It (sadly) took me 80 miles per week to go from a 20 minute 5K to a 16 minute 5K

I’m not skeptical. His mileage and his best time are perfectly aligned for a person who is not an elite or a very talented runner, and I’m being honest. There are guys running in the 15’s off 65mpw and “sub elites” running 14’s in the 85 range.

Even at 65 mpw, OP was running mid-17’s and that’s no better than 50th place at a good Turkey Trot.

The core value of LR is “I only run 30mpw but I ran 15:30 this past weekend”. OP is telling us the exact opposite.

Amazing! I stalled at 18m 5k and never progressed. Now at 37 now I feel like 80mpw would break me, HARD. Not to mention, I don't think I would have time for that kind of running at this stage in my life. You've given me a bit of inspiration. Maybe a sloooooow buildup over a year or two.

You guys read WTF wrong. WTF isn't skeptical, he's just pointing out that the OP is well above average, even in his first 5K. The OP is saying woe-is-me, I'm so untalented, and I'm sad that I had to run 80 mpw to get into the 16s. Anyone can point to someone faster, but that doesn't mean they aren't talented themselves. Again, OP is well above average.

I'm someone that has averaged 80 mpw over a full year recently in my 50s, and I don't even race anymore. So saying that he is sad that he had to run 80 mpw for a couple weeks kind of rubs me wrong. Running isn't punishment unless you make it so. Believe or not, some of us enjoy running -- even if we're not racing. I mean, if you dislike running so much, why do it?

I am inspired by what he did but if he was starting off at 20:30 for 5k and playing bball and other sports, he may just have natural 5k speed. Most beginners start off 30-31 in 5k. When I came back to running in 2017 my first 5k was in the 29s. One of them was as low as 31 because I didn't train and went out too fast at 8:45, then died. I hadn't run since 2008 though, so it had been 9 years of no fitness.

Positiver wrote:

The overwhelming positivity with this thread is really strange here on Letsrun.

I think most people think his accomplishments are really good for running under 16:30 at close to age 40. Most people can't do that unless they're talented and training hard and smart at that age.

OP's self-deprecation is too much for me. He can't possibly think what he's done is underwhelming. I'm sure at any local 5K that he races, he finishes top 3, and wins his age group. I'm sure everybody around him in real life think he is super fast and fit. They all probably think he's delusional for thinking that he's slow.

Props to OP for self-deprecation to get all of this positive vibe on Letsrun.

I'm sure you are right and I'm sure he knows he's running really well, but when you do manage to run "fast" it's only natural to start looking around and realize that while a 1630 is GREAT for someone close to 40 working a real job etc.. the time itself is insignificant. Most decent HS kids can run that without thinking much about it, it's not even a good halfway split for a collegiate XC runner, ... I think many runners end up doing this mind f*ck to themselves.

Instead of being happy with our successes, we intentionally self deprecate to keep from getting cocky. I think it's part and parcel of the typical personality of "The Distance Runner". It would be worse if he was the kind of guy that runs a 1630 at the local 5k and acts like it was the Finals of the Olympic 5000m. We purposely check ourselves, so we don't unintentionally wreak ourselves.

Great job. 16:25 is fast for your age, or any age really. Don’t be so self-deprecating. Most of those lame letsrun forum comments cricitizing and ridiculing anyone who doesn’t run elite times come from teen boys living at home with mom and dad and pretending they know so much.

Gentlemen,

Regarding the remark "The "average" runner doing 20mpw is barely breaking 30 minutes in the 5K and is over the moon with that" :

All those average numbers vary enormously from community to community. Take e.g. obese youngsters playing with gadgets 24/7 on one side, and young marines on the other side.

Or look at the US Army 2-mile run standards. Minimum score of 60 points (required to pass a regular test) corresponds to 15:54, and to get 100 points one needs to reach 13:00. Assuming a significant percentage of the staff make it under 14 min, it is roughly equivalent to under 22:30/5k. Those folks do not run more than 20 mpw, but get a ton of cross training which, along with the active lifestyle, allow them to stay generally very well fit. I could share my personal experience, but this would be an off-topic.

And what about the commitment of the athletes you've had over the years? Where do you think that comes from? The success your program has year after year and/or https://edubirdie.com/top-writers the goals that are set at the beginning of the season?

EZ10Miler wrote:

Instead of being happy with our successes, we intentionally self deprecate to keep from getting cocky. I think it's part and parcel of the typical personality of "The Distance Runner". It would be worse if he was the kind of guy that runs a 1630 at the local 5k and acts like it was the Finals of the Olympic 5000m. We purposely check ourselves, so we don't unintentionally wreak ourselves.

Well said

1) Yes, I’m an older guy which are pretty much despised here on LR so get your jokes in now. 2) 16 minutes is good, but not great for LR. I am not talented.

Dude. You are talented, and 16 minutes is an excellent 5K time.

You have to remember that most of the kids here are lying about their times.

It really depends on the standards one set in their mind. To me (and this is purely subjective), REAL running times (for a grown adult man in the prime of life) would be sub 3:40 1500, sub 14:00. sub 29:00 10k, sub 2:20 marathon. The OP times are a personal milestone and he might be personally proud, but as an a boastable achievement, they're very common in the competitive running community.

I get what you’re saying and I mostly agree. I just found the self deprecation to be an overkill for people to not comment something like, “you’re slow” to him. I mean, I see this a lot around here calling themselves hobbyjogger so others won’t have to. Or, I have a friend who is overweight and constantly make fat jokes about himself so others won’t. I get it.

Your second to last sentence really cheapens what you’re stating though. Of course if you’re presented with either self deprecating OR a runner treating the local 5k like Olympic finals, of course self deprecation would be better. That’s like something a politician would state and get the dumb voters all pumped up offering false dichotomy.

yes mileage works, but not always. 5k is a distance where you can run quick and not run heavy volume. I ran 75 mpw for about 5 weeks after a quicker buildup and ran a 4:29 mile and 8:57 3k. The next year, I started a low mileage plan where I found much better improvements and and no injuries. or aches and pains The most I ran in that 16 week training block was 32 miles, and I averaged 25-30mpw running 5x a week. I incorporated lifting and drills. I only raced/time trialed twice and ran 4:11 for 1500 then came back 2 weeks later and ran 4:22 for the mile. My coach at the time speculated that based off my fitness, I was in 15:20ish 5k shape. In high school, I ran 40 mpw and had a PR of 16:23. Ever since this coaching experience, I have completely changed my perspective on mileage for anything under 8K. I think 80mpw is on the higher end of mileage for 8K/10K training. Obviously some run more but most college guys run 80 during cross and then cut down once track comes around. I don't think you HAVE to run high mileage for the 5K.

In 2008, I somehow ran my 18:33 on 25-30 mpw, with no more than a peak of 36. I was young then at 24. Now, at 38, I can't break 21 (although in fairness I've been training for the marathon so that's a different energy system).

I run 20 mpw and can't run a 5k in 20 minutes. I would love to be as fast as you are when you thought you were slow. I'm 41 years old. Average at best for my age.