Can I run 2:58 in the marathon

Definitely have a shot, but I wouldn't expect it on the first cycle. I think if you have iterative cycles in the 55-75 mpw range (working up gradually) then you have a good shot. But right now none of your times, or mileage, predict sub 3.

sub_3_is_the_goal wrote:

Definitely have a shot, but I wouldn't expect it on the first cycle. I think if you have iterative cycles in the 55-75 mpw range (working up gradually) then you have a good shot. But right now none of your times, or mileage, predict sub 3.

Exactly. I had the exact same profile. Took me 5 tries. Probable could have been 3. My PRs were a little quicker but after 2-3 cycles, it won't matter.

What about me?

Completely different profile. Ran in high school and college. More of a miler (ran 4:04 1500, 4:25 mile, 9:05 3K) but that was years ago. 30 years old now

Running about 18-24 mpw (ran every other day), I ran 1:24 for the half marathon last spring (I did bike classes ~ intense ones, basketball and lifting most other days of the week). Topped out at a 9 mile long run or so.

For the marathon, I'm thinking of upping to 4-5 days a week (let's say 30 mpw) running some consecutive days with that being upped with some actual long runs down the road. I'm concerned about injury and getting enough sleep and really just want a Boston Marathon qualifier (grew up on the course, lifetime dream etc.

Obviously I got away with this low mileage strategy for the HM, but will these tweaks be good enough to secure me that sub-3 at the full distance?

You're looking at a 6:45-ish mile pace with a 2:58 marathon time.

Your mile time at least be well under 5:30, and preferably around 5:00 or under if you want to bust out a 6:45 mile pace for 26.2 miles straight. 6:30 should be an easy long run pace for you.

Can't tell if serious or not. You have speed but endurance is everything in the marathon. How do you expect to run 26 miles at a good clip if that is almost your entire weekly mileage? The marathon starts at mile 20.

Yeah that’s why I asked...Honestly no idea, I got away with very low mileage in the HM and I honestly felt easy. I’d like to add to it and have heard of others able to do wel on not crazy amounts of running like 40-50 miles with a long run. Is a HM so wildly different that doubling it and running slower will be a huge problem? HM was uncharted territory for me with having never raced over an 8K. So trying to get a realistic idea of how much I need to ramp up.

wha? wrote:

Can't tell if serious or not. You have speed but endurance is everything in the marathon. How do you expect to run 26 miles at a good clip if that is almost your entire weekly mileage? The marathon starts at mile 20.

marathon pacer wrote:

You're looking at a 6:45-ish mile pace with a 2:58 marathon time.

Your mile time at least be well under 5:30, and preferably around 5:00 or under if you want to bust out a 6:45 mile pace for 26.2 miles straight. 6:30 should be an easy long run pace for you.

Good post.

I have run in the area of 2:55 several times, and can break 5:00 for a mile any day of the week.

My speed is better than my endurance, but still I have got to think you need to be at least low-5 for the mile to have a shot at sub-3. (And even then, you need to translate that to the marathon with the actual training!)

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Yeah that’s why I asked...Honestly no idea, I got away with very low mileage in the HM and I honestly felt easy. I’d like to add to it and have heard of others able to do wel on not crazy amounts of running like 40-50 miles with a long run. Is a HM so wildly different that doubling it and running slower will be a huge problem? HM was uncharted territory for me with having never raced over an 8K. So trying to get a realistic idea of how much I need to ramp up.

You MIGHT be able to.

I broke 3 a few times off of less than 50mpw, but on the other hand I have some good natural speed, PRs a fair bit faster than yours before I trained at all.

But why try to do it that way, on as little running possible? If you are running 5-7 times a week it doesn't change the commitment much to just go longer each time. We aren't talking about doubles here.

Once I went to 70mpw it opened up a whole new world!

You're description is a bit unclear. Are you planning to up to 48-54/week or 30/week? If the former, 2:58 is possible but likely a bit of a stretch. If the latter, you must be joking.

In my opinion...you need at least this:

5K no slower than 18:40

10K no slower 38:50.

Half of 1:24/1:25. 1:26 if you are an aerobic beast.

I'd also say you need to average 60-65 miles a week to get there as well. 22 mile long runs. The mile doesn't matter. I ran 4:56 as 30-year old and I couldn't break 3:10 at the time. Completely different races.

FWIW, I ran Chicago last week on 50mpw and ran 3:18. Hard Tempos were around 6:23 pace, 6:00 for mile repeats, long runs were around 7:45 pace. It was a very easy race for me.

You need to be comfortable at 6:50 pace....that's all there is to it.

I'm a similar profile. Ran a 1:38 half and 3:25 full in college off that 30-40mpw running you speak of. Several years off then started running again at 29 and could run 1:37 after a few months of training also in that 30ish mile range.

Last year ran a cycle in the low 50s mpw peaking low 60s to run 3:09 on a hot day.

This spring ran 40-50s mpw to run a 1:24 half.

Just ran 2:57 in Chicago after averaging low 50s through the summer with a 70mile peak week.

So, yes, someone in their early 30s with a 1:38 half can get to sub 3, but I would agree with others that it might take more than one cycle.

Ha, looks like I will have to train more/harder. Only thing holding me back from running more is really just life balance. I enjoy lifting, playing basketball, Equinox Pursuit bike classes, not having to sleep 8 hours every night to not be dead tired. I got away with that mix for the HM (I honestly thought 1:35 was doable but 1:30 was pretty much tops and then I ran 1:24), but I guess people do not think that would work for the full distance. Get that totally. I'll have to see if I want to really commit to 5-6 days of running and a legit long run as I haven't done that since the year after college and have some maintenance I'll have to do (creaky calves). Guess you have to have to be pretty serious to break 3 hours in the marathon? Annoying lol.

Thanks for the insight. Again the HM was a huge surprise to me ( I literally listened to funny podcasts the whole way ~ started over 7min/mile before cruising 6:20s or faster at the end), so have no idea where it stops the distance really exposes lack of volume training. I don't know if I'll ever get up to 70 mpw, but sounds like I will have to at least get to more like 40-50 with good supplemental work on the bike and legit long runs. I definitely have a much better approach since college (honestly I should have run under 4:20 for sure but I was in my own head and being dumb often in training/nutrition/lifestyle etc.). Now I really maximize my fitness by running by feel and a long race suits me. Seems like I should take the marathon more seriously.

former low-mileage wrote:

You MIGHT be able to.

I broke 3 a few times off of less than 50mpw, but on the other hand I have some good natural speed, PRs a fair bit faster than yours before I trained at all.

But why try to do it that way, on as little running possible? If you are running 5-7 times a week it doesn't change the commitment much to just go longer each time. We aren't talking about doubles here.

Once I went to 70mpw it opened up a whole new world!

I have never been nor will ever be a 4:04 1500m runner though, so you can probably get by with less than me.

The half times would indicate that as we have the same with far different mileage, but I don't doubt people here saying that as you go from 13.1 miles to 26.2 miles, the importance of mileage goes up and you'd be in better position.

Gordon Tremeshko wrote:

I have never been nor will ever be a 4:04 1500m runner though, so you can probably get by with less than me.

Thanks for the real help. The thread got a little high jacked by someone with a totally different situation than me.

I’m willing to put in the work and run the miles. Just coming from a total non running background and wanted to know what was possible and how I should train.

Your profile sounds similar to mine. I'm 34 now and didn't start running road races until after college, and with (in retrospect) pretty poor training, could show up and run a low 1:3X half marathon in my mid-20s. I ran a 3:09 full marathon at 27 running probably an average of 40 miles a week and topping out at about 55-60 mpw. I tried three times after that between 27-31 to crack 3:05 with essentially the same mileage and always had huge fades and ended up with 3:07:xx, 3:05:xx and and 3:12:xx. I then upped my mileage using the Pfitzinger/Douglas 18-70 plan and ran a 2:59 low at age 32 and had plenty of gas at the end (my last mile was my fastest). I've used the same plan twice since with similar results--I ran a 3:04:xx at Boston this year (was probably in shape for a sub-3, but the conditions hurt me, and just ran a 2:59 again in Chicago). So, in short, I'll echo others and say the key is more mileage. I recommend the Pfitz 18-70 plan--it is higher mileage, but not crazy. I was able to stick to it fairly closely working a full time job and helping parent a 1 year old.

FWIW I used the Hanson's book to go from 1:3x and mid 3 hours to where I am now. They got me up to that higher consistent mileage without breaking me down better than I could do on my own previously.. Not sure it's enough to get me down to 2:4x or whatever once I really start trying to get all the juice out, but for that initial squeeze I highly recommend it.

But probably the most helpful thing I can say is that route you take to get there might be different, but it is definitely doable. Just be patient if it doesn't happen on the first try.

Yeah, you can do it if you train. I'm the same size and weight, but 10 years older. It took me 4 marathons to run 3:12, but I've also never averaged more than 45 mpw for a training cycle. I have no doubt that if I averaged 60 I could break 3. And if I were 10 years younger? Hell yes.