Connect with us

Fitness

Want to Run a Fast 5K? Here’s Everything You Need to Do

Published

on

Want to Run a Fast 5K? Here’s Everything You Need to Do

Just about anyone can run a 5K. At 3.1 miles, it’s long enough to challenge both the beginner and advanced runners, and everyone in between. Perhaps this is why so many of us, especially those who are just getting started with running, are interested in tackling the distance. But with so much variability, it’s not easy to figure out what makes a good 5K time, and how to set your own goals.

That’s why we dug up data on the average 5K finish time. Plus, we reached out to a couple of coaches to help you set your own 5K goals and understand what it takes to get better at running the distance. Here’s what you need to run your best.

What’s a good 5K time?

The average 5K finish time is 39:02, based on data collected from 2000 to 2018 and reported by Run Repeat. Meanwhile, the average 5K finish time for Strava users across the globe who uploaded their runs from September 2023 to August 2024 was 28:30 and in the U.S., runners clocked an average of 28:28 for 3.1 miles.

These could all be considered good 5K times. However, finish times are relative to a variety of factors, including fitness level, experience, current training, age, and more.

For example, “someone’s age can influence someone’s finishing time because as we age, physical capabilities tend to decline, which can lead to slower running speeds and longer finish times,” says Melissa Kendter, an ACE-certified functional strength trainer and running coach.

Advertisement

Finish times can also vary depending on gender. For example, the average finish time for men, according to Running USA based on race data collected from 2013 to 2023, is 32 minutes and for women, it’s 39 minutes.

Simply put: Someone else’s fast may be considered someone else’s slow, and vice versa. This is why you should set your own goals that are personal to you, and also look beyond finish time and focus on giving your best effort.

How can I set a good goal time for my first 5K?

When it comes to goal setting for a 5K, remember that you don’t always have to set a goal to finish in a certain time—especially if this is your first go at the distance.

“Your goal could just be to complete a 5K. It could be focusing on finishing the race regardless of the time. Just an accomplishment of doing it, I mean that in itself is huge. Not everybody’s going out every day running 3.1 miles,” says Kendter.

You can also focus your training and racing on improving your mental health or overall fitness, she adds.

Advertisement

If you do want to hit a specific time goal, you can predict your 5K finish time with a time trial before you start training and then set your goal time based on how you did.

To estimate your 5K pace with a one-mile time trial, Kendter recommends starting with a 10 minute jog to warm up then running one mile at your best effort.

After you finish, plug your total time into a race pace calculator, like ours, to estimate 5K finish time. You can also use our training pace calculator, using that mile time, to figure out your paces for workouts like long runs, tempos, and intervals leading up to race day. This can especially come in handy if you don’t have access to a coach, says Kendter.

What can you do to make sure you run your best?

Build Your Aerobic System

To complete the 5K comfortably, you have to consider it as both an endurance and a speed event, says Kendter. “You have to train your aerobic system to carry you through the 20 to 30 minutes, or however long it takes you. But you also have to train for speed appropriately, so that your aerobic system can then support the speed that you want,” she explains.

To do that, you want to include different types of runs throughout the week.

Advertisement

What types of runs should you do? Kendter recommends following a training plan that has a mixture of speed, long, and easy runs on the schedule each week, and lasts about four to eight weeks. This will not only help you build the endurance and speed you need, but it will also keep you consistent, which is important too.

“Just like anything else in life, it’s deliberate practice,” says Benson Lang’at, RRCA coaching certification instructor and level 2 certified coach, who stresses the importance of nutrition, stretching, and strength training in addition to running. “Really to get faster, you’ve got to do the things that help you meet the demands of what you’re trying to accomplish,” he adds.

This means running longer to build a solid base before implementing speed workouts like interval and tempo runs to get faster, and even developing and executing a good racing strategy to help you reach the finish line.

Add Speed Workouts to Your Calendar

As we mentioned, speed workouts play a critical role in training for a 5K because they will help get fitter and faster.

“You only want to do one to two speed workouts a week, and you want to pace them appropriately throughout the week, so that your body can recover in between and then gain the adaptations from the hard work,” says Kendter. This is why your speed workouts should be completed before a rest day, easy run, or active recovery day.

Advertisement

To help you get faster, Kendter recommends completing 10 rounds of one minute hard, one minute easy intervals to start. Then each week you can progress your workouts by increasing the intervals by one minute. This workout will help to train your VO2 max system, she says.

You can also add distance-specific speed work like 400-meter repeats to your calendar. Kendter recommends completing six rounds of 400 meters with a recovery jog of 400 meters in between each round. This workout should equal out to about four to five miles.

Monitor Your Progress

As you gear up for your first or next 5K, you can check your splits during or after your workout to make sure you’re hitting your goal paces. If you have a running watch like a Garmin or Coros, you can easily monitor your split times on your wrist, or you can record them and predict your finish time with a pace chart or calculator postrun.

If you notice you’re consistently hitting your target paces for each interval after adequate recovery, then this can be a strong indication you’re on track to hit your goal time for a 5K, says Lang’at. For example, if your goal is to break 20 minutes, then you’d want to complete 400-meter repeats at approximately a 5:39 min/mi pace, he explains.

Check the Elevation Map

Geography is another factor that can influence your race day performance, especially if you can expect to run hills on race day.

Advertisement

Even the slightest elevation change can slow you down, says Lang’at. This is why he recommends running hills when your training if you can expect to run them on race day.

It’s also why many runners opt for a flat or downhill course if the goal is to run a personal best.

Train for the Elements You Can Expect on Race Day

When it comes to running your best it’s important to understand how your body will respond to the weather, especially if you’re aiming for a personal best. For example, in colder conditions you want to make sure you’re dressed properly, particularly not wearing too many extra layers, and in hotter conditions you want to make sure you’re well hydrated (you always do, but especially when you’re overheated and sweating more).

Luckily, setting yourself up for success doesn’t have to be overly complicated. For starters, you can acclimate yourself to the certain weather conditions by training in them, says Lang’at. Also, check for season-specific gear guides to make sure you’re dressed appropriately (and can test our your outfit before race day).

Work With a Coach

If you really have your eyes set on running your best, working with a coach is a good approach to take.

Advertisement

If you want to hit a certain goal time, then working with someone who can guide you, will help you better manage your expectations, says Lang’at. For example, if you want to break 25 minutes, a coach can assess your fitness levels and adjust your training so you can reach this goal. Also, throughout your training a coach can monitor your progress and adjust your training accordingly, and also keep you motivated.

Monique LeBrun joined the editorial staff in October 2021 as the associate health and fitness editor. She has a master’s degree in journalism and has previously worked for ABC news and Scholastic. She is an avid runner who loves spending time outside.

Fitness

Monroe Center hosts Health and Fitness Day for Older Americans Month

Published

on

Monroe Center hosts Health and Fitness Day for Older Americans Month

The Monroe Center for Healthy Aging will mark Older Americans Month by hosting a Health and Fitness Day on May 27, according to a community announcement.

The event is designed to promote wellness, physical activity and a positive approach to aging, organizers said. Programming reflects the center’s philosophy that many factors influencing how people age — including nutrition, movement and mindset — are within individual control, according to the announcement.

Exercise classes and health screenings

The day begins with the Movin’ and Groovin’ exercise class at 9 a.m., followed by the EnhanceFitness class offered by the Monroe Family YMCA at 10 a.m.

Cholesterol checks will also be available, though space is limited and advance registration is required by calling 734‑241‑0404. Participants are asked to fast for eight hours before the screening, according to the announcement.

Advertisement

Lunch and educational presentation

A complimentary lunch will be served at 11:30 a.m. Registration is required and can be completed by calling 734‑241‑0404.

Following lunch, Chris Boudrie will present a program titled “The Pay‑Offs of Moving Your Body.” The presentation will examine the health benefits of physical activity and include a head‑to‑toe movement routine, according to the announcement.

Boudrie is a retired biology and health sciences professor at Lourdes University in Sylvania, Ohio, and currently works part‑time with the Monroe County Library System, and has been associated with the Monroe Center for Healthy Aging since 1987, organizers said.

Advertisement

This story was created by Dave DeMille, ddemille@gannett.com, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct.

Continue Reading

Fitness

Why The Heart Exercise ‘Sweet Spot’ May Be 560 Minutes Weekly, Not 150

Published

on

Why The Heart Exercise ‘Sweet Spot’ May Be 560 Minutes Weekly, Not 150

(Photo by Prostock-studio on Shutterstock)

The Standard Exercise Guideline Cuts Heart Risk by Only 8%, New Data Show

In A Nutshell

  • Hitting the standard 150-minutes-per-week exercise guideline was associated with only about an 8% to 9% reduction in heart disease risk across all fitness levels, a reduction the researchers describe as “consistent but modest.”
  • Cutting heart disease risk by 30% or more appeared to require exercise volumes roughly three to four times higher than the minimum recommendation, around 560 to 610 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity per week.
  • A person’s cardiorespiratory fitness level independently contributed to lower heart disease risk beyond what exercise volume alone explained, with each additional unit of fitness linked to approximately 2% lower risk.

For decades, the exercise advice handed out in doctor’s offices, schools, and government health campaigns has told everyone to get at least 150 minutes of moderate activity per week, and your heart will thank you. Millions of Americans have taken that suggestion very seriously, treating it as a finish line of sorts. A new large-scale study suggests it may be closer to a starting block.

Published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the research tracked more than 17,000 adults over nearly eight years and found that hitting the standard 150-minute weekly target was associated with only about an 8% to 9% reduction in heart disease risk. To cut that risk by 30% or more, the data pointed to a much higher threshold: somewhere around 560 to 610 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity per week. That’s roughly an hour and a half of moderate-to-vigorous activity per day.

Beyond raw minutes, the study identified a second factor that most public health guidelines barely acknowledge: how physically fit a person already is. Even after accounting for how much someone exercised, people with higher cardiorespiratory fitness, basically how well the heart and lungs deliver oxygen during exertion, had meaningfully lower heart disease risk. Fitness, the data suggest, may also play an independent protective role that extra exercise time alone doesn’t fully replicate.

What the 150-Minute Guideline Actually Delivers

To understand what was measured, it helps to understand how it was measured. Researchers drew on data from the UK Biobank, a large British health research database that recruited around 500,000 adults between the ages of 40 and 69. For this study, the team focused on a subset of roughly 17,000 participants who wore a wrist-based motion sensor for seven consecutive days. That device-based measurement is a meaningful advantage over most prior research, which relied on people self-reporting their own exercise habits, a method well-known for overestimating actual activity levels.

Participants also completed a stationary bike test at enrollment, which allowed researchers to estimate each person’s cardiorespiratory fitness level. After filtering for those without prior heart disease and with complete data, 17,088 people made it into the final analysis.

Advertisement

Over a median follow-up of just under eight years, 1,233 of those participants experienced a cardiovascular event: irregular heart rhythms, heart attacks, heart failure, or stroke. Researchers used an advanced statistical model to map how different combinations of weekly exercise volume and fitness level related to those outcomes.

What emerged was a clear tiered picture. At the guideline level of 150 minutes per week, the risk reduction was described by the researchers as “consistent but modest,” coming in at roughly 8% to 9% across all fitness levels. To push that figure to 20%, participants needed approximately 340 to 370 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity per week, more than double the recommendation. Reaching a 30% reduction required jumping to roughly 560 to 610 minutes per week.

Even robust cardiovascular fitness failed to protect against the health pitfalls of sitting.
A new study found that 150 minutes of weekly exercise cuts heart disease risk by only 8–9%. Meaningful protection may require up to 610 weekly. (Foto de Alexander Redl en Unsplash)

Why Fitness Matters Beyond Step Count

One of the more meaningful findings concerns what fitness itself adds to the equation, independent of how much someone moves. Using a statistical technique designed to isolate fitness’s effect from exercise behavior, the researchers found that each additional unit of fitness was associated with approximately 2% lower heart disease risk. The authors note this pattern is consistent with fitness carrying heart-protective effects through biological pathways, such as changes in heart structure and improved blood vessel function, that weekly exercise volume doesn’t fully capture.

Lower-fitness individuals also faced a steeper climb to reach the same risk reductions as their fitter counterparts. According to a table the researchers built to translate findings into practical targets, a person with low fitness needed roughly 30 to 50 more minutes per week than a high-fitness person to achieve the same percentage reduction in risk. Reaching a 20% risk reduction, for example, required approximately 370 minutes per week for lower-fitness individuals compared to approximately 340 minutes for those with higher fitness.

What a Genetic Analysis Added

Beyond tracking real-world behavior, the research team added a layer of genetic analysis to test whether the associations they found were likely to reflect true cause and effect, rather than the result of other lifestyle factors that active, fit people tend to share. This type of analysis uses inherited genetic differences between people as a kind of natural experiment.

The genetic findings offered partial support for the observational results. Genetically predicted higher fitness was most clearly linked to lower heart failure risk, with odds roughly 21% lower compared to those with genetically lower fitness levels. Evidence for other cardiovascular outcomes was less consistent, and the case for exercise behavior itself, as opposed to fitness as a physical trait, was weaker still across the genetic analysis.

Advertisement

The researchers explain this gap by noting that genetic tools are better suited to capturing stable biological traits like fitness than complex behaviors like weekly exercise habits. They conclude that the observational findings remain “the strongest available evidence for guiding activity-based prescriptions.”

Rethinking What Exercise Advice Should Do

The study’s authors propose that future guidelines may need to draw a clearer line between two distinct goals: the minimum exercise volume needed to avoid the worst cardiovascular outcomes, and the substantially higher volumes needed for substantial cardiovascular risk reduction. They also suggest that measuring a person’s fitness level, not just asking how much they exercise, could help doctors set more personalized targets.

About 11.6% of participants in the study, roughly 1,980 out of 17,088, managed to hit or exceed the 560-minute-per-week mark, confirming that such volumes are achievable but represent a high bar for most people. For those with low baseline fitness, the challenge is compounded: they face both higher absolute risk and the need to put in more work to see the same relative benefit.

The 150-minute guideline isn’t wrong. For the large share of Americans who don’t even hit that threshold yet, getting there still delivers real cardiovascular benefit. But for those who have cleared that mark and assumed they were done, this research makes a solid case that meaningful heart protection may require considerably more.


Disclaimer: This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. The findings described are based on observational research and should not be used to self-diagnose, treat, or make changes to an exercise or health regimen without consulting a qualified healthcare provider. Individual health needs and risk factors vary. Speak with your doctor before significantly increasing your physical activity level.

Advertisement

Paper Notes

Limitations

Several important constraints apply to these findings. The UK Biobank cohort skews toward healthier, predominantly white, middle-aged to older adults living in the United Kingdom, which limits how well the results translate to younger people, non-white populations, or other countries. Physical activity was measured during only a single seven-day window, which may not reflect a person’s typical long-term habits. Fitness was estimated using a submaximal bike test rather than a gold-standard maximal effort test, introducing some measurement uncertainty, particularly for individuals with unusual heart rate responses to exercise. The study also measured exercise and fitness at a single point in time, so it can’t account for how those behaviors change over years. Despite the genetic analysis component, the observational design cannot fully rule out unmeasured lifestyle or health factors. The genetic instruments used in the analysis explained limited variation in physical activity behavior, and substantial heterogeneity was detected across genetic variants for several outcome pairs; the authors addressed this using random-effects models. Patients and members of the public were not involved in the study’s design or conduct.

Funding and Disclosures

The authors declared no specific grant funding from any public, commercial, or not-for-profit agency. No competing interests were declared. The study was conducted using the UK Biobank resource under Application Number 1050630 and was approved by the North West Multicentre Research Ethics Committee (reference 11/NW/0382).

Publication Details

Paper Title: Joint non-linear dose–response associations of device-measured physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness with cardiovascular disease: a cohort and Mendelian randomisation study | Authors: Zhide Liang, Senyao Du, Shiao Zhao, Xianfei Wang, Qiang Yan, Baichao Xu, Sanfan Ng, Ziheng Ning | Journal: British Journal of Sports Medicine (BMJ Group) | DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2025-111351 | Status: Published online ahead of print, accepted 6 April 2026

Continue Reading

Fitness

Least fit people need to do more exercise than fittest to get same benefit – study

Published

on

Least fit people need to do more exercise than fittest to get same benefit – study

People who are the least fit need to do 30-50 minutes more exercise a week than the fittest to get the same reduction in cardiovascular risk, according to research.

Researchers examined data from more than 17,000 British adults taking part in the UK Biobank study. They completed a cycle test to measure their baseline cardiorespiratory fitness (estimated VO2 max) and wore a fitness tracker for a week to record typical exercise levels.

The adults, aged 40-69 were tracked for an average of eight years, during which there were more than 1,200 cardiovascular incidents, including heart attack, atrial fibrillation stroke and heart failure.

The NHS advises adults to do at least 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity each week, such as brisk walking, cycling or running.

The study, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, found achieving this guideline of two and a half hours’ exercise was associated with a 8-9% reduced cardiovascular risk.

Advertisement

“Given that large proportions of the population do not meet even this benchmark, the primary public health message remains straightforward: achieving 150 minutes per week of moderate to vigorous activity delivers meaningful cardiovascular protection regardless of fitness level,” the authors conclude.

The research also calculates that more exercise lowered the risk even further, but that those with the lowest fitness needed about 30-50 extra minutes’ exercise a week to obtain the same benefits.

To achieve a 20% reduced risk, the least fit needed to do 370 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity a week, whereas those with the highest fitness levels only needed 340 minutes.

To reduce the odds of cardiovascular events by more than 30%, the least fit would need to do more than 10 hours (610 minutes) while the most fit would have to do just over nine hours (560 minutes).

“This finding highlights the steeper challenge faced by deconditioned populations,” the research concludes.

Advertisement

“Current moderate-to-vigorous physical activity guidelines provide a universal but modest safety margin, whereas optimal cardiovascular protection may require substantially higher activity volumes.”

“Future guidelines and implementation strategies may need to differentiate between the minimal moderate-to-vigorous physical activity volume required for a basic safety margin and the substantially higher volumes necessary for optimal cardiovascular risk reduction.”

The findings appear to challenge previous research, which found that walking only 4,000 steps a day would still reduce older people’s risk of dying early by around a quarter.

But experts said recommending more than nine hours a week of exercise was “misguided”.

Aiden Doherty, professor of biomedical informatics at the University of Oxford, said: “We can’t give much weight to the figure of 560-610 minutes of exercise a week.

Advertisement

“Clearly there will be cardiovascular benefit for people who are able to do (more than) 1 hour 20 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity a day but this is not a sensible public health message.

“The public should continue to aim for at least 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous intensity of physical activity a week; more is better; every move counts.”

Responding to the findings, a Sport England spokesperson said that increasing activity levels was vital for keeping people healthier for longer: “Emerging research like this reinforces the importance of helping more people be active, more often.

“Sport England’s own research shows activity relieves healthcare issues for both individuals and the NHS, preventing 1.3 million cases of depression, 600,000 of diabetes and 57,000 of dementia.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending