How much is Patrick Lange's 2:39 marathon at IM World Champs worth at a normal marathon in good conditions

It is equal to a 1:59 marathon AT LEAST.

Expert. wrote:

It is equal to a 1:59 marathon AT LEAST.

Sorry, but this is horrible nonsense.

Brownlee's 28:32 10k at Stanford really opened my eyes to how good tri athletes can be at running. IAAF scoring tables put 28:32 equal to 2:14 for the marathon.

Yes, they are different people but you figure this is the caliber of athlete that is needed to win a world championship.

So yeah, anything under 2:20 for Lange shouldn't be surprising. Especially after a marathon in 95 freaking degrees.

Comparing Ironman marathon leg to a road marathon does not work. Duration of an Ironman makes it comparable to a road 100k run. 2:39 for the last 42k is a world class time for road IAAF road 100k championships.

3hr-marathoner wrote:

He'd go faster if fresh but probably not as much faster as one might imagine, maybe 2:30 fresh vs 2:39 on tired legs and maybe subtract another few minutes for a faster course. These ironman athletes train specifically to be aerobic monsters. The training isn't at all geared to going faster over shorter events so I think the question of how fast he could go if he trained specifically for the marathon has a completely different answer. Sub-2:15 is reasonable in that case but I think it would take him a couple years to get there from where he is now.

This is spot on.

(and I say this as someone who raced triathlon for 16 years, 7 professional)

My run times off the bike weren't really that much slower than what I could run in a fresh, open race.

but with a year or two of specific run training he would likely go a bit faster, though hard to say if he would get much below 2:25-2:20. IM guys are all about efficiency running.

comparinator wrote:

Brownlee's 28:32 10k at Stanford really opened my eyes to how good tri athletes can be at running. IAAF scoring tables put 28:32 equal to 2:14 for the marathon.

Yes, they are different people but you figure this is the caliber of athlete that is needed to win a world championship.

Brownlee is the best athlete the sport of triathlon has ever seen. There really is no comparison, so I would be careful extrapolating much from his times.

not a full HM

Latrick Pange wrote:

midwest ponds wrote:

(short course, talent is so much more important than training to be able to run a 2:18, i bet he can't even run a HM under 1:12)

He ran 1:11:51 in a 70.3 (half ironman)

https://www.endurance-data.com/en/result/73/2-patrick-lange/

MAYBE, SUB 230. THESE ARE NOT FAST RUNNERS THAT WHY THEY PIC TRIATHLON

YOU ARE A DREAMER....TERY 2'25, SUB 220 W EPO. I WOULD GUESS 228

I know 2.4 miles swimming is a bigger deal than it looks, but 180k cycling is a smaller deal for sure. Compared to running a marathon it is diddly squat. Two events where gravity is not a factor won't necessarily take that much out of you prior to the event where gravity is everything. Whole different nuther ball of wax entirely.

This is great. I love it when triathletes are discussed on Letsrun. The consensus is always that no one who chooses the triathlon over running is actually a good runner.. and it's not possible that they have the capacity to be great in our sport.

From a sport that has an approval rating lower than Congress this is a bold stance.

It's quite possible that these folks have an extreme capacity, and could excel in our sport... but that they just choose not to do it. Just like football players who would rather join the NFL. Running is a dead sport; just go to a local track meet. This isn't the 1970s.

This guy ran a 2:39 marathon after cycling at an insane pace over 112 miles and swimming over 2 miles, and you guys say (1) he probably can't run better than 2:30, and (2) cycling doesn't take a lot out of you. I'm actually more sad for the sport (running) after reading this thread.

ImissSpicey wrote:

Brownlee is the best athlete the sport of triathlon has ever seen. There really is no comparison, so I would be careful extrapolating much from his times.

He doesn't win his races easily and there are several triathletes at his level regarding running. For example, that Spanish guy Gomez is basically just as good as Brownlee. I am also very impressed by how fast the top triathletes are running as they cannot be spending all that much time dedicated to running training compared to athletes who are just distance running specialists.

I would love to know how the top triathletes are approaching their distance running training as I think they are far ahead in their running training than are pure distance runners - the training used for most specialist distance runners may be simply way below optimal in many cases and has not yet caught up.

I know that one of the Brownlees was leaked to be on TUEs for diuretics by Fancybears so I don't want this to lead to a "triathletes are dopers" discussion - track and field distance running has far worse doping revelations and cover ups.

I did an ironman, and the swim affected me very little but the cycling trashed my legs (and back a bit).During a 70.3 I got off the bike my calves were cramping so I had to run the half marathon with cramps all the way.

Bad Wigins wrote:

I know 2.4 miles swimming is a bigger deal than it looks, but 180k cycling is a smaller deal for sure. Compared to running a marathon it is diddly squat. Two events where gravity is not a factor won't necessarily take that much out of you prior to the event where gravity is everything. Whole different nuther ball of wax entirely.

Lange ran a sub 1:12 Half marathon when he won the Ironman 70.3 in Rügen last year. He can definately do better than that in a pure running event. Some runners seem to feel threatened by some Triathletes being great runners. I don‘t get it. Why?

I was at half ironman coeur d'alene 2018 last week watching my wife. The winner was definitely flying.

I ran the half marathon course the previous day In 1:12:40.... The course was a little short probably about a minute or two? My watch had it measured at 12.8 miles. I have no way to verify this because I didn't drive the course and who knows maybe my GPS was messed up. That being said it still wasn't fast or easy with all the twists and turns. Matt Hanson ran 1:11:44 to win it. It's pretty impressive off of the bike. I was out running with him on Sunday just watching and he was definitely running around 5:30 miles.

That being said everyone else in the pro field on Course was running much closer to six minutes or slower, but again impressive when you think about the heat and the less than ideal course. The course must of had 20 or 30 turns and some short hills and u-turns.

why do we always think the run in triathlon is short? It could be long

Starting a marathon after 5hrs+of intense racing while trying to consume enough calories for the run and staying hydrated is definitely a challenge compared to starting fresh in cooler temps.