If I'm comfortable doing 10 miles in training, could I do a marathon?

Freiheit

If that was to involve stops and a little walking....if I just want to finish? A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

jb-ski

Freiheit wrote: »

If that was to involve stops and a little walking....if I just want to finish? A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

Es ist moeglich, aber es wird dir wenig spass machen!

Go for it.

Oisin11178

Freiheit wrote: »

If that was to involve stops and a little walking....if I just want to finish? A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

You will probably get to 13-15 miles if you can comfortably run 10 miles. Do you want to walk 13 miles?
If the answer is yes then yes you can finish.

misty floyd

I don't know why anyone would want to run/walk a marathon with only 5-10mile training runs. Do you plan on doing it? I'm sure you can do it but it might not be fun.

I reckon you should go hell for leather for the first 10miles and try hang on

Brianderunner

jb-ski wrote: »

Es ist moeglich, aber es wird dir wenig spass machen!

Go for it.

Und ich bin der meinung das es wird eine scheißen Tag. Viel Gluck!!

Oisin11178

misty floyd wrote: »

I don't know why anyone would want to run/walk a marathon with only 5-10mile training runs. Do you plan on doing it? I'm sure you can do it but it might not be fun.

I reckon you should go hell for leather for the first 10miles and try hang on

Haha kaboom:D

RacoonQueen

No. Not at all. 10 miles isn't even half way there, why on earth would you even consider doing a marathon when the max you've ever done is 10 miles?

Silly/trolling season has definitely hit us.

Krusty_Clown

Brianderunner wrote: »

Und ich bin der meinung das es wird eine scheißen Tag. Viel Gluck!!

+1 (whatever it means!).

Condo131

Well.......I did my first Marathon on 15 miles a week. One long run of 13 miles. 4:10:03.

I certainly wouldn't recommend to anyone to do that, or what you're asking.

However I often tell beginners that "Anyone can do a marathon in the morning - it's the pace that kills!" You certainly could walk-jog the full distance, but you WILL suffer. The more ambitious you are, the more you'll suffer.

When I did my first there were very few marathons in Ireland, so you took the offering, or waited until next year. Nowadays, there are plenty. Therefore I'd strongly recommend that you train properly for a Marathon and then enjoy the one that you do - and bask in the knowledge that YOU have become a true Marathoner - not someone who has struggled to make it to the finish line because of inadequate training. (And apologies, in advance, to the many who will have inadequate training due to personal obstacles and/or adversity)

TheRoadRunner

Condo131 wrote: »

Well.......I did my first Marathon on 15 miles a week. One long run of 13 miles. 4:10:03.

I certainly wouldn't recommend to anyone to do that, or what you're asking.

However I often tell beginners that "Anyone can do a marathon in the morning - it's the pace that kills!" You certainly could walk-jog the full distance, but you WILL suffer. The more ambitious you are, the more you'll suffer.

When I did my first there were very few marathons in Ireland, so you took the offering, or waited until next year. Nowadays, there are plenty. Therefore I'd strongly recommend that you train properly for a Marathon and then enjoy the one that you do - and bask in the knowledge that YOU have become a true Marathoner - not someone who has struggled to make it to the finish line because of inadequate training. (And apologies, in advance, to the many who will have inadequate training due to personal obstacles and/or adversity)

+1
I did my first marathon off the back of 8*8 (treadmill) mile runs over 3 weeks. Did it for a bet. Hadn't ran seriously in about 3 years but was playing footie at the time and previous to that would have run a good bit. You could probably finish but trust me it may not be that enjoyable. Too late to enter the Dublin marathon by the way !!!!

jb-ski

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

+1
You could probably finish but trust me it may not be that enjoyable.

+1

That's what i just said!;)

TheRoadRunner

jb-ski wrote: »

+1

That's what i just said!;)

I'm not too good at gobley gook or foreign languages.

ecoli

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

I'm not too good at gobley gook or foreign languages.

Itakuwa chungu na si enjoyably kuwa na subira na lengo la kujenga mafunzo yako polepole

Bit of Swahili for you (thought being in an African language might make it more relevant to distance running;))

Peckham

Freiheit wrote: »

A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some

So, presumably your friend has taken this approach? How did he/she find the experience?

shels4ever

Peckham wrote: »

So, presumably your friend has taken this approach? How did he/she find the experience?

I'd say it hurt. A couple of years ago I planned my longest run of the year the day of the marathon, Was only doing about 8-10 at the time, Went to the start then ran to the 8 mile mark (the short way) met the brother there who was in a bad way by 10 miles. So ran with him for some of the way. By the time I got back to my car i'd covered 22 mile, the rest day was spent in bed, and couldnt walk for a week. I'd never do something like that again and if doing another marathon i'll train for it.

It's posisble to finish a marathon with no little or training at all, but its not something i'd advise.

meathcountysec

Freiheit wrote: »

A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

Some friend :rolleyes:

tunney

Of course you can. Most people doing the marathon will be woefully underprepared. As long as your run walk strategy is realistic then you'll get around fine.

--amadeus--

If a plane you were in crashed 26.2 miles away from rescue and the only way you could rescue your friends / family / pet / magazine collection from the wreckage was to cover that distance on foot then you'd do it. As would pretty much anyone under the age of 70 and with no general health issues.

Completing a marathon is actually not that big a deal or big an achievement. 18 weeks of training commitment and the effort required to complete a marathon in the fastest time you can, that's the achievement.

Cypher.

Again of course anyone can do it. But if you don't train for it you could end up getting injury. If your leg muscles aren't that strong your knees will be taking all the impact during the run.
I'd recommend lots of leg strengthening exercises and some long slow runs.

annieee

Freiheit wrote: »

If that was to involve stops and a little walking....if I just want to finish? A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

Would you not try a half marathon first? I'd say you'd be well able for that. Massive risk of injury throwing yourself into a marathon straight off. :eek:

tunney

--amadeus-- wrote: »

If a plane you were in crashed 26.2 miles away from rescue and the only way you could rescue your friends / family / pet / magazine collection from the wreckage was to cover that distance on foot then you'd do it. As would pretty much anyone under the age of 70 and with no general health issues.

Completing a marathon is actually not that big a deal or big an achievement. 18 weeks of training commitment and the effort required to complete a marathon in the fastest time you can, that's the achievement.

Emmm is it? Is it? I can see where this thread is going now.

18 weeks of training? Some would argue thats not a commitment to training it should be 24/26/52

Whats training? 4 runs a week? Or 160km a week?

Over the years there have been so many threads on "is 3:30 an achievement for a marathon?" and "Does 4:00 count as running a marathon?". People always go nuts "Its not the time that counts its the distance, respect my achievement".

Every so often there comes a thread like this one and the same people who roar "Its not the time that counts its the distance, respect my achievement" then turn around and completely contradict themselves.

ecoli

--amadeus-- wrote: »

If a plane you were in crashed 26.2 miles away from rescue and the only way you could rescue your friends / family / pet / magazine collection from the wreckage was to cover that distance on foot then you'd do it. As would pretty much anyone under the age of 70 and with no general health issues.

Completing a marathon is actually not that big a deal or big an achievement. 18 weeks of training commitment* and the effort required to complete a marathon in the fastest time you can, that's the achievement.

*18 weeks + years of accumulated miles to really go your best though you will always feel you can go one second quicker atleast

shels4ever

ecoli wrote: »

*18 weeks + years of accumulated miles to really go your best though you will always feel you can go one second quicker atleast

I'd say years of running then 12 months marathon specific training then your ready to go , but its just my view that to run a fast marathon you can start by runs faster over 10k etc....

kingQuez

Meh, for me its an achievement if you look back and think "damn, i wasnt convinced i could do that". Doesn't matter what training you did, or what time you clocked... training is an enabler to cover the distance and remain injury free, and time only matters if you're chasing it.

With a run/walk strategy you'll certainly cover the distance, but there's a good chance you'll injure yourself (feet/knees) quite badly and not enjoy the day. Off such little training I'd probably skip the marathon, and instead train consistently for a few weeks and see what you can do at a half marathon in the short term (Kinnitty Castle Half Marathon, November 27th?). You'd aim to run the full distance, and maybe even have a rough idea of a time that might challenge you.

Condo131

Fwiw, I recommend that one shouldn't race (as opposed to run) a marathon until you've 10,000 miles 'in the bank' first. I've seen plenty of people on 'rising stars' only to see then do sub-optimal marathons ....and then take an awful long time to recover back to the position they were in before their marathon exploits.

Marathons hurt your basic speed. IMHO, if you've got real speed, then enjoy and exploit that before jumping into marathoning.

Disclaimer: I was NEVER fast......but I still have a 2:46:03 PB!

Freiheit

I say this because I overdid training earlier this year and ended up injured....So wondering whether a marathon is possible with less than the recommended plan?....The friend in question was injured after about 16/18 miles and yes walked the remainder...

RayCun

Freiheit wrote: »

The friend in question was injured after about 16/18 miles and yes walked the remainder...

Why are you taking advice from him?

kippy

Am actually thinking of completing a marathon next year at some stage (Having only started running last April - Couch to 5K graduate)

First off, i dont intend to run the whole thing - that would be daft from my level. I do plan to train for it and run as much as I can - at thist stage I would be happy to run 5K/walk 5K for the entire distance. Currently looking at the Edinburgh Marathon.
To be honest, it is just something I would like to do and its a good thing to aim for over the winter months while hopefully loosing a few pounds when training towards it (I have a lot of pounds to spare).

I do agree with amadeus, the real achievement is training for and running the whole of it. For me, its just a goal and something I would like to do.
Who know, perhaps by the marathon I will be able to run all of it anyway.

kennyb3

Freiheit wrote: »

I say this because I overdid training earlier this year and ended up injured....So wondering whether a marathon is possible with less than the recommended plan?....The friend in question was injured after about 16/18 miles and yes walked the remainder...

Im going to go mad here and suggest you might get injured.

bart simpson

tunney wrote: »

Emmm is it? Is it? I can see where this thread is going now.

18 weeks of training? Some would argue thats not a commitment to training it should be 24/26/52

Whats training? 4 runs a week? Or 160km a week?

Over the years there have been so many threads on "is 3:30 an achievement for a marathon?" and "Does 4:00 count as running a marathon?". People always go nuts "Its not the time that counts its the distance, respect my achievement".

Every so often there comes a thread like this one and the same people who roar "Its not the time that counts its the distance, respect my achievement" then turn around and completely contradict themselves.

i think the achievement is measured against what a average healthy non runner would be capable of.....if you were to take 100 healthy non runners asked them to run a 3:30 marathon...very few would make it so therefore for someone to train for and complete something that most people have never done is an achievement,.... the quicker your time the bigger the achievement...its as simple as that......most healthy people can cover 26 miles on foot so that would be less of an achievement.

shels4ever

bart simpson wrote: »

i think the achievement is measured against what a average healthy non runner would be capable of.....if you were to take 100 healthy non runners asked them to run a 3:30 marathon...very few would make it so therefore for someone to train for and complete something that most people have never done is an achievement,.... the quicker your time the bigger the achievement...its as simple as that......most healthy people can cover 26 miles on foot so that would be less of an achievement.

I think the point that is been made, is that anyone can complete the marathon, you could take 2 guys both 20 stone and both decide to run a marathon, one follows a 18 week plan and does it in 5 hours, the other loses weight runs for 3-4 years does some 10k race , then half mara etch then runs 2:59 ... Both did well but the whole thing depends on what your potential is.

It's horses for courses what ever people are into , if you set a goal to finsh well done, if you decided to run your fastest marathon then well done.

The whole thing about marathons gets me too but thats for another day....

Gringo78

Freiheit wrote: »

If that was to involve stops and a little walking....if I just want to finish? A friend said that anyone who is comfortable at 5-10 miles in training can complete a marathon if they are prepared to walk some...Is this likely?.

When the first guy did the marathon back in ancient Greece, he had definitly never heard of LSR's, Hal Higdon, 18 week training plans and all that mumbo jumbo....he just went and ran it, no training, and completed it saving the day. The guys an absolute legend, people still talk about his achievment to this day, a couple of thousand years later. And what harm did it do him? none!* I say why not, go for it.

*actually he dropped dead upon completion...maybe a little training wouldn't have gone astray in hindsight.

shels4ever

Gringo78 wrote: »

When the first guy did the marathon back in ancient Greece, he had definitly never heard of LSR's, Hal Higdon, 18 week training plans and all that mumbo jumbo....he just went and ran it, no training, and completed it saving the day. The guys an absolute legend, people still talk about his achievment to this day, a couple of thousand years later. And what harm did it do him? none!* I say why not, go for it.

*actually he dropped dead upon completion...maybe a little training wouldn't have gone astray in hindsight.

Did he go sub 3:30 , if not he's a waster

bart simpson

shels4ever wrote: »

I think the point that is been made, is that anyone can complete the marathon, you could take 2 guys both 20 stone and both decide to run a marathon, one follows a 18 week plan and does it in 5 hours, the other loses weight runs for 3-4 years does some 10k race , then half mara etch then runs 2:59 ... Both did well but the whole thing depends on what your potential is.

It's horses for courses what ever people are into , if you set a goal to finsh well done, if you decided to run your fastest marathon then well done.

The whole thing about marathons gets me too but thats for another day....

if you decide to run your fastest marathon, then that is more of an achievement than the acheivement of just finishing a marathon.
Haile Gebrselassie achieved more in running than me...now i could say it is genetics and training, professionalism etc. etc. but he has the world records and gold medals,..... i wouldnt try and say my achievement is just as good as his, citing having to overcome bad running genes, inferior training, day-job etc. .
if i wouldn't equate my achievement to Haile, why would it be reasonable to equate the achievements of two marathon runners one doing 5:30, the other doing 3:30

shels4ever

bart simpson wrote: »

if you decide to run your fastest marathon, then that is more of an achievement than the acheivement of just finishing a marathon.
Haile Gebrselassie achieved more in running than me...now i could say it is genetics and training, professionalism etc. etc. but he has the world records and gold medals,..... i wouldnt try and say my achievement is just as good as his, citing having to overcome bad running genes, inferior training, day-job etc. .
if i wouldn't equate my achievement to Haile, why would it be reasonable to equate the achievements of two marathon runners one doing 5:30, the other doing 3:30

Not saying we can compete with the great man, just a view that the process is not the same, anyone can complete but to run to your full potential will take a different approach .
I think i'm capable of sub 3:15 at least but wont get there with a 14 week plan.
People running 4 hour plus marathon maybe capable of alot faster. Most people are in too much a ruch to run/finish a marathon because of the tag is has.

myflipflops

The achievement debate was done to death here in a thread I regret starting.

I don't think a repeat is necessary.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055719712

tunney

Gringo78 wrote: »

When the first guy did the marathon back in ancient Greece, he had definitly never heard of LSR's, Hal Higdon, 18 week training plans and all that mumbo jumbo....he just went and ran it, no training, and completed it saving the day. The guys an absolute legend, people still talk about his achievment to this day, a couple of thousand years later. And what harm did it do him? none!* I say why not, go for it.

*actually he dropped dead upon completion...maybe a little training wouldn't have gone astray in hindsight.

Emmm or it just didn't happen. Thought every knew that this was one of the ultimate urban myths.

TheRoadRunner

Gringo78 wrote: »

When the first guy did the marathon back in ancient Greece, he had definitly never heard of LSR's, Hal Higdon, 18 week training plans and all that mumbo jumbo....he just went and ran it, no training, and completed it saving the day. The guys an absolute legend, people still talk about his achievment to this day, a couple of thousand years later. And what harm did it do him? none!* I say why not, go for it.

*actually he dropped dead upon completion...maybe a little training wouldn't have gone astray in hindsight.

Not entirely true and as Tunney alludes to, there is evidence that Pheidippides did not die as he is mentioned in subsequent Greek writings if I remember correctly.

Secondly he was a professional courrier of his day. Instead of car/bike/horse he ran on foot and had covered distances much greater than the one supposed to have killed him. He was probably on the Plato couch to 120 mile program.

ecoli

Gringo78 wrote: »

When the first guy did the marathon back in ancient Greece, he had definitly never heard of LSR's, Hal Higdon, 18 week training plans and all that mumbo jumbo....he just went and ran it, no training, and completed it saving the day. The guys an absolute legend, people still talk about his achievment to this day, a couple of thousand years later. And what harm did it do him? none!* I say why not, go for it.

*actually he dropped dead upon completion...maybe a little training wouldn't have gone astray in hindsight.

The other thing is that guy was only doing 25 miles (40km) not 26.2 we have the British to thank for that:mad:

jb-ski

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

Not entirely true and as Tunney alludes to, there is evidence that Pheidippides did not die as he is mentioned in subsequent Greek writings if I remember correctly.

Secondly he was a professional courrier of his day. Instead of car/bike/horse he ran on foot and had covered distances much greater than the one supposed to have killed him. He was probably on the Plato couch to 120 mile program.

e.g. a nice 246k LSR from Athens to Sparta, as a warmer upper!

Gringo78

tunney wrote: »

Emmm or it just didn't happen. Thought every knew that this was one of the ultimate urban myths.

Gringo78 wrote: »

The guys an absolute legend

Apologies Tunney, I'll try to be less subtle in my sarcasm in future.

TheRoadRunner

jb-ski wrote: »

e.g. a nice 246k LSR from Athens to Sparta, as a warmer upper!

I wonder how many gels he took on board for that. I bet his garmin gave him 246.82K as well