Marathon pace based on 5k pace

[Jeff Linger]

Sasha, in another thread, don't remember which one, you stated that "true marathon pace" should be about 30 seconds/mile slower than one's current 5k pace. You said that one should train for this goal pace with the assumption that consistency over time will eventually lead to this result. Setting aside a discussion of the 'technical reasons' this is achievable, I have a couple questions. First, let us assume for argument sake that my current 5k equates to a 6:00/mile pace. This would place my true marathon pace at 6:30s. Let us further assume that currently my training has placed me at a 7:00/mile pace over the course of 26.2. As I continue to train towards the 6:30/mile goal, wouldn't my 5k time come down by default as my body makes training adaptions? Over time I assume one would reach a point of threshhold capacity both in terms of 5k and marathon times. As the 5k pace comes down to its limit, should training continue to be readjusted recalculating a 'true marathon pace', or should one work first towards attaining a 'true marathon pace' based on a starting point 5k time and then, at that point in time, re-evaluate 5k pace and construct new 'true marathon pace'? I.E. go for the M-pace goal until achieved and then re-adjust, or continue to evaluate 5k time and re-adjust continually?

I ran across a USATF article that established true aerobic threshhold (pace where a marathon should be able to be run) based on V02max capacity found by one's flat out mile time. The author suggests that your marathon goal pace over time with training should be 84% of your flat out mile pace, with lactic threshhold being 88%. In the case of a flat 5:00 mile your goal m-pace would be 5:57s. McMillan Running Calculator suggests that a flat out mile of 5:00 equates to a 5k pace of 5:35s ... in the case of 'true marathon pace' under your 30 seconds/mile addition would come to a 6:05. The training cycles suggested in the article to achieve this 5:57 pace based on a flat out 5:00 mile recommends a 14 week training cycle whereby weekly mileage moves as follows over the course of weeks 1 - 14: 50mpw, 70, 60, 80, 70, 100, 90, 120, 90, 70, 70, 70, race week. In this cycle 2 days a week are dedicated to Long Runs (1 based on time [2-3 hours] and a 2nd based on mileage 20 miles with 4 at tempo pace in the middle), 2 days a week are dedicated to Intensity (1 day of long intervals 5ks-miles and 1 day of short intervals 1ks-400s) 2 recovery runs,  and 1 day major tempo run + 3 days dedicated to core work, plyometrics, and weight training. That's certainly a workload.

Just curious to some of the thoughts about the above (especially from the elite runners on this blog). Also, is this the sort of training schedule that is attainable after a couple years of consistent 6day/week (60 mpw+) base training, or is this the sort of regiment that should be held off on until after more years of training (I read somewhere that aerobic capacity continues to develop until it reaches a limit, which, for most runners is after 10 years of consistent training).

[Dallen]

A couple thoughts.

Everyone's race paces will be slightly different based on personal physiology. Some people may be better suited for 5K, others for marathon. In general most people will fall fairly close the the paces that can be found in any of the many charts out there.

I think 30 seconds difference between 5K and marathon might be too small. Lets look at the world records:
Mile: 3:43
5K: 12:37 (4:04/mile)
10K 27:02 (4:22/mile)
Half Marathon 58:33 (4:28/mile)
Marathon 2:03:59 (4:44/mile)

This would suggest the absolute difference in 5K and marathon paces to be closer to 40 seconds.

My personal difference is 50 seconds, but with an ideal marathon would be probably be closer to 40. I suspect most of the top runners on the blog will have similar numbers. I doubt there is anyone closer than 30 seconds (at least on an unaided marathon course).

As for that training program you described, it's too hard. 2 long runs, 2 interval days, and a tempo run is too much. Any mortal attempting this sort of routine will either be too tired to perform the workouts appropriately and/or they will get injured.

[Sasha Pachev]

Dallen:

World records in general are a bad pattern to analyze because usually different people have them on different distances. However, Haile has a PR in the 5 K of 12:39, which is close to the world record. On the other hand, he ran it a long time ago, and on the track. The day he ran Berlin had you had him race a 5 K on the road he probably would not have broken 13:00. So that puts him a lot closer to the 30 second difference.

Having said that, there is nothing magic about 30 seconds. It varies among individual runners. For some it could be as high as 50 seconds - not enough slow twitch fibers, bad liver, bad heart, etc. But 30 seconds is not impossible to achieve.

The reason calculators are pessimistic about marathon is that most runners do not optimally train for the marathon for long enough. So they mess  up the curve.