All else equal (such as weather), if you give maximum effort in an Ironman 70.3 and in a marathon, which do you think is tougher? I could make an argument either way. I have done 12 marathons and four 70.3s so far (plus one brutal Ironman). I have a running background and I usually feel about the same amount of fatigue during the last 3-4 miles of a marathon and a 70.3. I was curious to see what the ST’ers think.
Weather equal. Effort equal.
70.3 wins… b/c it’s longer at maximal effort.
I’ll go with open marathon, my least favorite race distance. Takes me longer to recover from too.
If you consider the total pounding you take in both events, the marathon will likely be much harder overall. If I were to go out and race a marathon (I have yet to try, for good reason I believe). I would be in nearly the same level of pain I am in a half marathon and that just seems miserable. And the muscle soreness after that kind of effort would be very debilitating.
In a 70.3, which I have done many and have raced very close to my maximum, I am pretty shattered at the finish, but never in the kind of misery as the overall effort is less than running a half mary. Plus, even though the event is longer, the swim really doesn’t count as its not really much of an impact, in the moment or afterwards.
I’m sure it varies by person. But for me a marathon is tougher.
The marathon is certainly the event that has me closer to having to stop.
No contest… Sand alone Marathon is defiantly harder.
I have done a close to maximum effort in a 70.3 and then hopped on my bike the next day for 90k feeling a little tired but not too bad. When I do a max effort marathon I have trouble walking down stairs the next day. A marathon is definitely harder on your body than 70.3 (I am also from a running background) but not necessarily harder to do fast.
I’m not sure which is tougher, but I’ve got both on my schedule this fall. I still haven’t figured out how I’m going to focus on both races 6 weeks apart.
Marathon hands down.
marathon is tougher. Tougher to do and tougher to recover from.
Marathon hands down.
Can’t agree more, a marathon is WAYYYYY harder than a HIM.
I’m not sure which is tougher, but I’ve got both on my schedule this fall. I still haven’t figured out how I’m going to focus on both races 6 weeks apart.
I’m a firm believer that consistency and overall fitness will win out the day over 20-milers. Focus on the 70.3 and be sure to run relatively fast 13-15 milers each weekend leading up to it. It will make the 1/2 marathon portion of the 70.3 go smoother and you can then do a 15 miler 2 weeks after the 70.3, an 18 miler 3 weeks after the 70.3 and then taper leading in to the NYC marathon. No problem!
My last 70.3 (which was the first time that I’ve broken 5 hours) is the first time that I have felt a soreness comparable to marathon soreness. It was probably also the first time that I’ve truly given the same maximum effort that I do in marathons. I probably agree that, all else equal, marathons probably take more out of the body than 70.3s. By the way, I’ve actually heard more than 1 person say that marathons are harder than an Ironman because you are redlining the entire marathon and you are pacing yourself in an Ironman. I disagree, but I’ve only had one Ironman experience (Louisville 2010 - brutally hot).
Marathon for me.
I’ve done 5 (PB 3:07) and the next day can barely walk.
Day after 70.3 I could swim or go for a light spin. I don’t, but I could.
Cheers!
I could do a 70.3 today, right now and be able to run and swim tomorrow again. I could not run 26 miles right now, and if I did, there is no way in hell I am doing anything tomorrow.
One of my running partners used to swim with a current pro triathlete and a 6-time AG Ironman champion, and according to those guys doing a marathon is harder than a FULL Ironman, simply because you are too tired to really push the marathon in an Ironman. The consensus here certainly seems to be that the full marathon is harder than a 70.3, and I agree 100% base on my experiences.
Marathon is more painful, half-iron is more difficult to properly train for and execute.
Also, and this isn’t a criticism of you for using it but a general comment, when I started the sport, “70.3s” were called “halfs” and I think that it should stay that way. I dislike the combo of the ironman term with the shorter distance (I’m not trying to be a snob, it’s just the principle of the thing). As in, “hey guys, I just raced an ultra 5km.”
Marathon is more painful, half-iron is more difficult to properly train for and execute.
Also, and this isn’t a criticism of you for using it but a general comment, when I started the sport, “70.3s” were called “halfs” and I think that it should stay that way. I dislike the combo of the ironman term with the shorter distance (I’m not trying to be a snob, it’s just the principle of the thing). As in, “hey guys, I just raced an ultra 5km.”
A buddy of mine was telling his couch potato friend that he just completed a half Ironman. To which his buddy said, “why would you do half of anything?” Pretty harsh, but funny.
26.2 > 70.3
UltraMarathon of 50M+ > 140.6
.
Stand alone marathon hands down.