Nick Thompson: 7,000+ Words on Life and How To Run A 2:29 Marathon at Age 44

Tired Legs wrote:

Nicholas - wonderful article. Looked at strava, perhaps we can start another thread for those interested in better understanding your training. Going sub 2:30 is amazing at your age, ignore the haters here. I see plenty of discussion about Tinman for masters runners etc all over this site as example...would be interesting to just hear you describe the philosophy you followed under your coaches with more detail on the workouts, pacing / effort, nutrition, trade-offs you explicitly made as life got in the way, and any core/cross training elements in more detail. Share / discuss a few key workout weeks?

Maybe it's your next article or book :)

yes!

There are two basic things that are interacting

a). you can get better if you start training better

b) you will get slower as you age

Over the long run B will win out. Over short periods of time A can have its moments. If you start at a low base, you can hit peaks at older ages. But those peaks are lower. If you would have done this training in your 20s, you might have a been a 2:19 guy. The only way to be in better shape in yoru 40s than your 20s is to have been in bad shape in your 20s.

wow, Debbie downer

ready made wrote:

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

There are two basic things that are interacting

a). you can get better if you start training better

b) you will get slower as you age

Over the long run B will win out. Over short periods of time A can have its moments. If you start at a low base, you can hit peaks at older ages. But those peaks are lower. If you would have done this training in your 20s, you might have a been a 2:19 guy. The only way to be in better shape in yoru 40s than your 20s is to have been in bad shape in your 20s.

wow, Debbie downer

Aging is depressing:) Now I don't know the specific times that were run in HS, but if your running 35mpw and putting up times where 90s stanford wanted you, you are talking about Olympic trials level of distance running talent. Not shocked to learn that type of person can run 2:29 at 44. Now I am shocked that they actually did it:)

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

ready made wrote:

wow, Debbie downer

Aging is depressing:) Now I don't know the specific times that were run in HS, but if your running 35mpw and putting up times where 90s stanford wanted you, you are talking about Olympic trials level of distance running talent. Not shocked to learn that type of person can run 2:29 at 44. Now I am shocked that they actually did it:)

STFU

Thank you! I'd love to write longer about these questions. And I'd love to do more research into the questions where I don't know the answers.

On the question of latent talent: IDK. I wasn't /that/ good in high school. I ran 8:51 for the 3K, which converts to around 9:30 for a 2-mile. I was definitely the 9th best of the 9 freshmen on the Stanford team. Yes, I definitely could have been faster if I had done this focused training in my 20s. But I suspect my ceiling was quite a ways off from the true elite. Then again, part of the magic of the sport is that we really have no idea. When I started the process of working with the Nike coaches two years ago, I never would have thought 2:29 was realistic.

Thank you again for reading and all the kind things people have said in this forum. And since I got a couple queries about whether this is really me, I'm going to go and favorite whatever the most recent Tweet from the letsrun Twitter account is five minutes from now.

8:51 off 35mpw is a really talented runner. That is like 1% talent. Yes the gap between you and the truely elite (i.e. the kids running 8:25 off 35mpw) is huge but if you look down you would see how far up the mountain you were. And yes I know everyone thinks they are untalented. Nobody is saying you were going to be an olympian. But odds are you were the 29:30 type kid after 4 years of running 80+mpw. That is a 2:18 type marathoner later. Off a time like that your decline looks pretty normal.

Again I am impressed as hell that you got the work in. And 2:29 is pretty solid at any age. I know all the "comebacks" I have tried lasted about 4 weeks till life interfered and went back to just running my 25 mpw.

Nicholas, as someone approaching 30, who's dealt with weight gain and inconsistent training since my early 20's, your post gives me hope that I can still achieve my goals with renewed focus. I probably won't run 2:3X , but maybe I can break 3 hours or 2:50 even. Thank you!

Mostly because he squandered his talent when he was younger and didn't develop it, he had far less lifetime mileage in his legs in his 40s than anyone else with a level of talent to be recruited to Stanford.