Realistic but challenging Marathon debut goal time

marathon newbie wrote:

Say I went out and ran a 1:20 half marathon today, an equivalent time would be +-2:55ish on most charts. With the proper training, mileage and long runs for about 10-12 weeks, is there any reason this wouldn't be a reasonable goal time?

If you run smart it is reasonable. If you are stupid like I was you won't. Ran my first half marathon at the old Philadelphia Distance Run in September in 1:19 and then proceeded to run my first marathon in Columbus in November in 3:03. I hit the HM split in 1:22:30 and got CRUSHED the second half. Run smart and be patient. The pace WILL feel too easy the first half of the marathon.

I think 2:55 is a reasonable, conservative time if your current fitness is a 1:20 Half.

I have 1:19 and 2:53 PRs, so 2:55 is doable.

I’d recommend going out around 6:50 pace for the first 10 miles or so and see how you feel. Drop it to low 6:4X and if you feel good at mile 18 or so, drop the hammer. Miles 14-20 are always rough for me.

Conditions and training mileage make a big difference in the marathon.

Don't be like me wrote:

marathon newbie wrote:

Say I went out and ran a 1:20 half marathon today, an equivalent time would be +-2:55ish on most charts. With the proper training, mileage and long runs for about 10-12 weeks, is there any reason this wouldn't be a reasonable goal time?

If you run smart it is reasonable. If you are stupid like I was you won't. Ran my first half marathon at the old Philadelphia Distance Run in September in 1:19 and then proceeded to run my first marathon in Columbus in November in 3:03. I hit the HM split in 1:22:30 and got CRUSHED the second half. Run smart and be patient. The pace WILL feel too easy the first half of the marathon.

Truth. 2:55 sounds like a reasonable goal. The thing that kills most first time marathoners is going out too fast.

You've trained hard and tapered, you feel great, you're excited. It is SO hard to hold back in the early miles. If you pace properly, the first half will probably be the slowest you've ever run in a race. You'll look around in the early miles and see all these crap runners that you KNOW you're better than, and every instinct in you will be SCREAMING to speed up. Don't do it. Ignore the other runners around you and stick to the plan.

The real key is a combination of a lot of miles (75-100/week) and going under 7:00 easily and often, with some of your long runs having substantial pace for much of the time. If you want to run 2:55, you should be able to run 15 miles at that pace or close to it every several weeks or how is your body going to be trained to store and efficiently use glycogen. Running 7:30 or especially 8:00 for a long run is useful occasionally but it does not give you an adequate base for your race plan. I ran a little faster than your plan for my first road race after training for four months because I was able to up the mileage at the beginning of that four months (and one bout of shin splints); I was a mediocre high school runner who started running seriously at age 24.

The Very Good was my opinion of jogger262

That is definitely reasonable even w/o good training.

If the weather is perfect and all your training goes perfect, 2:55 should be a good goal and will leave you room to still break 3 if things don't go exactly as planned. If it is warm on race day and the 20+ mile long runs were a struggle, I would back off considerably and just try to finish strong. Maybe shoot for sub 3:10. There is nothing worse than bonking your first marathon. It can be an experience that takes many races to get past.

Precious Roy wrote:

If the weather is perfect and all your training goes perfect, 2:55 should be a good goal and will leave you room to still break 3 if things don't go exactly as planned. If it is warm on race day and the 20+ mile long runs were a struggle, I would back off considerably and just try to finish strong. Maybe shoot for sub 3:10. There is nothing worse than bonking your first marathon. It can be an experience that takes many races to get past.

I think that also he shouldn’t be afraid of bonking it

it’s the first marathon so even getting from start point to finish is kind of cool

In the early 2010s I ran 1:20-mid & 2:54 a month apart. I was probably ready for 2:50. Bonked a bit. A year later my half was only a little faster (1:19-high) and I ran 2:47 after going out in 1:20-mid. Oh to be younger and not know how to pace things. Probably had mid-2:40s on that day.

2:55 is more than reasonable for 1:20. I think breaking 2:50 is the right goal for someone with a 1:20 in their pocket.

NERunner0353 wrote:

In the early 2010s I ran 1:20-mid & 2:54 a month apart. I was probably ready for 2:50. Bonked a bit. A year later my half was only a little faster (1:19-high) and I ran 2:47 after going out in 1:20-mid. Oh to be younger and not know how to pace things. Probably had mid-2:40s on that day.

2:55 is more than reasonable for 1:20. I think breaking 2:50 is the right goal for someone with a 1:20 in their pocket.

I agree. What is the point in a conservative goal anyways, not just in running but in any context? To set a conservative goal is to set a goal to achieve less than your best. Why would anyone do that?

Running a conservative time is not going to feel satisfying at all. After all the hard work you have put in going all out will be the only way to run. So what if you hit the wall its part of the learning experience.