Lance Armstrong and the Marathon

I am calling bullsh#$ on both Average_Joe and high boy. Don't write crap like this without explaining something about your background. Average_Joe DID NOT run 2:41 off of "5 weeks of training." You probably were running 20-40 miles a week for three or four months and then ramped your mileage up to 60-80 for 5 weeks and ran 2:41. In your mind you now believe you ONLY trained for 5 weeks. In reality you had probably been running for 5, 10, 15 years previous to a small three or four month break. In your mind, and I suspect you couch it in these terms to make people who train and train and train and never even run under 2:50 feel inferior, you ARE NOT taking into account the years and years of running and training that came before your "2:41". I am not even sure I believe that your ran 2:41.

High boy,

Your 2:44 without being about to run 1 sub 5:30 mile is also ridiculous. You might not be able to do 5xmile at 5:30 because you have never tried, but that doesn't mean that it is not a good indicator of what is needed to achieve these marks.

I stick by my statement that to run 2:30 you SHOULD (that doesn't mean you have to) be able to run 5x1mile at 5:00 with 1-to-1 rest. That SHOULD BE a manageable workout. Don't just disregard these metric. They are sound! I have never known a 2:30 marathoner who couldn't or didn't have these skills. And, also, if you have only run 2:41 than you have no idea what I am talking about because there is a HUGE difference between a 2:30 and a 2:41!!!!

Urine Samples wrote:

I like Hollywood movies, hip hop, rock, too. It's all a fantasy. Dopers perform superhuman feats which are fantasy. This appeals to many who asprire to be like them. Sports organizations, manufacturers, media companies, look the other way, and take advantage of human desire. Have some common sense and get with the program. Congress will soon federalize the process and may create a mini TSA to catch dopers. Most likely they will use local Corrections, Probation, and Law Enforcement staff. Children's lives are at stake. Dopers die too young. It's our responsibility to save our children.

Point to this supposed legislation.

A mini-TSA! There is a brilliant idea!

Old Athlete wrote:I am calling bullsh#$ on both Average_Joe and high boy.

Whoa, big fella!

If I recall, Average Joe was injured for an extended period before getting in the 5 weeks of decent training before the marathon, and I'm fairly certain he's legit with whatever time he's claimed. His training (and injury) were a matter of public record on this board.

I don't think a 2:30 runner necessarily HAS to be capable of that workout when in marathon shape, but I agree with you that a 2:30 runner should be capable of BEING capable (ie training to) run that workout. Not everyone will do a lot of sub-M pace work before the marathon, so that sort of workout would be very tough (maybe impossible) in that case.

A buddy of mine just ran Chicago in 2:43, but all his training for the prior 6 months was M-pace or slower (except a handfull of races), and I'm certain he could not have run 5 x mile @ 5:30 with equal rest. Now, given some faster work, I've no boubt he's capable of training to be able to run that workout, but not today.

You know, I didn't think from my statement that people would believe I had zero training beforehand. You are correct that I should have qualified it. You are correct that I had mainly 20-40 mpw weeks before the 5 in which I was finally able to train without injury. To me, that's next to no training at all. Regardless, my training that got me the 2:41 was irrelevant to the point and I should not have mentioned it. My point was to dispute your figures, not to blow my horn about some great talent I possess for running marathons off little training. (I have no such talent. I need tons of mileage to do well.)

But there is very little difference between 2:40 and 2:41. Have you forgotten your own statement?

I was able to run very close to 2:40 and could not possibly have approached this workout, and I'm better at shorter distances than longer ones. Your assessment of what someone in 2:40 shape should be able to do was completely off base, as the other testimonials here support

My name is Joe O'Leary and I ran 2:41:56 (chip) at Chicago this year. I finished 167th overall.

It's not that I disregard it. Of the three statements you made, this is probably the most reasonable. Though I've known at least one who wasn't about to do this workout.

More importantly, what about your absolutely ridiculous statement that, for a 2:30 marathoner, a sub 5:00 mile at the end of a 20 mile run "needs to feel very easy and relaxed". Do you still stand by that one?

I stick by my statement that your statements (this last one most of all) are out of touch with reality.

he could easily go sub 210 if he tried... they actually did a conversion for him with his VO2 and biking comparison to running and said he could run a 206. he was a triathlete you know before he became the best bicycler in history... arguable to some with Merckx and Indurain... but we know the truth

Dear USATF,

Do your own legwork.

Thanks.

urine samples,

why would WE want to go on a wild goose chase to prove an obviously false claim that YOU made?

thanks

sub 210 wrote:

he could easily go sub 210 if he tried... they actually did a conversion for him with his VO2 and biking comparison to running and said he could run a 206. he was a triathlete you know before he became the best bicycler in history... arguable to some with Merckx and Indurain... but we know the truth

Biking is not running...so..the estimate must be based on only his VO2max.....so how accurate do you think it is??

not very....there is no real easy why to estimate marathon time ....people put far to much faith in the predictive models that are used to estimate times....they are NOT good enough to predict someones time down to a couple of minutes...damn do you know how accurate they would have to be...no way ....no many variables

The famous French rider Laurent Jalabert ran NYC this year. He retired in 2002 after a fantastic career.

Finished in 2:55. A little news story is at the link below.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/nov05/nov08news

It's in the congressional record. I work in infectious disesases. It not my area but I saw something related to that from McCain. I think the cops want a bigger union. Everyone is looking to expand their empires here. Google for it or ask your congressman.

I wouldn't bet against Lance if he does decide to go after the Ironman title. He's young enough to still win, remember Dave Scott and Mark Allen. I seriously doubt he's running NYC for the heck of it.

I am sure if Lance can score the right drugs - he can do anything.

If he has proper mechanics and the proper engine, the question comes down to durability. Can his legs repeat the same motion for 2.5 hours when it is different than the motion he trained for 1,000's of miles.

He's more likely to succumb to severe blisters or a lower leg injury than fatique.

Old Athlete wrote:

I stick by my statement that to run 2:30 you SHOULD (that doesn't mean you have to) be able to run 5x1mile at 5:00 with 1-to-1 rest.

Wait. Is that really true? And what is 1-to-1 rest? You mean like 5 min rest?

Because I'm 35 and I just did a 5 x 1600 workout alone at the track in 4:59 w/ a strict 3 min rest.

I would sure love to run 2:30.

Old Athlete wrote:

I stick by my statement that to run 2:30 you SHOULD (that doesn\'t mean you have to) be able to run 5x1mile at 5:00 with 1-to-1 rest.

Wait. Is that really true? And what is 1-to-1 rest? You mean like 5 min rest?

Because I\'m 35 and I just did a 5 x 1600 workout alone at the track in 4:59 w/ a strict 3 min rest.

I would sure love to run 2:30.[/quote]

He said that anyone who can run a 2:30 marathon should be able to do 5xmile in 5:00 each, not anyone who can do 5xmile in 5:00 each should be able to run a 2:30 marathon.

Old athlete wrote:

If he got to 155 and found that he could do 8xmile at 5:10-5:25 with some effort, he might run 2:40. To run 2:30, you must be able to do at least 5xmile at sub 5 with 1 to 1 rest. A five minute mile needs to feel very easy and very relaxed at the end of a 16-20 mile long run. I don't think he can run one.

Spoken like a true non-marathoner. I have run 2:35 and could not have done that first workout. I couldn't even shake a stick at the second, but you can be sure I'm shaking one at 2:30. A five-minute mile is NEVER easy or relaxed for me, as I've never run one. Running faster than 5:20 pace is kind of a big deal for me. You just have to realize that not everyone works the same way as you. I think it's safe to assume that if Lance trained seriously for distance running, he would be the type of runner that's better over long distances (like me) and might find himself unable to perform these workouts to your standards as well.

I think people put the marathon on too high a pedestal. It's just a longer distance than most are accustomed to.