How difficult is it to run a sub 2.20 marathon?

Ok I looked up my training log from last year. Basically I couldn't train for 6 months due to sickness and exams so when I finally got around to training I had to start from scratch.

The mileage totals leading up to that 10k look like this

26, 28, 43, 37, 60, 60, 35, 65, 56, 53, 59, 61, 41, 70, 76, 55, 60, 22.

That's 18 weeks. Highest ever period of mileage for me.There were hardly any interval sessions before week 10, and I didn't schedule tempos but instead just picked up the pace whenever I felt good (once or twice a week max though).

Three weeks after the 10k I got a bad virus and couldn't run for 6 weeks so I never got to build on the fitness I had built up. Niggly injuries and other stuff means that I'm in about 34.30 shape now.

My coach used to have me do tons of VO2 max intervals which I felt my body wasn't able to handle for more than six weeks before I broke down. I used to run 40-45 mpw.

I think the getting sick and little injuries mean something. I looked at my old training logs and when I was hitting 40-50 mile weeks, I would get sick. I added up those 10 mile (sick) weeks with the 50 mile weeks and calculated the average and saw that I was really averaging 25 miles a week.

If you left those 6 months (or 6 weeks) of sickness in your weekly averaging, then I would say that that average is your starting point from which to increase 10% per week. This way you won't get injured so much, if at all. My two cents.

average no name runner wrote:

Nutella1 wrote:

Being able to run fast Marathons with lack of speed in the 5k is a myth. It doesn't happen.

YOU ARE FULL OF CRAP. I ran sub 2:20 (2:18 actually) before I broke 15 in the 5km. And I did try very very hard many times to break 15 in the 5km.

1. There are exceptions to the rule

2. I am sure you could have broken 15min on the day of your 2:18 if you ran a 5k instead of the M. You disagree?

Hard to say. For a plodder like me that could barely break 3:00, a sub-2:20 feels impossible. Much more so than a 4:30 mile (which I didn't quite do).

You need three thing to run under 2:20. 1) You must be genetically gifted. Very few people can do it. 2) You must train very hard even if you are gifted. You cannot just wing it. It's good that you have a plan but know it will be hard. 3) You must believe you can do it and it sounds like you have that one covered. Never give up if you know you can do it. There is a big difference between positive thinking and positive knowing. Good luck on your quest.

[quote]vin scully wrote:

Hard to say. For a plodder like me that could barely break 3:00, a sub-2:20 feels impossible. Much more so than a 4:30 mile (which I didn't quite do).

Congrats on breaking three! It was big one for me since I was 40.

what you don't understand, Nutella, is that you can get very comfortable running marathon pace and fall apart completely at anything below that pace if you are not training at faster than marathon pace. that is exactly what happens to hall when the leaders do surges. Hall (not to speak of Radcliffe) simply was not in 13:00 shape when he ran 59:43, although he probably would have been close had he been training for the 5k.

Supersonic, based on your training to get thus far I think 2:20 will be hard but not impossible. I have known several good (say 31m 10K) runners who ramped up 60 to 100+mpw in their early 20's and it transformed them for the Marathon to sub 2:20. BUT most do not react that way (I didn't!). The typical 31m guy reacts to this training by either coming out with 2;22 or something (whats the point!) or getting injured.

I'd say enjoy your running, get some miles in your legs the next 3-4 of years then give 100+ a shot for a few months and see what happens. Good Luck!

Nutella1 wrote:

average no name runner wrote:

YOU ARE FULL OF CRAP. I ran sub 2:20 (2:18 actually) before I broke 15 in the 5km. And I did try very very hard many times to break 15 in the 5km.

1. There are exceptions to the rule

2. I am sure you could have broken 15min on the day of your 2:18 if you ran a 5k instead of the M. You disagree?

I disagree. I ran a 3km time trial about 5 days before my 2:18 marathon and it was 9:06. When I train for the marathon, I only run tempo runs and long runs, which is what works for me.

I'm amazed at the amounts of responses on this post. What that this guy stated I believe is right on the mark. This all takes huge amounts of perseverance and commitment, and of course a little natural ability. And probably even just as important, is the ability to handle the mileage without getting injured. This is key. For the original poster on this, if you are serious, and still on the college program, stick with the interval training and anything focused on your leg speed/anerobic development. Don't skip this. It will help you. You have a good number of years to develop yourself as a marathoner, and if your will is good and you can handle the high mileage without geting injured, good things can happen. It will take sacrifice, a lot of focus, maybe some luck as well, but you never know what you can do till you take the shot.

To the OP,

another Kenyan went sub 2:04 today.

Sub 2:20 doesn't really mean $hit anymore, hasn't for a long time.

In the above mentioned race, sub 2:20 was top 45.

average no name runner wrote:

I disagree. I ran a 3km time trial about 5 days before my 2:18 marathon and it was 9:06. When I train for the marathon, I only run tempo runs and long runs, which is what works for me.

Well, maybe you're one of these exceptions I mentioned. On the other hand, in a well balanced taper, 5 days before the Marathon you would not be 100% fresh yet.

Its hard but achievable. Become a runner 1st before you think about being a marathoner. Run on a college team , they will pull you along to develop your running skills , enjoy the sport and the team. Plenty of time for marathoning in your young career. Logging a bunch of empty miles by yourself is not so easy.

Get your ass kicked in college , dont worry about some magic formula for milage when you prep for a marathon. If your serious post college get around a group of like minded runners with similar aspirations and athletic ability , you will pull each other towards the sub 2:20 goal.

supersonic wrote:

Basically I couldn't train for 6 months due to sickness and exams so when I finally got around to training I had to start from scratch.

Three weeks after the 10k I got a bad virus and couldn't run for 6 weeks so I never got to build on the fitness I had built up. Niggly injuries and other stuff means that I'm in about 34.30 shape now.

This is what will hold you back in my opinion. You may think that you are goal oriented and can stick to a difficult plan, but you also sound like you could be an excuse guy. Don't be that guy.

Saying that, I don't think you should go for the marathon anyway. You will miss out on so many great experiences by skipping college running and being on a team. If you're not good enough to make the university team, go to a JC for a couple years and hone your skills. Then go after your marathon. It will still be there when you're done.

Groundskeeper Willie wrote:

To the OP,

another Kenyan went sub 2:04 today.

Sub 2:20 doesn't really mean $hit anymore, hasn't for a long time.

In the above mentioned race, sub 2:20 was top 45.

What? 2:20 won't win the Olympics? OMG, thanks for telling me! I think I'll give up running!

For a properly conditioned Marathon runner, with 16-24 weeks of progressive mileage, with 2-3 runs of 90 minutes to 2hrs30+ a week, 2hrs20 requires the following.

1 A half marathon time in the vicinity of 67.20

2 A 10K time in the vicinity of 30.35

3 A 5K time in the vicinity of 14.42

4 A 3K time in the vicinity of 8.36

A 4.00 time over 1500 metres, or indeed 4.00 to 4.03 could convert to 8.36 3000 metres, or thereabouts. If the runner cannot beat 30.40 for 10k, he will be finding it hard to beat 2.20 unless he has extraordinary strength endurance.

If a runner is running 30.10 for 10k, or perhaps 66.20 for the half, yet only runs 2.20, then it is fair to say he is not doing enough relaxed longer running in his preparation.Marathon requires longer runs of 2hrs to 3 hrs in order to be effective over the distance, where the body adapts and responds to glycogen depletion after 100 minutes.

Had a guy in this neck of the woods (Vic. B.C., Canada) whio was high 31's for 10 km, don't know what his other short times were but, megamileage generally at a solid clip for a long time period - he netted 2:18 at Las Vegas years ago.

Weird that this thread was resurrected. But as it was, the OP should be at 2:25 this year. How's that going?

Yer gonna have to put in some 110 mile weeks