I Never Realized How Thin-Skinned Slow Runners Are -- thanks, Deadspin

Thank you, wouldn't it be great now if this happened more often around here.

Now a Coach wrote:

Reg fields wrote:

I'm going to change up my routine and do my long runs slower this year and I'll do multiple 20 milers so I'm doing what I can on the routine front.

I still say most males in this forum could've broken 3 with my training so genetics is a factor.

It's probably your diet or inadequate training.

No need to do multiple 20 milers.

I guess we'll never truly know since I made several overall changes but I did also significantly improve my diet in order to lose the additional pounds. Thanks again everyone, I found this to be a very helpful thread.

Running a 3:05 marathon is easy. Training for it is not.

For a 30y.o. "runner", someone who has averaged 50mpw for 5-10 years, throwing in a taper and banging out 3:05 is probably "easy".

For a "normal person", who has averaged about 3mpw for 5-10 years and is now cranking it up to 30mpw for a whole 16 weeks... yeah, 4:05 might be really hard, unless they are fit from something else and/or ridiculously talented.

How's this for size...

"Nearly any non-obese, able-bodied person can easily run a BQ. All they have to do is hire a coach and train hard for 3 years."

Because really, with no base and no idea of how to self-coach, that's what most people need.

Also, the difference between someone who runs

Muebele wrote:

I am shocked at how arrogant fast runners can be. For the majority of the world, running a marathon is hard and running at the paces needed for boston is harder. That is why most marathon runners don't qualify. Most people on this site act like people who don't qualify are lazy slob. They are not, they are not fast runners.

But remember, marathons and most races are run for everybody, not just the ones up front.

I coach at a club which is mainly hobby joggers/ weekend warriors - 400 members

How many turned up for hill reps last Thurs when it was raining, 10

This shows how pathetic runners are. Why would they waste time and money (Boston probably costs around $2000 after entry, flight, hotel, food) and then still come up with the short end of the stick?

SKINNY/SCRAWNY, looking like a woman, not BUFF at all.

Who would want that?

I didn't even read the article. But the "Deadspin" article is incredibly lame, stupid, insulting and lame. Do they ever reject any submissions over there?

Runners are not people wrote:

For a "normal person", who has averaged about 3mpw for 5-10 years and is now cranking it up to 30mpw for a whole 16 weeks... yeah, 4:05 might be really hard, unless they are fit from something else and/or ridiculously talented.

Bob Kennedy trained "three or four days a week and running 32 to 33 miles a week" before his NYC marathon.

Before that he was running "for a half-hour at a time, but only intermittently, starting for two or three weeks, then stopping for eight or 10."

He was 6 minutes slower than his BQ.

This thread is completely against the grain of Letsrun: links to an article which is actually funny, then a poster actually uses proffered advice to get his sub-3:00 AND gets back to us on it. Mind = blown!!

I just had a breakthrough run the other day and am seriously considering a run at sub-3:00 next year, which would be my first marathon since 1980. Some great advice on fueling and mileage, etc.. here.

Reg, did you use the socks or have any calf issues?

when the commenter says how hard he worked, he does not mention how many miles per week he ran. I would be very surprised to see more than a few non-boston qualifiers running more than maybe 40-50 mpw and hugely surprised to see them running a consistent 80-100mpw. How can you say that you worked that hard on half the mileage and much less speedwork?