Title.
I feel like it's very reasonable to run sub-3 while minimally changing the circumstances of one's (average) life. Running sub-2:50 is more commitment, and in general the dedication that one has to running grows with faster results. Obviously, someone running 2:1x is treating Running like a part (if not full)-time job. What about 2:30? 2:40?
klyachman wrote:
Title.
I feel like it's very reasonable to run sub-3 while minimally changing the circumstances of one's (average) life. Running sub-2:50 is more commitment, and in general the dedication that one has to running grows with faster results. Obviously, someone running 2:1x is treating Running like a part (if not full)-time job. What about 2:30? 2:40?
A part (if not near full)-time job that pays nothing.
Shouldn't take much for such a mediocre time.
klyachman wrote:
Title.
I feel like it's very reasonable to run sub-3 while minimally changing the circumstances of one's (average) life. Running sub-2:50 is more commitment, and in general the dedication that one has to running grows with faster results. Obviously, someone running 2:1x is treating Running like a part (if not full)-time job. What about 2:30? 2:40?
Requires too much time and energy. Their are better things to do with your life than to do all that training for a 2:30-2:40 marathon.
Most people running 2:30-2:40 are running 1-2h/day.
But compared to the average joe, it just means they don't watch TV, or less mindless scrolling on a phone. So honestly it doesn't require that much of a sacrifice.
Yeah I tend to agree with this. 4 days a week around 1hr. 2 around 1.5. 1 around 2. Consistency like that can get someone into the 2:30s/40s. 70-80mpw. You can do the training before work & have your evenings with your family/friends. I do think recovery adds an additional time component. It's important to eat well, sleep well, do injury prevention work, etc. But, at the end of the day, we're not talking about an OTQ. You don't have to go to extremes to run some pretty solid times. You just have to be intentional with blocking off the 1-2 hours to get the work in.
Starno wrote:
Most people running 2:30-2:40 are running 1-2h/day.
But compared to the average joe, it just means they don't watch TV, or less mindless scrolling on a phone. So honestly it doesn't require that much of a sacrifice.
Agreed. I'm a woman and I ran 2:43 while working toward tenure as an experimental physical chemist at a good research university. I worked probably 60 hrs/week, but training for the marathon required only 10-12 hrs/week. I was single, watched little TV, and fortunately we didn't have smartphones in those days, and I had plenty of time to train the necessary amount.
amkelley days she ran 10-12 hrs a week to get to 2:43. Sounds about right. It's not a huge commitment. I only ran about 8 or 9 / week hours to get down to 2:51 but was 50 at that time. I would guess 10-12 would have gotten me into the low 2:40s if I were younger. I think after that the time commitment and ancillary things (rest, active recovery, drills, lifting etc) becomes >>greater. I have much respect for the folks that can do that.
Who are you? How good a runner do you seem to be? What do you count as a big commitment? How old are you? What sort of running background do you have? There are a handful of guys who have run under 2:20 without much time invested at all. I had to work like crazy to get under 2:40.
Depends on talent. I knew an 18 year old (and he's not east African either) who ran a 2:40 at the end of his senior year of track without any specific training or even long runs above 13 miles and off ~45 mpw. And this wasn't even in a race - I biked 13.1 miles up on a trail and back next to him.
But he ended up breaking 14 before pogo shoes as an underclassman so far more talented than the normal hobbyjogger.
You can definitely run 2:40 while working full-time and treating running as just a hobby. I ran 2:42 something as a graduate student (which is essentially a full-time job) in what I felt like was a really bad race for me. I came through the 20 mile mark around 2:02 and hit the wall, which I attribute to not fueling at all during the race or not doing proper long runs (I kinda just got bored doing them and ended up doing too many "longish" tempo runs that would've been much more suited to running a good half.) But anyway, my training consisted of 60-90 minutes per day during the week with long runs most weekends, and a day completely off. So I think it's possible to run sub-2:40 without making your life revolve around running.
I ran 2:33 on 35 MPW about 10 years ago. I assume that I could have run 2:29 with modern shoes.