Someone told me that they know they could break 3:00 based off their 1:21:30 Half marathon. I don’t have much other information. Good athlete overall, also spends several hours on the bike and in the pool every week (obviously a triathlete.).
(oh and I put I in the title but it isn’t me : )
The answer is yes. The person may want to do a few long runs leading up to the marathon to get their endurance up, but the cake is made for 3:00.
Can they? Sure…comfortably. Will they? Depends on execution.
Yes. And I would have said yes even if it was an open 13.1 instead of a split from a 70.3.
They are right and sign me up to take your buddy’s side of the bet.
I would have thought so too, but then I saw your post about running 1:25 half marathon and dropping a 3:20.
The half time was an open half, not a HIM. Well I am 99% sure of that.
1:21 talent AND a triathlete (i.e. biking and swim training as well), should have NO problems going sub 3 for a marathon with even a little focus.
maybe.
the 2x13.1 + 10 mins is only a guideline. Execution is super important. I made every mistake possible in 3 marathons - starting with picking the wrong race (too hot, too hilly) to nutrition (not drinking enough, no calories) to getting the pacing wrong. There are a lot of ways to not break 3 hours - i didn’t with a 1.16 pr for the half.
i also think there is somethng else…being comfortable and efficient at 6.50 pace.
1:21 talent AND a triathlete (i.e. biking and swim training as well), should have NO problems going sub 3 for a marathon with even a little focus.
This.
Depends on the course and conditions of the 1:21 vs the planned marathon. I can bust a 1:21 all the time but haven’t broken 3 hours in my last two attempts. The wall gets me every time but halfs are cakes comparatively.
1:21 talent AND a triathlete (i.e. biking and swim training as well), should have NO problems going sub 3 for a marathon with even a little focus.
This.
I’d say it’s possible. I did it. 
Techincally they should off of 1:21 marathon time (x2 plus 10 mins, 2:52 marathon) but probably not off 30-35 miles a week, they probably won’t have the durability to keep up that pace at that distance.
Techincally they should off of 1:21 marathon time (x2 plus 10 mins, 2:52 marathon) but probably not off 30-35 miles a week, they probably won’t have the durability to keep up that pace at that distance.
Runner with 35 mpw I agree. How about a triathlete? And what if that 35 mpw includes an 18 mile long run every few weeks?
(This is not a leading question, I am generally curious. I have a theory that a triathlete can run a little less than a pure runner for a given pace, but not proven at all)
Techincally they should off of 1:21 marathon time (x2 plus 10 mins, 2:52 marathon) but probably not off 30-35 miles a week, they probably won’t have the durability to keep up that pace at that distance.
Runner with 35 mpw I agree. How about a triathlete? And what if that 35 mpw includes an 18 mile long run every few weeks?
(This is not a leading question, I am generally curious. I have a theory that a triathlete can run a little less than a pure runner for a given pace, but not proven at all)
There are outliers in every sport, someone will be able to run a 2:50(ish) marathon off of 35mpw. There are true talented athletes in swimming/cycling/running that are just built (geneics) to excel at certain sports. That being said I will agree that as a triathlete (you) will increase fitness from swimming and light cycling and can run a “little” less mileage than a pure runner for a given pace as long as your are running 5-6x per week and hitting key workouts.
Techincally they should off of 1:21 marathon time (x2 plus 10 mins, 2:52 marathon) but probably not off 30-35 miles a week, they probably won’t have the durability to keep up that pace at that distance.
Runner with 35 mpw I agree. How about a triathlete? And what if that 35 mpw includes an 18 mile long run every few weeks?
(This is not a leading question, I am generally curious. I have a theory that a triathlete can run a little less than a pure runner for a given pace, but not proven at all)
I don’t think that the question is whether the triathlete can run less than a pure runner for a given pace. It’s an apples to oranges comparison based on athletic backgrounds. The question is whether the triathlete can run faster than his pure running self. I think that, unless it gets him injured with the greater miles, specifity dictates that he can’t
I don’t think that the question is whether the triathlete can run less than a pure runner for a given pace. It’s an apples to oranges comparison based on athletic backgrounds. The question is whether the triathlete can run faster than his pure running self. I think that, unless it gets him injured with the greater miles, specifity dictates that he can’t
I am sure you are right on the extremes, like the full time pro side. But how many people are that close to potential? I would say of the people that BQ, 95% of people are not at potential. So for them, clearing a little biking and swiming is going to increase their overall fitness. yes swimming will add muscles to their arms and slow them down, but you do not need to weight 110 pounds to BQ. (To win, maybe).
I think most runners could run a little less, bike a little more - and have less injuries and faster running times. Not sure exactly where the cutoff is, and clearly not advocating all runners cut half their runs for bike time… but -1h of running and +4h of bike time… might be good for a lot of people.
Totally agree with this. 30mpw + 5 hours of biking a week is going to be as good as 40+mpw.
To the OP - I did run a few 1:25ish 1/2’s and fail at the 3hr marathon. My running volume was more like 25mpw with a few bigger weeks containing a long run.
Here’s my race: http://app.strava.com/activities/60976576
I did 244 miles in the 12 weeks leading up to the race. That works out to 20.33mpw. I’m sticking with my original statement that I didn’t train enough to break 3 hours. And I went out trying to break 3 hours, not run the fastest marathon my training would allow. I failed. Maybe I had 3:15 or 3:10 in me that day, but the goal was to break 3.
That mileage is measly, so I would not count on it. 45-60 mpw for 2-3 months would be better.
Three-10 years ago I was there (59 min 10 miler, 81-82 min half) but 3 hours in a mara. proved elusive.
Faking a 3:20? No problem. But on 3 diff. serious tries I ran in the 3:04-09 range, despite having the “speed.”
I think you have to put the right 3-4 months of running AND not get injured along the way AND execute on race day AND have race day weather cooperate.
(I sort of consider my 3:04 into a 15 mph headwind a 3-hour race.)
Last March, I ran 1:24:00 on a fast half course, then 3:00:03 at the Paris Marathon (so wanted to be sub 3, but I had to start in the 3:00-3:15 group of 5000 runners, so I passed literally 1000’s of people), all on 30-35 mpw, with maybe 3 weeks at 40 mpw. Lots of swimming and biking too. Broke all kinds of ST cardinal rules: my longest run was more than half my weekly mileage. Longest run was 23 miles. Then PR’d a half two weeks after Paris, 4:13 with a 1:27 split on the run.
My vote is yes, but
I went 2:59 11 months after a 1:35 13.1, as a pretty dang new runner.
My friend has been <17’ 5k, 1:20:xx 13.1, and has now had 5 failed attempts at going <3hrs at the marathon even after peaking at 80mpw and working with McMillian’s coaching program.
The marathon is an evil race.
Depends on the course and conditions of the 1:21 vs the planned marathon. I can bust a 1:21 all the time but haven’t broken 3 hours in my last two attempts. The wall gets me every time but halfs are cakes comparatively.
same here…sub 1:25 twice but can’t break 3:00 after last attempt at the Tokyo marathon. All the research points to going past 20 miles on my long runs, and longer tempo runs at sub race pace.