Sub 3Hr Marathon

6 lurkers | 298 watchers

jdarun Feb 2015 5:30pm, 25 Feb 2015 237 posts	0 jdarun Interesting post TC, but I just have to say... "* Most of the runners we have under 3 hours will be doing double days once or twice a week, some under 2.30 will be doing more than this but we do have a few pretty quick folks only running 5 times week mixing with XT" ...wow....
tom_craggs Feb 2015 8:08am, 26 Feb 2015 2,752 posts	0 tom_craggs In what respect jda?
jdarun Feb 2015 9:53am, 26 Feb 2015 239 posts	0 jdarun I'm surprised at the volume. I realise you are generally catering to a more serious crowd and describing someone as sub-3 places no upper limit on their ability but ...double sessions, and talking of "only" running 5 times plus XT makes me feel very casual indeed! I don't think I have evern managed to fit 5 runs into a week, 3-4 is about typical. The thing is, I really don't think I could go all that much better if I ran more...could I? I never had much talent when younger and I did try another aerobic power sport quite seriously when younger (rowing, that was 6 days a week plus double days) and quickly found my limit...
HappyG(rrr) Feb 2015 11:23am, 26 Feb 2015 24,180 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) Even at my lowly ability, in order to sub 3 I was doing 1-2 doubles per week and rarely dipped below 5 runs per week and averaged 70 mpw for 14 weeks before taper. I also did a pretty high volume of cross train, strength, stretch and other remedial work on top of this. Everyone is a study of one and all that, but I'd say anyone doing less than 5 runs and 50 mpw to get to sub 3 would have to have a huge amount of natural ability and talent and/or be capable of 2:45 or better with more volume of training (i.e. just ticking over at sub 3! - I wish I were in that camp, but believe I was pretty close to my maximum capability when I was going for sub 3.) G
baz p Feb 2015 11:32am, 26 Feb 2015 1,861 posts	0 baz p i agree :)G, natural ability has got to play a big part in this. Surely fat Steve Way had a skinny athlete itching to come out, he then found his hidden talent and flew to sub 2:20. His natural talent was found when he trained for sub 3 and got 2:35. I dont think any normal person doing 120 mile weeks for 18 weeks would be able to replicate the same performances, unless they had some natural talent stored away? i may be wrong (hope i am). just my thoughts. however, i believe adding doubles during marathon training DOES help. i currently do 3/4 doubles a week, and i find these have helped recovery and added endurance and strength needed for continuous marathon training, and aided race days. When i started i was doing enough to get by, but ive tweaked my training each time and saw times come down gradually. Im averaging about 74 mpw, but know i could do more, and if i added more mileage on top of what i do, how much more time could i take off? but what really helps. quality of sessions or quantity of miles? or a bit of both?
Bazoaxe Feb 2015 11:50am, 26 Feb 2015 8,025 posts	0 Bazoaxe I am like HappyG andneed more miles to get close to the best I can manage. 12 months ago I was doing 5 runs a week and 50+ mpw avge, and ended with another sub 3:15.For the autumn Ipushed up to 6 runs per week and closer to 60mpw avge and PBd with 3:02. In order to find another 2 mins I am still running 6 days but have 1 or ywo doubles in there and an avge of just above 65mpw. jda, if you gradually built up miles over a few years I think you would see some big improvements....I just wish I clould get sub 3 off that little training. Baz, similar debate has been had on the 3:15 thread, for me its a mix of both.....lots of miles initially to build aa base and then maintain those miles but introduce a bit of quality as well.
jdarun Feb 2015 1:20pm, 26 Feb 2015 240 posts	0 jdarun No, really, I never was particularly good at sports in general (including running), I got to a tolerable level in a few things through a reasonable amount of effort and persistence but there's no way I'm a steve way in hiding (by his own account, he was hugely overweight and barely trained when he ran around 3h). 2:45 is a fantasy for me, but also I was really surprised that people around that level are prepared to be so dedicated. Different maybe if you are going to be winning stuff. Anyway, it's certainly interesting to hear about what others are doing...
MPH Feb 2015 1:27pm, 26 Feb 2015 685 posts	0 MPH I'll never win a big marathon, but I do want to to see what I'm capable of and that means dedicating and training to meet that goal. I'm around 65 mpw now, but when I kick into marathon training I expect that to hit 80..I think to reach potential 80-100mpw is needed, but I'm a few years away from that I think.
Bazoaxe Feb 2015 1:39pm, 26 Feb 2015 8,029 posts	0 Bazoaxe Jda We are in the same age category and have similar PBs. I however run double your mileage to get the same results! Do you do any other training to supplement running. Fetch only has two years running history for you. What was your background before then. You clearly have a great level of fitness that leads to the times you run.
tom_craggs Feb 2015 1:50pm, 26 Feb 2015 2,753 posts	0 tom_craggs The woman I was referring to on the only 5 runs a week point ran 2.33 for the marathon last year - 5 runs a week is a low volume for a athlete of this standard but she cross trains very well to make up the volume. Just a linked I suppose, other than in a few key sessions all of them will be running to time and effort, not mileage and pace.