Forums >Racing>2010 Goal of Sub 3:00 marathon
2:49:59 marathon equivalent to a 1:00:53 10 miler (average of Daniels, Tinman, Wava, McMillan, Reigel)
What happened to the Table of Equivalent Performances that used to be on Page 1 of the thread?
Also - anyone want to post a few pieces of training advice to answer Ger's dilemma of having the requisite shorter distance times but not able to hit the Big One? I'd like to hear some thoughts on this as well.
"Thanks for that Ken, yes everything points to a good sub 3, but last year I hit a 10K in 37m30s, 10 miles in 63 Min and 2 halves, one in 1hr 22m 29s and one in 1 hr 22m 45s and only ended up with a 3hr 7m 48s marathon. My training must have been wrong. This year I an going to stick with pfitzingers 55-70 mile plan.
What's your training been like, I have the confidence that I have the ability but missing it through the wrong training hurts.
I have no doubt you will get it.
Its my ultimate goal in running."
The King of Beasts
I ran a 1:20:42 half on the back of a 110 & 90 mile week (no taper at all) in March.
I ran a 35:53 10k (i think that predicts a 2:49 ish) two weeks out from the Marathon in April.
Ran the marathon in 3:00:35.
"As a dreamer of dreams and a travelin' man I have chalked up many a mile. Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks, And I've learned much from both of their styles." ~ Jimmy Buffett
"I don't see much sense in that," said Rabbit. "No," said Pooh humbly, "there isn't. But there was going to be when I began it. It's just that something happened to it along the way."”
With no log to look at it's pretty hard to make any comments about training, but judging by those 2 HM's it couldn't have been bad enough to explain that marathon time. He should have been able to run 2:57-2:59 on a off day. Aside from the training a couple things I'd be curious about would be:
1. What was the marathon course like and what were weather conditions? How did they compare to the courses and conditions HM's were run on?
2. What was the taper like? Too much or too little can make a major difference. I've actually seen more cases of people overdoing the taper than not tapering enough. Obviously Ger wasn't on top of his game that day.
I'm guessing that the answer to those questions would explain the disappointing marathon time. If the training was good enough to produce those HM times it was good enough to run a sub-3.
EDTA: "another one" and I must have been typing at same time. This post is in response to Ken's post about Ger.
I ran a 1:20:42 half on the back of a 110 & 90 mile week (no taper at all) in March. I ran a 35:53 10k (i think that predicts a 2:49 ish) two weeks out from the Marathon in April. Ran the marathon in 3:00:35.
Now I'll take a shot it this one. It was either a taper problem or you went out way too fast and had a meltdown. The latter is what happened to me on my second marathon and is pretty common at this distance.
I was shooting for 2:50, came through the half at 1:26:ish. It got up to about 85-88 degrees depending on who you talk to. It was hot. Very hot. so was Grandmas.
I believe that was on the 'old' sub-3 thread started by JimHowe.
* So hey, DB, post the Table of Equivolent Performances on page one of this twenty-ten thread already.
Some of us don't like looking it up.
Ricky —our ability to perform up to our physiological potential in a race is determined by whether or not we truly psychologically believe that what we are attempting is realistic. Anton Krupicka
Well, I guessed right on the "meltdown" part even though it wasn't quite the kind I was thinking of . Yeah, heat is a huge factor...the longer the distance the more it matters.
My thoughts are simply a lack of endurance for the marathon, and/or poor nutrition during said marathon.
Right on Hereford...
My thoughts are simply a lack of endurance for the marathon
I have to disagree with this. The half is the best predictor (of commonly raced distances) of the marathon, and he ran 1:22:29. This predicts a 2:52 marathon.
Jim's point is that even on an off day, he should have still had enough of a buffer to go sub-3.
You can't run a 1:22 half marathon without possessing some good endurance, and this will carry over to the marathon distance to a great extent. A 3:07 marathon result indicates a different problem, IMO.
Are we there yet?
perhaps a Port-O-Let issue
Indeed the 59 minute 10 mile would be a comparative performance to sub-2:50. My opinion is that 6 weeks out is ideal for such a tune up. Also favor ten miles over the HM as easier to recover from and continue training.
I think a 60-61 time miler will get you there fairly easy
Long dead ... But my stench lingers !
A 3:07 marathon result indicates a different problem, IMO.
What do you think that problem might be? We have no info from his log, nor has he responded back.
The half is just that - a predictor. If the training/marathon nutrition(cramping) isn't sufficient - regardless of a 1:22 half - one will likely fail meeting the calculators prediction has I have witnessed from runners here.
But I agree in that a gastric distress could have caused a 3:07.
Sorry, the high mileage is making me insane...
What do you think that problem might be? We have no info from his log, nor has he responded back. The half is just that - a predictor. If the training/marathon nutrition(cramping) isn't sufficient - regardless of a 1:22 half - one will likely fail meeting the calculators prediction has I have witnessed from runners here. But I agree in that a gastric distress could have caused a 3:07.
Guys I did an 28 week programme , given to me by an old club mate who has done sub 3 on numerous occasions.
It started with a low mileage weeks of 35 miles running 5 days per week.
The long run started at 10 miles and I did 4 weeks of 10 milers, before moving up to 4 weeks of 12 milers and so onuntill I hit 4 x 18 milers, I then did two 20 miler that were split by a step back week of 16 weeks.
I also did a run twice a week that was at 6.30 to 6.46 mile pace, these started as a 3 mile run and went right up to 11 miles.
Apart from this I did no type of speed work.
All my other runs including my long runs were done at between 6.50 and 7.20 mile pace.
My highest week mileage was 58.
As for the hydration nutrition question. I was happy that I carbo loaded adequately and took on enough fluids during the race. I took hi 5 energy gels ( i had tried them on my long runs and they gave me no problem ) but I took one at mile 22 and it made me feel so sick that I had to stop and try vomit twice before actually self enducing a vomit which helped. I have posted my mile splits for the marathon below, as you can see it all went pear shaped aroung mile 19. The 9 min + miles I was actually walking for some of those. After the marathon my legs recovered really quickly and I was back to normal mileage within 2 weeks. My weekly mileage is now up to 50 +.
I hope this will give some pointers as to what went wrong, thanks for all the help.
Ger, I think you could have done better off more than a 58 highest weekly mileage. That's not enough is it?
I think I was correct about the endurance, and far as nutrition, you got sick from trying to injest too many gu's.
I also feel that your easy days were too fast.