I think it’s difficult to put a number to correlation but I believe in high volume if you can handle it. FWIW I ran 70+ miles a week when I ran the 1500/mile in college but now I run between 30-40 training for 70.3 events.
I remember seeing a graph that correlated hrs per week to marathon results. I cannot seem to find the chart again.
I ran 3:08 on 60 - 65 mpw all training was at MAF heart rate and based on Barry P.
If I can get mpw up to 80 - 85 am I likely to go sub 3?
Is it cool to keep up with the MAF / Barry P style training or should I follow a Phitzinger approach once I get my base miles back up?
A good friend of mine does around 70 mpw and is 2:50 marathoner in his mid 50’s. He does supplement his running with 5-6 days per week swimming as he feels it really helps a lot. He found when he gets above 70 the risk of injury was far too high for him.
Weekly milage does not directly correlate to lowered marathon times.
40 miles per week spread out over 3-4 runs per week yielded me a 2:52
Monday - Short/Slow Recovery Run
Tuesday - Off
Wednesday - 45mins- 1 hour run
Thursday - Off
Friday - Focused Tempo @ MP
Saturday - Long Run
Sunday - OFF
Your question is entirely individual. Were you doing the tempo/speed work that BarryP suggests after getting a solid base (I can’t remember those workouts exactly)? Or just steady, easy miles? If the latter, you could probably get more out of the 60-65 with structured workouts and a bunch of MP running. Ramping up the volume AND doing a Pfitzinger plan might be too much!
Only 2 reference points for me: 55 ish MPW, 2:46. 70 MPW, 2:40. I basically did base volume according to BarryP, but switched to Pfitzinger (mostly) for the marathon plan “proper.” All I can say is that I felt like piss during some weeks- like, couldn’t complete the goal workouts.
I’d agree with ggeiger. In my first three marathons I felt injuries coming on when I sustained 80-90 mpw during peak weeks. Last year in my fourth marathon cycle I peaked at 80 and supplemented the training with cycling once or twice a week. I felt much better and knocked about 5 minutes off my previous PR (2:44 → 2:39). I think everyone is different though and you have to find your sweet spot. I’ve met people who train 100 mpw and never get injured.
Gawd, I hope so! That’s a lot of volume. I wonder how many amateurs can handle that much running.
quite a lot. that mileage is unremarkable for a competitive runner.
I’m not sure I’d call someone who is trying to break 3 hours a competitive runner unless we are talking the upper age groups / like that 70+ runner who just went like 2:55!
I felt good every week when I did the 60 - 65 mpw all at MAF HR / Barry P. No intensity. Running was a joy.
All my other attempts at a marathon ended in injury trying to follow the 3 - 4 runs per week with intensity type plans. I recall them being in the 35 mpw range.
The Phitzinger plan adds a bit of intensity, but is still mostly aerobic, which has me intrigued.
Sounds like it may be better to stick with a lower volume Fitzinger or ramp volume, but take intensity out of the equation.
Thanks - I plan on a couple of swim / bikes during the week.
I want to keep some feel for the water. Also, I did one hard bike session per week during my last build. A V02 type session. It helped maintain most of my FTP and probably helped the top end of my run a bit without the abuse. Then I did one more recovery type ride.
Maybe I just keep building until I feel like I am not recovering or my pacing stalls. Then reassses capping my mileage and adding in intensity.
Well there is a thread here where a 70+ year old guy who sounds like he used to run the MAF method, got a coach that told him to run fast, and for about 50mpw, and he runs 2;55 or so now. So looks like you either have to get a lot older, run much less than 80mpw, or just run faster… I would say if you emulate this guy at his age, you would probably make your goal…
a male runner shooting for a sub 3 probably considers himself to be competitive. a female runner shooting for a sub 3 definitely does.
Think “respectable” runner would be a better term for a male running sub3
To the OP’er:
As others have said, I do not believe mileage is the key to running sub 3. It really depends on what you have been doing leading up to the next training block, what your previous races/training looks like, and what the workouts in the upcoming block indicate.
I have ran sub3 on far less than 80 miles a week, probably less than 40. It was so long ago I don’t have the data in TrainingPeaks. In 2015 I ran 3:09 OTB at IMUK, and that was on 33 miles a week…
I’m on a jack Daniels plan right now trying to hit 2:50, but happy with sub 3. I tried for sub 3 last feb but fell apart at mile 22 and went 3:08. Im 37.
My current plan has be going 40-50 mpw, 5 days, 3 easy, one day of vo2 and intervals/speed work, and one long run. I did a half marathon as a benchmark last weekend in 1:23:12 which I was very happy with. Should translate to a pretty easy sub 3, and hopefully around the 2:50 mark.
I realize there are people who can get by with less time on their feet. Higher V02 max or LT.
I’m heavier at ~180 lbs and intensity beats me up too bad.
I go back to the graph I saw and there was some scatter, but it was a strong correlation maybe -0.8ish between hrs per week and finish time.
There has to be something to it.
There’s probably some correlation but that much volume shouldn’t be necessary if you are efficient with your training. 180 lbs shouldn’t prevent a sub3 either. I’m 195, run 35-40 MPW and ran a 3:13 at my last IM.
