I’m running a marathon this Sunday and I have confidence in my fitness. I’ve been putting in 80-90 mile weeks throughout most of the summer, and based on a recent 10k, that over-trusted but loved McMillan calculator estimates me at around a 2:48 marathon - nothing crazy fast of course but all I want is to run a marathon reflecting my fitness level, give or take 5 to 10 minutes. So I’m planning to aim slightly short of this to ensure I have a GOOD marathon, at around 2:55-3:00 hours.
This is only my 2nd marathon. The 1st one I felt great in the legs and cardio wise, but I was plagued with severe chest pains for the last 6-7 miles. I’ve seen a cardiologist since and have ruled out any heart issues. So the best guess my doctor and I have made is that it must have been some form of indigestion from all the gels (I had taken 5 gels up to the 20 mile mark).
Long story short, as a solution I’ve been focusing on running intermittently fasted for my runs this summer (including a stack of my long runs), to teach my body to tap into its fat reserve more. Maffetone has a bunch of content on the value of this. I still carb up pretty consistently in my overall diet, so it’s not like I intend to go into the marathon carb depleted and completely relying on fat burning - that’s the other extreme that I think is dangerous. But given that I feel my body’s now more efficient at running without any gels, is it actually wise to run a marathon on only the 1-2 gels that I’m planning on taking?
Obviously I feel as if it may be possible, as otherwise I wouldn’t be taking this risk. I just haven’t spoken to enough people who have done it. So who here has run a marathon in their 160-170 heart rate range (as in, run it as a race and not a long run) and has taken no/minimal gels? If this is totally against convention, it’s not too late for me to rethink my gel plan. Or are we seriously all being duped by marketing into thinking that we NEED gels to race to our abilities?