Jack Daniels Race Result Conversion

I think I probably had to put in that kind of mileage. I am definitely not what you would call talented. I am willing to put in the work but realize I will never be truly fast. Just a local age group winner at best.

I cite JD conversions for the most part on here but it's going to be hard to translate a 10k PB to the marathon on 50-60 miles/week. 2:50 sounds like the right goal. A lot of people say they consider themselves half or full marathon guys but to hit full potential at 5k/10k you would need more miles so my guess is that your short distance PRs are the stronger ones when you enter them into something like Daniels. If you were running 70-80+ miles/week then I would be more optimistic about 2:45.

I just ran a high 2:51 (but that includes a 1.5 minute toilet stop) just 2 weeks after a 35:25 10k. Averaged low 70s mpw the last 12 weeks prior.

JD table works really well for me at the 5/10k but I fall off a bit going up to the full. YMMV, I think your 2:50 goal is reasonable but 2:45 might be a stretch.

i don't think the marathon calculators are much use when you are using 5ks or 10ks as the input field because they're such different disciplines. the marathon needs solid aerobic conditioning and endurance, much more than the shorter distances. if you haven't put in the work you're going to blow up two thirds of the way into the race, even running at a conservative pace. training should be focused on longer aerobic workouts at threshold pace, sacrificing some of the high quality workouts like intervals.

if you have done all the requisite training then maybe you can start to reference the calculators.

also running economy is much more important the longer the distance becomes. if you don't run efficiently you can get away with it in a 10k but not a marathon. the calculator doesn't know how efficiently you run. if you are bouncing too high or your gait is too short, the relative energy expenditure over 42km will cost you a lot of time.

It's not about the miles, it's about how the miles are done.....😉🇸🇪🧙‍♂️

i think it's both

i just sh*t myself and keep on running. enjoy your breakfast.

I like it when you say that, like you are sharing some amazing knowledge, like you are a real wise man for saying it.
You are not.

Open image

And my coach already said the same back in the 1970s

My PR's were slightly faster and I ran 2:49 and it took me 20 minutes to run the last 2.2.

I felt I could go close to 2:40 but I was never interested in doing the training you'd need.

I think you could go 2:45 (and wear super shoes?).

My five weeks leading up toy msrathon in 256 was 60, 64,52,54, 43. I didn't run super hard just enough to get a BQ. I don't think you have to run crazy mileage to get your 250 goal. Just some quality MP work.

Actually leading to Boston in 2018 I ran a 1:18 half than 2:51 at Boston so there you go.

I wrote my own running calculator (https://davethecanuck.github.io/runcalc/) which lets you add in more details like altitude and elevation gain/loss, along with the age you were when you ran the race. Assuming you are in your mid-20s and the races you did were flat, my calculator predicts a 2:49 for you. Give it a try and let me know how it works out (<username>@gmail.com)!

Of course, the calculator assumes you executed similarly well at your marathon as you did at your other races, which is of course much harder to do, so results may vary at that distance :)

The "help" section explains my methodologies and it has proven pretty accurate for myself and several friends for converting hilly high altitude races to longer flatter sea level races, and also for converting my races from 15 years ago to my current more elderly body.

This is very cool to play around with. Thanks for sharing! My 5k is from a tough, hilly course, so I think your calc is more accurate to that.

Also, I've found that I can possibly get near, or under, 2:40 if I just take off 14ish years of my life. New training goals. Should be no problem.

Your mileage is too low to translate 10k time straight to the marathon in the Daniels table. He states that the table assumes equivalent training & ability for each event. Very few of us are built to be equivalent across all distances and very few train well enough for each specific distance to have the same VDOT across..

Really your best indicators for the marathon are your training runs. If you can do a weekly 10mi run at MP and a 20mi long run with pick up to MP the last few miles consistently and are just tired, but not wrecked, you have a good chance at that MP. Way too many people pick a time and try to train for that pace rather than training consistently and letting the workout paces tell them what they can really run.

Supershoes can close the gap some in the marathon - as much as 5sec/mi. But disregard if you training tempos and racing in those shoes.

Good luck.

Daniels' table is heavily skewed towards the longer distances. Only the slowest of slow twitch runners will find it even remotely accurate.

That being said, go through the first half in 1:23:30 and see how you feel.

I ran a marathon back in May and the goal was to go sub 2:40. However as the day got closer I started thinking thay maybe I could even hit 2:35. Turns out I couldn't and ended up running 2:42. A PB, but not the result I wanted.

Running 2:35 would have been fantastic but I would have been delighted to have ran 2:39. So my advice would be to stick with your original goal of sub 2:50 and if you end up with a big negative split then that's bonus bragging rights!

Agree with this. The disappointment you would feel with 2:52 v. 2:47 is much greater than the thrill you'd get from running 2:45 this year v. next race.

Out in 1:25 and negative split -- with room for improvement -- is a choice you won't regret.

HIs times are equivalents given you train specifically for that event. The reality is most people aren't running 50-60 miles per week consistently for year prior to their marathon. Aditionally, a marathon requires you to get nutrition during the race, and hydrate. This is easy to get wrong with disasterous consequences. I think his conversion times are spot on, but there is just so much more that can go wrong in a marathon. Most people never hit a marathon time that matches their true potential on that day, whereas in 10k and lower, most people get pretty close to the best they can do.

Go out conservative, maybe 2:55 pace, and if half way you feel awesome gradually pick up the pace. Most important thing in the first marathon as a 2:45 shape guy is you finish, and break 3 hours. You can always shave off the minutes in your next one.