UKC

So, I've committed to running a sub 18 minute 5 k by summer at the latest and hopefully sooner. Suggestions for training and thoughts on whether this is realistic appreciated.

About me. I'm thirty three. I don't run, or do much in the way of exercise beyond cycling a to work (2miles round trip), climbing once a week ish and a bit of hillwalking - once a month. And I've just quit smoking (five - ten a day for most of the last fifteen years). Plus my knees have always been a bit rubbish.

I'm naturally quite fit though and I'm not fat yet. My only ever timed running was a 40:30 10k on a treadmill when I was 27 or 28 and about an hour ten for the Grim Challenge around the same time. I forget how far the grim challenge was - it's one of these muddy races, probably about six miles. I was going to the gym a bit at the time though.

So, Runners, is it doable? What should my training look like?

In reply to Donnie:

Well out of the 720 runners at our last parkrun, that would put you in the top 6.

Personally I don't think it's do-able in that time frame, else that would be my goal too. Maybe you should aim for sub-20 mins first, that's what I'm going for.

In reply to Donnie: if you're lucky it's doable. What's your height and weight ? More to the point, as you'll be running 5 or 6 times a week , is whether you get sore or injured.

You need to be able to run 8, 10k a day, twice a week you'll do speed work and once a week 10 miles of so. One of your speed work sessions should be about 6km of reps with relatively short rest at approx 84 seconds per 400m lap. Once you can do 6 * 1km at that pace with 1 min rest you're likely good. The other rep session will normally be shorter but occasionally longer.

I do not know where to go for week plans/schedules - maybe Google 'couch to 5k' and see if they have an intermediate plan.

Good luck - 5k is the king of distances in my opinion, and a fast performance is really tough

In reply to Donnie:

Good luck. That would put you in the top 5% of runners in the UK.

In reply to Donnie: aesj - don't worry about that. If you don't have a go you won't find out.

That 100% includes a lot of age groupers (to be polite). As a non overweight 33 year old I've seen this happen plenty of times. Do you have a club to join and a local park run as the sooner you start racing the better

In reply to Donnie:

Go to a parkrun this Saturday, and come back and tell us what time you did.

From your description of yourself I'd say it was unlikely, but you may be a natural who responds well to training.

A lot will depend how much time and effort you can commit to this, and as was said above whether you pick up any injuries which is a real risk going from zilch to serious training ( if that's what you start to do ! )

It is definitely do able, as 18 mins is a fairly average 5km time, I guess regularly train 4 to 5 times a week, with the right amount of faster sessions and long runs you should be ok. But will also depends on how natural running comes to you, some will manage it on 20 miles a week, others will struggle on 70 miles a week.

In reply to daftdazza:

It's not an average 5km time at all!

In reply to Donnie:

Thanks folks. Sounds like it might be tougher than I thought! I'll try park run this Saturday and get back to you.

In reply to Donnie:

Chances are that even with lots of hard work you won't, but without trying you won't know.

Get to you local Parkrun and see what you do. Come back and tell us what you did!

In reply to JayPee630:


Indeed, less than 3000 Brits did it in official 5ks last year, and less than 2000 at Parkruns. If you can manage it in a few months off little running history then you have some serious natural talent.

In reply to Donnie:

Unless you are a genetically very talented potential runner, I think that's a tall order. Sub 20 minute certainly realistic, but squeezing those extra minutes off takes a bit of background work for most, quite hard to obtain both the speed and stamina from scratch - without injury - a tough one.
I think injury would be the most likely outcome if you push for it.

In reply to Donnie:

I reckon you should give it a crack, do as much as you want to, follow a training programme if you want, see what happens. You mihgt love it, you might get injured.

Best advise would be to get a GPS watch, then you can feel what 18 min 5km pace feel like (3'36 per km). You might be able to keep it up for 500m now, but keep training and you will see that increase.

I train about 3-4 times a week, mostly fell running, between 30 and 70km a week, some hill reps and have run sub 17 minutes a couple of times so it's not impossible if you are fit.

In reply to Donnie:

It really depends on if you are a natural quick runner.. people who are naturally good runners get fit super quick, so its certainly not impossible, but yeah a tall order.

The main issue will be injury, just build your miles slowly for now..

In reply to DancingOnRock:

As much as that? Would have thought it would be less than 5%. I think about 2% of Parkrun participants do it.

To the OP - good luck. Let us know how you get on. I got some useful tips about lowering my 5k time on here a while ago. I'm now stuck in the low 19's - Sub 19 just seem's like a psychological brick wall to me.

It's probably below average for a normal club runner, and it's not an amazing difficult time for someone to run if the put the effort in, maybe the summer is a bit optimistic, but if he has talent and comes back with a 21/22 min park run time at the weekend, then sub 18 would be do able. I think it's a time most people could do if they train for it, but for others lacking natural speed or talent, sub 3 hour marahon may be easier.

And best of luck to OP, I think you can do it, if not get very close.

In reply to Donnie:

http://www.active.com/running/articles/how-to-kill-your-10k-pr-focus-on-get...

The 'average' 10K targets for age in the link above are about right, and I'd guess multiply by 0.45'ish for 5K. I couldn't do it now but I ran a couple of 5K's at about 18 minutes when I was your age, but found it a pig of a distance to get right because it was so easy to go into lactate overload and just drop out somewhere on the way. The advice in the other posts is correct, you'll need to commit to six days a week with reps, fartlek sessions, a long run (10-15 miles), a threshold run etc, and it'll likely end in injuries if you haven't had a long build-up, or say come off the back of training for a respectable equivalent marathon time.

And when I was running tarmac 10K's under 40 minutes, my running machine time for the same distance was a very flattering 35 :-P

In reply to daftdazza:

"if he has talent and comes back with a 21/22 min park run time at the weekend, then sub 18 would be do able"

Agreed, but if he does under 22 mins in his first proper 5k that would be really good going. I think under 25 mins for a first 5k with virtually zero training would be very respectable and aiming to get down to sub 20 would be a challenging but achievable target. That's what I'm aiming for.

I know people who are climbing and hill walking fit, not overweight and their natural 5k speed is closer to 30 mins. Others can run close to 20mins with little training but they are the exception rather than the norm. You'll only know your natural level once you give it a go and set yourself a base.

In reply to JMGLondon:

Possibly. I was just going on the RunBritian rankings and yes that probably includes age groupers. I think there's 55,000 men with less than 3000 of them sub 18:00. These will be serious runners, not just park runners.

An 18min 5k equates to 3 miles @ 5:48/mi.

In reply to daftdazza:


If your club is on of the elite clubs like Salford, Stockport, Leeds City, Tipton etc, but in most clubs it is definately above average.

My club qualified for the national 12 stage last year with a team with 3 or 4 runners who had not run sub 18 minutes.

In reply to Donnie:

Good luck, (depending on your time on Saturday) i think you can do it, and if you can't you may as well try anyway!

I managed to go from nothing to 18.30 in two months with not much more than a parkrun a week, so it's definitely possible if you train. But, it did take me another year to run 18.00, for this I found speedwork mixed with some longer mileage seemed to work well.

In reply to daftdazza:


Jibber-jabber. You'd do well in many local races with that ...in front of most club runners.

In reply to Donnie: Yes, but his interest is in training for a reasonably quick 5K - most club runners don't train for this properly if at all, and don't know how to race them (unfortunately). Even the majority of people doing Parkruns don't really target 5K specifically I suspect.

He is a he.
He isn't 40, 50, 60 +
He isn't overweight (or so he says)
He is not interested in marathons and ultras
He is interested in racing it

All those count for him running that time, or having a decent crack at it. Who here specifically targets 5K, or at least has it as one of there major target distances?

You're not miles away at 6 minute miling. Is 3 miles at 6 minute pace really so exceptional?

I am jesting, Was mainly to highlight that a sub 18 min 5km is not the impressive really hard to achieve time most folks on here has made it out to be, it is an achievable target if someone trains accordingly, though I acknowledge it will be physically beyond a few people.

In reply to daftdazza:


Not unless if by "club" you mean an elite club like Belgrave that regularly send athletes to the Olympics, but there's no need to estimate this. Stats are readily available on the web.

For example, a sub 18m 5k would have got you a top 7 place in the largest Edinburgh Parkrun, 641 runners, in August this year. The largest parkrun was at Bushy Park in October, with 1705 runners. There, a sub 18m run would barely scrape the top 40, but that's still the top 2.5%

Generally, I'd be surprised to see someone with no active running history aiming for an 18m 5k. It's certainly not unreasonable, but I think 20m is more realistic.

Andrew.

In reply to wbo:


You may well be right, but unless you have data to back up your suspicions, you're guessing.


Well it depends how you quantify 'exceptional'. If we are talking about the top 3% of parkrunners ( using a large parkrun like Bushy Park as being a representative sample of the UK as a whole ), then yes - it is exceptional.

In reply to Donnie:

It's definitely worth aspiring to, but to suggest 18 mins is somehow normal is a bit silly. Normal for who? Certainly not your average runner.

I've not done many dedicated ParkRuns, but during training for my last marathon (Sub 4hrs) I did 21:49 and was really puffing at the end. I think if I trained specifically at that distance then I could get sub 20 but sub 18 would be beyond me.

In reply to planetmarshall:

The bottom line is, the OP hasn't even yet gone out and tried running 5k to get a feel for it, so we don't even have a benchmark. There seem to be so many posts on here (not just running related) asking everyone if something is doable, when the first step should be to just go out and have a go and come back to discuss improvements.

Squeezing marginal gains out is hard work and takes a lot of commitment. The OP needs to get a base and sharpen up from there - otherwise everything else is blind luck. There's no denying that sub-18 is both very hard work to achieve, and something that only a small minority of competitive runners ever achieve - so its not to be dismissed or seen as anything but very impressive.

Since the OP admits they're 'not a runner', it also strikes me as a rather odd goal. Why not try to start running x number of miles a week and/or make regular gains on speed/race results/distance. Just going for 5km seems arbitrary, temporary and a bit tick-listy.

Each to their own though.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Here's an exceptional: one of the best runners in our club has just moved up to V55 (currently 2nd V55 in the UK for parkrun on Power of 10). He only started running 2 years ago (after being a really talented junior) ...still took him around 6 months to go sub 18 ...though I admit he wouldn't have been targetting them or doing many early on.

But heck, try and fail, or succeed, or fail gloriously and try again. There's only one way to find out.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Yeah but what percentage of park run finishers are club runners? And how serious do the rest take running.

If you look at a club event, the isle of man Easter athletics festival, I think about 64 males ran 18mins or below, and that's after two heavy days of drinking and racing, so it's not an especially great time for club runners.

In reply to moffatross:



More like 0.48-0.49. An 18 minute 5Ker should be doing something like 37 for 10K - 40 minutes would be more like marathon pace...

In reply to daftdazza:

Sure, plenty can do it, but your view of "18 mins is a fairly average 5km time" is simply false (and a little pompous too).

In reply to yorkshireman:


Well indeed, so we can only look at the UK population as a whole, and based on my own experience and the parkrun stats I'd say that sub 18 mins in under 6 months of training for someone with no running history is a tall order. But yes, the OP should get out there and run and post his initial time.

In reply to daftdazza:


If the Isle of Man festival were representative of UK club runners as a whole, I'd agree, but it isn't. A quick look at the results shows a high proportion of University athletes who are a fairly self-selecting group of committed, well above average runners in the prime of their athletic lives.

I'd maintain that parkrun is a better indicator of average UK club running times for 5k.

In reply to daftdazza:

From my experience of Park Runs there's always a number of good club runners.

here's the list of the fastest 500 runners at Leamington (which isn't a fast course)

http://www.parkrun.org.uk/leamington/results/fastest500/

In reply to planetmarshall:


I'd agree, and add that the OP does sound more like your average park runner (e.g. me) than club runner.
So if 18 min is a completely unrealistic target, would it better to set him a more reasonable target. For example I've managed to knock 3 mins off my parkrun time in about 9 months without too much effort. Still over 24 mins so still a long way to go before I get to what UKC believes is average !

In reply to Donnie:

One of the things coming out of this thread is just how much disagreement there is about how 'good' 18 minutes is - it's amazing! I think the term 'club runner' should be taken with a bucketload of salt too, as if Leeds is any indication of the strength of club runners on an average parkrun, you'd have about 5-10 % of them running <18 minutes, then another 20 % at sub <21, then about 35% sub <25, 35% sub 0, then the rest. In short, just because you're in a club doesn't mean you're any good.

I can consistently run under 20.30 minutes whether or not I've done any running for months, but getting under 19.30 requires me to do some training. Getting under 18 is a long-term goal, but to do that I'll have to do much more focussed mileage than I do at the moment. If you really want it, I think it's totally possible.

In reply to daftdazza:


I filtered through the RunBritain Rankings for 5k (note a distinct category from parkrun) which will include all UKA registered events. With the creation of parkrun, specific 5ks are often biased to a faster club based field, especially as the numbers of such events has reduced.

Even so, there are less than 3000 runners who went sub 18 in the UK last year.

There is a popular summer 5k on a very fast course around here. About 60 runners per event manage sub 18, but you'll also notice at the sharp end they're from all over Yorkshire - people will travel for a fast officially recognised event.

In reply to Rampikino:
But see my post above. Was joking. More to highlight 18 mins is not that hard a time to aim for.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Have you been to the isle of man festival, its a massive piss up for students of non elite universities, none of the races are taken very serious, and majority of people running the 5km will be very hungover, I think the Times are about right for normal club runners in my experience.

In reply to Liam M:


Another comparison is to look at the time as a percentage of the World Record ( or World Best ) and compare with other events.

The World Best for the 5k road is 12:59, this is 72% of 18:00
So using this method this is comparable to

Marathon : 2:50
10k : 37:09

Not sure it's meaningful to do this for sprint races, as this equates to something like 13s for the 100m so I expect there is a different distribution.

In reply to Donnie:

I'm in a pretty small club - total membership about 120, but lots of 40, 50, 60, even a few 70+

We've got I think 5 guys who have run sub 18 recently - 1 mid 30s, 2 late 30s, 1 early 40s, and 1 superfit late 50s.

I've just turned 50, been running at about 40-70 mpw for the last 2 or 3 years, and I've gone sub 19 about 5 or 6 times, pb 18:45. I like to think I could have gone sub 18 in my early 30s.

I'd still say that with no running background and just cycling 1 mile to work and 1 mile back again each day, then chances of OP doing this are very, very slim.

Given the timeframe, then sub 20 if he's got some natural ability would be an excellent achievement.

My guess, based on seeing other people start at parkrun is that he would do about 25 or 26 on his first attempt, if he trains regularly see a quite quick improvement obver 2 or 3 months to about 22 or 23, then plateau a bit, and with a considerable more effort push on to 20 or 21.

In reply to daftdazza:


I haven't, no, but as I said it's not representative of UK club runners. The top 16 in the Men's 5k relay all ran under 16 minutes, and I see a number of names from Cambridge, Edinburgh, Manchester and Leeds - hardly obscure polytechnics - so you'll forgive me if I take your assurances that they were all hungover with a pinch of salt.

Your experience doesn't seem to tie up with that of anyone else on this thread. What club do you run with?

In reply to Liam M:
The problem with 5k road is that there aren't many of them outside parkruns so unless you race on the track you don't get many races. Of the 30+ 5ks I've raced only 3 were on the road. Parkruns has improved that.

You need to race 5k a fair bit to learn how to do it properly, especially as most road runners are coming from a background of long distance. It hurts, a lot

In reply to steelbru:


I'm no expert but I think that's likely to be the problem rather than his ultimate ability to acheive that time.

In reply to Donnie:

We're all different but in that timeframe assuming you're keen and don't get hurt I'd have thought <20 was more realistic but if you don't try you won't know.

I've only ever tried a timed 5k once in less than ideal conditions (dark and crowded), from memory I was around the 22min mark and it hadn't felt easy. The idea of knocking 4min off is pretty well unthinkable for me. Last night's 5k, my first run in months (including some hobbling, toilet breaks for the hound and stopping to moan about my knees) was slower than my best 10k time

Go for a run, see where you're starting from.

jk

In reply to Donnie:

Thanks for all the advice/support/healthy realism.

I said I'd do a Park Run this Saturday to see where I was at. I'm hoping to do some winter walking instead, so I downloaded Strava and tried to do a timed 5k (twice round the meadows in Edinburgh) that turned out to only be 4.5k.

18:29 and it was quite cold and windy. Pretty shattered for the last k and my knee was a bit sore but fine after.

In reply to Donnie:

Wow, 18.29 for 4.5k as a first run is very good. Given that performance I would say getting under 20 with some training shouldn't take you too long, and getting under 18 in 6 months with some proper training could be acheiveable.

Well done and let us know how you get on.

In reply to mountain.martin:

Thanks, and I will do.

18 seems a long way off though, I was actually hoping I'd be under 20 with no training. I expect the main thing will be if my knees hold up. No longer 25.

In reply to Donnie:

That works out to just over 4 mins per km which is very impressive for a first effort. It's hard to know whether you'll be able to knock 2 minutes off that with training but assuming you've been truthful about your experience it seems likely that you have some considerable natural running talent. I say go for it, and good luck.

Andrew.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Sub 18 isn't an unreasonable target for someone coming in to running in their early thirties, a reasonable percentage will achieve it, but unless the OP is very lucky genetically it isn't going to happen in the next few months.

In reply to Donnie:

Nice one Donnie, you undoubtedly have some natural ability !!

I'd still try and get yourself down to Cramond for a parkrun as soon as you can for an accurate measurement

In reply to Donnie:

"I was actually hoping I'd be under 20 with no training"

What you've done equates to about 20.40 for 5k. If you were in a race/parkrun on a fast course you could probably take most of that 40 secs off due to the competition/adrenalin as long as you got the pacing right.

In reply to steelbru:


Cheers. I will do. Hopefully the weekend after this one.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Thanks Andrew.

I think that's a pretty honest summary. I've been for the odd run before though, three or four in 2014. And I did quite a lot of sport until my mid twenties - rugby at school, fives at uni etc. - and I've generally been naturally quite fit.

Also, my bike's a single speed and Edinburgh's quite hilly. So that mile's probably more exercise than it sounds. On the way home at least.

In reply to wbo:


Don't be silly, there are thousands. I could do 2 a week without travelling more than 20 miles from home. The local fast courses are also well known.

In reply to Donnie: Well that's a welcome development because when I did a lot of racing (mid /late 90's) there were very, very few and you needed to go on the track if you wanted to race.

In reply to The New NickB:

I'd agree that sub-18 isn't an unreasonable target and as has been mentioned that with some talent, careful, specific training and a focus on that event it is well do-able. For those who think parkruns are the be all and end all there is another world of running outside of those in the clubs and I would say it is a fairly average time for a "young" club runner. Part of the problem is in the age spectrum of clubs (not many under 30 unless a T&F club) and the fact that people tend to focus on being the best in the club rather than the best they can be.......

In reply to wbo:

I'd also agree with your earlier post - 5K's a great distance, hard to get right and man do those last 2 laps hurt.

In reply to moffatross:

No way.. A treadmill is marginally quicker.. No 30-40 sec per mile..

In reply to The New NickB:

It's hard to find super quick good ones with strong fields...

Most are fairl quick but not pb courses

In reply to Donnie:
If you're in Edinburgh, maybe look at the Self Transcendence Meadows races when they start up again in the summer for achieving the target. I got both my two PBs on those. They are normally small but often with good winning times, and it seems to be a fast course.

I got 19:00 in my first 5k (although had done a couple of seasons of fell racing), managed to get it down to 18:13 after a few months, both those were in the Meadows races. There's definitely hope!

Edit: done the parkrun in Cramond a bunch of times too and find it harder to get a good time. Normally seem to be 20-30 secs slower

In reply to Donnie:

Brilliant Donnie, great effort, you definitely have the talent to achieve your goal, and I think you can do it by the end of the summer if you train hard. My advice is to join hunters bog trotters, they train Monday and Thursday night on the meadows, great structured training, plus their is a joint Edinburgh uni bog trotter session on a Tuesday night, lots of ultra quick runners then to pull you a long. It's a great club, so recommend you give them a bash, email me and I can send you more details.

In reply to daftdazza:

I'll second joining HBT, they are awesome

In reply to oliverk:

Going by my GPS watch then the Meadows course is slightly short, and the Cramond parkrun is slightly long. Would explain 20 or 30 seconds difference.

Best bet for a fast time is the Scottish 5k Champs which is also held down at Silverknowes/Cramond ( but a slight variation on the parkrun course ). always a very high quality field, normally a Wednesday evening in early/mid May, which will be a bit early probably for the OP

In reply to IainRUK:

About 15 years ago, hotel gym running machines, and yes way. No longer stay in hotels through work so haven't used them since.

In reply to moffatross:

very surprised.. I use treadmills regularly and no my pace like the back of my hand..

I run km at 5:10-5:15 pace on the road and 5:05-5:10 pace on a treadmill..

In germany we trained constantly on treadmills as those guys were soft.. our paces were always fairly close...

Must have been a freak treadmill.. nowadays no chance and tbh even back in 2000 my fitness test was 3 miles in 21 mins on a treadmill and the same on the road...

In reply to oliverk:

there certainly is...

I think those who say no chance just rent that good a runner.. I wouldn't have.. the likes of humperdink could go from 15 stone and still bang out a quick time as the weight dropped over a 5k as they are naturally quick runners...

But also younger people get fit quick.. very quick.

I just coached a XC team for 10-12 weeks and tbh I didnt expect much but by the end I was amazed at how far they came.. leaps I couldnt have made at 35 years old..

In reply to IainRUK:

Good to hear that. I see bargains from time to time on ebay for what look like industrial looking treadmills that are described as used only privately from new, and often wondered if the running 'feel' is more natural than I remember it, and if it's worth having a punt ...

In reply to daftdazza:

I think I've seen them - they look a bit quick for me. Maybe if I manage to get a month or so under my belt without getting injured

In reply to oliverk:

I'll keep an eye out for them - thanks

In reply to Donnie:

Great to see a busy running thread - esp about 5k. Such a popular distance now.

In reply to JMGLondon:

Yes I agree. This thread really took off. I've never raced 5k, but have run about 19:40 on a training run, so this has been quite interesting. I haven't gone sub-40 for 10k yet, which I've raced many times (and halves/full marathon). Would be interesting to train for a 5k, see if that gives me more speed for 10k, and beyond.

In reply to Donnie: Training and racing 5k would make a huge difference to your 10K and most probably your half as well. It depends how much time/commitment you want to put into the distance.
You will find it very difficult initially though as you are going to need to run fast for a solid 15-20 minutes but it is worth the commitment.

People running high level 10K don't tend to run 10K that often. They run a lot of 5K instead.

In reply to wbo:

Interesting. I might give it a go as I have been finding it hard breaking sub 40 for 10K. I've been between 15 and 50 seconds too slow 3 or 4 times now.

I definitely notice if I don't do speed work (even just missing one or two sessions in the space of a week or two), I lose it very quickly. Performance on things like 400m to mile intervals and LT/tempo runs drops right off and it is hard work to get back.

In reply to Donnie:

did you do a parkrun today

Tony

In reply to Donnie:

Come on Donnie - Did you run it? Give us a time!

In reply to Hamfunk:
Hey, thanks for asking. I was walking instead on Saturday - i tried my own timed one last Wednesday though. Turned out to be only 4 and a half. 18:30 and a sore knee. So about 20:30 if I'd actually done 5k.

Skiing this weekend so it'll be the Saturday after before i make a park run.

In reply to Tony & Sarah:

Afraid not. See above. Thanks for asking and let you know when i do

In reply to Donnie:

Don't get too hung up about sub 18 for 5k. Once you've run a few, you'll discover what you need to do. I've always found that the extra effort required to knock fractions of a minute off a 5k time seems to rise exponentially most of the time. And then sometimes you pull one out of the bag when you least expect it. Sub 6 minute milling for the distance is a big ask of yourself.

In reply to birdie num num:

A sensible thread from you, num num
What's going on?

In reply to goose299:

Mrs num num is like a hippopotamus, beefy and fat but with a surprising turn of speed when angered, years of training to first dodge then outrun her have given num num a good insight into middle distance training and beyond.

In reply to birdie num num:


Ha ha brilliant response

In reply to birdie num num:


Afraid it's all about the sub 18. There's a bit non monetary wager going on.

In reply to Donnie:

Have you raced 5k yet?

In reply to Donnie:

Not yet. I did my own timed one, managed 4.5k at about 20:30 5k pace, injured myself in the process and then got bronchitis.

In reply to Donnie: To quote a better man than me

'If you're weak or just so-so
Don't go running, no no no'

From the absolutely excellent 'How to become a champion' by the greatest coach of all time, Percy Wells Cerutty, and after reprinting available on amazon for <£200

In reply to wbo:

Does he mean just don't bother at all, or does he tell you how to be better than just so-so?

In reply to Donnie:

I think he means don't run if you're feeling unwell. Or at least that's how I read it, rather than "if you're not Mo Mo Mo, don't bother no no no".

In reply to mountainbagger:

Aha - that makes sense. Advice I take to quite naturally, alongside if the weather's a bit sh1t maybe just wait until tomorrow.

In reply to Donnie:

In the book he certainly encourages you to be just so so - for a book with it's origins around 1958 the stuff that isn't barking mad is pretty revolutionary - train very hard, good diet, rejection of materialism, focus on all body health.... I thoroughly recommend having a look tho' there is a decent chance you'll throw it in the bin.

No, it's nothing to do with not running when you feel sick. It is an exhortion that running is difficuly, but the effort and suffering will make you a better, stronger person.

In reply to wbo:


OK, I misinterpreted it then and I totally get what you're saying, but I still don't quite get the quote! It seems to be saying the opposite, but perhaps it's all about its context in the book. It just looks like it's telling me not to run (because I am weak and just so-so, which I am, but I like running!)

In reply to Donnie: Well from the same book but another poem, is something like

'wind and hail, rain and shine,
real men run and never whine.'

I would thoroughly recommend the book. It's a bit of a manual on living, and some pretty stern stuff on training that is alarmingly modern when compared to modern E African running. His protege Herb Elliott won the 1500 in Tokyo in a world record. Elliott retired a few years later with the unique record of never being beaten in a race, which naturally meant racing was rather boring. Best distance runner ever?

In reply to wbo:



I like that one! I know many people who don't train consistently, especially over winter, saying things like "oh I'll start up again when it's a bit warmer" or "it gets dark too early" or "are you kidding? It's p*ssing down out there!"

The only thing I don't like is running into the wind. It makes me angry for some reason! Maybe frustrated is a better word.