What Are My Chances of a 3:00 Marathon Within the Next Five Years?

It's more realistic for in the next year or two rather than when you are 45. High mileage is great but don't completely abandon the speed work.

I ran under a PR (sub 3, barely) at age 37. So I don't think age is your primary obstacle. But being 40 certainly won't help.

If you are running 80 miles a week, you definitely are putting in the necessary miles. But with a 3:30 time on 80 miles a week, I don't know if the marginal addition of 20 miles per week (to 100 mpw) will shave 30 minutes off your marathon time. Frankly, I don't think it will.

I think you'd be better off making sure your 80 miles per week are smart miles. I think you need to focus on lactate threshold and speed workouts (e.g. mile repeats).

It took me several years of training to break 3 hours. I ran 3:07 then 3:09 then 3:03 then 3:00 (ugh!) and finally broke 3.

In sum, I don't think mileage is your issue. What are your half marathon and 10K times? Do they predict that you have the potential to run 3:00 hours? To do that, you should be able to run about 1:23 to 1:24 half and a 37:30 10K.

Thanks for your reply. I should clarify that it was a gradual build up to 80 mpw. My mileage went from 40 to 80 within 10 months. I only hit 80 near my last marathon.

My plan is to now have a full year between 80 and 100mpw.

As for your question about 1/2 marathon and 10k times, I cannot answer because I trained solely for the marathon and did not race those other distances in the 10 months.

Right NOW, I am definitely not a 3:00 runner. I know this. I am more curious about whether my goal is realistic or not.

It sounds like I need to get the next year done before that assessment can be made?

I think your goal is realistic but I don't think it would hurt to race a few other distances to get a feel for different paces. I ran several sub-3 marathons when I was in my mid to late 40's. My highest mileage was approx 65-70 miles per week. I usually went to the track once a week doing mostly 400s or 800s and I'd often run a race 2-3 times a month (5K through 1/2 marathon) as hard workouts.

Old Slug,

I think you have a good chance. Make sure you look after the little things and avoid injury and illness. Uninterrupted training is going to be the key I'd say.

Good luck!

Thanks everyone!

You prob need to be in 1:20-1:22 half mara shape to run under 3 w/ confidence. you prob half enough volume in your program to run under 3 and you really run the risk of injury getting to 100 and trying to stay there for any lentgh of time. without knowing details of how you structure your training I would suggest like others have you need more threshold work and pace specific work. for example building to 12-14 mile sessions done at 6:20 pace. that is the type of session that tells you sub is doable esp if done alone.

At his age a 1:25 half is enough of an accomplishment to let him know he is close. 1:22 is probably impossible for him at this point.

Okay, since you were able to run up to 80 miles per week then it means you're going in the right direction in terms of appropriate preparation for the the marathon.

you're goal to try to run 80-100 miles for almost the entire year in the upcoming year can be a big mistake. no, do not do this!

Instead, aim to keep your miles in the 80-90 miles range for roughly 6-8 weeks only and alternate high 80-90's mile weeks with some 55-65 miles weeks to allow recovery. Furthermore, make sure that these high weeks are during your trainig for your marathon next spring. 6-8 weeks is a progression for you and that's what you're looking to do - progress.

Allow for more space in between your workouts. For example, if you run a track work out on Tuesday, then run another work out on Friday or Saturday to allow for proper recovery and to give you enough days to maintain higher volume. Keep your miles easy, a real jog.

From now until next year just maintain a comfortable level of 60-70 miles per week working on your 5k, 10K speeds.Take full rest days of no running at all every 14-21 days. Don't forget to leave 2-3 days in between hard workouts and don't forget to do tempo runs as well.

Not impossible. I think you can do this.

Definitely race other distances to get a sense for what your limiting factors are, though! If a given runner is doing 10k at 37:00, a weaker HM at 1:25, and having trouble breaking 3:00, I'd say that total mileage might be one of the main issues and look to up the weekly miles. On the other hand, if another 3:00:01 marathoner was doing 38:00 and 1:24, I'd take a good look at that runner's LT. Which kind are you?

Anyway, like some people above, I don't think that 80 mpw vs 100 is going to hold you back in this goal. I'd say keep up the excellent totals you're achieving, but before moving up to 85, 90, etc, make sure you've got the right quality things happening. And those are another post.

You can definitely do it. I broke 3:00 for the first time at 48, following Hadd's training principles. The right approach makes a huge, huge difference.

Thank you everyone for this good range of information and opinion. I appreciate it.

I disagree with those who suggest a greater focus on speed and less focus on volume. The only way to drop another 30 minutes is by dramatically increasing training volume (mileage) and losing any unnecessary body mass. Of course, the training shouldn't be just easy jogging, but should instead be, to a large extent, the kind of steady, tough running that Lydiard advocated. Faster running (marathon race pace or faster) can have its place in marathon training, but won't do much toward slicing 30 minutes off your marathon time. The big gains are made by increasing training volume. In your sitution and with your goals, you don't have the luxury of training methods that distract you from the primary training focus of consistently higher training volume at a steady pace.

The man is running 80 a week already! And you want him to "dramatically increase training volume"??? You mean you want him to get injured?

It doesn't take 80 miles a week to break 3 hours. He's 40, not 60. I know plenty of young masters runners who do it on less than that.

No offense to the OP, but I don't know many people who run 80 miles a week and can only run a 3:30. I would focus more on tempo runs and doing some 10Ks and half marathons, and I'm sure that will improve the time.

You're wrong.

First, he said that he "hit" 80 miles in a week just before his last marathon. That's not the same as training 80 mpw. I'm guessing that his real average training volume in the months leading up to his PR was around 60 mpw. Increasing that to 100 mpw could result in dramatic gains in marathon performance, although a 30-minute improvement is by no means guaranteed. On the other hand, adding tempo runs and shorter races, as you suggest, isn't going to come close to improving his marathon time by 30 minutes.

Second, you have no idea what it takes for this particular runner to break three hours. Maybe it does take 80 mpw, or 100 mpw, or 120 mpw and sleeping in an altitude tent every night. For me, 80 mpw probably would have put me at about 2:30 when I was in my 20s or early 30s. To go under 2:20, I probably needed at least 100 mpw for extended periods. So that's what I did. When I returned to running as a "young master," I could have run under three hours on less than 80 mpw and some tempo runs and short races. But sub-3 was not my goal. So I put in over 100 mpw and ran 2:28 (a disappointment, but such is life) at the age of 41.

An issue that has not been discussed here, but should be considered by the OP, is his motivation for wanting to put so much time and effort into achieving the goal of a sub-3 marathon, especially when achieving that goal is by no means assured. When I hear an older runner talk about putting in 100 mile weeks to achieve a competitive goal that seems fairly modest, I want to know what else is going on -- or, more importantly, what else is missing -- in that person's life. That's an uncomfortable topic, but probably much more important than the subject of how to turn a 40-year-old 3:30 marathoner into a 45-year-old sub-3 marathoner.

Just to add the point that mileage isn't the only answer.

At 39 years old I nipped under the three hours on the London Marathon race clock by about 30s. As it was before race chips you could take about another 4 minutes off my time before I actually crossed the start line.

Within the next 12 months I got my half marathon time to 1.18 and my 10 mile time to just under 59 mins. That was on average weekly mileage of 35 mpw. When I trained for the marathon I peaked at 50 mpw. Horses for courses.

I would certainly suggest doing plenty of shorter races to help with speed endurance and race experience.

Good luck.

[quote]An issue that has not been discussed here, but should be considered by the OP, is his motivation for wanting to put so much time and effort into achieving the goal of a sub-3 marathon, especially when achieving that goal is by no means assured. When I hear an older runner talk about putting in 100 mile weeks to achieve a competitive goal that seems fairly modest, I want to know what else is going on -- or, more importantly, what else is missing -- in that person's life. That's an uncomfortable topic, but probably much more important than the subject of how to turn a 40-year-old 3:30 marathoner into a 45-year-old sub-3 marathoner./]

Wow. There seems to be a lot of not so subtle judgment here. I lead a full life. I have a family I love and spend a great deal of time with, have a career I enjoy and a past-time (running) that I absolutely love. I have had the good fortune to have a job with some flexibility allowing me to spend more time running.

I love running. Is that a foreign idea here? I think not! I want to improve and enjoy the challenge of trying.

In terms of training, I will say that I have done the intervals and tempo but, at 40mpw, I was not improving - not in the least. In contrast, building my mileage up to PEAK at 80mpw, I have found all my training paces to be coming down roughly every month.

Miles seem to be working for me so I want to see where this will take me.

Thanks all. I am enjoying the conversation.

come on wrote:

The man is running 80 a week already! And you want him to "dramatically increase training volume"??? You mean you want him to get injured?

It doesn't take 80 miles a week to break 3 hours. He's 40, not 60. I know plenty of young masters runners who do it on less than that.

No offense to the OP, but I don't know many people who run 80 miles a week and can only run a 3:30. I would focus more on tempo runs and doing some 10Ks and half marathons, and I'm sure that will improve the time.

You are correct, Sir.

Daniels has a chart in Running Formula that shows that all things being equal(wght., base, training plan) there is a law of diminishing return as far as volume. You have achieved more than 90% of your potential at 70 to 80 mpw.

You will still improve above that volume but will probably not gain 16 to 20% in performance as hoped by the original poster.

If he were primarily a speed guy who needed 'resistance' training ala Canova he would likely be running about 2:50 now off the gradual intelligent reasonably high volume he has used.

He has the base and a longer time at base may bring more improvement but as someone who went from 3:20 to mid 2:50's in my late forties on about 3 years of training, I would say that he needs some long, comfortably hard segments in his long runs and some long tempo repeats. An example would be a ten mile ladder of 4 mi, 3mi, 2mi and 1m, separated by 2 to 5 minutes of easy running.

especially when achieving that goal is by no means assured. When I hear an older runner talk about putting in 100 mile weeks to achieve a competitive goal that seems fairly modest

------

The statement above shows we have very different perspectives on success in running. I imagine you are a very accomplished runner. For you, a 3:00 marathon would probably be a disappointment. For me, and probably 99% of the population (i.e. not JUST the people on this forum!), a 3:00 marathon is FAST and would be a big deal.

So, can I do it? I don't know. But I'd sure like to try and, if I succeed, I will be very happy. Probably almost as happy as someone else breaking under 2:30.

But certainly not as happy as Haile is today, I imagine.