Question for the fast runners. What would be the better tune up race for my ‘a’ race marathon? A half marathon that’s 6 weeks before the marathon or a full marathon that’s 4 weeks out?
For what it’s worth, I’m an experienced marathoner who’s shooting for a 2:38
I’m closer to an open 3:00, so I’d opt for the half if it was me. However, being significantly faster, you could do the full as a longer training run to dial in pace and nutrition and take the last 10k or so pretty easy so your body isn’t that beat up for the main event 4 weeks later.
I did a marathon on Feb 25th and ran a good portion of it w/someone running Boston this year. He was using the race as a long training run and nutrition practice.
Question for the fast runners. What would be the better tune up race for my ‘a’ race marathon? A half marathon that’s 6 weeks before the marathon or a full marathon that’s 4 weeks out?
For what it’s worth, I’m an experienced marathoner who’s shooting for a 2:38
Definitely not a full marathon. I’ve run what you want, and have coached others. Everyone is different but I like doing an unrested half as part of a full week of training, then taking a very easy week after. 6 weeks out is a tad earlier than I’d prefer, but it works fine. The point of doing it unrested is that if you go out and run, say 1:16 unrested at the end of a heavy block, you know the taper will give you a bunch of speed and you’re on track.
Then take a few days off to recover, then a few days light, then back into it for a few weeks and taper.
Question for the fast runners. What would be the better tune up race for my ‘a’ race marathon? A half marathon that’s 6 weeks before the marathon or a full marathon that’s 4 weeks out?
For what it’s worth, I’m an experienced marathoner who’s shooting for a 2:38
I just did a HM (Sunday) and it is six weeks out from my A marathon. I like 6 weeks, as I can get a recovery this week and still have 3 solid weeks of real training. Doing a half closer than 6 weeks really leave very little time to do much real training after, before the A race. As others suggested, I basically “trained through”, I did skip my marathon pace workout (2nd hard workout of the week, not really skipped. I did 13 miles at HM pace instead of 9 miles at Marathon pace), but did not take any extra days off and was only a few miles under what I would have normally done for week. Ran 1:20 on a hilly course (550 ft of net gain), makes me feel reasonably confident about going for the 2:50 I am looking to hit in Boston.
A marathon 4 weeks out (or at any time in the training plan) for an A marathon doesn’t make any sense based on any training plans I have ever seen.
I would strongly favor a HM 6-8 weeks out, that usually works best in my experience. You can hammer it and find out where your fitness is at then have plenty of time to recover and fit in a build phase before the taper. At Philly this year I managed a 2:39 (with all that wind) after running a 1:14 high HM 7 weeks out.
I’m definitely leaning towards the half marathon, because it’s local, and because doing a full 4 weeks out will take 1-2 weeks out of big training with the taper and recovery
.
I’ll preface this with all of the usuals such as your history, your durability, recent volume, etc but why not Both? I’m not as fast as you (2:50) but a fast half during a marathon build up shouldn’t require much recovery, maybe a few days. A full at about 90% of goal pace off of a full training week without tapering will build some killer strength if it’s done towards the the end of a solid build up also should require minimal recovery.
I would switch up the scheduling though. Run the marathon 4 weeks out at around 90% and then race a half at full effort 3 weeks out. Taper and watch the magic happen on race day.
I’ll preface this with all of the usuals such as your history, your durability, recent volume, etc but why not Both? I’m not as fast as you (2:50) but a fast half during a marathon build up shouldn’t require much recovery, maybe a few days. A full at about 90% of goal pace off of a full training week without tapering will build some killer strength if it’s done towards the the end of a solid build up also should require minimal recovery.
I would switch up the scheduling though. Run the marathon 4 weeks out at around 90% and then race a half at full effort 3 weeks out. Taper and watch the magic happen on race day.
There’s a reason that the best in the world don’t do that.
First of all you can’t compare ammeters to “the best in the world” especially at the marathon level. We average half of their weekly milage. The marathon is about strength and when you can’t put in 150 miles per week off of 12-14 runs per week you have to find another way to build that strength.
Second of all, what part of that do you think is out of line with what the “best in the world” Do you think their long runs are 18-20 mile slogs? You think they aren’t putting in a solid long threshold run 3 weeks out?
I’m racing London in April and wife happened to signed up for a half marathon four weeks prior in Valencia so I figured what the hell… basically training right through the half using it a good tempo run of sorts. My larger goal is 2:40 @ London. With my (limited) marathon training experience i’d say a marathon four weeks out from an A effort seems like a recipe for disaster.
First of all you can’t compare ammeters to “the best in the world” especially at the marathon level. We average half of their weekly milage. The marathon is about strength and when you can’t put in 150 miles per week off of 12-14 runs per week you have to find another way to build that strength.
Second of all, what part of that do you think is out of line with what the “best in the world” Do you think their long runs are 18-20 mile slogs? You think they aren’t putting in a solid long threshold run 3 weeks out?
Yup… best in world would do both - doesn’t have to be an official race… But the effort is there:
http://www.sweatelite.co/eliud-kipchoge-full-training-log-leading-marathon-world-record-attempt/
That is a bad comparison as Kipchoge is running 120 miles/w and can handle a lot higher load than your average runner.
If you look at the canova style training that many of the top pros do, they do have a run around 40km at 95-97% of mp, but he does not recommend that to his slower runners.
Running both would be a terrible build up, and I would recommend running a fast half, or maybe even a half at mp.
That is a bad comparison as Kipchoge is running 120 miles/w and can handle a lot higher load than your average runner.
If you look at the canova style training that many of the top pros do, they do have a run around 40km at 95-97% of mp, but he does not recommend that to his slower runners.
Running both would be a terrible build up, and I would recommend running a fast half, or maybe even a half at mp.
I prefaced it with volume, history, durability… What makes you say it would be terrible? Experience? I have experience doing this and it is the opposite of terrible.
Remember OP indicated he was shooting for 2:38. So the question becomes are we training to race a marathon or survive a marathon and I’d say he is training to race. These are 2 different things. I agree, if you are training to survive a marathon it would be a terrible idea but if you are training to race a marathon and you can’t recover from a 26 mile long run at 90% 4 weeks out and a half-marathon effort 3 weeks out then you are going to get shellacked on race day. I prefer to cross the line standing up and this will give you the strength to do that.
This. Although ideally this would be a little later. Does the full have a half with it?
I can’t think I any circumstances when doing both or even the full make sense if indeed you are after your best performance. Although some posters make some valid points for pro’s in terms of training load and doing the full, even this would be better managed outside an actual race.
The only caveat I would throw in is that if you want to do the full, run it a goal pace (with a little build-up) and pull the plug at 20 or so depending on your training.
Because there would be no benefit of the workout, it would physically put an enormous strain on the body and you would be recovering for 2 weeks making the next 2 weeks of your training worthless.
Your experience doesn’t say anything in this matter, perhaps you would have run a faster time if you hadn’t done the full 4 weeks out. There is a reason only sub 2:10 guys do these types of workouts and that no coach recommends this to amateur athletes.
Because there would be no benefit of the workout, it would physically put an enormous strain on the body and you would be recovering for 2 weeks making the next 2 weeks of your training worthless.
a. If you have run 22-24 mile long runs prior in the cycle then 26 at 90% is not going to knock you out as much as you indicate.
b. 4 weeks out, how much quality training do you have left? You put in 1 more week and if your a little slow for a couple of days who cares. You think you are goin get get more out of a couple of 8-10 miles at 75% to 80% than you would a full + a couple of 8-10s at 70% + a half?
Your experience doesn’t say anything in this matter
This tells me everything I need to know about where you are coming from. This isn’t my first go a round. I’m pretty in tune with my body. I know when I’m recovered and when I’m not.
There is a reason only sub 2:10 guys do these types of workouts and that no coach recommends this to amateur athletes.
My experience is that most coaches that “coach” amateurs is that they are charlatans who overcomplicate things to prove their worth. Training specificity is pretty simple. Whether you are 2:10, 2:50, or 3:30 if you are training to race a marathon you have to train your body to go the distance and pace that you intend to go or the wheels will fall off. I know, I used to listen to the kind the kind of wisdom that says “you shouldn’t do so much” and the wheels fell off. The wheels don’t fall off any more. My experience does say something. The original post was asking a question. I answered with what I know from what I have experienced.
Because there would be no benefit of the workout, it would physically put an enormous strain on the body and you would be recovering for 2 weeks making the next 2 weeks of your training worthless.
a. If you have run 22-24 mile long runs prior in the cycle then 26 at 90% is not going to knock you out as much as you indicate.
b. 4 weeks out, how much quality training do you have left? You put in 1 more week and if your a little slow for a couple of days who cares. You think you are goin get get more out of a couple of 8-10 miles at 75% to 80% than you would a full + a couple of 8-10s at 70% + a half?
Your experience doesn’t say anything in this matter
This tells me everything I need to know about where you are coming from. This isn’t my first go a round. I’m pretty in tune with my body. I know when I’m recovered and when I’m not.
There is a reason only sub 2:10 guys do these types of workouts and that no coach recommends this to amateur athletes.
My experience is that most coaches that “coach” amateurs is that they are charlatans who overcomplicate things to prove their worth. Training specificity is pretty simple. Whether you are 2:10, 2:50, or 3:30 if you are training to race a marathon you have to train your body to go the distance and pace that you intend to go or the wheels will fall off. I know, I used to listen to the kind the kind of wisdom that says “you shouldn’t do so much” and the wheels fell off. The wheels don’t fall off any more. My experience does say something. The original post was asking a question. I answered with what I know from what I have experienced.
You experience with yourself means nothing, he is correct. The reasons why: 1) N = 1 is meaningless 2) You cannot prove a negative, ie you don’t know if you would have been faster having not done it.
There is zero need to run 26 at all in a marathon build. I’ve known very few good amateur marathons who do it and maximize themselves. Some pros do, but guess what? 26 miles out of 140 is a much different proposition than doing 26 out of 50-80. And despite your protests, the recovery from that is much greater than doing 20-22 at the same pace or even a bit faster. Pfitz even says so in Advanced Marathoning.
The point of marathon training is to get to the line injury free, fit, and rested. Running a marathon at say 7:30 pace for most 3 hour marathoners will put that at risk, or at the very least disrupt too much of their training afterward to make the risk/reward payoff. Maybe you’re an outlier, though I doubt it and would more guess that you underperformed where you could have been (unproveable by either of us) or got lucky not to be tired/injured.