4 Hour Marathon: Long Run Question

The long run should be specific to the event being trained for. So, 20+ miles, no matter how long it takes.

I agree with Richard, on the other hand, I would not recommend running more than 3 hours.

Boston27 wrote:

I agree with Richard, on the other hand, I would not recommend running more than 3 hours.

You must be a lawyer. The poster would have to run at goal pace for 20 not to go over 3 hours.

otter wrote:

Boston27 wrote:

I agree with Richard, on the other hand, I would not recommend running more than 3 hours.

You must be a lawyer. The poster would have to run at goal pace for 20 not to go over 3 hours.

First, many well known and respected coaches advocate a long run going no further than 3 hours regardless of what the predicted finishing time is.

Secondly, how funny is it that a post about a 4 hour marathon has an ad at the bottom asking if you need music when "jogging".

I know a 2:15 guy who has told me many times in the past that you are begging for an injury once you go past 2:30 for the long run. I did notice that he has the people he trains doing one run of 2:45 for the first time this year though.

I've run a couple marathons just under 4 hours and my longest runs were 20 milers that took about 3:20.

Thanks for coming to my defense. The point is exactly as you note. I have a been running marathons for 30 years, I know that runs longer than 3 hours aren't going to improve performance and can lead to injury.

Lastly, to otter, thanks for picking up on the obfuscation. A four hour marathoner seeking advice is better off with your critique of me than the priciples embedded in the feedback. For your future pettiness, the insult would've been more effective had you asserted I was an economist.

Boston27 wrote:

Thanks for coming to my defense. The point is exactly as you note. I have a been running marathons for 30 years, I know that runs longer than 3 hours aren't going to improve performance and can lead to injury.

Lastly, to otter, thanks for picking up on the obfuscation. A four hour marathoner seeking advice is better off with your critique of me than the priciples embedded in the feedback. For your future pettiness, the insult would've been more effective had you asserted I was an economist.

Well, I was trying to be sarcastic and it went over both of your heads. You said you agree with Richard who wrote that the original poster should go 20+ miles no matter how long it takes, and then you said that you don't think the original poster should go over three hours. Do you see how this makes no sense. If the original poster ran 20 miles at marathon goal pace that would mean a run in excess of 3:10 in training. So pick one or the other is all I was trying to say. Sorry about the unabriged version but I guess nobody understood the first comment I made.

9 * 20 is 180 min/3 hrs. exactly.

9 minute pace is a 3:58 marathon.

Thanks for the feed-back. I did note the contradiction in the earlier posts. It seems that the suggestion is in fact to cap the long run at 3 hours or so, albeit at easy and not marathon pace. I'll pass it on.

3 hrs near to race pace.

A taper and adrenaline will see you thru on the day.

As someone who did not break 4 hours in this first and second marathons and then ran 3:59 and 3:48 in my next two, I advocate running up to 22-23 miles, but not on very hilly courses. Maybe 24 miles if it is a very joint friendly course like a rail trail. You've got to slow down from race pace, a minute or more per mile, but then get within 45 seconds of race pace in the last 3-5 miles. Pfitzinger's program has worked well for me.

You can probably get by with a few 20 milers if you regularly do some mid-week runs of 10-14 miles and either long tempo runs of 6-8 miles or tempo intervals of say 3 x 5km.

Doug E. wrote:

I know a 2:15 guy who has told me many times in the past that you are begging for an injury once you go past 2:30 for the long run. I did notice that he has the people he trains doing one run of 2:45 for the first time this year though.

Accomplished runners as a group obviously make better role models than fitness Gallowalkers and newbies, but this is one more reason not to assume someone's advice is valid merely on account of how fast he is. No one, quick or slow, is being reasonable when extrapolating something particular to his own experience, such as the don't-exceed-2 1/2-hours "rule," to the running population at large. In terms of liong-run duration (not distance), you probably don't *need* to exceed your marathon goal time, but you should play around to find out how well your body tolerates "very long" runs.