Not seeing a chart…

Me neither. Which makes sense because I'll never see a 29' 10k.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

Swing and a miss on your first post, but dont give up, try again!!!!

Kind of mad at you though, was looking forward to seeing those splits so that I could attempt to hold them on my run today.... (-;

Think about 4;40 per mile will get you there though...

29 minute 10K pace is 4:40 min/mile. I could do a 4:40 mile in my younger days but could never put two of them back-to-back.

As a 45-49AG I can do a 36:00 10K. Dropping a minute a mile is not something even remotely possible for me. It is crazy that the best in the world hold that pace for a full marathon.

Why do I suspect that there's going to be a link to a training plan that you'll need to subscribe to, or a sales pitch involved?

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

It's got the faint odor of AI...hard to tell with the small sample size. But it's there.

AG 40-44 and my 10K is ~42min, so your 36min seems equally unattainable :-)

Which is strange because to post a pace chart you don't need AI, just a rudimentary understanding of addition.

1- 4:40
2- 9:20
3- 14:00
4- 18:40
5- 23:20
6- 28:00
6.2-28:55

If you want to sign up for my Masterclass on adding numbers together click the link below. The first class is FREE for the first 50 subscribers!!!!

Definitely spam of some sort; if you Google "The splits are listed in both miles and kilometers, use the buttons to toggle between the two." you'll see the same post appearing on a variety of other forums.

Hate to break it to you, with your name and that, but 4:40s will result in a time, rounded up to the nearest tenth, as 29:00.0 so would not be sub-29. Would be super-frustrating.
5 minute miles for a 10k gets you 31:07 DAMHIKT

"Free bottle of rum for you if you are willing to take a guided tour of our property and attend our presentation on 'Vacation Ownership' here in USVI"

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

Ohhh pedantry is one of my all time favorites. I'll retort with 2 arguments, and may it please the court

(starting with the correction that 10k=6.214m, not 6.2m, as referred to in my somewhat sloppy calculation, the final line should read 6.214-28:59.999999... or 29:00, as argued below)

1-OP said "If you hit the splits listed below, you’ll finish a 10K in 29 minutes." Not in under 29 minutes.

2-The title of the thread does indeed reference Sub-29 pace chart for a 10k, not specifically Sub-29 for a FAT recorded 10k with standard rounding practices. Rounding up by definition refers to a number less than the rounded result.

(Just for fun, the difference in a 29:00.00 and 28:59.90 10k at 4:40/mile is ~22inches, or about 15meters of running in lane 2)

4:40 / mile pace lands you right at 28 minutes for 6 miles. Keeping the same pace for the last 0.2 mile would be 56 seconds. That comes in sub-29 minutes, no?

That's hilarious.

Neither will I, not even a 39'

I got 29:59.8 when rounding to the nearest 10th of a second and 29:59.9 when rounding up, so I am not sure what is going on with all the different results. Probably we are all using different definitions to convert between miles and meters.

Probably a difference in rounding the conversion from km --> miles. I used 6.2 to keep it simple...but redoing the calculations with 6.21371, I got 28:59.8 (which yes, if you round to the nearest second, is 29 minutes exactly).

In the running world, a 10 km is a road race, for the course to be IAAF legal it has to be a bit long, you are thinking about 10,000 m on the track. But the AI bot is talking about a 10 km, so you need to run a bit faster than your 4:40 estimate ;-)

It's super easy pacing. 3.00 per km and on the last one you go 2:59. Probably better to play it safe and string together five 3:01's and do the last four 2:59 and last one 2:58.

Your problem is seems to be getting imperial into the equation. Just go with metric and it is dead easy pacing (regardless if you want to break 30 min, 31 min, 32 min....and so on up to 40:00. The pace is 3:0x where X is size times your minute digit (example if you want to go 32 min you have to run 3:12, 33 min is 3:18, 36 min is 3:36, 37 min is 3:42).

Stay in metric and figuring out the pace per km is super easy.

Since we're going for Pendant of the Week in this thread, the distance on a track is measured on the extreme inside of lane one. So even if you flirt with penalty by planting your left foot right on the paint as best you can, your center mass is going to be going a bit longer.

And the race ain't over yet...it is actually measured 20-30 cm from the inside of the lane as per IAAF ;-)

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2024/01/running-track-measurements-a-brief-rabbit-hole.html

DAMMIT! I'm wrong. Mostly. Out-pedanted. Even still your center mass is going to vary slight from 20cm, one way or the other.

Your honor, I'd like to submit into evidence, for purposes of pedantry, that the specific track measurement is 20cm from the inside of lane 1 for a non-railed track, and 30cm from the inside of lane 1 on a railed track. At 4:40 pace one can find the runner's center of mass distance traveled per lap.

The average 1.80m height runner is traveling 5.75m/s around a 100m turn with a radius of 31.85m. Their centripetal force Fc=mv^2/r, 1.038m/s^2, and the gravity force is Fg=mG/tan(A). At stable lean Fc=Fg, so you can simplify into v^2/r=Gtan(A). Solve for 6.05 degrees (0.1056 radians) of lean angle. For our 1.80m tall runner let's just say the center of gravity is in the middle at 0.90m height. That CoG then falls 9.5cm inside the midline of footstrike, or a total of 30.5cm less through each turn (7.63m/10k). With a nominal stride width of 20cm (10cm from outside of shoe to midline of stride) our 1.80m runner needs only to keep the inside of their shoe within 20.5cm of the painted line or 30.5cm of the rail, all else inside of that is less distance traveled than 10k (from the viewpoint of CoG). This average runner abiding exactly by the set line at 20/30cm will travel only 9,992.4m, able to pace at a comparably pedestrian 4:40.2 min/mile.

Ok...you win ;-)

I started preparing a response indicating that you failed to correct your analysis for Coriolis acceleration.. but then I forgot the actual concepts and equations, so went to my Beer-Johnston dynamics book and realized that I hadn't touched the book in over 20 years and I really did not want to study that stuff again even if just to win an internet argument.

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin