w1r1 complete - hang on, what!?: connect.garmin... - Couch to 5K

Couch to 5K

127,123 members155,499 posts

w1r1 complete - hang on, what!?

yatesco profile image
21 Replies


My usual 5Ks are ~40 minutes and I want to run a 30 minute 5K. I started thinking about intervals etc. but I wanted something that was quite gentle as I am now running every day.

After thinking a bit, I thought "hmmm, I know a really good 9 week plan that starts off really gently and increases gradually - C25K!"

So, either genius or madness, not sure which, but I am going to intersperse my easy 5Ks with C25K run at a 5 or 6 minute pace giving me (eventually) a 25-30 minute 5K.

That's the plan anyway.

So, C25K w1r1 eh? Great fun. I messed up in the first two intervals, but you can clearly see the segments where I ran...and boy, those walking breaks were _very_ appreciated. I overcooked the first few running segments and found it tough completing the minute run. As ever, slow (but not TOO slow!) and steady wins the race, and yeah, pretty chuffed with the pace.

The very disappointing bit is that despite running at 90-95% flat-out for 8 minutes in total, it only cost 290 calories! I didn't include the 5 minute warm up/cool down so maybe that would have bumped up the calorie count...

My first C25K w1r1 cost 537 calories (including the 5 minute warm up/cool down) but unfortunately that was pre-gamin so nothing to see here.

Tomorrow, assuming I can still walk, a very easy 5K, maybe even a 2.5K run with a 2.5K walk back.

Rock on!

21 Replies
melly4012 profile image

A little bit of genius interspersed with some madness perhaps?! :D I'm hoping you'll be giving us updates towards that 30 minute 5k, Yatsey! Will you get a double graduation badge at the end do you think?

Bazza1234 profile image

You have the "endurance" to run 5K without stopping? - you have the speed to run at around 4 mins per k - but what you (and I) lack is the STAMINA to endure 5k at a 6minute per k pace !! You don't need speed sessions - you need tempo/stamina sessions, initially at under goal pace but slowly inching toward goal pace as your 5K PB's improve. You might care to read this runnersconnect.net/coach-co...

And get your tempo training pace here runsmartproject.com/calcula... (from your most recent parkrun PB)

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to Bazza1234

Hi Bazza1234 , thanks for those links. In truth, my 'easy 5Ks' are actually tempo runs (at least at the end) :-). Actually, that isn't quite so true now, which is great.

I have read those articles before, but part of the reason of doing c25k again is really just for the sheer joy of (close to sprinting), and it's always great to hear Laura!

Bazza1234 profile image
Bazza1234Graduate in reply to yatesco

I have also gone back to C25K - except I have gone back to W9D1 - so I will be doing 4x30mins per week ( increasing slowly until I get to 4x1 hours ) at a slow easy pace - enforced on me by my HRM :)

I have developed into a quite speedy little devil - but I am lacking stamina. I think I moved on from C25K too quickly and should have done lots more 30 minute slow easy runs.

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to Bazza1234

I went straight to 5Ks, just because I couldn't quite believe I could do a 5K. My graduation was <4K if I remember correctly.

Overtime those 5Ks are getting 'less hard', I daren't use the word 'easy' with a straight face.

RainbowC profile image

537 seems an awful lot of calories for w1r1 to burn - a general rule of thumb that I've seen in numerous places is c. 100 calories per mile, whether walking or running... 290 seems pretty good for a w1 run though!

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to RainbowC

Yeah, they probably don't take into account the 20 stone of 'relaxed muscle' I am carting around :-).

Having said that, I just checked the other early runs and they were all around 200-400 calories, so yes, I think that was just an anomaly.

My slow and steady 5Ks (around 40 minutes) usually consume around 700 calories and that is with an accurate chest strap.

AncientMum profile image

I love the early weeks of c25k with Laura. I've done the programme, or the bulk of it, 3 times now and each time I've finished faster and stronger. I've had the best part of a month off with a back twinge that I just couldn't shift but, fingers crossed, it's gone now so I'll be back to w1r1 tomorrow morning with my daughter who's decided she wants to start running. Can't tell you how excited I am. As well as w1, you could also try Speed from the c25k+ podcast -that's great too.

Good luck Yatesco, enjoy getting reacquainted with Lovely Laura :)

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to AncientMum

I do keep looking at the speed one, but I don't like the music on the podcasts. I have the NHS choices iPhone c25K app which only has Laura talking so you can play your own music. Last night Welder kindly accompanied me with his Florescence album.

JaySeeSkinny profile image

I had the same idea and have just completed w1! On the first run I could only do 6 of the sprints! On the second I walked during the 90second slow bits and today I ran fast for the 8 mins and slowed down, but didn't walk in the slower bits. I completed it and even managed my fastest ever km (6:08). Still a long way from my aim of 5k in 30 mins, but chipping away at it.

I actually enjoy intervals - never thought I'd say that!

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to JaySeeSkinny

They are great aren't they - something about that 'wild abandon' feeling. Just running for the heck of it.

John_W profile image

Interesting - I've toyed with the same idea myself. The closest I do to it is my own version of the C25K+ Speed podcast - 1 min on/1 min off.

If you're going to stick with this, I'd recommend 2 tweaks to increase the chances of sustainable success:

(1) instead of RUN/walk, try RUN/JOG . So instead of walking breaks, you slow down to a jog - and slower than your 40min 5k pace.

(2) Given all the info you've shared and your current pace, making that leap from 40 min to 30 min for 5k, even in 9 weeks, is ambitious IMO. I'd suggest a 'run' pace closer to around 33 minutes for 5k and then push on from there. So around 6:30-6:45 min/km.

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to John_W

Great advice - thanks. The numbers themselves actually aren't that important to me (who'd have thought I would ever say that!). I started with the numbers but towards the end I was just 'running fast for a minute' and then seeing what the pace was.

Happily the pace was around the 5-6minute pace which was great. Next week when I have to run further it might naturally slow down.

As for jogging instead of walking - ha, you are kidding right! Walking was hard enough :-).

This is definitely much more of a 'fun' activity than my regular 5Ks, for which I scrutinise the stats, particularly heart rate and cadence.

It is also interesting to me how the muscles used in sprinting are so different from those used in long runs. I can tell by the different areas of pain :-).

Sarah-A profile image

Don't forget that you have lost weight since you first began C25K. And being a Skinny Minnie means that sadly, you won't burn as many calories as when you are Chunky Monkey for the same workout ;)

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to Sarah-A

Ha :-). Unfortunately I am still hovering around the 20 stone mark. I am not so much losing weight as converting it into muscle I think.

PotterBook profile image

Looks like we're doing the same thing my friend!

Suebguineapig profile image

Sorry to be completely off the point in replying to your post (by the way, my ultimate aim is also to run 5K in under 30 mins. I have run 5K just once, in 35 mins 30 secs and it was hard work and re activated the knee prob previously sustained, so I am in rebuild mode). My real, selfish, reason for responding is that I know you are the gadget man on this forum, so, with a birthday coming up, could I ask: which Garmin type running watch has the clearest display in daylight for someone who needs glasses but can't run with them on!?

yatesco profile image
yatescoGraduate in reply to Suebguineapig

The fenix3 has a very bright backlight, much more than the fr230/235/630, but it is a whopping price. It is a fantastic watch though and a higher resolution screen then the other frs. I don't get on with wrist based him so I have the chest strap bundle.

The vivoactive and fr230/235/630 all let you customise the screens so you can configure one, two or three fields per screen. The Fenix also does 4 - I can't remember whether the others do, but I expect the frs will, probably not vivoactive.

If money is not a barrier, grab the Fenix 3, otherwise the 230/5/630 would be my recommendation. Buy online, if you don't like it you can then return it.

Hope this helps, and let me know what you get!

Suebguineapig profile image
SuebguineapigGraduate in reply to yatesco

Thanks. I really appreciate you taking the time on this. will consider and let you know!

John_W profile image
John_WAmbassador in reply to Suebguineapig

I'd say that the TomTom watches - the Runner, Runner 2, Sparks, etc have the biggest and easiest to see displays. Have a look here:


Suebguineapig profile image

Thanks really helpful!

You may also like...