Jack Daniels Race Result Conversion

We need your other PRs to triangulate this.

10k: 35:30

Half: 1:18:30 (14 months ago)

Full: 2:53 (~3 years and 10 months year ago)

Of course, I am just a sample size of 1, but when I was training post-collegiately I would reference the Daniel's VDot tables quite often. I nearly had them memorized. Anyway, for me, instead of being a straight line across, the line's slope would go up as you moved to the right. So, for me a 4:16 mile (Vdot 71) would correspond more closely with 5K/10K of 14:55/31:00 (Vdot 70) and then to a 2:25/26 marathon (Vdot 69-68). I am sure more slowtwitch guys might even say the opposite. But, I always thought I was pretty even on the FT/ST scale, and I trained pretty reasonably for the distance (imo, but of course others have run a lot more).

Your PRs look in line with mine when I ran 2:51.

10K - 35:59

HM - 1:18:50

2:45 might be pushing it. I'd aim to break 2:50 first and pick it up the last 10K if you still feel good at 20 miles.

According to this very good calculator, both your 10K and 1/2 line up perfectly with 2:45. Of course your mileage, MP runs, day of race conditions, and long run will affect this as well. Your average mileage typically should be 60-70. Pace conservatively and let us know how it goes.

Interesting, what was your mileage for most of the season building to that 2:51?

So much depends on where you're coming from. A ton of high school kids can run 35:30 (no disrespect, of course), but have no prayer of hitting 2:45. On the other hand, if you were 40+ years old, doing a lot of miles, have no problem doing a MP tempo run of 12-16 miles any time you want, and the 35:30 was a recent race where you really had to hoof it to get that time, then maybe 2:45ish could be in range.

Perhaps it is too close, but I always felt that if I could run 16-18 miles at MP for a temp run, then I felt really good (due to experience) about being able to do the marathon at the same pace.

Without knowing anything about you and your running, I like the idea of going out at 2:48-2:50 pace and being open to having a strong 2nd half. It's just a better way to run, imo.

That was WAY back in 2004 but I was able to find the mileages. Starting 20 weeks out:

20 - 62.5

19 - 74.35

18 - 77.5

17 - 81.15

16 - 70.4

15 - 86.3

14 - 85.7

13 - 93.25

12 - 87.75

11 - 85.35

10 - 82.2

9 - 87.45

8 - 80.6

7 - 96.55

6 - 83.05

5 - 88.75

4 - 84.3

3 - 72.45

2 - 51.35

1 - Race week

Thanks for digging that up! Interesting. You put in some serious mileage for that marathon - looks like 80 mpw on average! Nice work. Looking back, do you think that that is what it takes to get a 2:51 or do you think less mileage, like 65, would be sufficient off of your 1:18:50 half?

Don’t fixate on the tables Daniels was not making an. effort to individualize or think too deeply The shoes make a difference as well

My advice is run the pace you feel, which I guess is closer to 6:10- 6:15 on a fast course. Run what you can as long as you can and good chance you’ll get past 20mu feeling better than if you hold back to gear which is not really yours

It does seem like most people are not able to convert their shorter race distances to the corresponding marathon times on the Daniels tables. My times line up from 2 mile up through 5 and 10k and the marathon.

My 10k is a minute slower than yours, and I have a 2:48 marathon. But I was running 65-70 miles a week to get that. Not sure how that helps you, but I do think going for 2:50 is a soft target for you. Maybe try to hit halfway in 1:24 or so and plan on picking up the pace if you feel good after 18 miles.

That's pretty solid that you're able to match the Daniels conversions up to the marathon. I've seen people more achieve a 2:57 off of your 10K time and 65-70 mpw mileage. Do you think this is all due to race day execution or is it doing more marathon tempos or something else like genetics?

Thanks! I have a couple ideas for why this might be true. I will say that I could not convert my 10k and shorter times to the marathon when I started ran my first marathon a few years ago (38:40 led to a 3:01). But over the last few years my 10k time has come down, but my marathon time came down more. I have a few guesses for why my times line up.

I like the marathon style training as opposed to the shorter stuff. I pretty much never do 5k paced work or VO2 max intervals and things like that. I do some strides and shorter, faster reps, but more for mechanical practice rather than race specific work. Some kind of injury always comes back if I hit the 5k pace stuff too much. Instead I like long runs, medium long runs, various length tempo runs, and get some solid miles in at MP+20-30" in addition to classic MP runs. When I set my marathon PR last spring I think all that is what gave me some solid late race strength that I did not have years before.

Is it genetics? I guess it could be. I mean, there is probably a reason I gravitate towards the above training. Do what you like and what you're good at and all that. Maybe I'm more of a slow twitch runner. I will say that the grind of this type of training is enjoyable to me both physically and mentally.

As a result, my 5 and 10k PRs are probably a little on the soft side. I'm not sure if I could break 17 minutes or get into the 35's with more proper training, though. Maybe. But I bet I could get them a little faster.

And I'm also in my 40s. I think that can lead to more endurance and success at the longer stuff. But all my PRs have been set in my early 40s, including the 2 mile. So everything is quite recent. Within the last 15 or so months.

I've got another marathon coming up soon. I'm hoping I can hit a time that is actually better than my short distance races. Right now my workouts indicate I might be able to. But you never know. The marathon is a fickle beast.

Thanks for sharing your ideas! It's really interesting how you have done more marathon style training and not the 5K VO2 type workouts. That does seem like it would explain much of this - how you gained the solid late race strength (that probably most people are missing when they don't align with Daniels' times) and how your 5K/10K times could probably be improved with more focus. I think it's a wonderful point you make about going with what you find more enjoyable and that's probably related to one's genetics. Being 48, I agree that you can develop more of the endurance and longer distance success - the 5K becomes more of a challenge to train for. You can still put in good 10K and Half work though.

All the best with your marathon! Nice work putting in all that good training.

Thanks a lot for all the answers, very helpful! I still have some weeks to decide. I will run the workouts according to my new Vdot (except Easy runs, often run them significantly slower than JDs suggestion) and if I manage to finish them without destroying myself, I might shoot for 2:45. Valencia is a fast course. Will give an update afterwards.

His estimated times are very realistic but his proposed training schedules for marahon needs another approach to give predicted times.

When I ran my PR of a 2:48, I was averaging 80 mpw during the meat of my training. 50-60 mpw got me a 3:06. Just food for thought.