Do you know runners who run 3:20 marathons off 100mpw training??

As opposed to running for President, right?

According to Mercier:

http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/Mercier/instructions.html

3:20 for a man is about 2:41 for a woman.

It's pretty accurate for other distances (Mercier).

And no way is a 20:00 for a woman equal to 18:30 for a man.. more like 20:00 is closer to 17:00 for a guy, or possibly even lower than that.

No way. Face it, women are less competitive. It's far easier to be a decent female runner than it is to be a decent male runner. A 20 minute 5k is slow. 17 for a guy isn't great but it's far better than 20 minutes for a woman.

Let's face it, when you have women running low 14's for 5000 and 2:15 for a marathon, there is no way you can realistically say that a female 3:20 marathon is equivalent to a 2:40. Total joke. Just because there are the same number of male 2:40 marathoners as female 3:20 marathoners does not mean they are equal.

There was a thread recently devoted to the question of how far could the posters hold Geb's marathon WR pace. Now, for me the answer these days is about 800 meters. Even at my best the answer was about 3k - not quite, though. And here's the thing: I trained hard,yes over 120 miles per week to run my 2:27. Do I suck? Yes, compared to Geb; I always have. The same is true for 99% of the posters on this site. This morning, though, I waddled through a beautiful day on my 2 hour run - a measly 15 miles in all - the rising sun streaming through the changing leaves while I was feeling the bracing chill of fall and I was no less happy than I would be if I were as talented as Geb. I bet most of us feel the same way.

3:20 is not too bad, by the way. It takes more than a year to get the full benefit of high-mileage. If she runs under 3:00 at some point she'll be in a position to win a lot of marathons out there. In any case only she can say whether it's worth it. I bet she thinks it is, though. And unless you depend on your race performances to put food on the table that's the only thing that matters.

The differences of opinion on this thread are typical on this message board along with the willingness of some very good runners to describe themselves as having 'sucked' even if he or she has run nearly well enough to qualify for the Olympic trials in a huge sporting country.

The problem seems to arise between posters who are athletes who have taken up running and folks who have always been runners.

Reading this message board I come away with the impression that there are many readers like me who are not pencil thin, small boned and started cross country and track in junior high. A 3:20 woman most likely on her way to much faster times without a long background in running is part of a very select class of athlete. She may have been a soccer player, swimmer or couch potato as a student.

How the heck could I poo on her efforts.

To the 2:27 guy above,

You do not suck. I have probably not met in person more than 2 runners as fast as you and I've completed 20 marathons, a few of them under three hours. There is no need to cow tow to the running snobs.

A scratch golfer is proud of his ability earned through years of hard work and doesn't feel the need to exclaim after a good round that he 'sucks' compared to Tiger Woods.

A pianist who can play a good piece of Bach for his friends and relatives does not end the performance by saying, "I hope you liked it but of course I suck like crap compared to Mozart."

Mileage takes a long time to work! After ONLY one year of quality training, she took almost an hour off her time. In 5-6 YEARS, how fast can she get? Who knows? Maybe 2:40s for all we know.

Is she crazy? Yeah, a bit. But, yes, actually, I do know other runners that are similar to her. For me, I think having a meaningful job is important to happiness in life, but I admit to quitting jobs or not taking jobs that would interfere too much with my running.

Thank you, gg. I don't really think I suck ,though. (O.K. maybe the way I'm running lately, I do now... but that's a different story). I do know I used to be good. My point, though, is that excellence is necessarily relative. If I had run 2:27 80 years ago I would have been the best in the world - or close to it. One hundred years from now, Geb will possibly be regarded as great 'for his time'. I don't think I speak for only myself when I say that running has profoundly enriched my life quite regardless of my competitive record. I bet the woman who ran 3:20 feels that way too. That's what I was trying to say, anyway.

where is her blog?

For interest,here is a true real life male/female comparison for pb marathon times.Husband/wife couple.Both trained on much the same type of program/mileage.

Male 33yrs old 2h33m09s

Female 38 yrs old 3h05m33s.

As the times get faster the differential tends to decrease,the faster the time the greater the decrease.

My years of experience and knowledge of many male/female racers have suggested a half hour differential is common at the male 2h30m level.

SoI think the lady has done pretty well to date and hopefully will get her sub 3h time eventually.