I am in my late 50s, been running for 7 years. Was a cyclist in my youth, never ran. I am your weight and 6'2" and have run 7 marathons since 2016, four of which met the BQ thresholds for my age group. I got below the cutoff for 2020 and for 2021 so, yes, you can do it with the proper training.
Jon Anderson is 6-4 and he won Boston. On a hot day.
So, yes, tall runners can qualify for Boston. It's not likely on 20miles a week.
Training in Houston, TX in the evenings. Heat and humidity are killer. Maybe I need to shift to early mornings, or indoor treadmill with AC.
At track doing mile repeats at marathon goal pace. And then some 400s and 800s at faster than goal pace.
Thank you for the advice!
wickerman wrote:
I’m 6'5”, ~205 lbs, late 40s, with a lean frame (not too much excess weight to lose), training “seriously” (at least consistently) for about 7 years. I’ve run a recent 1:36 half and 3:28 full... still a bit away from BQ, but close enough to keep trying to improve. Keep at it! With consistency you’ll see improvement, and don’t forget at 45 your BQ time will be slower. Don’t overthink the big/tall stuff and count yourself out. Put in the work, and you’ll get out what you put in. Good luck!
That’s very inspirational and impressive. Thank you for the encouragement!
malmo wrote:
Jon Anderson is 6-4 and he won Boston. On a hot day.
So, yes, tall runners can qualify for Boston. It's not likely on 20miles a week.
Wow! Thanks for the info. Sounds like I need to dig in and increase mileage and not overthink it.
Ottawa Runner wrote:
I am in my late 50s, been running for 7 years. Was a cyclist in my youth, never ran. I am your weight and 6'2" and have run 7 marathons since 2016, four of which met the BQ thresholds for my age group. I got below the cutoff for 2020 and for 2021 so, yes, you can do it with the proper training.
Amazing! Thanks for the encouragement. I appreciate it.
Hardloper wrote:
Height has almost nothing to do with distance running. Train harder.
That simply isn’t true. Height/body mass clearly has an affect on distance running. If you are having trouble seeing this, imagine Lebron James running a marathon versus a small Kenyan. Who is going to have better mechanics, speed, efficiency, endurance, etc?
There is no question that smaller people with a lighter frame have an advantage. The question is can the effect be overcome and what would it take to BQ.
A 6-6 LRC poster was the first to finish shirtless in Boston in 2018. Into the wind
Hardloper wrote:
mortyd wrote:
As I’ve tried to increase distance I’ve noticed that it is harder to dissipate heat due to my surface area to mass ratio in comparison to smaller people.
Oh come on, taller people tend to have a higher surface area to mass ratio, not lower. Just drop all these lame excuses and run more
Read this article and you will understand what I’m saying. It describes the exact thing I have noticed about mass/surface area.
https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a20855134/great-marathoners-over-six-feet-tall-are-rare/You would be better off on a flat course. Hills don't favor the tall runners.
Sorry, no you can't. At the Boston Marathon everybody has to stand in line and get measured. If you are taller than 5'9" you are too tall. You'll have to find a tall people race. Good luck.
Ask regular poster angryjohnny who was a high school high jumper. His height/ body size was a positive attribute when he set a PB at Boston ‘18 at 2:35-ish
Something to consider is current fitness vs goal marathon pace. At your current fitness, based on your recent half marathon, your goal marathon pace is what your current 5k pace converts to. So your mile repeats at goal marathon pace could be too fast and too long, for your marathon goals.
A suggestion would be to train at your current fitness level with longer intervals. So steady state runs at your current marathon pace, tempo runs at your half marathon pace (those could be done in mile intervals as well). And then 800s-1ks around your current 10k pace, and 400s around your current 5k pace.
Might sound a little backward but when you train from where you are, you then can move the needle up in pace as your body adapts. But if you train from where you wish you were, you aren't achieving the physiological effects of each workout's purpose. Basically, train within your current abilities to get faster, as opposed to running faster and wishing your current abilities were different.
Jack Bacheler was quite successful, as a runner and as a educator. He earned his PhD degree and taught for many years at NC State
mortyd wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Oh come on, taller people tend to have a higher surface area to mass ratio, not lower. Just drop all these lame excuses and run more
Read this article and you will understand what I’m saying. It describes the exact thing I have noticed
Ya, don't know where that guy was coming from. As an object is scaled up, the mass goes up by height^3 while the surface area goes up by height^2, so for the same shape, the taller person will have lower surface area to mass ratio. This is also a flaw in BMI btw. Taller people tend to be relatively longer and narrower, so it's not exactly like scaling up the same shape, but the shape difference is not likely to overcome the cubed vs squared thing.
you got this wrote:
Something to consider is current fitness vs goal marathon pace. At your current fitness, based on your recent half marathon, your goal marathon pace is what your current 5k pace converts to. So your mile repeats at goal marathon pace could be too fast and too long, for your marathon goals.
A suggestion would be to train at your current fitness level with longer intervals. So steady state runs at your current marathon pace, tempo runs at your half marathon pace (those could be done in mile intervals as well). And then 800s-1ks around your current 10k pace, and 400s around your current 5k pace.
Might sound a little backward but when you train from where you are, you then can move the needle up in pace as your body adapts. But if you train from where you wish you were, you aren't achieving the physiological effects of each workout's purpose. Basically, train within your current abilities to get faster, as opposed to running faster and wishing your current abilities were different.
That’s really helpful advice. Thank you so much! I’m going to adjust my training paces accordingly. I agree that I am being much too hopeful with my speed work. It really isn’t helping my marathon ambitions at all. Even though I wish I could run a marathon at my 5K pace, I need to slow it all down and put in the miles.
kingojamin wrote:
You would be better off on a flat course. Hills don't favor the tall runners.
Jim Walmsley is 6'4" and the current world mountain running long distance champion. I think Joe Gray is also around that height and the current (and two-time) world mountain running champion
Taller people have more surface area yes, but 185 and 6 4 means a longer stride and much more impact than 5 7 155. This generates more heat at the same speed. Having more total mass may increase retention of heat as well, despite surface area. With enough mileage you may improve running economy to the point where this doesn't matter, but you'd probably lose some weight in the process. 185 is a bit heavy to qualify unless very strong.
YARLY wrote:
1. Taller people have more surface area yes, but 185 and 6 4 means a 2. longer stride
1. but less surface area per mass as mentioned above
2. not necessarily:
https://www.hillrunner.com/jim2/id109.htmloutside running wrote:
kingojamin wrote:
You would be better off on a flat course. Hills don't favor the tall runners.
Jim Walmsley is 6'4" and the current world mountain running long distance champion. I think Joe Gray is also around that height and the current (and two-time) world mountain running champion
Walms is 5-10 at best