Biggest Limitation on Marathon Time??

mediocre 123 wrote:

Mid 30s. 6'0". 168lbs. Been training for 5 years.

PRs

Mile - 4:52

5k - 16:50

Half - 1:19

Marathon 2:54

Averaging over 2k miles per year. Marathon build-ups start around 65mpw up to 85mpw. 6 days per week, 1 tempo day, 1 track day, long run 16-22 milers. Haven't had any real injuries to deal with.

At this point what is my biggest limiting factor/factors to dropping another 10 minutes on my marathon time?

I want to say weight.

Yes, you're right - it is weight. Try the app Myfitnesspal and work your way down by losing 1-2 lbs/week. I think a good goal would be to lose 10 lbs and then try to maintain that weight for 2-4 weeks. After that, you can continue to lose weight in the same manner. Once you reach a goal, maintain it for 2-4 weeks before progressing to the next goal. The most difficult thing about weight loss is keeping the weight off.

If you can afford it, get a DXA scan. Those will tell you how much fat mass you can afford to lose.

It's often a taboo concept but it's true that weight loss improves performance. However, it's also important to emphasize that weight loss after a certain point will hurt performance.

1) Obviously weight loss will help.

2) If your annual mileage is 2k, you must be doing low mileage outside of the training block. It could be worthwhile keeping your weekly mileage at a higher consistency throughout the year.

Considering I graduated high school at an athletic 185lbs, being 168 at 35 seems pretty light. I'm built like a high school DB but really need to drop about 15lbs of muscle and fat if I want to run a sub 2:45. Wife already thinks I'm too skinny.

Not really sure if the lifestyle change is worth it just to run a faster marathon.

if you do 2h45 but loose your wife, I'm not sure it is worth it indeed...

Thanks for confirming it's mostly the weight. Guess im gonna stay looking somewhat like a full grown man and live with the fact that I'm just not going to be that fast. Not worth loosing 15lbs to still not be elite or even win a decent marathon. Just an ok hobby jogger is what it'll have to be.

mediocre 123 wrote:

Thanks for confirming it's mostly the weight. Guess im gonna stay looking somewhat like a full grown man and live with the fact that I'm just not going to be that fast. Not worth loosing 15lbs to still not be elite or even win a decent marathon. Just an ok hobby jogger is what it'll have to be.

It surprises me that you're willing to run 85 mpw but not lose 15 lbs of fat. To each their own, though. Enjoy running

Edit: to be fair, it would not be 100% fat loss if you lost 15 lbs, but some muscle as well. Just wanted to clarify. My post looked a bit harsh and inaccurate just now. You're right that 15 lbs is a lot. I understand the feeling

Chris Solinsky was 6'0 160 and looked pretty built when he broke 27m in the 10K.

https://alchetron.com/cdn/chris-solinsky-65ea21ce-4f74-48a9-bb24-1eadca5c017-resize-750.jpeg

I'm guessing you could drop to 160, not look scrawny, and run near-optimal times up to the half. A strong marathon's probably out of the cards unless you drop more though.

168lbs is twelve stone right?

That’s not heavy at all for someone of your height,i think the suggestion you got up the thread abit about keeping your mileage abit higher outside of training blocks would help more than getting rail thin.

Probably find some weight might drop anyway with more regular mileage all year round.

I seriously doubt that increasing my off marathon cycle weeks from 40-50 to 50-60 would help as much as dropping 15lbs when we are talking about a marathon. Maybe a combination of both but the weight would have to be a factor.

x days without injury wrote:

Chris Solinsky was 6'0 160 and looked pretty built when he broke 27m in the 10K.

https://alchetron.com/cdn/chris-solinsky-65ea21ce-4f74-48a9-bb24-1eadca5c017-resize-750.jpeg

I'm guessing you could drop to 160, not look scrawny, and run near-optimal times up to the half. A strong marathon's probably out of the cards unless you drop more though.

I would agree with you. Shorter the distance the more optimal without looking sick.

Probably aging will be the issue.

2:54 is a pretty good time.

x days without injury wrote:

Chris Solinsky was 6'0 160 and looked pretty built when he broke 27m in the 10K.

https://alchetron.com/cdn/chris-solinsky-65ea21ce-4f74-48a9-bb24-1eadca5c017-resize-750.jpeg

I'm guessing you could drop to 160, not look scrawny, and run near-optimal times up to the half. A strong marathon's probably out of the cards unless you drop more though.

Solinsky was 160 lbs at probably 8% body fat or less. Body fat % is the determining factor here. I'm guessing OP isn't shredded.

Your PRs similar to mine, except your 1/2 marathon is a couple of minutes quicker. I was the same height but 175-180# when doing it. I think more mileage and more endurance is what you need. This may lead to weight loss.

mediocre 123 wrote:

I seriously doubt that increasing my off marathon cycle weeks from 40-50 to 50-60 would help as much as dropping 15lbs when we are talking about a marathon. Maybe a combination of both but the weight would have to be a factor.

It would probably not be as effective as huge weight loss indeed. But it would help for sure.

If you manage to do 60mpw all year round, marathon training will be way easier and you could put more miles like 80-100.

And it would probably make you loose a bit of weight as well without looking skinny. So it might be a good option for you.

I guess it’s your ability to answer your own questions.

And yes, adding in 10 mpw over the year is an extra 500 miles, so that will help markedly. Zzzzzz....

I bet you could run a 2:50 or 2:45 after your next training cycle without significant intentional weight loss. I guess this depends how difficult it was for you to get to 2:54, but your If you built up to a peak volume of 85 mpw and maintained good quality workouts for a 2:45 target, you would probably lose a few pounds naturally. You could hit your goal at 160-165 lbs. and you probably wouldn't look very much different than you do now.

I doubt that you can go through your next marathon training block without thinking about a PB anyway, so why not shoot for 2:45 instead of 2:53?

I'm probably in similar marathon shape- PR was 2:55 in 2018, but I felt I was ready to drop below 2:50 before my race got cancelled in May. Similar mileage, also mid 30's, 6'4" / 175- maybe a little thinner accounting for height, but same ballpark. 5K is only ~17:30, these days, so you've got the edge in speed.

The one thing that helped me that I've become a big fan of is long runs with marathon pace work thrown in, and now I recommend them to everybody. If you're not already doing this, you could try alternating a 20-22 mile long run one week with 18 miles the next, where 12 of those are at 6:25 or so. This worked when I hit my PR, and it's why I'm confident I was in 2:49 or faster shape this spring.

Based off of your 5K and mile times, you should have potential for improvement. I'm assuming you've already ruled out other obvious things- your marathon wasn't some ugly 1:20/1:34 split, you had enough fuel and water, etc.

Marathon was even splits and I do MP during some long runs.

Who are all of you that think you will "naturally" drop some weight when picking up the mileage?

Have yall not seen the 5'9" 190lb runners that are full dad bod? Increasing mileage doesnt naturally make you lose weight. At some point you have to be hungry and not give in to that hunger. More miles more hunger.