low mileage sub 3 hour marathon

duathlete wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

outsiderunner;

Would I be better to replace my (poorly executed) intervals with a 12km or so run, and work on increasing my long run distance over time? Or are the intervals really useful training at 3 hour pace?

Those intervals are not useful at all for marathon training.

Yeah, as others have said, your 17:xx 5k is way better than 1:27, and if you're already falling apart in the half marathon, you have no chance in the full.

Slow Bro wrote:

duathlete wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

outsiderunner;

Would I be better to replace my (poorly executed) intervals with a 12km or so run, and work on increasing my long run distance over time? Or are the intervals really useful training at 3 hour pace?

Those intervals are not useful at all for marathon training.

Yeah, as others have said, your 17:xx 5k is way better than 1:27, and if you're already falling apart in the half marathon, you have no chance in the full.

So would my best approach, if I were to keep running 3 days a week, be to increase my long run and replace the intervals with what? Longer, slower intervals, or more steady mileage? Disregarding the specific goal of a sub 3 hour time, what approach is most likely to contribute to my best marathon time? To be honest I don't really enjoy the intervals, and much prefer steady kms, so I wouldn't really do them unless I felt they would improve my overall conditioning and thus my marathon or half marathon times.

Trying to be nice and not be a jerk (like I normally am) but even if you were running much more (say 80-100 kpw) I would say it would be very hard to break 3:00 if you are running 1:28 for half-mar.

Others would know better than me what half-mar time equates to 2:59 , but I would say 1:23-24-25 would be the very minimum that a higher-mileage person would need to run 2:59. A lower-mileage person probably needs to be even faster.

If 3 running days a week is most you are comfortable with then I would suggest

Tuesday- 12k steady

Wednesday- 10k Progression- start at easy pace and increase speed steadily with last mile at 5k pace

Saturday- Long Run as outlined in earlier post

IMO, Running back to back days prompts muscle adaptation.

With a three day a week running schedule I would do one fast group ride and one long solo ride to maximize cardio fitness.

Again, and not being a jerk, the best approach to maximizing marathon potential is simply to run more often. Yes, injury risks and time/interest constraints must be considered but I would say 4 days a week is the minimum required to see real performance gains.

duathlete wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

outsiderunner;

Would I be better to replace my (poorly executed) intervals with a 12km or so run, and work on increasing my long run distance over time? Or are the intervals really useful training at 3 hour pace?

Yes, I would replace the intervals, and increase the distance of the long run. For me, the slow but steady increase in my long run worked wonders. I adapted rather quickly, and my pace increased over time, too.

I agree with the comment about muscle adaptation--back-to-back runs work. iI would do this at least once per week. When I was on a 3-4 day per week program, and almost never running two days in a row, my training suffered. I was decent, but I became a different runner when I added sensible stress.

outsiderunner wrote:

duathlete wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

outsiderunner;

Would I be better to replace my (poorly executed) intervals with a 12km or so run, and work on increasing my long run distance over time? Or are the intervals really useful training at 3 hour pace?

Yes, I would replace the intervals, and increase the distance of the long run. For me, the slow but steady increase in my long run worked wonders. I adapted rather quickly, and my pace increased over time, too.

I agree with the comment about muscle adaptation--back-to-back runs work. iI would do this at least once per week. When I was on a 3-4 day per week program, and almost never running two days in a row, my training suffered. I was decent, but I became a different runner when I added sensible stress.

Fantastic; any excuse to reduce interval training frequency. My reluctance to train >3 days a week is from my fear of overuse injuries, which I have suffered in past higher (40-60km/week) mileage training bouts.

To attempt to get as much 'bang from my buck' I have been running pretty much all of my (non-interval) running at around 4'00"-4'20'/km. Daniels calculator suggests a slower pace but I feel comfortable at that faster pace and don't find injuries an issue given my current 3 days a week of running. Is this pacing sensible given my low mileage or am I better to modify it?

I could not agree more--I accept any excuse to recuce interval training. I have little affection for this type of running, but it sure does work for a 5k/10k guy.

I also have the same fear of overuse injuries, but I think a sensible approach can get you safely through a 4-5 day per week program. Do what is comfortable for you, though. At my peak this winter, and before my injury, I was training 6-7 days per week. I had never envisioned myself doing such a thing. Yes, I got injured, but it was on a very cold day...probably too cold to run. I also needed to strenghten my hips and glutes. This is important when building mileage.

In my recovery, I have been running three days and biking two days. It has worked fairly well, but I admit I am surprised that my VO2 max has suffered so much. I say this becuase my bike sessions are pretty sweaty. They are helpful, but all I could muster in a hilly 5k recently was 20:18. I thought surely I would be around 19:45. It was a warm morning, but I hate excuses.

In any case, I have retained some endurance, but the road to sub-3 requires much more work.

To answer your question: I think you pace sounds okay, especially running only three days per week. Most of all, run at a fairly comfortable pace, and gradually build that steady state speed for your marathon.

All the best...

Sorry about the typos. I am a stinky typist, especially on an iPad.

Before I forget...the Daniels calculator has me pretty far out, too...8:00+ territory for easier stuff. Even coming off the injury, this pace feel more or less like walking. I probabaly run my easy runs a bit too hard, but that slow stuff messes with my stride, and with my mind, too. With a three-day schedule, though, you are dealing with something different...getting lots of rest.

Question about your overuse injuries. Did you ever decrease the intensity of your running while increasing the volume? People tend to blame mileage for their injuries, when in fact, it is probably intensity (speedwork, tempo, doing your easy runs too fast, etc.) that is causing the problems. No one seems to increase volume while simultaneously decreasing intensity, and so they state "I can't run that much! I'll get injured!" when in fact it is "I can't run that fast! I'll get injured!"

To answer your question, no, I really don't think you can break 3 hours on such low volume, despite the fact that your times at the shorter distances are good. The cycling is great for overall fitness, but if you want to run 26.2 miles as fast as possible, then you just really need to run a lot more.

All of my overuse injuries (patellofemoral syndrome - mild, achilles tedonitis - severe) arose when I was running more kms (40-60 a week) at a much slower pace, around 5.5-6 mins/km. Since changing to less mileage and faster running around 2 years ago, combined with cycling, I seem to suffer less injuries and be capable of running faster over all distances up to the half. Have not yet tried a marathon with this lower mileage training.

The consensus seems to be to drop the intervals, but most plans I see for 3 hour marathons seem to include speedwork. Is this because whilst speedwork is handy the mileage is a much higher priority for the marathon, and thus if one has to choose they should choose mileage over speedwork?

I managed a not sub3 on low mileage this year (3:00:15). I only averaged 50km/week but I kept the quality up and was swimming and cycling.

Based on your PBs, it doesn't look good for you. I managed a 37:20 10k and a 1:21:50 HM but still messed up the marathon. I know I could have done it without 'stomach' issues and poor pacing, but 1:27:54 to sub 3h on low mileage sounds pretty unlikely to me.

3x1km intervals are a bit weak too, try 7x1km or 1-2-3-2-1 pyramid. I personally would rather do 7x1km at 3:45 with 90s rest than 3x1km at 3:30 with 5 mins rest, especially for marathon training.

at about 3h marathon level, easy pace of 8m/mile is about right. It's only 72s a mile slower than goal race pace. The issue for you is that if you are running 24km a week, then you probably shouldn't be doing any easy miles.

If you started running 80km+ a week, you would probably appreciate that easy pace a bit more!

duathlete wrote:

All of my overuse injuries (patellofemoral syndrome - mild, achilles tedonitis - severe) arose when I was running more kms (40-60 a week) at a much slower pace, around 5.5-6 mins/km. Since changing to less mileage and faster running around 2 years ago, combined with cycling, I seem to suffer less injuries and be capable of running faster over all distances up to the half. Have not yet tried a marathon with this lower mileage training.

The consensus seems to be to drop the intervals, but most plans I see for 3 hour marathons seem to include speedwork. Is this because whilst speedwork is handy the mileage is a much higher priority for the marathon, and thus if one has to choose they should choose mileage over speedwork?

Yes, absolutely, volume over speedwork. For the marathon, efficiency is a lot more important than it is for the shorter distances. The only way you can build efficiency is by running a lot. You can build overall fitness with the cycling and lifting, but it doesn't help your running efficiency.

NUFCrichard wrote:

at about 3h marathon level, easy pace of 8m/mile is about right. It's only 72s a mile slower than goal race pace. The issue for you is that if you are running 24km a week, then you probably shouldn't be doing any easy miles.

If you started running 80km+ a week, you would probably appreciate that easy pace a bit more!

Thanks for the input. I agree with you, and see the issue for what it is. I am running only three days per week in this transition period--from recovery to a marathon phase. In about two weeks, my marathon phase will begin (24 weeks of training), and I will peak at 70 mpw.

Hopefully, my body will not balk at the mileage. In know I can do 50-55 mpw...but the marathon requires more, at least in my perspective and in my coach's perspective. It is a conundrum--the only thing that will get you to that good marathon time is that which may perhaps injure you. However, I think I am stronger and perhaps smarter at this point. If I were younger, I probably would not worry so much about it.

I did it on 40 mpw but my 5k and 10k times were much faster then your's.

The fall off of your half shows the lack of endurance.

However your present 5-10k predict sub three.

Run 40 mpw with and focus on marathon goal pace runs every other week. 10-12 miles at 6:50 pace ( just under three hour pace ) during the week I would do at least one other MPR over 7-8 miles.

Alternate weekends, run a race or something that focuses on improving your 5k and 10k.

I wouldn't worry too much about long runs. Maybe every 3rd week go two hours at an easy pace, but no mandatory. You need pace work.

Oh and stop being a duathlete for a while. Just run.