Well, according to the file, he ran at an average HR of 96% of his max heart rate, which is right about where you'd expect someone to be for a 5K. EDIT - IGNORE THIS, I READ HIS MAX HR WRONG!

To the OP, you're a 38-year-old, 195 pound guy that doesn't do much run-specific training, and you just ran a 19:40 5K, which is pretty good. Your splits were also pretty even until the last 1/4 mile, which shows that you paced the race pretty well. If you do nothing more than run more and lose twenty pounds, your 5K time will improve. A lot. Heck, even if you don't run that much more and lose twenty pounds, your time will still improve a lot.

Thanks, I'm definitely pleased with the result (given my girth, age etc), but I'd argue against my pace being consistent.
Mile 1: pace = 6:12, it was modestly uphill (+25 ft) and I settled into a 167/168 HR - 1 hour threshold level for me
Mile 2: pace = 6:28, it was essentially flat, HR remained at 168 average
Mile 3: pace = 6:30 (but trended down to 6:45 at the end of mile 3), HR ticked up to 169 average
Mile 3.1 doesnt count because I went anaerobic to the finish.

The kicker is I couldn't hold the pace, but my HR was in a completely manageable zone.
The other kicker is I watched my long run partner (who I can routinely drop at will on anything over 10k) just run away from me as he held the initial pace and I faded into oblivion.

But, I'll try to work in some speedwork and see how that impacts my performance. maybe I'll target a Turkey Trot after my goal Half Marathon to see how things go.

Thanks, Slowtwitch, for the wisdom.

---

- Pete

---

Luckily my over eating disorder is offset by my over exercising disorder

don't know your body type but you probably need to lose weight.

don't stress about your 5k time or the "difference" between your legs and lungs, just stay healthy, lose lbs, and run more, you will be faster in 5k and tri.

health+more training=faster for you

What he said. I've found that I respond to 400m repeats much better than sprints. What's your age, that makes a huge difference in how much intensity you can handle without hurting yourself. Also, when you taper, reduce your volume but keep up the intensity. I think you were fatigued starting the race.

I totally agree with the volume requirement in running BUT, it is crucially important to realize that if you're running AND biking, you can get away with a lot less in the run mileage compared to if you were not cycling at all.

25-30mpw running per week PLUS biking an equivalent volume is a decent training volume to make gains for even an intermediate AGer.

25-30mpw running per week without anything else on top will just get you to scratching the surface of your ability.

I agree with jjabr.

1. He is older.
2. He doesn't have a running background, i.e., no significant base.
3. Running a 5K faster shouldn't be a short term goal.
4. Intervals is a good route to injury for aging runners with little base.
5. His goal is to lose weight. Consistent running will yield the result he seeks. Not too long, not too hard, but 4-6 days per week. Come back in a year and we will up the dose.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Agree to a point. I woukd add some intensity to existing runs...fartlek or 2 minute builds. Just something to increase leg speed.

Pete, I'm new to tri as of April this year, and your fitness is much better than mine, so my experience may not be relevant...

Looking at your pace vs HR, this seems perfectly normal to me. For most of my runs, I simply target 140bpm, and my last mile is always slower than my first. I attribute this to my body heating up and maybe accumulated fatigue (i'm only running 16mpw now). So to me, it looks like you ran a great race as far as your effort over the duration goes.

As far as your comment on not being able to hold the pace even though your cardio was good, I wonder what your HR is during tempo runs vs the 5k? I know I'm not fast, but burying my HR at 174 (age 46) is very doable and I've never done speedwork (well, twice this year). If you are saying your legs just wouldn't let you go higher than 168, then I would guess fatigue or warmup were holding you back.

I dropped from 19:30 to 17:44 without doing any speed work. Runs were either zone R or zone 2.

No way. Especially when your running the distances he is running you need an interval day. It will give the biggest improvements.

This is what I don't understand. If you're running a faster pace than you typically do for a one-hour run, then there's no way that your heart rate should be the same as when you're doing a one-hour run. In other words, if your typical one-hour pace is, say, 7:45 a mile, then your HR when running 6:12 should be much higher.

What pace are you typically running for your hour-long runs?

Do you even exercise science, bro?

---

Robert Dao
ATC Racing - Austin, TX
Gold's Gym Triathlon Coach
@speedao1
@daotraining

I guess the problem is that instead of holding the pace and my HR increasing, instead I receded back to my hour pace (6:40ish) as the race progressed.

Maybe I just need beet juice, or better yet HTFU.

Regarding some of the other points:
Yes, the weight is still coming off, but my lean mass is about 174, so there's not much more to work with (my guess is 5-10 more lbs could come off) so I do want to focus on speed

I did do a warmup prior, easy 8s with some accelerations.

---

- Pete

---

Luckily my over eating disorder is offset by my over exercising disorder

Your max pace was 5:25 min miles and you average is 6:24.

This obvious was a really short race but:
1st you are a big guy
2nd you don't have the foot speed/endurance to run 5:25 pace
3rd run more
4th most importantly in a foot race you want to tick off even splits and not run erratic splits, because running erratic splits will burn matches fast and you will drop.

*Side note you will see a lot of IMarathoners go out fast and eventually fade this is the theory that, you will fade anyways.
I am of the theory that you should pace yourself run even splits to conserve energy and run a faster time. I don't think you can/should bank time especially in a triathlon run, running negative splits in a triathlon extremely difficult.

Long story short PACE yourself

I think most of the short term variation was simply GPS variance. I was as consistent as possible ... consistently slowing down throughout the race!

---

- Pete

---

Luckily my over eating disorder is offset by my over exercising disorder