Brazilian Guy wrote:
In terms of performance equivalency the sub 3min 1k is superior.
A 2:59.97 1000m gives you 387 points on the IAAF scoring tables wich equates to a 3:04:58 marathon.
But in terms of what is easier or harder, I think the sub 3 marathon would require a far greater amount of training to be done. I think that even those who at first don't have the speed to break 3 (unless they're super slow) wouldn't need as much training in order to do it than for the sub 3 marathon.
This is correct. The entire question is rather invalid, and requires rephrasing. Which of the two would require the least amount of training, and also considering age groups?
If the limit is 10 mpw, then the 1k is going to be easier, period, for all age groups.
As you scale the milage, then there will be a point where it switches to be easier for older people, while younger people might find both to be rather achievable. This is if you keep the milage consistent for a year.
If you scale by age, then there is a point where the sub 3 1k is probably not possible no matter what, while the sub 3 marathon is still a possibility (regardless of training).
It's an interesting challenge, and I wonder if I could do it within the next year (which would put me a newly turned 47 years of age).