Realistic First Marathon Target time (Read 3780 times)

AmoresPerros


Options,Account, Forums

    <deleted>

    I used a lot of words to say that I thought "poisoning your mind" sounded a bit insulting -- but I suppose you probably sincerely believe I am damaging myself mentally with whatever you think is going on in my head, and you're really sincerely trying to help me avoid that (imagined) damage... So never mind.

    It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.

      This is something I would not normally suggest to anybody (especially without adult's supervision!! ;o) but here's what I prescribed to my wife when she did her first marathon.

       

      Monday: rest

      Tuesday: rest

      Wednesday: 2~3 miles easy jog

      Thursday: rest

      Friday: rest

      Saturday: 2 miles easy jog

      Sunday:: long run, starting about 12-miles, working her way up to 18 (3 hours)

       

      She did this for 10-weeks.  She ran her first marathon in 3:54.  That was her second ever road race (the first being a 5-miler).  And don't nobody gives this "oh, she's got talent..." crap!!

       

      What was your reason for giving this schedule to your wife if you don't mind me asking?  I love your statement  "You've got to understand your own sweet spot and train intelligently".  When I started lurking on this board over a year ago, I would always read posts about you've got to run more miles to get fast.  I tried this and included some speed work in my weekly runs and did start getting faster.  Then I kind of hit a plateau where I wasn't really getting faster, but not getting any slower.  At this point, my longest weekly run was 45 miles.  Anything over 40 mpw and my body feels it...the knees, quads, calves, feet.  I'd love to get to 60 mpw but I'm not sure the body could hold up.

      BeeRunB


         And don't nobody gives this "oh, she's got talent..." crap!!

         

        LOL. I think Mozart's father said the same thing to several European kings. Or was it Jimi Hendrix's?

        BeeRunB


          Ok, got the Paris Marathon in April.

           

          Been training approx 40 miles per week since start of Jan.  My intention is move up to 60 - 70 miles per week as we get closer, and use the last two weeks to taper down.  I have run only the half marathon distance no further yet.

           

          Last 10K race, one week ago was 54.00 Minutes.  Previous PBs when fitter for Half was 1 hr 41, and 43 mins for 10K.  Running pace around 8 min per mile, and much slower like 10 min per mile on the long runs - I want to get near 7.30 per minute for marathon time.  At the moment my weight is too high and it needs to come down.

           

          Ok - is 3.30 realistic with enough training at this stage, or  faster.  Or should I just concentrate on trying to get under 4 hours at this stage.

           

          I see many of the training programmes say to taper 3 or 4 weeks before, but I am thinking, I'd like to push training until say a week and half before it.

           

          Also they say only one longish run a week, and don't go over 20 mile in one run.  I don't feel that tired after a long run. Anything wrong with just  trying run the entire distance say 4 weeks before.

           

          PAris!

          I suggest doing a few tune-up races before the marathon, then use the Team ORegon Pace Wizard with those times to give yourself a ballpark idea of what might be possible. Then take 5-10 minutes off that time and structure the first half  pace plan according to that number. 

           

          A 26-mile long run 4 weeks out is not advisable, and is unnecessary. You most likely will take some zip out of your legs.

           

          Enjoy Paris!

          --Jimmy

          keeponrunning


            I will admit, I am very jealous of those on this board who run 100+mi a week.  I'm lucky to get that in a month.  

            Back on topic,  I'm far from experienced at that sort of distance, but I will say, my last 10k was in 49:00, and my 10miler was in 1:24Tight lippedx.  So, I'm probably in the same boat as the OP, with a lack of cardiovascular endurance.  I would not attempt a marathon right now.  If I did a half, I would do like I did the 10mi and start off very conservative.  I ended up sandbagging both the 10k and 10mi, but I finished strong and not once did I think I wouldn't finish without dieing.  

            Sulphur Springs 50km-- Ancaster, ON-- May 28, 2022

            Tally in the Valley 12 hours-- Dundas, ON -- July 30, 2022 (Support SickKids Toronto)

            Stokely Creek-- 56km-- Sault Ste. Marie, ON-- Sept. 24, 2022

             

             

              <deleted>

              I used a lot of words to say that I thought "poisoning your mind" sounded a bit insulting -- but I suppose you probably sincerely believe I am damaging myself mentally with whatever you think is going on in my head, and you're really sincerely trying to help me avoid that (imagined) damage... So never mind.

               

              Hey!!  You mellowed down.  I liked your original post...cuz it got some spark in it.  Maybe I was intentionally being a bit harsh but I believe you got me very slightly wrong.  It's a subtle difference; but it's a big difference.  I wasn't saying that you have to believe you could run 1:06 half marathon or you could make the Olympic team or Olympic Trial or whatever.  But rather I was saying that you need to UN-believe that you are not fast. 

               

              There are a handful of guys who are pretty close to making a good breakthrough.  They train very hard and their times show that.  Some of them probably don't care as much for shooting for a big thing and that's fine too.  That's their choice.  But what DOES bother me is when those people come back and say; "Well, I can't really make it because I'm not talented..."  Yes, I believe I probably have more experience in running/coaching/associated with some of the elite runners around the world more than anybody on this site.  I've helped some very slow people.  And, amazingly, they DO improve quite a bit IF they train deligently, systematically and intelligently.  My sharing my wife's training for her first marathon, in a way, was because of that.  She didn't train much at all; yet she did alright.  I guided her to her sub-4.  Her program was not just slacking workout; we put a lot of thought into it and I knew she'd do well.  But, like I said, I wouldn't recommend that for everybody. 

               

              Like i said, I don't really pay much attention to who people are.  I don't know how old you are, I don't know your family background, I dont' know what your goal is; your target race is...  For one, though, suppose a 5k race is your target.  You've run 5:15 for a mile.  That's pretty darn good (well, depending on how old you are, I guess...).  I think that's plenty fast.  Now, a few years back, I ran a mile in 6:23.  I hit the wall and that was pretty much as fast as I could go.  That same year I ran 20:06.  I wanted to break 20 and, at that time, I was pacing this young girl I was coaching so maybe I could have broken 20 if I did it my own.  But that's, what, 6:30 pace???  I was as much proud for holding on that pace for 5k as I was disappointed that I couldn't run a better mile.  I believe, if I work on my mile time, I could do a better 5k.  So, yes, I'm saying I wasn't fast enough.  But I wouldn't look at it as a limiting factor (genetics).  I'll think of the ways to improve my speed.

               

              Having said that, speed CAN be a limiting factor.  Lydiard used to use 200m time as one's basic speed.  I remember when he asked me how fast my 200 was.  It was about 25 seconds...  Looking back, though, I never really trained to run fast.  I could have gone a bit faster.  So here's the thing.  I would say more than 90% of people on here, if I ask them how fast their 200m time is, they wouldn't know; OR they would turn around and maybe run one and come back and say; "I'm not fast..."  Out of those, 99% had NEVER EVER trained to run fast.  In other words, each and every one of us has limit to how fast we can run 200.  VERY few actually see their limit for 200m dash simply because they've NEVER trained to run 200m dash.  Almost everybody is concerned about running 22 miles or 24 miles because "to run 26, you'd better be able to run 24..."  With that same tongue, having NEVER trained to run fast, they'll turn around and say, "Oh, I'm not fast..."  Why?  Because "I'm not talented..."  BS. 

               

              now, with 5:14 mile, you seem to be quite fast.  So have you actually with my standard, your 5k doesn't look as good.  So, if 5k was your target (assjming), have you trained to run 5k?  When I did that 20-minutes 5, I was training for 5 and I knew my race would be 5.  I didn't train for a mile and it showed.  And I trained for 5k and it showed.  So when you ran all those times, did you actually trained for them?  Or did you just pick whatever the race available at hand and ran 10k here, 5k there, half here and some ultra race there??? 

               

              Performing up to your real potential requires some planning and intelligent work AS WELL AS hard work.  But, I'd say, 90% of people on here would say; "How many mile does so-and-so run per week...?" and that has become a standard for "effort for performance."  But it isn't so.  Now, some of you don't give a damn about meticulously planning and working hard to just improve your 5k time by 12 seconds or whatever.  And that's perfectly fine too.  Personally, however, i would not be very happy when someone like that would butt in and say something about "lack of talent". 

               

              Let me just go on and on and on and tell you a few stories about 3 ladies I personally know.  One was an okay runner in college but never left a mark through high school or college.  When she graduated, she wanted to run for a corporate team but no corporate team wanted her as an athlete.  She begged to one coach to join in with their training camp.  The coach told her if she pays for all the expense, she could join.  So she did.  She loved to run.  She was running, running, running...all the time.  In most people's standard, she didn't have "talent".  7 years later, she won the gold medal in Sydney Olympic marathon and, the following year, broke 2:20 as a women for the first time in history.  Her name is Naoko Takahashi.

               

              Another one had a terrible running style.  Same thing--she begged to join the corporate team but her coach told her that he took 2 young girls at the age of 18 and they ran almost 45 seconds faster in 3000m (a little less than 2 miles) when they were 15 as she did in college.  He took her as a team care-taker.  It wasn't that she loved to run; but she was very tenacious.  She won silver medal in 1992 Olympic marathon, first Olympic T&F medal by a Japanese woman in 68 years, and won the bronze in 1996.  Her name is Yuko Arimori.

               

              The alst one, she played basketball in high school and ran track in college but nothing to brag about.  She ran barely 3-hour marathon upon graduation.  No corporate team took her but one team finally took her as the slowest runner on the team.  She was very determined and ran and ran and ran; she started the trend for "jogging" (junk miles) up to 2 hours in the morning for the team.  Her enthusiasm migrated to the entire team and soon everybody on the team started to run loooong in the morning.  Americans might consider all this as "junk miles".  She never had any track credentials as some elite marathon runners but she was very tenacious.  She made it to the 2004 Olympics, came to Boston in 2006, led the whole way and finished 3rd and was the only Japanese athlete to medal at 2007 Osaka World Championships (bronze in the marathon). 

               

              So I ask you, or anybody who had mentioned this "genetics" on this thread; "What is talent?" and "How do you detemine someone has it or doesn't?"

                I differ with you entirely. I don't think that my believing I could break 13 on the 5K would magically make it happen, nor would it magically make me break even 13:30 on the 5K. I think you're simply advocating "positive thinking", without serious respect for physical capabilities.

                 

                (But, it is true that I've been wrong before.)

                 

                It depends what you mean by "believe". Just wishing something to be true is certainly not going to make it happen. But I do think that having a genuine belief that you're capable of a particular performance is an important part of achieving it. It may not be sufficient - because things can go wrong on the day, but if you don't believe deep down then when the going gets tough you're more likely to think "ah, well - it was never really going to happen anyway" and bail out.

                 

                Of course getting to the point of really believing is where the hard work comes in - you train hard, you see your training performances and race performances improve and you reset what you think you can do.

                xor


                  Hey, can someone help me unbelieve that I'm the World's Worst Trail Runner?

                   

                  That's bumming me out lately.

                   

                    Hey, can someone help me unbelieve that I'm the World's Worst Trail Runner?

                     

                    That's bumming me out lately.

                     Um, are you counting my three abortive attempts at trail races?

                    "If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus

                    Scout7


                      I'm not overly experienced at the marathon, but everyone else gets to have their say, so I get mine as well.

                       

                      People put far too much time into thinking about "goal times".  It's nice to have, but you have to base it on something concrete and tangible.  You don't pluck a number out of thin air and say "Gee, I wonder if I can run this."  You base it on your training and your prior racing.  In other words, it takes experience and practice to pick a goal time.

                       

                      Unfortunately, the ones who seem to obsess over goal times the most are the ones who lack the requisite experience to select goal times.

                       

                      Relax.  It's just a number, with no more or less importance than what you attach to it.  If you feel that you need a time, then pick it based off your current races, not races from a year ago.

                       

                      If you have no races from which to draw conclusions, then I suggest that you not worry about a goal time at all, and just run the damn thing.  In fact, even if you have a goal time, you should just run the damn thing.

                       

                      Stop worrying.  It's running.  You end up with the time you get when you're done.  You should be happy with it, regardless, and you should learn from the race so you can do better next time.

                         "ah, well - it was never really going to happen anyway" and bail out.

                         

                        A related phenomenon is the "yeah I could do this if I really wanted to" and never get around to doing it. Ten years ago, the only thing between me and a pro kickboxing career was 2 hours a day. Excuses are excuses.

                         

                         

                         

                        Damn, now I'm going to have to go for a run in 6 degrees and snowing, huh?

                        LedLincoln


                        not bad for mile 25

                          PAris!

                          I suggest doing a few tune-up races before the marathon, then use the Team ORegon Pace Wizard with those times to give yourself a ballpark idea of what might be possible.

                           

                          Dang, that was giving me a two-hour marathon until I realized I was entering my pace instead of total race time. Sad

                            So what is gained from marathon exp.? How does this differ from 5k / 10k races? Race exp. could be gained from running shorter distances more often. Combined with training and we should be able to put the parts together for a marathon. After all, wasn't one of the winners of the NYC 2010 a first time marathon runner? What is behind the advice from taking it very easy on the first marathon? My guess is that we would learn more from each race by pushing everything to the limit?

                            And we run because we like it
                            Through the broad bright land


                            Why is it sideways?

                              So what is gained from marathon exp.? How does this differ from 5k / 10k races? Race exp. could be gained from running shorter distances more often. Combined with training and we should be able to put the parts together for a marathon. After all, wasn't one of the winners of the NYC 2010 a first time marathon runner? What is behind the advice from taking it very easy on the first marathon? My guess is that we would learn more from each race by pushing everything to the limit?

                               

                              A distinction needs to be made between the beginning runner and the beginning marathoner.

                               

                              Beginning runners are well advised to err on the side of caution in their first marathon. What is behind this advice? The simple idea that these runners are unfamiliar with their capacities.

                               

                              Experienced runners who are beginning marathoners can of course extrapolate from their experience racing at shorter distances. Those are great points.

                                So what is gained from marathon exp.? How does this differ from 5k / 10k races? Race exp. could be gained from running shorter distances more often. Combined with training and we should be able to put the parts together for a marathon. After all, wasn't one of the winners of the NYC 2010 a first time marathon runner? What is behind the advice from taking it very easy on the first marathon? My guess is that we would learn more from each race by pushing everything to the limit?

                                 

                                Elite runners (and their coaches) have a realistic notion of what kind of pace they can maintain. They know pretty precisely what they can do for 5k, 10k, half-marathon... They will not set off at their 10k pace - even if it is their first marathon.  Pushing too hard early on in a marathon is a recipe for disaster... and the trouble is that it feels easy to run fast at the beginning. 

                                 

                                Sure you can push "to the limit", but you need to understand what the limit is... running too fast is beyond the limit and will ultimately lead to a slower time than a more conservative early pace.

                                 

                                Most great marathon runs come from more or less constant pacing.. when elites talk about negative (or positive) splits the two halves are still within a couple of minutes of each other.