How many mpw to break 3 hrs in the Marathon?

maybe 50 mpw over 3 or 4 months if you are talented?

You're going to get a wide variety of responses on this. Some can do it on 50, some 70-80, some close to 100. For you depends on training history, aerobic endurance, talent and recent PRs.

I checked my training log from 30 years ago and I did it running 50-60 a week. A lot depends on natural talent. I have a friend who trained more than myself and never beat 3:01. I ran 70 miles a week later and ran 2:45.

If you have solid running fitness already, say sub 18 5K then I would guess about 60 mpw.

Way more info needed, beginning with your age and how long you have been running. Also, recent PRs would help, as well as your thoughts on if you are still in the initial few years of running and still on the "getting better every race" period, or are you someone that has been running for 10+ years and have been trying (and failing) to break 3 hours for years.

As much as you can safely handle would best, especially if you're trying to do your best marathon performance. This training plan from coolrunning.com suggests 40-60mpw (http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_4/129.shtml). If you can run 18:30-18:45 for 5K, 39min. for 10K, and 1:24 half-marathon, you've got the required speed to break 3hrs. cicirunner on YouTube, despite, at the time, having a 4:40ish mile, 16:30 5K, and 32:00-33:00 10k, it took him like 3 attempts to finally break 3 for the marathon (3:07, then 3:01-3:04, then 2:48-2:58, I forget the last one). He runs 50mpw, but is also a triathlete, so he does lots of swimming and cycling. I hope this helps, and thanks for reading.

I am also interested in the constistency, with the difference of the OP im very new so I was wondering if anyone knows for how many weeks the 60-70 range training is?

1 month? 2 ,3 ,4 ,5?

It took me a 12 week program that peaked at 70mpw. I don't think of myself as a good runner but a sub 3 hour does put one in the top 20% or so, if not better.

joho wrote:

It took me a 12 week program that peaked at 70mpw. I don't think of myself as a good runner but a sub 3 hour does put one in the top 20% or so, if not better.

I would think it would be much higher than that. I thought I read somewhere that only 1% of marathoners break 3.

I run 3-7 days out of the year depending if I am training for something.

2 years after starting up, I did my first marathon plan. First few weeks were around 20-25 mpw, and I started 4 months before the race.

Longest week was 46 miles, average was around 40. Ran 2:54.

If I could have any advice, it would be to train for a 3 hour race, not a marathon, if that makes sense.

So on your long run, the goal is to progress to running for 3 hours or more at a time, somewhat comfortably (as comfortable as that can be...we're all crazy)

Likewise, make your tempo days more like practice for a long race too. So either a shorter run earlier in the day so you have something in your legs pre-workout, or at least a long warm-up (like and hour easy running) before going into a long tempo (like 8-12 miles)

dfmndsmsfd wrote:

I would think it would be much higher than that. I thought I read somewhere that only 1% of marathoners break 3.

The percentage thing would be accurate if every person that toes the line at every marathon (or any other distance) was doing so for competitive reasons and the goal was to complete it as fast as they can.

However as we all know, less than 15-20% (at best) of people who enter races have that goal. The vast majority of race entrants are there for fun, simple fitness, social aspects, and the charitable causes.

If you rate your running with the masses to provide an idea of how "good" you are, it just won't work. A three hour marathon is not even close to the top percentiles of people that actually give a damn about what their time will be. Don't compare your times with those who are just trying to finish, carrying around cameras and lining up at the back so they don't get bowled over. What you are attempting and what they are attempting are not the same.

hard to answer wrote:

You're going to get a wide variety of responses on this. Some can do it on 50, some 70-80, some close to 100. For you depends on training history, aerobic endurance, talent and recent PRs.

Well if any tw*t does suggest 100m/wk to jog a 2.59 they need help.

dfmndsmsfd wrote:

joho wrote:

It took me a 12 week program that peaked at 70mpw. I don't think of myself as a good runner but a sub 3 hour does put one in the top 20% or so, if not better.

I would think it would be much higher than that. I thought I read somewhere that only 1% of marathoners break 3.

Wow, I'm practically elite.

Wow, hobby joggers are really pulling this sport down, aren't they.

I'm at 1%er at something.

gosh thank you all for the answers ! I read so much bs about letsrun on other websites yet i haven't found any undeserved trolling yet many decent to excellent opinions / answers!

I did it on 30 miles/week.

Sub3 wrote:

gosh thank you all for the answers ! I read so much bs about letsrun on other websites yet i haven't found any undeserved trolling yet many decent to excellent opinions / answers!

Were you looking for me?

Seriously, two points:

1) That sub-3 = top 1% is pure and utter BS spouted by some pathetic slow hobby jogger who simply wants to boost his ego. Probably some JV runner in HS who couldn't even crack the top 50% of his HS team all of a sudden wanting to feel elite.

2) Did I just read some idiot above recommending you start off with a 7-8 mile run before progressing into a 10-18 mile tempo run? WTF are you nuts? This place sometimes...

formerD1 wrote:

2) Did I just read some idiot above recommending you start off with a 7-8 mile run before progressing into a 10-18 mile tempo run? WTF are you nuts?

No you didn't read that. Hour easy followed by 8-12 tempo. If tempo means marathon pace, then this is a common workout.