Lance Armstrong to Run the NY Marathon Again... This Time He'll Train More Seriously

Lance put his foot in his mouth this time. He said that if he trained seriously he could run 2:25-2:30. He is in for a rude awakening.

yeah, biking a couple thousand miles through the mountains of france is soo easy. get over yourself... id take racing 26.2 miles over biking 100 plus miles day in and day out any time. and as far as his quote saying "this is the hardest thing ive ever done", he was just being humble.

um did you ever hear of coasting?

Seriously. Lance & other team leaders are protected until key moments. So its all about energy conservation, they only pedal 80 percent of the time, They are tucked in the draft of their domestiques, did you check out the heart rates of the major players during the race(a nice touch by OLN)100 BPM and undermuch of the time.

No coasting in the marathon

And cycling is also low impact

Lances body would take years to adapt to the pounding at his age

Oh and by the way Lance has never been humble

I ain't no Lance Armstrong.

I was a mediocre runner in High School. Then I dedicated 11 years to eating pringles and to beefing up (which some people around here might still consider less of a hinderance to future marathoning than winning 7 TDFs...)

I decided to run a marathon at age 29. After several months of training, peaking at 75 mpw (though mostly at no more than 50-60 mpw) I ran my first marathon in just under 3:03. Mind you, this was off of more training than Lance did for his debut.

8 months later, after training consistently at 70-90 mpw I took over 21 minutes off of that time.

3 years after starting up again, I managed a 2:34.

And I ain't no Lance Armstrong.

The only thing sillier than the overhyped coverage of Lance's "heroics" at the NYCM is the constant debating whether or not he could break 2:45. Only question is: Is he willing to put in the training, or in other words, does he want to?

I ain't no Lance Armstrong.

I was a mediocre runner in High School. Then I dedicated 11 years to eating pringles and to beefing up (which some people around here might still consider less of a hinderance to future marathoning than winning 7 TDFs...)

I decided to run a marathon at age 29. After several months of training, peaking at 75 mpw (though mostly at no more than 50-60 mpw) I ran my first marathon in just under 3:03. Mind you, this was off of more training than Lance did for his debut.

8 months later, after training consistently at 70-90 mpw I took over 21 minutes off of that time.

3 years after starting up again, I managed a 2:34.

And I ain't no Lance Armstrong.

The only thing sillier than the overhyped coverage of Lance's "heroics" at the NYCM is the constant debating whether or not he could break 2:45. Only question is: Is he willing to put in the training, or in other words, does he want to?

This last post helps define the marathon. Many letsrunners think the marathon is just 4x10K. Anyone that has run a marathon knows that overcoming that attitude is the biggest challenge of the distance. The marathon is about serious preparation. Pretty much anyone can finish the thing, but even a fit and serious runner will pay the price in the final few miles if adequate preparation is neglected(?). This is the difference of 5 or 10 minutes for a world class runner and 30 to 45 minutes for a decent endurance athlete. Closing that gap is pretty much what the marathon is about. That's why the elites generally don't begin racing until after mile 18.

I'm never going to run this again.

Grete Waitz after winning her first of nine New York City marathons

no

No

NO

Enough already. Please? Lance just enjoy your life, OK?

You are a very lucky man as you well know.