Is a >3 hour marathon something to be proud of? I say if you are a woman, yes.. If you're a guy..

The 3:07 guy wrote:

Mustang wrote:

When did this 3:07 guy challenge you? I can’t find the thread.

Yes, that was me.

Greg boosted about his old times and how he could have run a sub 3 Marathon.

Could he? Probably with a lot of hard training. But he didn't even try and he didn't run one single marathon.

There is a huge difference with having the potential and actually doing it.

I probably could have run sub 3 too if I would have put a lot of work into it. But I am a ultrarunner, always was. I have seen many training for and running under 3 hours. But I can tell you, all of them were not Greg types. Lots of them worked there asses of to get under 3 hours.

And we all know, that's not what Greg would do.

The only thing Greg works hard at is tricking the government to give him money for nothing

I ran 2:36 in my first marathon on 40MPW. It is hard for me me to see anything slower than that being anything but slow.

Whiskers wrote:

Greg,

If you ran a marathon in the next 6 months and you ran a 3:09, would you be proud of that?

I am guessing that you would be proud of that.

Not even a 4:09 Marathon.

I would be proud of Greg if he could run a 4:45 Marathon within the next year.

KudzuRunner wrote:

Take pride in what you've actually done.

I think you touched a sensible subject here, Kudzu Runner.

Nope, he didn't do it so he didn't do it. Maybe he was only strong enough to run 6:52 miles for 20 miles, who knows?

I know several runners that could not get under but were close each time. Their half marathons indicated they could do it, but...they never did. It doesn't lessen them as being great people, but they never broke 3 hours. I give them more credit for trying than I give this Greg person for making false unknown claims.

I broke 2:45 at age 17 and it never comes up in conversation with anyone as it was for me, not them. Yet this Greg poster is going to post assumptions that never happened and never will? No, you did not break 3 hours Greg and probably never would have because the training would have destroyed you.

The 3:07 guy wrote:

I ran my 3:07 when I was 40.

Am I proud of it? Not really, since I have done a lot cooler stuff on longer distances.

But when I see all these slow pokes these days, especially in my running group, I think 3:07 was not that bad.

If this would be a competitive running site, Greg would not be on here.

With all times, it's relative. 3:07 is not as good as sub 3 hours but hell lot better than just getting under 4 hours.

A sub 2:30 is a lot better than sub 3 hours but not that great if you compare it with sub 2:15 runners.

And a sub 2:10 is not that much if you are from Kenia.

But the best is if you have no Marathon time and can judge like Greg. That is the ultimate Marathon runner.

Good on you for doing that marathon 3:07 guy! You actually accomplished something and that something to be proud of.

All women on this forum are literally faster than Greg and I don’t hear them belittling him.

He’s a joke.

He just decided to bring up the past so he could bully someone but he hates when anyone here brings up his past??

I’ll say it again, Greg you’re a joke and yes my PR have been and still are much better than yours, you’ve even complimented me on them in the past so why do you keep coming on this forum if you’re not a competitive runner?

Just stop already.

Wait. You're talking down to people in an event you've never run because you've run 26:20 in the 8K? That's comical.

Lol. Uncle Rico once threw a football a quarter mile. If only the coach had put him in they would’ve won state.

You don’t get credit for things you could’ve done but never did.

For a runner who did not compete seriously in HS or college, a sub 3 marathon is a big accomplishment and something to definitely be proud of. I ran 16 marathons. I ran XC in jr high and did not do any competitive running again until I was 33. It took me 4 tries to get under 3 hours. I eventually got down to 2:47, but was in my early 40s. I watched a lot of very dedicated runners beat their heads against the wall trying to get under 3 hours. Unless you had the privilege of running competitively in school, it takes years of dedication to get your body in shape to run a sub 3 marathon.

Mustang wrote:

Greg wrote:

There is nothing for me to prove in running. I am satisfied with the results I have. This started from someone with a 3:07 PR claiming I couldn't run under 3 hours... Most LRers know my track/road times line up to a marathon performance 10-20 minutes faster than a 3:07, so why would I have to go prove it to the slower guy?

Shouldn't the 3:07 guy be proving he can run a mile under 4:50? Break 27 for 5 miles? Why would I have to prove it?

When did this 3:07 guy challenge you? I can’t find the thread.

That’s the saddest part of this thread—he’s revisiting a “squabble” from approximately 7-8 months ago. He already started multiple threads on the subject...7-8 months ago!

In that time Greg could have trained for and posted a 3:06 marathon, and then he might have a legitimate reason for bringing this back up.

Not a good look Greg.

I think we would all be rather impressed and congratulatory if you trained up and ran under 3:10, Greg, because you would have actually done something. And if you’re set on leaving your running in your schoolboy days, forever hanging your hat on a decent D3-type 8k time while starting trash threads like this, you should just find another website. “This is a competitive running site!”

"Knowing I had ability to run sub 3 hours in the marathon is good enough for me". Haha right. You don't know this, and we certainly don't know it, until and unless you actually do it. Toe the line.

No one cares about the 8K or 5 mile times you actually ran. The marathon is the gold standard of distance running. What serious runner does not aspire to race it, and eventually do so? I don't know any, but have heard of some (including ultra runners), and wonder whether they fear that on the ultimate stage, they will fall short.

Running rule of thumb: You should never criticize someone else's marathon time unless you have run a faster one yourself.

beersandmiles wrote:

Wait. You're talking down to people in an event you've never run because you've run 26:20 in the 8K? That's comical.

Common mistake a lot of young posters here make.

Just because your short distance results shows a possible 2:33 marathon time on a race time calculator site, does not mean it will happen automatically. You have to put in the work and survive the weekly mileage. And it has to be your kind of distance. Just because you are fast on track, does not mean you will be good at Half Marathons or Marathons.

But hey, we all like to dream.

This mentality is why the sport hasn’t reached its potential.

Competitive running is arguably the largest sport in the United States by participation and its culturally irrelevant as an elite sport.

Why?

Well, objectively, a sub-3hr marathon is an advanced result that would place someone among the highest percentiles of race entrants. Is it an elite result? No. Is it objectively “difficult” in that it would require a lot of dedication and effort from an average individual to achieve? Yes.

Saying a sub-3hr marathon is “impressive” doesn’t take away from elite competitors. Quite the opposite— the fact that elite runners are blowing those times out of the water is a testament to their talent and dedication. It’s IN YOUR INTEREST to recognize others’ significant achievements, even if it is below your own expectations.

If your mentality is “well I can run faster on low mileage, so it’s not impressive” — congratulations, you’ve won the talent/genetics lottery. This makes you sound worse, not better, because you fail to recognize the hard work of others.

John Wesley Harding wrote:

That’s the saddest part of this thread—he’s revisiting a “squabble” from approximately 7-8 months ago. He already started multiple threads on the subject...7-8 months ago!

In that time Greg could have trained for and posted a 3:06 marathon, and then he might have a legitimate reason for bringing this back up.

Not a good look Greg.

I think we would all be rather impressed and congratulatory if you trained up and ran under 3:10, Greg, because you would have actually done something. And if you’re set on leaving your running in your schoolboy days, forever hanging your hat on a decent D3-type 8k time while starting trash threads like this, you should just find another website. “This is a competitive running site!”

Plus he's a little salty from getting exposed in his thread about his resume at the grocery store a couple days ago. That was a really bad look for him too. He seems to thrive on attention, even if it's negative, while posting about how great his life is and how happy he is.

The answer is Yes. This is very tough to do for most people. Stop being running snobs

About 40 years ago I ran a 2:49 (I'm a man). Runners World used to publish ALL Marathons run in the country. I was in the top 2%.

I was surprised because I jumped in it as an afterthought (you used to be able to register day of race).

50 or so mpw, 5 long runs of from 15-18 miles. No workouts.

How about a challenge for Greg?

Sub 3:00 Marathon by the end of 2021 and the brojos give you 30 minutes on the Letsrun podcast?

Greg isn't commenting anymore. Is he sleeping or out on a 2 hour-run??