weight v height v speed

Don't stress about hitting a certain weight. If you've done a 2:38 already you're in pretty good shape. Focus on training - if you train properly and eat sensibly your weight should take care of itself.

Good luck with the 2:25.

You are a bit heavy - you should weigh around 150-155.

Good luck.

Ghost in Korea

tassieEFC wrote:

Don't stress about hitting a certain weight. If you've done a 2:38 already you're in pretty good shape. Focus on training - if you train properly and eat sensibly your weight should take care of itself.

Good luck with the 2:25.

That all sounds real nice, but the truth is, especially as you approach 30 and beyond, you HAVE to pay attention to calorie intake and weight if you want to perform well. Same goes for the oft-told "eat until you're full" line. If I ate until I was full, I'd be AT LEAST 15-20 pounds overweight. Teenage metabolism doesn't last forever.

I've found the old 2 pounds per inch of height to be a good guide. When I'm at or a bit under this weight, I seem to race well. When I'm over it, I race poorly.

steptoe wrote:

i,m 6'2' and 168 lbs.my question is....what would be a good weight for me to aim for by this time next year if i have ambitions of running a 2:25 marathon.

my pr for the distance is 2:38 for boston this year.i,m 31 years old and have been running 18 months.i was 185lbs prior to running.i am currently running 75mpw and will be increasing it gradually till i'm doing 110mpw by march 08.

any suggestions of calorie intake and what type of foods.

any advice greatly accepted.

great site this

from ireland.

Theres a good article in this month's Running Times with marathon height and weight averages for US elites v. world class runners. The comparisons for weekly mileage and quality work are also there with the surprising data that trials qualifiers average about 90 mpw.

Be yourself.

You wouldn't go out and buy a suit for a 5'9" man because the average man is 5'9". Now that would be stupid, wouldn't it?

Train to run 2:25, don't change your diet to run 2:25. Mold your diet to support your training.(it's not all that complex)

By the way, how did you come up with 2:25?

I suggest you train and believe that your potential is limitless.

(Hope for the fatties: I ran faster then 2:25 and was 5-10 and over 150)

I don't know what folks assume this fellow is fat - he may just be well muscled. I ran my PR's weighing 170 at 6'4". I am now down to like 155-160 but it is almost all muscle I have lost.

2:25 .going on the irish marathon championships the last 8 years,that time would get me into the top 3.i'm a realist and to try for 2:20 or under maybe too fast too soon as i'm still new to the sport.i've never done speed work on the track or road,just used to head out the door for runs.i did always do longruns leading up to boston.that is why,with speedwork and being that bit lighter i think 2:25 can be attainable.

i look thin in clothes,but am stronger looking out of them,than in them if you get my meaning.

Mr. No Name wrote:

tassieEFC wrote:

Don't stress about hitting a certain weight. If you've done a 2:38 already you're in pretty good shape. Focus on training - if you train properly and eat sensibly your weight should take care of itself.

Good luck with the 2:25.

That all sounds real nice, but the truth is, especially as you approach 30 and beyond, you HAVE to pay attention to calorie intake and weight if you want to perform well. Same goes for the oft-told "eat until you're full" line. If I ate until I was full, I'd be AT LEAST 15-20 pounds overweight. Teenage metabolism doesn't last forever.

I've found the old 2 pounds per inch of height to be a good guide. When I'm at or a bit under this weight, I seem to race well. When I'm over it, I race poorly.

"2 pounds an inch." That may work for a 5'9 person, but stupid for someone 6'2. You really think height and weight are linear, or did it occur to you that we exist in 3 dimensions?

kartelite wrote:

Mr. No Name wrote:

That all sounds real nice, but the truth is, especially as you approach 30 and beyond, you HAVE to pay attention to calorie intake and weight if you want to perform well. Same goes for the oft-told "eat until you're full" line. If I ate until I was full, I'd be AT LEAST 15-20 pounds overweight. Teenage metabolism doesn't last forever.

I've found the old 2 pounds per inch of height to be a good guide. When I'm at or a bit under this weight, I seem to race well. When I'm over it, I race poorly.

"2 pounds an inch." That may work for a 5'9 person, but stupid for someone 6'2. You really think height and weight are linear, or did it occur to you that we exist in 3 dimensions?

That's why I called it a "guide", not a hard and fast rule. Besides, 148 lbs. for 6'2" doesn't sound unreasonable for a fit marathoner to me.

You are a bit heavy - you should weigh around 150-155.

Good luck.

Ghost in Korea

------------------------------------

Thats a stupid comment

Stupid comment? yes, Ghost is full of 'em

steptoe wrote:

i,m 6'2' and 168 lbs.my question is....what would be a good weight for me to aim for by this time next year if i have ambitions of running a 2:25 marathon.

my pr for the distance is 2:38 for boston this year.i,m 31 years old and have been running 18 months.i was 185lbs prior to running.i am currently running 75mpw and will be increasing it gradually till i'm doing 110mpw by march 08.

any suggestions of calorie intake and what type of foods.

any advice greatly accepted.

great site this

from ireland.

It's not a question anyone can answer here. What is your build?

Generally, the best Marathon runners have very low bodyfat. How skinny should you go? that's up to you.

Titan wrote:

You are a bit heavy - you should weigh around 150-155.

Good luck.

Ghost in Korea

------------------------------------

Thats a stupid comment

No, it isn't. For most people running distances, best performances will be had with BMI levels of 18.5-20.5, i.e., the low end of the govenrment's healthy range. 18.5 for 6'2" is a little under 150.

In my program (college), we use 5% body fat (by immersion) as the real lower limit, and we don't bother with this unless an athlete (male or female) is under BMI 20. People like Tergat and Kastor actually have BMI levels pushing the envelope, BUT they have RDs and other professionals helping them, which most "normal" people do not have.

I'm not denying the Female Athlete Triad and such, but beyond a certain point it is much easier to raise relative VO2 and relative LT by dropping some weight than to increase these in absolute terms. One of the tricks is to do this slowly--not more than 1 pound/wk for a number of weeks--and to keep protein levels up so you do NOT lose strength or recovery ability.

Same thing applies to sprinters. If you can reduce body fat without losing strength, you will get faster. See Michael Johnson with 4-5% BF when competing. See Allyson Felix, presently borderline anorexic by weight.

Coach D, it depends on the guys build. A freind of mine is one inch taller than me, but many pounds heavier, but with lower bodyfat, so you can't give a number (poundage) to a guy you have never seen, based on his height.

I agree with the one pound per week max fat loss, to retain strength.

Derek Clayton.. 160lbs

too fat

I'm a college coach and I don't want to get out of my depth here. But if I take a college distance guy running 32 for 10000 (which Dr. Daniels equations imply a VO2max of ~67), THEN drop 10% of weight, the projected performance improvement is to just under 30. You don't usually see this magnitude of effect because NCAA 10000 runners don't have 10% of body weight to sacrifice without getting into the unhealthy range. But if you can do this, the effect is very significant, and very difficult to duplicate through training in the same time period.

THIS is why those of us coaching spend so much time harping on proper diet to college athletes....alas, with much less effect than we'd like.

I don't think you are going to get out of your depth Coach D. It's all hypothetical, you're opinions, backed by some useful information are valuable.

I would guess that there are a lot of college guys with 15-17% bodyfat running in the 32 minute range. For them a 10% weight loss could realistically give a 10% improvement, if done sensibly.

The runner has to want that kind of improvement without getting too obsessive. And such a combination of ambition and common sense is very rare.

Man just worry about training, Allen Colepepper is 6 and 130. KK is 5'5'' and 125. KK has the faster pr.