This is a real poser, that i've been trying to get a handle on. Right now i'm looking at between 3 and 4. I've got conflicting opinions as to where I stand. On the one hand, i'm told that it's a pretty good sized one. Of course this poll sample is pretty small. On the other hand, a flurry of e-mails claim that it's no where near long enough, and I could safely extend it. It's kinda hard for me to judge. I can easily go 13 or so, presently, and stay sub 3, but what happens when the plan calls for 15 to 20 miles and I need to exceed 4 hours? Is it prudent to be banging out this much mileage when my pace is so slow? Don't misunderstand... going this long doesn't seem to phase me, and i'm "keen to go on". I value your opinions on this. I'm trying to not get too hung up on this. Just seems that there must be some kinda threshold, you ultra type guys being an obvious exception. Should I attempt 4+ hours in training, or play it more safe, and stay under?? Lg1

That’s a very good question. From what I have read from various gurus, there is lots of differing opinion. I've heard the long run should comprise of about 20 to 25% of total mileage. That might be fine if you run everyday, but what about those who only run 3 or 4 times a week, then it wouldn't amount to very much distance. I've also read that at a certain amount time running there is a diminishing return. For instance, the difference between a 3 hr run and a 3.5 hr run in terms of physical gain is not that much, however that extra 30m costs a lot more in terms of stress. Even Lydiard suggested long runs of only about 2 hrs. The Brooks project team caps there long runs to 2 hrs, but that could mean 18 to 22 miles for them. On flipside, I spoke to someone who is a coach for Team in Training and they have there runners slowly build up to a 25 mile run before there first marathon. I'd imagine this takes quite a bit longer than 3hrs for many people. I can see this argument either way. If you've never run a marathon before or gone even close to that distance, I'd say it's probably a good idea to try to cover a distance close to that at some point in training even if it does take an excruciating amount of time. But, do this kind of workout very sparingly, maybe once or twice before the actual race. I think the benefit is probably as much mental as it is physical, and be prepared to have to take a number of easy days or even rest days after the super long run, before getting back into regular training. I'm no expert, just my thoughts.

Sage advice guys, thanks I don't anticipate any problem with additional mileage/time while following the Hal Higdon Novice II Plan. It seems nicely tailored for someone at my level. Plenty of recovery time built in. Easy to say now, but I rather look forward to the increased mileage/time. It does climax in less then 2 months, so ample fluids/electrolytes will be critical. Packing a lunch is also under consideration. Lg1

You more than likely will find your paces improving the longer your long runs get, and the more total miles you put in. --JImmy

I always do a couple of training runs that will be as long as or longer than my next marathon, this keeps my head screwed on right. I did a 5 hour+ run prior to my first marathon. Run for as long as you feel you need to to be mentally prepared for the race at hand. If that means 5+ hours or 2 hours, I don't care, just do it.

Thanks Will, 10/4 ! This being my first go at > 13 or so, has me a bit nervous, but at the same time very eager to forge on. BTW, the dude with the vivid crayolas, (I think that's hims gazing down from just above your post) has such knowledge that it requires two repositories. Wouldn't you agree?? Makes my avatar seem narrow minded. A genuine elite, Jimmy, never elitist.. Pure candy. How's your journey into ultra-land going? Lg1