Sub 15 5k or sub 2:30 marathon. Which is more impressive?

Sub 15 is way harder. You need conditions to be perfect if you're near the mark. If you want to break 2:30 go run Berlin, London or one of the Japanese marathons.

I think it's cool that there's so much disagreement about this, clearly a good question. having run both sub-15 and sub-2:30, I agree with arguments in favor of both sides. I think a good way to 'test' the question would be to do a marathon training cycle and race right after a season with a lifetime PR in the 5K.

of course one can't know when one is getting a lifetime PR at the time, but this would be senior year of college for many people - like myself. I really regret waiting five years after college to run the marathon, because I think I may have been ready to run substantially faster with my senior year shape (14:48) than the 2:28's and 2:27's I hit five to seven years later following some long periods without training or poor training. although I wasn't training for the distance while doing those marathon cycles, I never felt capable of 14:48 during that time

I think the conclusion I am coming to is as follows:

1) Nearly all sub 15 runners have the ability to run sub 230

2) Not all sub 230 runners have the ability to run sub 15

3) As such sub 15 requires more “natural genetic talent”

4) Because of different length sub 15 can be run on questionable training for a very talented runner. Not many people can run sub 230 without a legit marathon block

5) As such... if you are impressed by people who are naturally talented running objectively (VDOT, female comparison or choose your method) faster times then the 5k is more impressive. If you are impressed by people who are able to grind and put in serious mileage and workouts over a cycle to achieve a solid goal then sub 230 will take the cake.

6) A lot of people are impressed by what they haven’t been able to (or couldn’t see themselves being able to do.

7) There are still a lot of really good runners hanging around letsrun

I really appreciate all the responses. Really good stuff.

Sub-15 is approaching OTQ territory. Endurance guys who put in the work can run 2:18 off of 14:40s/50s. But you got it right from the start. More people probably go sub-15 than sub-2:30. Sub-15 is still harder. I feel like a combination of things prevent good college runners from chasing the marathon standard. & college runners might run a decently fast 5k every weekend during the outdoor season. Someone without a ton of talent might be able to run 2:29.

Both are impressive. I think sub-15 is harder even if less people get the marathon right.

n9 wrote:

Depending on the region where you live, sub230 may not even make you 'local competitive' or 'sub-elite' Your only sure bet would be age group placing if you manage to keep your fitness into your 50s.

This is incorrect. There are few marathons around the country where sub 2:30 at even age 40 won't result in an age group win.

HRE wrote:

A sub 2:30 marathon once got you into the Olympic Trials. A sub 15:00 never did. I vote marathon.

Interesting comparison - 23 men out of 139 finishers (17%?) couldn't break 2:30 in Rio 2016 Olympic Marathon. Some from countries (Israel, Portugal, South Korea etc) who had much faster times either in the same race or at the least, that year.

Across 2 heats and the final (50 men), only 3 finishers (6%) were over 15 minutes in the 5000m. These were from Myanmar, Solomon Islands, and Sao Tome & Principe (which I never knew existed, but fair play to that guy, can't have many training partners and was only 19).

Not counting DNFs in either. Takes more to pull off a 2:30:00 marathon to order, given all the variables that are at play.

interesting discussion. my answer is the 5K because while i personally know a few 2:30 guys, i do not know any 14:xx guys (unless they're hiding it). so that's rarefied air to me. i do think it requires a higher degree of genetic talent.

just for kicks i looked up 2019 results for the one fast 5K in my area and our big marathon. interestingly, there were 5 local guys that broke 15, and 5 that broke 2:30. granted, the 5K course is pancake flat and our marathon course is not. i was surprised we didn't have more sub 2:30 guys to be honest.

Dubious Caesar wrote:

HRE wrote:

A sub 2:30 marathon once got you into the Olympic Trials. A sub 15:00 never did. I vote marathon.

Interesting comparison - 23 men out of 139 finishers (17%?) couldn't break 2:30 in Rio 2016 Olympic Marathon. Some from countries (Israel, Portugal, South Korea etc) who had much faster times either in the same race or at the least, that year.

Across 2 heats and the final (50 men), only 3 finishers (6%) were over 15 minutes in the 5000m. These were from Myanmar, Solomon Islands, and Sao Tome & Principe (which I never knew existed, but fair play to that guy, can't have many training partners and was only 19).

Not counting DNFs in either. Takes more to pull off a 2:30:00 marathon to order, given all the variables that are at play.

Something tells me the heat of the summer olympics in Rio played a huge factor in this as well.

I think most people could eventually run a 2:30 marathon with enough training and determination. I know several hobby runners in our local group who work full time, raise kids, have other hobbies, and can run 2:30 (ish). I don't think most ordinary people could run a sub-15 5k, even with years of training.

14:45 at 70mpw, 2:27 at 60mpw (1:10/1:17s splits, made it to 22 at 2:21 pace before the wheels fell off, more my legs were trashed from the pounding than anything). I worked way harder to run 14:45, so I think sub-15 is harder. I only ran two marathons because I hated the distance. It's a regret of mine that I never gave the marathon an honest effort.

I’d go with the 2:30 as more impressive. But this is coming from an 800 guy. I ran 1:52 in the 800 and 4:10 in the mile, I didn’t ever get to run the 5k on the track in college but ran 15:20s once in a random road race. A sub 15 5k or 3 4:50s seems like a very achievable goal for me, but I don’t think I could ever sniff 2:30 in the marathon. Too many things just have to go right and if you mess up in a marathon you still need to take a lot of time off vs a 5k you could “Try again next week”

Sub 15 for me.

Opportunities to run a sub 2h30 marathon are easier to find. Just go to any big marathon and you have good chances to find a group.

To find a race with a decent competition around 15‘ is very hard.

My 5k PB is from a race with great competition and is 20 seconds faster than the next best 5k (16:22 vs. 16:42). I‘ve run in the 16:40s many times, but only once 16:22.

To be fair, I’ve only run one marathon race at the very beginning of my running career at age 19. The distance is not attractive to me.

I admire both, but sub 15 is closer to the heart.

Age might be a factor, but I’ve run sub 2:30 ...4 times since turning 40 years old, and I still can’t break 16 in a 5K.

My vote at 45 years old is sub 15 is impossible and sub 2:30 is very doable.

According to the IAAF scoring tables a 2:29:59 marathon (road) is worth 832 points while a 14:59 5,000 (track) is worth 811 points.

I think a lot of sub 2:30 guys could break 15 if a month out from their marathon they were told that they had to run a 5k instead.

I've run 2:28 high and 2:29 high before. My 5K road PR is 15:24 and my 5K rack PR is 15:25. I did not run in college and did these times in my early 30s. I've also run 1:09;14 and several other high 1:09 halfs

Sub 15:00 is far more impressive. I can't make it sub 15 pace past 3200. It's just too fast. I have a suspicion that my training for the 5K was not correct- too mileage heavy, not enough top end speed work.

Now that I'm 36 I don't ever see myself breaking 15:00

Gauging the results of the largest 5K and 10K road races in the country think Peachtree and Hot Chocolate and comparing them with the largest Marathon's especially Chicago there are far more sub 2:30 Marathon finishers than there are sub 15 5K and sub 31 10K finishers. For instance the 2019 Peachtree 10K which had ~56k participants and is larger than the Chicago Marathon at 45K participants yet only had twenty-three sub 31 minute finishers whereas the Chicago Marathon had over 140 sub 2:30 finishers.

There aren't a lot of 5Ks with massive fields but in general you will find fewer sub 15 minute finishers on a % basis than for the big marathons.

18rabbitskiing wrote:

Gauging the results of the largest 5K and 10K road races in the country think Peachtree and Hot Chocolate and comparing them with the largest Marathon's especially Chicago there are far more sub 2:30 Marathon finishers than there are sub 15 5K and sub 31 10K finishers. For instance the 2019 Peachtree 10K which had ~56k participants and is larger than the Chicago Marathon at 45K participants yet only had twenty-three sub 31 minute finishers whereas the Chicago Marathon had over 140 sub 2:30 finishers.

There aren't a lot of 5Ks with massive fields but in general you will find fewer sub 15 minute finishers on a % basis than for the big marathons.

This may be true but people usually run a marathon as a goal race and are tapered for it. People run these big city 5ks and 10ks in various stages of training.

Its like asking which is the tallest of Snow White's roommates.

That's a fair point. Perhaps a better example is the 2019 Abbott Dash to the Finish Line 5K which hosted that year's USATF 5km championships. Only 23 runners broke 15 minutes despite it being the USATF championships. Compare that to any major marathon, and even some mid-major ones like the California International Marathon which had 180 runners break 2:30 in 2019. The Carlsbad 5000 had an elite field in 2019 but only 10 runners cracked 15 including the winner Edward Cheserek.

I'm probably being too male centric as a sub 15 minute 5K road race would approach the women's world record of 14:54 whereas the world record for women's marathon is sub 2:15 and many women broke 2:30 in this year's Olympic Marathon US qualifier.

I run primarily in Northern California and pre-covid would do 30 to 40 races in a year mainly 5Ks with a few 10K and half’s sprinkled in. A sub 15 minute 5K by a man would win most of the 5Ks and many of them by 30 seconds or more. A 2:30 marathon might win a small race but wouldn't crack the top 25 in Los Angeles, the top 75 in Chicago, New York, Boston, CIM. A sub 15 minute 5K would win the women's division in every race and a 2:30 wouldn't usually come close to winning the female division of a major marathon.