What is the longest run you should do when training for a marathon

I ran 2:43-2:47 at my best and my longest training runs were 22-23 miles. I never ran longer than 26.2 except the one time I took a wrong turn in a marathon and ran about 26.6.

2 and a half hours. Risking injury and diminished returns beyond that.

Long runs tend to be shorter relative to race distance when training for a marathon, because to do longer damages the legs too much. But if you come from an ultra background, that's not the case so much.

All that to say, I'd do 30-35M at least.

I've ran 3 marathons with longest runs of 22, 20 & 18 miles respectively.

My best time was off the 18 mile run...

Time time time wrote:

2 and a half hours. Risking injury and diminished returns beyond that.

This is in Distance Formula. I know runners world used to say 18 miles but RW have backed off on it.

I've typically gone 22 as my longest, although I did go 23 once because my loop took me a little long and I was feeling good so I figured I might as well finish that last mile so as to not see 22.4 in the log book.

Lots of 20-21 milers that included 7 miles of tempo mixed in though, so that probably functionally stretches it out to longer than 22 in terms of overall effort.

The faster you are the shorter those long runs take. I've finished two marathons (got hurt training for Boston), and got up to a couple of 23 milers for both, with a best of 2:36. It depends if you're looking for a specific time or just looking to finish. But yes, the elites are pretty much doing marathon distance runs at least a few times before the race. Most joggers probably will be lucky to get to 18-20.

Jruns wrote:

It's probably different for everyone.

You answered your own question.

I predict a sub 2:20 for Chris derrick

ampmampm wrote:

Jruns wrote:

It's probably different for everyone.

You answered your own question.

Exactly. When I was running at my best (2:31 PR) My longest was 20 miles (2-3 in the cycle) However when I did try to bump up to 22 I found it to be too hard to recover from. So my coach at the time just kept me at 20. I now coach a wide range of marathoners with varying abilities, (Hobby joggers to OT qualifiers) 2:30 is the longest in duration anyone does.

I think cumulative mileage is probably more important than just the long run for marathon training (for us hobby joggers at least). I felt pretty strong at my first marathon having not specifically trained for it. I basically did 5/5 doubles 4 days a week, one 8-12 mile day with 3-5 miles at threshold, one long run of 15-18 miles, and one super easy or off day. Kept this consistent for 8 weeks or so. Was it optimal training? Probably not, but I'd rather go into a race slightly undertrained than burnt out.

ampmampm wrote:

Jruns wrote:

It's probably different for everyone.

You answered your own question.

Exactly. And you could add that even for the same person the answer can be different at different times of their running career. My fastest time came with no runs longer than 15-16 miles but it was after ten years of having done 17-22 weekly.

I think I've done 21. I'd like to do more because I've hit the wall in past marathons pretty hard at 23-25 miles, but te problem for me is more logistical - anything more than three hours becomes pretty difficult to squeeze into the schedule. (Right now I'm doing 20-milers every week, on Fridays. I hit the door between 4 and 4:05, though, to get them in.)

Hanson Method has 16m as the longest - you do it a few times.

My take on this is that you should focus more on never reaching glycogen depletion by taking in more calories while you are racing rather than trying to get your body adapted to the feeling of glycogen depletion by running longer. For most of us, no matter how far our long run is, we will reach glycogen completion if we run 26.2, but can avoid that by taking in calories during the race.Personally, I would save my body from going the extra 2 to 4 miles.

IndyJ wrote:

I think I've done 21. I'd like to do more because I've hit the wall in past marathons pretty hard at 23-25 miles, but te problem for me is more logistical - anything more than three hours becomes pretty difficult to squeeze into the schedule. (Right now I'm doing 20-milers every week, on Fridays. I hit the door between 4 and 4:05, though, to get them in.)

3 runs at 3 hours per starting at 5 weeks out has worked for me.

Jruns wrote:

It's probably different for everyone because everyone is on a different level and everyone responds to different training differently.

But i follow chris derrick on instagram and he said he did a 24-25 mile/2:30 the other day.

I don't know if it's because he's elite. He trains with Jerry so he does "badger miles"

I'm just surprised because he seems injury prone and becuase 25 miles is so close to marathon distance

Do a lot of people just go on 25 mile runs?

Like do any hobby joggers, sub elites, or below sub elite runners make their long run this long?

I have coached 2.07.38 , 2.08.43 , 2.09.26 , 2.10.44 marathoners.....the longest run is about 2.40 hours in training......but the secret is to run the last 10-40 min fast at marathon racepace in intervals or sustained.

COACH J.S,

The future coach

I used to run for 3 hours, on the track. A lot less impact and I ran it in intervals at first to work up to the distance. On the trail I might also have run 3 hours. On hard surfaces, 2.5. On hard but bumpy worn out roads, 2. All of this only applying to slow running. It depends on the impact because the rest of your weekly training does more for fitness than a long run ever will.

Smoove wrote:

My take on this is that you should focus more on never reaching glycogen depletion by taking in more calories while you are racing rather than trying to get your body adapted to the feeling of glycogen depletion by running longer. For most of us, no matter how far our long run is, we will reach glycogen completion if we run 26.2, but can avoid that by taking in calories during the race.

Interesting. My brain, I guess, is still programmed in "old school thinking," from back when we only took water during marathons. It was essential, then, to be efficient at switching fuel source. I would fast before 20-mile runs, and always include one 23-mile long run.

Nowadays, I think I'm afraid to NOT include that 23-miler simply because I always have done it.

Today was THAT DAY for this year's marathon prep. Cool temperatures, nice north breeze, so no water, and, as always, no gu or the like.

I started easy, with 9:48, 8:57, then progressed to 7:30s. Still felt good at 20 miles, but faded badly by 21, and extreme fatigue at 22, with numbness in my arms and legs, blurry vision. Finally stopped and walked at 22.5.

Probably should have stopped at 20. And instead of STRIVING to deplete my glycogen, I should practice ingesting carbohydrates during long runs. Ahhh ... never too old to learn.