Predicted time for 10k in a year

11 messages
01/06/2011 at 17:56
I ran the Bupa London 10000 on Monday in 60:27. My previous (and only other) 10k was in March, when I got 67:01.

I'd like to take advantage of the preferred entry I've been offered for next year's London 10000, but don't have a clue what my predicted time would be by then. Two months ago, when I entered this year's, I knew I wanted to beat 60 mins (so close!) so I put that. In a year, I don't know where I'll be.

My next major race is the Bupa Great South Run at the end of October; I also hope to do the MK Half next March, again before the London 10000.

Any suggestions for a semi-realistic target to aim for in a 10k a year away? You're not able to change them once you've applied. Thanks.
cougie    pirate
01/06/2011 at 17:58
Depends how keen you are to get the time down - and what training you have been doing. If you have been busting your balls then you'll probably not improve by more than a few minutes.

If you've been taking it easy and now are determined to slice minutes off it - you could take 20 or more off.

01/06/2011 at 18:09
It's all down to your training really. You need to start doing some tempo runs, if you aren't already, so you know what time you could achieve. If you can run a 7 min mile pace for 1km now then there is a good chance you could do that for the whole race by next year if you keep at it.
01/06/2011 at 21:05
When you are that slow there is a lot of room for improvement so who knows. anything you can do can leave to improvement and there is a lot of room for it
01/06/2011 at 21:11
if your race is not till october then you have pently time to improve
01/06/2011 at 22:20
What do you want to do !?
01/06/2011 at 22:21
40 minutes. Put down 40 minutes. Or 30. Yes. 30 minutes is good.
01/06/2011 at 22:24
20 at a push ?
01/06/2011 at 22:45

It depends on how long you've been running. You've knocked 7mins off your time in 4 weeks which suggests you've not been running long. You can make pretty good improvements when you start but soon hit a point of diminishing returns.

I would put 55mins. It's not like they will disqualify you if you finish faster or slower.

01/06/2011 at 23:43
If I was you I'd just look to improve on your previous time but by how much is all down to you. If you trained religiously everyday for the next 365 days like a Royal Marine and ensured that your diet was spot on then the reality is you'd be closer to 30 minutes than an hour. That type of dedication (unless you're a Royal Marine)is likely to eat into your schedule so just aim for to knock 10 minutes off as a realistic target.
As an example the first ever competitive 10k I ran was in 2006 and I completed the course in just over an hour. My PB over a 10k distance was coincidently on the same course last year and I completed it in 39 minutes and 12 seconds,.

Just give it your best shot; The proof is in the pudding.
02/06/2011 at 09:37
If it was a sweepstake I'd plump for something around 50 mins for the sake of the application form, not that anyone will pay much attention to this.  You're clearly on an upward curve of improvement, but a lot can happen either way in a year.  I like your idea of progressing through the distances to HM because when you come back to doing the 10k, the increased endurance training you do for the longer distances will make it seem a lot shorter.  I wouldn't worry too much about 'speedwork' for the foreseeable future, just get the miles in and build that aerobic base.  Throw in the odd tempo run if you feel like pushing it a bit.

We'd love you to add a comment! Please login or take half a minute to register as a free member
11 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums