mile. Good luck to you.
When you started running you were doing 10k in an hour! Man I was lucky to do 6k in that when I started. You must be a natural.0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »Choose your parents carefully.
You may never run a 6 minute mile. Genetics play a huge role in athletic performance.Disagree with this statement. When I started running, I was doing 10k runs in a hour, then got it down to 52 minutes and now run it consistently at about 43 minutes. Same with my half marathons. Started at about anywhere from 1:49:00 to 1:53:00 and now run a half in about 1:35:00. If you work hard and train you can do what your mind tells you to do. Going from 8:58 pace per mile to 6 is really tough though. It would take a lot of training to cut it down that much. That's almost 3 minutes a mile. Good luck to you.
You disagree that genetics plays a huge role in athletic performance?
No matter how hard I work, I could never have a build like Arnold.
No matter how hard I work, I could never compete at the level of Bill Rogers.
No matter how hard I work, I could never ride like Lance Armstrong.
I could go on and on but suffice it to say that some people will never achieve their athletic goals because of genetics.
Six minutes per mile is an extremely fast pace. In my prime, I could do a sub seven minute 5K but six minutes was out of reach. I did run an occasional split at/near six minutes but that was extremely rare. I've got the age group trophies to show for it.0 -
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.0 -
Shouldn't you just run more frequently and try to go faster each time? You said that you haven't ran for a long time, probably a start would to be get back into a running schedule. I always thought distance or time comes before speed - as it gets easier for you to run, you'll go faster. I think 8:58 is a pretty good start for someone who hasn't ran in a while.0
-
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.0 -
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
True, we all have a different potential. Hard work allows us to achieve our potential but additional work will be without reward. Genetics determines ones potential.
Even as we approach our potential the improvements are much harder to achieve. If ones potential is a six minute pace and they are currently running 6:30 the gains will come very slowly. On the other hand, progressing from nine minute pace to eight minutes may be easily accomplished if ones potential is a six minute pace.0 -
...I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Obviously you are doing great, also obviously you have good genes. No amount of work would get you where you are if you didn't have the genetic potential. Another person may work twice as hard and only accomplish half as much.
That is why everyone that does the work and tries their hardest is a winner. The sub five minute runner all the way to the twelve minute runner can be equally as proud if they give it their all.
ps. you may not realize but you are now at or near your prime when it comes to running. The age groups between 35 and 45 always seem to be the most competitive. The rate of injury increases and running performance starts declining after around 45.0 -
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
I guess all I am trying to say is you can't necessarily blame "the genetics" because you have no idea what your genetics really are. As I said my parents are not at all athletic, nor is ANYONE in my family. Never has been. If I had used that as an excuse to not do endurance sports I would never get anywhere. But I got there because I wanted it bad enough. Turns out my genetics were pretty good after all. Just hiding under a layer of fat that I needed to drop.
One of the things your "genetics" apparently gives you is a high VO2max and although trainable to an extent, you inherit your top-end ability. A while back I actually thanked my parents for gifting me with a ridiculously high VO2max - they didn't understand but that's OK
0 -
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
I guess all I am trying to say is you can't necessarily blame "the genetics" because you have no idea what your genetics really are. As I said my parents are not at all athletic, nor is ANYONE in my family. Never has been. If I had used that as an excuse to not do endurance sports I would never get anywhere. But I got there because I wanted it bad enough. Turns out my genetics were pretty good after all. Just hiding under a layer of fat that I needed to drop.
One of the things your "genetics" apparently gives you is a high VO2max and although trainable to an extent, you inherit your top-end ability. A while back I actually thanked my parents for gifting me with a ridiculously high VO2max - they didn't understand but that's OK
Where your parents smokers? I read an article once that said that many elite runners had smoked at some point but none of the top runners had parents that smoked.
Living in a household of smokers while in the formative years stunts children's lung development. Those lungs stunted as a child will never have the same potential as if they were raised in a smoke-free environment.
0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
I guess all I am trying to say is you can't necessarily blame "the genetics" because you have no idea what your genetics really are. As I said my parents are not at all athletic, nor is ANYONE in my family. Never has been. If I had used that as an excuse to not do endurance sports I would never get anywhere. But I got there because I wanted it bad enough. Turns out my genetics were pretty good after all. Just hiding under a layer of fat that I needed to drop.
One of the things your "genetics" apparently gives you is a high VO2max and although trainable to an extent, you inherit your top-end ability. A while back I actually thanked my parents for gifting me with a ridiculously high VO2max - they didn't understand but that's OK
Where your parents smokers? I read an article once that said that many elite runners had smoked at some point but none of the top runners had parents that smoked.
Living in a household of smokers while in the formative years stunts children's lung development. Those lungs stunted as a child will never have the same potential as if they were raised in a smoke-free environment.
Never...0 -
6 minute mile is not elite and elite is usually where genetics factor in.
Its fast. Far faster than I can do at this moment, but its not anywhere near elite.
Its a number many* people without other underlying health issues that aren't middle aged or beyond can attain with enough training. (Plenty of middle aged people can attain it too, but the number of mitigating factors jumps way up.)
It might be murder, but most people physically could do a mile in 6 minutes by training hard enough.
Sub 5 mile? Then yeah, genetics/environmental factors are gonna play more of a role.
Keeping a 6 minute pace for multiple miles is an entirely different story. The percentage of people who can do that is going to be a lot less, even for young healthy people.
Genetics and upbringing matter, especially if you want to aim for elite level but for most of us, we'll be held back by other factors besides the "genetic wall."
I don't know what the OP wants to do (1 mile in 6 min or 4 miles @ 6 minute pace) but the first one might be possible the second is highly unlikely.
Only way to know for sure is to go for it though.
Edit: Changed most to many.0 -
1st thing is to avoid injury. Injuries will derail your training and set you back. I don't know if your goal for a 6 minute pace is doable in that time frame but it is a goal to shoot for.0
-
pandabear_ wrote: »Shouldn't you just run more frequently and try to go faster each time? You said that you haven't ran for a long time, probably a start would to be get back into a running schedule. I always thought distance or time comes before speed - as it gets easier for you to run, you'll go faster. I think 8:58 is a pretty good start for someone who hasn't ran in a while.
No no no no!
Lot's and lot's of slow conversational miles build up the aerobic base.
Tempo and threshold work builds the endurance and shifts your lactate threshold to the right.
Short speedwork in the form of intervals and repeats build on aerobic power, build on the neurological development, and high turnover rate. But these are low miles (usually 800-1600 meter repeats x6 or x8) with lots of rest in between each rep.
But you just don't go out and try to run faster each time. You have to build up the different systems. Most of the miles you run should be easy or recovery paced. At least 80% of your weekly mileage.scorpio516 wrote: »As others have said - a 6:00 mile, or a 6:00 pace?
I don't think either are doable in your time frame though.
6:00 mile will be easier. You could probably do it in a year if you are under 35. 200-400-800-400-200 repeats at race pace.
6:00 pace is difficult. If you are young and a decent athlete with good genes, 20 mpw for a number of months will get you into the 7's, maybe even 6:59. Then months of speedwork on top of the 20+ mpw.
I think he needs more than 20 miles per week to get to 6:00. I am now at 60-65 mpw and at my last HM I was only able to hold 7:20 for 8 miles. Then I fell apart.I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
YES!!!! I ran a 6:30 mile (the first mile at my 8K) back in March this past year. Not really that hard to achieve and not elite level by any way.
0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
I guess all I am trying to say is you can't necessarily blame "the genetics" because you have no idea what your genetics really are. As I said my parents are not at all athletic, nor is ANYONE in my family. Never has been. If I had used that as an excuse to not do endurance sports I would never get anywhere. But I got there because I wanted it bad enough. Turns out my genetics were pretty good after all. Just hiding under a layer of fat that I needed to drop.
One of the things your "genetics" apparently gives you is a high VO2max and although trainable to an extent, you inherit your top-end ability. A while back I actually thanked my parents for gifting me with a ridiculously high VO2max - they didn't understand but that's OK
Where your parents smokers? I read an article once that said that many elite runners had smoked at some point but none of the top runners had parents that smoked.
Living in a household of smokers while in the formative years stunts children's lung development. Those lungs stunted as a child will never have the same potential as if they were raised in a smoke-free environment.
And now I have something to blame my slowness on.I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I do agree with this. Even for me I think a 6 minute single mile is achieveable and I do not consider myself a gifted athlete. I do have some room for improvement with training but I do not forsee me running a sub 20 minute 5k though, cerrtainly not holding a 6 m/m pace for longer races.0 -
I personally don't even buy the smoker or kids of a smoker theory. If a person is reasonably thin and not carrying too much excess, applies themselves, most people could run 6 minute miles in their younger years at least. It might be a struggle for really short people, some with short legs, and people who would rather find a reason to say it's genetic.
I'd bet most people 40 or below could knock out at least a couple 6 minute miles in a row if they applied themselves. It takes some training, some pace discipline, and understanding of your cardio limits as they apply to pace. But it surely doesn't take elitist type gene pools, or lack of exposure to things unhealthy.0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »Choose your parents carefully.
You may never run a 6 minute mile. Genetics play a huge role in athletic performance.Disagree with this statement. When I started running, I was doing 10k runs in a hour, then got it down to 52 minutes and now run it consistently at about 43 minutes. Same with my half marathons. Started at about anywhere from 1:49:00 to 1:53:00 and now run a half in about 1:35:00. If you work hard and train you can do what your mind tells you to do. Going from 8:58 pace per mile to 6 is really tough though. It would take a lot of training to cut it down that much. That's almost 3 minutes a mile. Good luck to you.
You disagree that genetics plays a huge role in athletic performance?
No matter how hard I work, I could never have a build like Arnold.
No matter how hard I work, I could never compete at the level of Bill Rogers.
No matter how hard I work, I could never ride like Lance Armstrong.
I could go on and on but suffice it to say that some people will never achieve their athletic goals because of genetics.
Six minutes per mile is an extremely fast pace. In my prime, I could do a sub seven minute 5K but six minutes was out of reach. I did run an occasional split at/near six minutes but that was extremely rare. I've got the age group trophies to show for it.
He never said he wanted to be Lance Armstrong or Arnold, just wants to get faster. If he trains hard enough, he may be able to improve and get better. Cardio improves with hard work and training. Genetics could have a slight role but anybody who trains hard will improve no matter what your genetics are. My Mother smoked her whole life and my dad for 20 years. Then why did I get faster over time? Hard work and trained my butt off, that's how.0 -
Well this 38 year old guy ran a 5:31 mile just yesterday after a lifting session. It was on a treadmill though. I am not much of a runner either so yea, it's not that difficult. Maintaining that over a stretch would be the hard part.0
-
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Wow.... that is amazing. Do you have a "success" thread anywhere that talks about how you did all that?0 -
deluxmary2000 wrote: »I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Wow.... that is amazing. Do you have a "success" thread anywhere that talks about how you did all that?
No. But very briefly I realized I was a bit fat and out of shape a few years ago. Nothing terrible but at 5'7" I was definitely too large at 185lbs. I decided to fix it and started running and eating better. Quickly got down to 165 without trying all that hard. At that point my runs were probably 5 days a week, 3 miles at a time and probably at a 11-12 minute pace.
My wife randomly signed up for a women's-only triathlon. We never even heard of triathlon, but she saw a flier at the local REI and thought it would be cool to train for something like that. So she does, completes the sprint tri, has fun, and asks me to do one with her the next year. I was always a reasonably decent swimmer and I had recently started riding my bike again so it seemed a natural thing to try. I complete that race and get hooked.
Since then I dropped my weight down to 145 and body fat to around 10-12% by simply being careful about what I am eating during training. I built my endurance and speed up to the point I now can race (as opposed to just complete) Ironman. Honestly it didn't even seem like a "big deal". I won't ever say it wasn't hard work because it absolutely was hard work. But I wanted it bad enough that I did all the hard work, and the hard work paid off. It took 6 years to get there from scratch. It didn't happen overnight.0 -
deluxmary2000 wrote: »I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Wow.... that is amazing. Do you have a "success" thread anywhere that talks about how you did all that?
No. But very briefly I realized I was a bit fat and out of shape a few years ago. Nothing terrible but at 5'7" I was definitely too large at 185lbs. I decided to fix it and started running and eating better. Quickly got down to 165 without trying all that hard. At that point my runs were probably 5 days a week, 3 miles at a time and probably at a 11-12 minute pace.
My wife randomly signed up for a women's-only triathlon. We never even heard of triathlon, but she saw a flier at the local REI and thought it would be cool to train for something like that. So she does, completes the sprint tri, has fun, and asks me to do one with her the next year. I was always a reasonably decent swimmer and I had recently started riding my bike again so it seemed a natural thing to try. I complete that race and get hooked.
Since then I dropped my weight down to 145 and body fat to around 10-12% by simply being careful about what I am eating during training. I built my endurance and speed up to the point I now can race (as opposed to just complete) Ironman. Honestly it didn't even seem like a "big deal". I won't ever say it wasn't hard work because it absolutely was hard work. But I wanted it bad enough that I did all the hard work, and the hard work paid off. It took 6 years to get there from scratch. It didn't happen overnight.
Thanks for sharing this!
0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »As others have said - a 6:00 mile, or a 6:00 pace?
I don't think either are doable in your time frame though.
6:00 mile will be easier. You could probably do it in a year if you are under 35. 200-400-800-400-200 repeats at race pace.
6:00 pace is difficult. If you are young and a decent athlete with good genes, 20 mpw for a number of months will get you into the 7's, maybe even 6:59. Then months of speedwork on top of the 20+ mpw.
I think he needs more than 20 miles per week to get to 6:00. I am now at 60-65 mpw and at my last HM I was only able to hold 7:20 for 8 miles. Then I fell apart.
Probably. I'd say it's a minimum though.
In my n=1 study, 15 mpw gets consistent 20 min 5k. And frustratingly weight independent, I'll bust out 20 min 5k at 150lbs and at 175 lbs (6'-0")
0 -
I am not sure you can necessarily attribute those superstar's performance to genetics alone. Sure, that can play a part, but a large portion of that comes from training.
I hate to sound elitist but being capable of running 6:00 for a single mile isn't that fast. Admittedly I am basing that on the OP's profile picture, and his username that includes 1989, and concluding that he is probably a 26yr old male in reasonable shape.
I started endurance sports from absolutely NOTHING when I was 29. My parents are not at all gifted athletically. Their idea of sport is to walk around the block. Yet I was able to start from being barely able to crack a 12 minute mile, to recently (at 35yrs old) posting a 5k in the high 17s (5:40 pace), 10k in the 37s and a 3:04 marathon as well as a <10hr Ironman. I started from scratch 6 years ago and built all of that ability myself. I doubt my genetics played a part. Genetics might be the difference between me and the truly elite, but genetics isn't going to limit someone to being slow.
Genetics absolutely plays a role. But it is only part of the story. Hard work is the rest. If you don't have the genetics, you don't have the genetics. But that should not stop you from reaching your particular athletic potential.
I guess all I am trying to say is you can't necessarily blame "the genetics" because you have no idea what your genetics really are. As I said my parents are not at all athletic, nor is ANYONE in my family. Never has been. If I had used that as an excuse to not do endurance sports I would never get anywhere. But I got there because I wanted it bad enough. Turns out my genetics were pretty good after all. Just hiding under a layer of fat that I needed to drop.
One of the things your "genetics" apparently gives you is a high VO2max and although trainable to an extent, you inherit your top-end ability. A while back I actually thanked my parents for gifting me with a ridiculously high VO2max - they didn't understand but that's OK
OK, genetics.
About 40-50% of your VO2Max potential is "heritable". i.e. genetic. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9502354
Which also means 50-60% of your VO2Max potential is trainable.
In layman's terms, genetics might be the difference between a 14:30 5k and a 13:59 5k.
Genetics are not at all the difference between a 20:00 5k and a 25:00 5k.0 -
robertw486 wrote: »I personally don't even buy the smoker or kids of a smoker theory. If a person is reasonably thin and not carrying too much excess, applies themselves, most people could run 6 minute miles in their younger years at least. It might be a struggle for really short people, some with short legs, and people who would rather find a reason to say it's genetic.
Son of a heavy smoker here. So much so, my dad died of throat cancer when I was 25. In High school, I could run a sub minute 400m, a 2:10 800m, and a 18:00 5k. Although it probably is the cause of my current issue with EIB. So I agree with you.
But your last point, height doesn't matter, and at the pointy end, height is a disadvantage. Mo Farah, the reigning olympic 5000m champ, is 5'-5". Meb is 5'-7". Kiprotich, won the olympic marathon in 2012, is 5'-8".
Sprinters usually are tall though, Bolt is 6'-5".0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 435 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions