I still think that most people who run more than 4,000 miles over a two year period, regularly do speed work, and I should add, who up the mileage and intensity for a 12-16 week marathon training plan, would qualify for Boston.
I'm not sure about 'most'. I may be one of the exceptions (and it's true that 3400 isn't 4000) but I am pretty darn far from a BQ.
If you plug those times into McMillan, you'll find that those are nearly BQ equivalencies. I have long asserted that most people could BQ if they put in the time and effort.
But McMillan equivalencies don't really apply for most people unless you're running about 70 mpw, right? (I'm under the 25:00 5K mark, but feel that I'm FAR from a BQ-- much further than 4000/miles over the next 2 years)
But McMillan equivalencies don't really apply for most people unless you're running about 70 mpw, right?
(I'm under the 25:00 5K mark, but feel that I'm FAR from a BQ-- much further than 4000/miles over the next 2 years)
If not for the 2:50 standard at the time my 3:05 would have qualified me... and I ran all of 900 miles for the year or 17.2 mpw! And ten years later for my 1st three BQ's I only averaged in the 40's for my training schedules.
Youth Has No Age. ~ Picasso / 1st road race: Charleston Distance Run 15 Miler - 1974 / profile
Former Bad Ass
I run more than that and I will probably never qualify for Boston even if I lower my races to one marathon a year. I like to think my lungs are the culprit because it's not for the lack of mileage and training.
Damaris
5K Specialist
I will never qualify for Boston. I have no desire to ever run a marathon.
Personal Bests:
800M - 2:38 (5/28/13) | 1 Mile -5:54 (5/28/13) | 3K - 11:55 (12/29/12) | 2M - 13:00 (12/1/12) | 5K - 20:00 (4/12/13) | 13.1M - 1:37:24 (2/3/13)
I discounted the possibility of future BQ for myself based on another LTH requirement, stated in a post some months ago: BMI < 22.
I am at 24.5, and I just do not see that I have an extra 20 lb to lose.
Dave
I discounted the possibility of future BQ for myself based on another LTH requirement, stated in a post some months ago: BMI < 22. I am at 24.5, and I just do not see that I have an extra 20 lb to lose.
Dave, that girl beside me finished Boston in sub-3:30. I doubt her BMI is less than 22. My guess is that she's muscular enough to carry her weight through 26.2 miles, and fast enough for a BQ...
PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013
Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013
18 marathons, 18 BQs since 2010
Okay, where's that darn picture now? grrr... just a minute...
Dave, that girl beside me finished Boston in sub-3:30..
Why limit yourself to a BQ and fall short? Why not shoot for the fastest you can be, and fall into a BQ?
Yes, of course. But Dave seems to think that because of his 24 BMI, he'll never be able to BQ. Well, he has a choice: he can lose the weight and BQ or he can BQ at 24 BMI anyway. Because he doesn't look overweight to me... My 56 year old friend ran Boston in 3:18 and he is NOT thin. He is more on the boxy side, muscular and not all that light. Maybe it requires more work for people who are naturally built like that, but it's still possible for them to be fast.
No more marathons
Yep, same here. Just for chuckles I put my 16 weeks before my first marathon on my RA log. Averaged less than 40 miles per week with some weeks as low as 15 and only one week above 50. My 3:01 was 11 minutes too slow for Boston then but would have got me in this year. Ah to be young and (reasonably) fast again.
Boston 2014 - a 33 year journey
Lordy, I hope there are tapes.
He's a leaker!
Skirt Runner
Does the BMI theory hold weight? If so I'm REALLY screwed. My BMI is 24.8. I have about 10 pounds I could lose......but don't really think I would look awful at much less than that. I have weighed more than the weight I would need to be a 22 BMI since 6th grade, and I had not an ounce of fat on me then!
PRs: 5K- 28:16 (5/5/13) 10K- 1:00:13 (10/27/13) 4M- 41:43 (9/7/13) 15K- 1:34:25 (8/17/13) 10M- 1:56:30 (4/6/14) HM- 2:20:16 (4/13/14) Full- 5:55:33 (11/1/15)
I started a blog about running :) Check it out if you care to
Kristin, people always think that they cannot possibly weigh less, or that they would look awful if they did lose what they think is too much weight for them. It's not true. Everyone can get to 19 BMI and still look good. Just like everyone can still look good if they bring themselves to 24 BMI. You could lose 20 lbs, just like I could gain 20 lbs and we'd both be ok... At 22 BMI, there is still fat on a body, believe me.
I don't know....I think there are all different builds.... I honestly don't think as a grown woman I would look very good at my 4th grade weight, which would be a 19 BMI for me, nor do I think I could get there without an eating disorder.
Maybe YOU wouldn't like the look of your body, but I'm willing to bet that it would still look good in the eyes of others.
My sister is 5'6" and she was 110lbs most of her life. Everyone agreed that she looked great and we thought her low weight was because she had a thin frame, like a model. Now, she's 135 lbs (she had some glandular problem recently and gained weight as a result). It's funny because we all think that she also looks great now and that she was born to be curvy... :-)
Hey, don't sell me short, 24.5! In any case, I am not seriously concerned about this. I have no interest in losing weight, I am only 10 lb more than when I graduated high school 30 years ago. And I currently have zero thought about BQ, I have way too far to go. First I have to get healthy & start running again, then I have to actually break 4:00, stay healthy, then eventually somehow turn that into 3:25 (or more likely 3:30 by the time I could actually get close). Anyway, right now I am focused on step 1, prognosis currently unknown. Long term the LRB strategy is more likely. I just threw that 22 out there because it stuck in my head when I read it; obviously pretty arbitrary, although certainly being lighter helps.