[Closed] Runners - whats your 5k time?

I've done 5km in 26minutes and I'm not really a runner - just tried it out a few times. That was outdoors mind. Edit - I'm also 54 and I don't know if age should be taken into account.

I can do 5 miles in 50 min (off road), hoping to get that up to 6 miles in the same time.

Come back when you have done it not on a treadmill.

My best is 25m, but that's off road moors and paths with about 300ft of climbing.

Still slow though compared to a mate of mine

23 minutes - although I couldn't move for days afterwards...

17:28.

Try a Parkrun if there is one near you. Then you can have a proper run and see the whole gamut of ability levels.

I think good runners would aim for sub-20. My PB as an occasional runner is 23:30.

+1 for Parkrun, fantastic events (free too)

I can do 5k in a shade over 20 minutes on a treadmill, but my 10k time on tarmac is closer to 50 minutes and my half marathon is 1hr 40 mins on tarmac. Treadmills are great for training when you can't get outside, but I find them a hindrance for training for outside events

Agree treadmill times are irrelevant. I used to race and got down time 15:15 as a junior but got distracted by booze at uni to really see what could be done

With a few weeks training most men should be able to run under 20 mins I would have thought, unless overweight. That's (obviously) 40 minute 10k pace which in itself is not particularly quick.

23 or 24m i think but ran 3.5k tonight in 4:47 pace, not bad as ive been hardly running and ate too many pies

Mines 22.34. Working towards getting it under 20mins but only run a couple times a week at the moment so could take some time

23 minutes at the end of a sprint triathlon, not done one on its own but Strava tells me 22:25 is my best time.

Never run a 5, but went 37 odd for 10k last year so I'd guess around 18 dead

I read somewhere that you need to have a gradient (1% from memory) on the treadmill to replicate running outside better. PB for me outside sub 21min on out and back course which was very flat. I would like to do sub 20min 5km and sub 42min for 10km but that would require some serious training/commitment from me. Just not that fussed about running at the moment.

sub 40 for a 10k is the start of running properly. So you should be aiming for under 20mins if you'r at all serious about your running. 17.30 for me a long,long time ago.

21.40 in a dualathon, 1st run mind 😀

I did a charity 5K in 31 minutes not long back and I'm fat and unfit...

I am aiming to get my 10k time down though so as I can complete a charity run in a more respectable time!

20 minutes on the flat is supposed to be the 'proper runner' time.

Last I tried I could do pretty much exactly 21 minutes, but I am not really a runner, just someone who goes for a run sometimes. When I went out with the local running club I was with a load of kids and geriatrics!

I'm also 54 and I don't know if age should be taken into account.

Yes, it should you old fart.

OP - No idea on my time. But everyone I've met that's done a parkrun recommends them. I don't run them as I thoroughly dislike all other people.

20 minutes 33 seconds for tonight's quick 5k 🙂

OP - No idea on my time. But everyone I've met that's done a parkrun recommends them.

Likewise. We should hang out...actually..

I don't run them as I thoroughly dislike all other people.

We also have this in common, so maybe not.

8)

A touch over 20 mins. Not raced one for ages though and would now expect to scrape under 20 when fit.

20.54 is my best parkrun .

22:54 for a fraction under 5k with a 46 minute time for a 10k. Everything over that is in the sky, with a 1 hour, 57 minute 13.5 mile time.

I've just remembered that they have started a new parkrun thing down the road from me that is a bit more trail-y than normal. I'll get on to that and let you know when I get back from this course.

Where's Surfer? He's a handy lad in two legs.
Me I'm 17:29. Was a few years ago I must admit.

[url] http://www.roadracestatistics.org.uk/5km.htm [/url]
[url] http://www.roadracestatistics.org.uk/parkrun5k.htm [/url]
[url] http://www.roadracestatistics.org.uk/conclusion.htm [/url]

looks like I need to up my game then 🙄

although from the above links I look about average which I am happy with at the moment as the running is just to supplement other things and keep the weight off. Dont think I will ever be a serious runner and compete, but do enjoy a quick 5k to get the heart and lungs going, more of a warm up for a weights session or cardio afterwards, or just to keep me fit for karate.

21:36 on a "rolling" out and back race on 27 Dec. PB so far, times are still falling.

I'm a grandad and only been running/triathlons for 2 years. So really happy with my time.

Will be aiming for 20:xx this year, and sub 20 at next christmas's race 🙂

I have run just over 4 miles in 24 minutes on a mixed outdoors run.
I would say that means about 18:40 for me. It was 10 years ago though......mmmm.....new goal for me I think.

my mate did 5k in two minutes in a casino--loon !

[i]With a few weeks training most men should be able to run under 20 mins I would have thought, unless overweight. That's (obviously) 40 minute 10k pace which in itself is not particularly quick.[/i]

That's weird because if you turn up to any 10k event and finish in 40min you'll more than likely be in the top 10% of runners. When do you start getting quick if you're already faster than 90% ?

19:31 at a Parkrun. I am old. And sh*t.

Keva - Member

That's weird because if you turn up to any 10k event and finish in 40min you'll more than likely be in the top 10% of runners.

I don't agree with that at all! Maybe you're talking about fun runs, but most of the local 10k club races are won in around 30-31 mins and 40 min would see you in the bottom half! Or maybe races have got slower since I used to do them?

Or maybe races have got slower since I used to do them?

Not at all. Your post is exactly what I was thinking.

I reckon I'll probably clock up my fifth kilometre of running in about 2015

22 minutes 32 seconds, but that was as part of a 10km loop, off road in the desert. 10km pb is 50 minutes 41 seconds that I'd really like to get down. Been running for 6 months now and it's better than the 5km in 33 minutes 38 seconds I was doing back in July when I started running. Lost 3 stone doing it as well.

It takes a lot more than a few weeks training for any man to run a sub 20. My local park run has around 100 entrants and although it is a slow course I normally come in the top 10 at just over 20 mins. I would expect to knock a minute off that for a pan flat road course. Just get out and join your local park run, they hurt but are addictive.

'Good' is tricky to quantify. The faster you get, the faster 'good' is (and if you're anything like me, you'll never quite get there!)

I think 40min for a 10k is generally thought of as 'good' so maybe 20min for 5k is a nice round target number? - Edit - If you're a reasonably healthy 15-50 year old male.

My PB (at a parkrun last week) is 26:01. I'm with the slowcoaches here, I reckon a 20min 5k / 40min 10k is pretty fast from where I'm standing...

Actually, scrap what I just said.

'Good' is either better than last time or the same as last time but it feeling easier.

Don't compare yourself with other people. Unless you're winning races you'll just get frustrated. I came 2nd in a little hilly road 10k last year and was really annoyed as I should have won it. But I was fast and felt good so it was a good performance for me.

Keva - Member

That's weird because if you turn up to any 10k event and finish in 40min you'll more than likely be in the top 10% of runners.

I don't agree with that at all! Maybe you're talking about fun runs, but most of the local 10k club races are won in around 30-31 mins and 40 min would see you in the bottom half! Or maybe races have got slower since I used to do them?

Speaking as a 39:35 PB, sub 40 is most definitely NOT ballpark for a regular runner. A sub-40 will see you in the top 25% of a 10k - not a fun run but one with club runners too. A combination of natural talent, speedwork and bloody-mindedness needed for a sub-40. A new runner would have to be very talented to see sub-40 with only a few weeks training.

Look at the tables in the post on the previous stage which provides empirical (rather than subjective) figures...

16:50 a couple of years ago, haven't done one for ages.
35:52 for a 10K.
.
It's weird, when racing locally (Lincolnshire) I'm right up there, top-10s in 10Ks and 2nd at an XC half. But I still race near my old home in Fife, did a 10 mile race in 29:40, came about 40th and got beaten by two girls! Got into the top 100 at Carnethy (just) and was dead chuffed with that. The competition is definatle ybetter up there.

It depends upon what you're trying to measure yourself against as to how fast you are.

If you're a beanpole/run for a club/have 'competed' then sub-20 mins for 5k is where you should be aiming.

If you run to get fit, do occasional fun-runs / charity runs then if you're sub-25 you're usually in the top half.

I've run 21:46 for a 5km, I only occasionally run for a bit of fitness for hockey and biking and come in the top 50 out of 300 in my local parkrun when i do it. I'm happy with that as I have a completely different physique from the skinny gets in front of me and carry a good 4 stone more in weight than them.

Parkruns are great if you pick the right pacemaker in front of you to focus on and concentrate on their 'form'

brooess - Member

A sub-40 will see you in the top 25% of a 10k - not a fun run but one with club runners too.

Depends on the race,. Last year I ran:
35:30 in a low-key club 10k and came about 65th of 500ish.
36:50 in a big charity 10k and came 11th of about 7,000.

Managed a 17:34 at park run last year.

"Quick" for a cyclist and "quick" for a runner doing a 5k / 10k are different I guess. I was basing this on my experience as a runner from about 10 years ago when I was training quite a lot and a 40 minute 10k for me, then, would have been a steady training run. It's all relative isn't it, I doubt I could get anywhere near a 40 minute 10k now.

I'd say sub 20 would be considered pretty good. Most people would need to do a bit of running to achieve that.
Closer to 15 minutes is very good and sub 15 would be very competitive. Thats when you realise that Mo is practically sprinting for 5k to get sub 13min. Madness.

aye andrewh carnethy Hill runners are notoriously unhinged.

1 or 2 of them will even give most expert mtb riders a run for their money at cycling.

With a few weeks training most men should be able to run under 20 mins I would have thought, unless overweight. That's (obviously) 40 minute 10k pace which in itself is not particularly quick.

Really? You appear to have forgotten to tell us what your pb is.

My best 5k on the road was 17:30, but that was the half-way point in a 10k as I've never run a 5k event (second half was a little slower at 18 minutes dead). Have run 16:30 on a treadmill.

The last 10k I ran I was top 10 with a 38 minute run, but as mentioned it all depends on the event.

Speaking as a 39:35 PB, sub 40 is most definitely NOT ballpark for a regular runner. A sub-40 will see you in the top 25% of a 10k

Top 25% but over 5 mins back from the top 10.

(speaking as a sub 35 10k'er)

I guess many people think the fun-run/park run/mass entry type of thing is what a normal 10k or 5k event is all about, whereas I think the smaller local races are the standard. Given that on every single weekend there will be a local race not far from you then I say that's right as the smaller open club races are the most common type.

Troon 10k 2012 had nearly 900 entrants yet it was won in only 31-odd. I remember doing a club event that had 20-odd in it and it was won in 30 mins, pretty much everyone was finished by 40mins.

mtbmatt - Member
I'd say sub 20 would be considered pretty good. Most people would need to do a bit of running to achieve that.
Closer to 15 minutes is very good and sub 15 would be very competitive. Thats when you realise that Mo is practically sprinting for 5k to get sub 13min. Madness.

Exactly! Try running a lap of a track in 62 seconds and imagine holding that for 12 laps! I could have done it for 4 laps at my best, and be utterly dead with no sprint at the end and I thought I was good... another level!

Really? You appear to have forgotten to tell us what your pb is.

15:50 fwiw, having done a lot of training for the 800/1500m. That isn't especially "quick" but it would appear to be to the novice runner. 20 mins would be achievable for most runners with a bit of (the right kind of) training.

15:50 fwiw, having done a lot of training for the 800/1500m. That isn't especially "quick"

...erm. It isn't?

aye andrewh carnethy Hill runners are notoriously unhinged

Pish, bunch of pansies

Jamie - Member
15:50 fwiw, having done a lot of training for the 800/1500m. That isn't especially "quick"
...erm. It isn't?

You'd need to be hitting sub 15 to win a lot of good club races, say 14:30 to win county races. The better you get the more you feel/know how much faster you should/want to be. You'd still be getting lapped by Mo etc at this speed!

Going by the title this thread is aimed at runners, as opposed to people who just jog now and then?

[b]Organic[/b] don't worry about it, your 24 mins for 5k was on a treadmill in a gym during a training session. You can pretty much guarantee everyone else is talking about their PB during a race.

You should be able to run a fair bit faster if you ran on the road in a race - I certainly wouldn't be running flat out for 5k very often on a training run.

Totally agree, but he did ask for pbs 🙂

Dan - I'm guessing you're referring to club races in and around Glasgow? Given that runners who are sub 15 mins tend to race the track at some point during the season there aren't a huge number of sub 15s on this 5k track rankings list from runners from Scottish clubs (similar numbers on the 10k rankings too).

Must be the same few runners winning most of the races, so those that are able to must be the very best, and not the norm.

[url= http://www.thepowerof10.info/rankings/rankinglist.aspx?event=5000&agegroup=ALL&sex=M&year=2012 ]5k track rankings[/url]

Marvin - he did, but no point getting disheartened comparing against PBs.

Not really hammerite, there are often a shortage of high quality 5000m track races in the scottish calendar, and there are more club runners that focus on road racing than the track in the senior rankings, therefore peaking for a track 5000m would possibly interfere with big 5k road races. There are far more guys running road seriously than track at that distance.

My road pb was 15s faster than my track 5000m. Track surfaces vary a lot and it's not always faster, not to mention that races can be more tactical especially when there are people who feel they have a good sprint finish, such as an old club mate from Inverclyde that won the national xc 2 times.

Where's Surfer? He's a handy lad in two legs

Road ones dont really count but I have done under 15 for 3 miles (around 200m short of 5k) and done sub 20 mins for 4 miles.
Best track 5k 15:48, best track 3k 9.01.

23 minutes, but that was a while ago so should be a minute or two quicker now. 1/4 marathon 54 mins, 1/2 marathon under 2 hours.

Training a fair bit so should beat all of those in the next month or two.

Running is great.

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/stw-runners-who-is-the-fastest?replies=1#post-4556965 ]Come on let's compare PB's, who is fastest?[/url]

Understood Dan. I'd agree with you that generally a lot of 5k races round here are won in around 15m, but there are very few runners who get close to being in that position and not the norm. There usually tends to be a fair gap between the top couple of runners and the next best.

OP here again, just upped my game a little this evening and from my original 24:07 yesterday I managed a 21:32 tonight which I am quite pleased with.

I am definitely not a runner and this was hard for me, cant see me ever being able to break 20 minutes to be honest.

I ran 16m59s on the road last Saturday. My PB is a smidge faster.

organic355 - Member
OP here again, just upped my game a little this evening and from my original 24:07 yesterday I managed a 21:32 tonight which I am quite pleased with.

I am definitely not a runner and this was hard for me, cant see me ever being able to break 20 minutes to be honest.

You need to get outdoors to guage what sort of speed you can run at. Honestly, the treadmill is pointless. Get a well-callibrated cycle computer and measure out a loop of, say, roughly 1000m, and then see what you can do. If it's just under 1000m, make a white mark on a tree/pavement/fence where the extra metres are to make up the 5000 on the last lap.

I really don't think the treadmill is "pointless" it has a very valid point. It was raining the last 2 evenings when I go home from work, with it in my garage I have run 20k this week, without it I would have sat on my area and played playstation.

With a few weeks training most men should be able to run under 20 mins I would have thought, unless overweight.

Statements like this are:

1. Wrong
2. Exactly the right thing to say to beginner runners if you want them to quit before they've got into running.

My fastest adult 5k is 22 minutes. As a teenager it was around 18 minutes. I'm sure I could get below 20 minutes but it would be a lot of work and although I don't look like a distance runner, I look much less like a rugby second row, so I'm in the right physical ballpark as it were.

damn predictive text above area = arse

It was raining the last 2 evenings when I go home from work

I haven't run for years and years. Injured. It sucks. I loved it.

Running in the rain = awesome.

I really miss it.

Using treadmills is not as good for getting fit as proper running for many reasons. Your ankles and shins won't learn to adapt to the terrain, you overheat given there is no wind to evaporate the sweat, you genuinely can't push yourself as hard (despite what you may feel after running hard on the treadmill!), your body is simply not prepared for running were you to enter a race, for example.

It's odd that rain puts you off running!

Get out there and get fit! 🙂

I assume most if not all these times are on road? How much difference would you expect a time to be if the route is off road, fields and mud? Assume similar elevation.

it's impossible to say, all depends on the course. I doubt many got a PB on this one...

[img] [/img]

Using treadmills is not as good for getting fit as proper running for many reasons. Your ankles and shins won't learn to adapt to the terrain, you overheat given there is no wind to evaporate the sweat, you genuinely can't push yourself as hard (despite what you may feel after running hard on the treadmill!), your body is simply not prepared for running were you to enter a race, for example.

A friend does 95% of her running on a treadmill, with the odd track session. Normally finishes in the top 3 female vets. She's not so great at off-road for obvious reasons. So yeah no doubt she could go faster if she did more miles on roads, but it's hardly crippling her performance.