Running a marathon with only four months training

ecoli

PatientBear wrote: »

A person can do a marathon in four months. I did it, and I was never athletic. It opened a whole new world for me. Rather than recommending people not to do it, I believe that they should inform themselves (e.g. buy a copy of 'The Non-Runner's Marathon Trainer' (http://www.amazon.com/Non-Runners-Marathon-Trainer-David-Whitsett/dp/1570281823) and then make up their mind for themselves. I coached three people on their first marathons (one a complete beginner) and they both did very well.

I think this could do as seperate post actually...

Yes it can be done. That doesnt mean it is recommended. Going from nothing to marathon in such a short time brings with it a load of risks such as dramatic increase in injury and illness. It can also affect your mood as well as decrease in motivation which can cause you to get fed up with the sport.

You are right people should be informed about it but rather than just is it possible the should be aware of the risks as well.

Again the previous poster is just giving advice based on their experience and as a coach I personally agree. Normally I would not reccomend a marathon until a runner had atleast 2-3 years constant running under their belt. Again that i just me but I like my athletes to have the distance as an after thought. If an athlete is worried about being able to make it to the finish line i personally dont think you can enjoy it (as much as is possible to enjoy a marathon:D) again this is my personal opinion but there is no greater feeling than hitting your paces feeling controlled and feeling fast

PatientBear

I thought this might make an interesting post after reading about the couch to 5k plan (http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_3/181.shtml). Whereas I think anything that gets people active is excellent, I also want to display that the human body can actually achieve a LOT in a relatively short period of time.

There's a marathon training plan which brings you from the couch to marathon finish line in four months (or five months if you have major obesity or a similar hurdle to overcome). The only target of the plan is to get the person across the finish line. It is not aimed at fast times or personal bests or anything of that nature - just enough to train for a single marathon that you can finish within the regular time limit. For a non-runner, that alone is a serious achievement.

The training plan is here (http://www.nyceats.net/running/2004/06/_nonrunners_mar.html) and I can say that it is totally doable. I trained on this schedule myself for my first marathon and I found it excellent, if tough going at times. However, I would recommend that people who would like to attempt this plan purchase the book written by the academic who actually developed the program (see http://www.amazon.co.uk/Non-Runners-Marathon-Trainer-David-Whitsett/dp/1570281823/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1309124355&sr=8-1 on UK Amazon). There's a lot of very good advice in it, particularly on the psychological aspects of running. The book is a bit 'American' in it's style, but that's minor.

Also, I don't know if anyone remembers the BBC series that was on about three or four years ago? I think that was also a four month plan, and although a few people dropped out, one of the guys who completed the marathon at the end was seriously obese. If anyone can remember that series please post here as it was quite interesting.

I would be interested in reading responses to this post. Overall I want to get the message out there that long-distance racing can be enjoyed by the vast majority of people within a relatively short space of time if they are willing to committ to a challenge.

ecoli

I merged my response from the 5k thread to this one (sorry comes up before yours bit if i delete it the thread goes with it as counts as first post my bad:D)

PatientBear

ecoli wrote: »

Yes it can be done. That doesnt mean it is recommended. Going from nothing to marathon in such a short time brings with it a load of risks such as dramatic increase in injury and illness. It can also affect your mood as well as decrease in motivation which can cause you to get fed up with the sport.

You are right people should be informed about it but rather than just is it possible the should be aware of the risks as well.

Again the previous poster is just giving advice based on their experience and as a coach I personally agree. Normally I would not reccomend a marathon until a runner had atleast 2-3 years constant running under their belt. Again that i just me but I like my athletes to have the distance as an after thought. If an athlete is worried about being able to make it to the finish line i personally dont think you can enjoy it (as much as is possible to enjoy a marathon:D) again this is my personal opinion but there is no greater feeling than hitting your paces feeling controlled and feeling fast

Those are good points. The risks of injury I would agree with, and that's why I'd recommend purchasing a good book or getting professional advice. I knew one guy who actually was a regular runner and 'gave a marathon a go' and he ended up with a hip injury in the last two miles or so. His mistake was not following a training plan and he approached the race casually - which is a definite no and a foolish thing to do.

That leads on to the next point, regarding the motivation. You really have to 'hunger' for that medal from the outset, or you just won't do the training. I have to say that for my first race, I honestly did not want to do 70% of my training runs (I was doing them in the evening after work. I now do them early morning instead), but I did want to complete the race. So, yes, I'd agree with you that there is a risk of demotivation. However, I would counter that this is a sign that the person hadn't fully understood the committment required.

One the flip side, a successful finish really is a peak experience and well, well worth the pain of training. I personally would recommend a person taking the challenge 'with their eyes open'. Once you research the challenge, you'll soon get a gut feeling whether it's something you want to take on or not. The first marathon is very much a personal challenge, and the motivations can be quite deep rooted.

p.s. no worries on combining the posts! It adds to the context.

RayCun

PatientBear wrote: »

Those are good points. The risks of injury I would agree with, and that's why I'd recommend purchasing a good book or getting professional advice. I knew one guy who actually was a regular runner and 'gave a marathon a go' and he ended up with a hip injury in the last two miles or so. His mistake was not following a training plan and he approached the race casually - which is a definite no and a foolish thing to do.

The implication is that 'following a training plan' will ensure you avoid injury, and it won't. Marathon running places enormous stress on your body. If you have a good level of running fitness then your body is prepared for that stress, if you're coming from the couch then it isn't. A training plan will tell you the best way to load that stress gradually, but too much is still too much.

Sure, some people can do it. But the risk of injury is much higher.

PatientBear

RayCun wrote: »

The implication is that 'following a training plan' will ensure you avoid injury, and it won't. Marathon running places enormous stress on your body. If you have a good level of running fitness then your body is prepared for that stress, if you're coming from the couch then it isn't. A training plan will tell you the best way to load that stress gradually, but too much is still too much.

Sure, some people can do it. But the risk of injury is much higher.

I wouldn't agree with these assertions, being a) that the plan claims to be risk free training and b) that it is only for a select few.

a) The risk of injury is not necessarily higher on the four-month plan, but at the same time it is not risk-free either. The four month plan is a gradual load and is specifically designed for novice runners. Hence it is geared purely on distance, without zero emphasis on speed. For those who are extremely unfit, an additional month is offered.

There is no assertion that you will avoid injury, the plan merely states that if you commit to the overall plan (and by this I mean everything outlined in the book) you should be able to complete your first marathon. That's all. My reference to the guy who injured himself was to demonstrate that danger of approaching a marathon casually. You can only build the required endurance by training accordingly.

b) The training plan is not for just some people, it is designed for a broad segment of the population. The creator of the schedule offers an academic course in the US in which completing a marathon is the project. If you do it, you get an A. If you fail, you get an F. There is no other grade. Only one person had failed the course at the time of publication, and hundreds have completed it. The only condition for entry to the course is that you have NOT been engaged in regular running prior to the course.

As a quantitative backup, I recommend viewing the reviews of the book on Amazon. Only two people have given detailed critiques based on personal experience (which I respect), while the remainder grading at three stars of less offer a great deal of opinion. It has only 16 reviews at three stars or less and over 200 at four and five stars (the majority being five star). Positive feedback on the schedule is overwhelming.

So to sum up, I would say that most people can do this plan, and the injury factor is not necessarily higher due to the plan being tailored for novice runners.

RayCun

PatientBear wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with these assertions, being a) that the plan claims to be risk free training

That's in response to your

I knew one guy who actually was a regular runner and 'gave a marathon a go' and he ended up with a hip injury in the last two miles or so. His mistake was not following a training plan

which suggests that if he had followed a training plan, he wouldn't have been injured.

PatientBear wrote: »

and b) that it is only for a select few.

I didn't say anything like that.

My position is this.

• Training for a marathon puts a lot of stress on your body, so there is an inherent risk of injury.
• If you are an experienced runner, who has built up endurance, you reduce (though not eliminate) that injury risk.
• If you follow a good training plan, that builds the stress gradually, you reduce (though not eliminate) that injury risk.
• Some people are lucky enough to complete a marathon without following a proper plan and/or without having a good base.
• But I wouldn't advise anybody to sign up for a marathon without either.

yosser hughes

I did my first marathon after only 4 months training. A bit less tha 4 actually. No injuries and I found that the target of the marathon motivated me.
Of course, I think it is preferable to do a lot more training, but I'm just throwing my tuppence worth in. I'd say a year training is plenty. Not sure about 2 or 3 years! Seems a bit over the top.

plodder

yosser hughes wrote: »

I did my first marathon after only 4 months training. A bit less tha 4 actually. No injuries and I found that the target of the marathon motivated me.
Of course, I think it is preferable to do a lot more training, but I'm just throwing my tuppence worth in. I'd say a year training is plenty. Not sure about 2 or 3 years! Seems a bit over the top.

I did as well. If you're not aiming for a time, and you're not too much out of shape (weight wise) I think it's do-able. Also, it gives you an easy target for improvement in subsequent years.

milosh

I did my first marathon last year with 4 months training. My fitness levels were pretty poor heading into it but the fact that I had a specific plan to follow and a long term tangible goal at the end of the plan made it easy. It also helps that you reach milestones along the route e.g. first time running 10 miles, first half marathon etc. I would have thought that the vast majority of people who followed the novice mentored threads here over the past few years were very new to running and most people completed the run without too much difficulty. I sometimes think there can be an over inflation of how difficult the marathon is to complete from those who have one behind them.

I would encourage anyone with a reasonable level of fitness to give it a go.

RayCun

milosh wrote: »

I would have thought that the vast majority of people who followed the novice mentored threads here over the past few years were very new to running and most people completed the run without too much difficulty.

I had a look back over previous years before starting this year's thread. I think everyone who got to the start line finished the marathon - but quite a lot of people didn't make it to the start line, and a few finished in more pain than they'd expected.

wurzlitzer

Hi Guys
New around here was in gear and equipment and a came acroos this thread.
A friend of mine convinced me to sign up for the DCM, sort of regretting it now.

Have no planning plan as such.
I run 5k Mon, Wed, and Fri
8k every tues & thurs, 1K of which is up the Kyber in the park.

I run 10K at the weekend either 5k on sat followed by 5K on sunday, or i run 10K in the park one of the weekend days.

I have been running between 20K and 30K a week for 3 months now.

Other excercise
16K five days a week on a road bike.
1-3 hours of yoga per week
Starting swimming lessons in july and August.

Total novice, Am I mad? Do I need to do some running on a track?

Four months seems like very little time now.
Maybe I could be an experiment of this thread?

menoscemo

wurzlitzer wrote: »

Total novice, Am I mad? Do I need to do some running on a track?

Four months seems like very little time now.
Maybe I could be an experiment of this thread?

I'd recommend you follow the DCMnovice mentored thread. You'll get more support over there.

PatientBear

milosh wrote: »

I did my first marathon last year with 4 months training. My fitness levels were pretty poor heading into it but the fact that I had a specific plan to follow and a long term tangible goal at the end of the plan made it easy. It also helps that you reach milestones along the route e.g. first time running 10 miles, first half marathon etc. I would have thought that the vast majority of people who followed the novice mentored threads here over the past few years were very new to running and most people completed the run without too much difficulty. I sometimes think there can be an over inflation of how difficult the marathon is to complete from those who have one behind them.

I would encourage anyone with a reasonable level of fitness to give it a go.

That's precisely what I think too. I think it's good to have the marathon demystified and not have it held up there as some kind of sacred cow. If people realise that long-distance races such as marathons can be prepared for and successfully done within relatively short spaces of time, then it may motivate them to try more and do more in sports in general. It certainly did for me.

I think the marathon should be seen as an accessible and positive challenge to undertake, and not something daunting and intimidating.

PatientBear

wurzlitzer wrote: »

Hi Guys

Total novice, Am I mad? Do I need to do some running on a track?

Four months seems like very little time now.
Maybe I could be an experiment of this thread?

By DCM you mean Dublin City Marathon? If you genuinely do not want to do it, just drop out. You should want to do it for your own reasons, and not because of peer pressure.

However, if you're borderline on the issue either way, I say give it a go and I'd strongly recommend you purchase the book I referred to above or at least view the actual schedule which I have linked above. If the DCM is in October, then you should have enough time as you are already at the standard of the first month of training. However, you'll have to introduce one consistently longer run each week, peaking with an 18 mile run three weeks before the marathon.

I would also say definitely do not attempt to complete a full marathon unless you are willing to build up your distance runs and make use of tried training program. You'll be courting an injury otherwise and potentially a big blow to your self-esteem if you have to drop out of the race...

thirstywork2

if you just want to get around schedule then 4 months shoul dbe no probelm if you walk/run
If you are aiming for a time then 4months isn't enough.
I had debated doing the marathon this year but after speaking to a few people who are ''experienced'' I realised its not going to happen.

I havn't run a marathon so maybe people with ''experience'' might know better

gerard65

wurzlitzer wrote: »

A friend of mine convinced me to sign up for the DCM, sort of regretting it now.

Forget it. Unless your 100% commited to that race it screw you, chew you up and spit you out. The marathon is a killer, there is no half measures.

ecoli

wurzlitzer wrote: »

Hi Guys
New around here was in gear and equipment and a came acroos this thread.
A friend of mine convinced me to sign up for the DCM, sort of regretting it now.

Have no planning plan as such.
I run 5k Mon, Wed, and Fri
8k every tues & thurs, 1K of which is up the Kyber in the park.

I run 10K at the weekend either 5k on sat followed by 5K on sunday, or i run 10K in the park one of the weekend days.

I have been running between 20K and 30K a week for 3 months now.

Other excercise
16K five days a week on a road bike.
1-3 hours of yoga per week
Starting swimming lessons in july and August.

Total novice, Am I mad? Do I need to do some running on a track?

Four months seems like very little time now.
Maybe I could be an experiment of this thread?

I would say you are better off than this thread is suggesting (nothing to marathon in four months). You have built up a solid base over the last 3 months of constant running topped with alot of cross training.

This is alot more sensible that the approach suggested and If you are just looking to get around as TW says i think you would have no problem getting around. I would suggest looking at the training logs section at the Novice runner there are some safe progression programs there which will get you to complete it.

Again if it is something you want to do go for it, if the only reason you are regretting it is because you are not sure if you will finish as I said I think you are in alot better situation than most who attempt it. Again personally I think people should try not to get obsessed with the marathon distance at first and can get great achievement out of training for 5k/10k. Have been running 14 year myself and have still yet to attempt a marathon and get great satisfaction out of racing the shorter distances but again that is not for everyone.

Best of luck what ever you decide

PatientBear

ecoli wrote: »

I would say you are better off than this thread is suggesting (nothing to marathon in four months). You have built up a solid base over the last 3 months of constant running topped with alot of cross training.

This is alot more sensible that the approach suggested and If you are just looking to get around as TW says i think you would have no problem getting around. I would suggest looking at the training logs section at the Novice runner there are some safe progression programs there which will get you to complete it.

Again if it is something you want to do go for it, if the only reason you are regretting it is because you are not sure if you will finish as I said I think you are in alot better situation than most who attempt it. Again personally I think people should try not to get obsessed with the marathon distance at first and can get great achievement out of training for 5k/10k. Have been running 14 year myself and have still yet to attempt a marathon and get great satisfaction out of racing the shorter distances but again that is not for everyone.

Best of luck what ever you decide

I'd agree that Wurlitzer's fitness level is obviously good, but the big issue here is the lack of long training runs. You must do them to compete in a marathon because the long runs actually build up bone thickness and strength. There's a big difference between having the cardio fitness to get around the course, and the actually physical endurance required to take the punishment.

Without doing the long runs consistently, you should not do a marathon. Frequent short runs are not a substitute. However the good news is that Wurlitzer can move directly into a novice marathoner's training schedule right now if he wishes.

anymore

wurzlitzer wrote: »

Hi Guys
New around here was in gear and equipment and a came acroos this thread.
A friend of mine convinced me to sign up for the DCM, sort of regretting it now.

Have no planning plan as such.
I run 5k Mon, Wed, and Fri
8k every tues & thurs, 1K of which is up the Kyber in the park.

I run 10K at the weekend either 5k on sat followed by 5K on sunday, or i run 10K in the park one of the weekend days.

I have been running between 20K and 30K a week for 3 months now.

Other excercise
16K five days a week on a road bike.
1-3 hours of yoga per week
Starting swimming lessons in july and August.

Total novice, Am I mad? Do I need to do some running on a track?

Four months seems like very little time now.
Maybe I could be an experiment of this thread?

Google HH Marathon schedules and follow one.

anymore

ecoli wrote: »

I would say you are better off than this thread is suggesting (nothing to marathon in four months). You have built up a solid base over the last 3 months of constant running topped with alot of cross training.

This is alot more sensible that the approach suggested and If you are just looking to get around as TW says i think you would have no problem getting around. I would suggest looking at the training logs section at the Novice runner there are some safe progression programs there which will get you to complete it.

Again if it is something you want to do go for it, if the only reason you are regretting it is because you are not sure if you will finish as I said I think you are in alot better situation than most who attempt it. Again personally I think people should try not to get obsessed with the marathon distance at first and can get great achievement out of training for 5k/10k. Have been running 14 year myself and have still yet to attempt a marathon and get great satisfaction out of racing the shorter distances but again that is not for everyone.

Best of luck what ever you decide

Agree with what you say. I was an occassional/slighly regualr runner and went from training for marathon in June last to running Dingle marathon in five hours in sept and then running Dublin in Oct in 4 hours. I hadnt trained enough for Dingle but was fine for Dublin.

ecoli

PatientBear wrote: »

I'd agree that Wurlitzer's fitness level is obviously good, but the big issue here is the lack of long training runs. You must do them to compete in a marathon because the long runs actually build up bone thickness and strength. There's a big difference between having the cardio fitness to get around the course, and the actually physical endurance required to take the punishment.

Without doing the long runs consistently, you should not do a marathon. Frequent short runs are not a substitute. However the good news is that Wurlitzer can move directly into a novice marathoner's training schedule right now if he wishes.

My point was through boosting their cardio system through cross training as well as building slow twitch fibers, mithochondria,blood volume, capillary density and increase impact resistance (i presume this is what you meant by bone thickness and strength) the poster is in alot better and safer position to build up their mileage both in long runs and their supplementary weekly mileage than that of someone starting from scratch on your 4 month plan.By focusing on the long run for someone who has a very small base you are overloading the stress on the body and ultimately the body cant repair sufficiently to become stronger and ultimately breaks down

Yes long runs are a vital component to any marathon training plan but they are only one of a number of vital ingredients to a plan. The poster has made a very sensible approach to their training that alot of people would do well to emulate

PatientBear

ecoli wrote: »

My point was through boosting their cardio system through cross training as well as building slow twitch fibers, mithochondria,blood volume, capillary density and increase impact resistance (i presume this is what you meant by bone thickness and strength) the poster is in alot better and safer position to build up their mileage both in long runs and their supplementary weekly mileage than that of someone starting from scratch on your 4 month plan.By focusing on the long run for someone who has a very small base you are overloading the stress on the body and ultimately the body cant repair sufficiently to become stronger and ultimately breaks down

Yes long runs are a vital component to any marathon training plan but they are only one of a number of vital ingredients to a plan. The poster has made a very sensible approach to their training that alot of people would do well to emulate

Actually when I say bone thickness I mean bone density, which is more precise, but you get the drift.

I'd agree with you that a person who has run and cross-trained frequently is much better off than a person off the couch - that's certainly clear - but the long runs are the be all and end all of marathon training. There's no other way around it and nothing will compensate for a lack of long training runs. The key is to build them gradually so that there is sufficient time for repair and this is already accounted for in the training plan I recommend.

Wurlitzer has a great base to move from, but it's a distance race and you have to build distance to do it. That will mean moving out of the existing limits and comfort zone and into a standalone marathon training schedule, and that schedule will place a heavy emphasis on long training runs. If you are not prepared to do those runs, don't bother with the marathon.

Sorry if I'm coming across as bit of a fundamentalist here, but the effort required to build long-distance capability in a short timespan - such as the four month plan being discussed - means that you have to become focused on distance. Three times a week you will do training runs of a maximum of 8 miles, which is not so bad, but once in the week you will do a training run of up 18 miles. This is without doubt the most important training session.

Also, this does not leave much time or stamina left for cross-training, and you may be forced to jettison or substitue some of those other activities in order to reach your goal or you run the risk of becoming fatigued.

For a marathon we must train the way that we have to, not the way that we want to or which is convenient for us...

ecoli

PatientBear wrote: »

Actually when I say bone thickness I mean bone density, which is more precise, but you get the drift.

I'd agree with you that a person who has run and cross-trained frequently is much better off than a person off the couch - that's certainly clear - but the long runs are the be all and end all of marathon training. There's no other way around it and nothing will compensate for a lack of long training runs. The key is to build them gradually so that there is sufficient time for repair and this is already accounted for in the training plan I recommend.

Wurlitzer has a great base to move from, but it's a distance race and you have to build distance to do it. That will mean moving out of the existing limits and comfort zone and into a standalone marathon training schedule, and that schedule will place a heavy emphasis on long training runs. If you are not prepared to do those runs, don't bother with the marathon.

Sorry if I'm coming across as bit of a fundamentalist here, but the effort required to build long-distance capability in a short timespan - such as the four month plan being discussed - means that you have to become focused on distance. Three times a week you will do training runs of a maximum of 8 miles, which is not so bad, but once in the week you will do a training run of up 18 miles. This is without doubt the most important training session.

Also, this does not leave much time or stamina left for cross-training, and you may be forced to jettison or substitue some of those other activities in order to reach your goal or you run the risk of becoming fatigued.

For a marathon we must train the way that we have to, not the way that we want to or which is convenient for us...

You are missing the point completely here. You have interpreted one important aspect of marathon training and blindly focused on that to the detriment of all other aspects. Yes the long run is one of the most crucial parts of the marathon program but you need to build up the body to allow it to cope with a long run. Your LSR needs to be proportionate to your weekly mileage.

The plan you have mentioned has half of your weekly mileage run in one run this is far too much and creates huge injury risks. Because a beginner athlete has not developed the muscular strength to allow the body to sufficiently cope with such a dramatic increase in mileage it ultimately breaks down.

The idea is to stress the body and adapt by overloading and overcompensation within the body. If over done the body cannot adapt and get the benefits. Most coaches recommend no more that 20% - 25% of your overall weekly mileage should account for your Long Run.

Among the most common injuries in running are overuse injuries such as shin splints,runners knee etc. These are also among the most common complaints that beginners have and the reason for this is that they have not developed the muscular and skeletal strength and stability to cope with the training load which is why this needs to be gradually introduced.

Going from nothing to an 18 mile run in 10 weeks is just asking for trouble. Again you may get around but you are increasing the risk of putting your body through significant damage as a result and people need to be aware of this.

wurzlitzer

Hi
Thanks a million guys for all the info

I am going to do it, my mind is made up, I think I have enough strong will.

I have no technical knowledge, but think I am going to wing it and follow the Novice thread also.

The plan for July will be to increase
my runs from 5k to 6k on Mon, Wed, Fri

8k to 10K every tues and thurs
16k in one run at the weekend

Cut out two days cycling, therefore only cycle 3/5 days that I am currently cycling
Two more yoga classes on the days I do not cycle.

I will do this for the month of July and see how I get on,
I will up the distance in August, if I feel comfortable.

Might start keeping a weekly log to keep me motivated.

Cheers guys

Later

RayCun

Why not take a look at the Novices thread?

wurzlitzer

RayCun wrote: »

Why not take a look at the Novices thread?

I will, intended doing this, but thanks for pointing me in the right direction:)

Gringo78

PatientBear wrote: »

Three times a week you will do training runs of a maximum of 8 miles, which is not so bad, but once in the week you will do a training run of up 18 miles. This is without doubt the most important training session.

Is it really neccessary for a beginner aiming for >4hrs in the marathon to do 18 miles? I mean, they should be only running it at 10min miles so a 15mile run is already 2.5hrs which is a fair long run. To be honest, I can't see how anyone should be out on the road for longer than 3hrs during training for a marathon, and at that only a couple of times during training cycle.

In fact, I imagine 2 x 1.5hr runs easy at the weekend might be more beneficial than a 3hr run and you'd be a lot less likely to be injured. When I look at a Hal Higdon novice plan and see a 20 mile run for a 4:30 marathoner - you're talking 4.5 hours out on the road for a training run? For a complete beginner? What elite does that it training?

plodder

It might be better to work off a standard plan as well, rather than a home-made one. You'd get the benefit of all the science behind training methods and influences without having to know much about them (initially anyway). For instance, most plans will be progressive in the sense that the mileage is increased gradually. And there's a lot of other very important factors that wouldn't be obvious from just looking at them as well.

eg http://www.halhigdon.com/marathon/Mar00index.htm

You don't have to pick the easiest one. Just pick one that starts roughly at the level of effort you are doing currently.

heffsarmy

It depends on alot of things the person age, weight, health etc. If your grossly over weight forget about it and loose the weight before you attempt a marathon program. If your an average person aged 20 - 40, without no medical conditions, carrying a stone or two above your normal weight you could easily run a marathon within 4 months. I never ran before my first marathon programme, I used halhigdons program a combintaion of novice and intermediate and finished in 3hrs 14mins. For your first program just stick to whatever schedule you decide and keep it consistent, you don't need to get caught up in tempo runs, marathon pace runs etc. I would recommend halhigdon as they will get you over the line. After that if you decide you want to take things more serious, I would recommend joining a club.

PatientBear

ecoli wrote: »

You are missing the point completely here. You have interpreted one important aspect of marathon training and blindly focused on that to the detriment of all other aspects. Yes the long run is one of the most crucial parts of the marathon program but you need to build up the body to allow it to cope with a long run. Your LSR needs to be proportionate to your weekly mileage.

The plan you have mentioned has half of your weekly mileage run in one run this is far too much and creates huge injury risks. Because a beginner athlete has not developed the muscular strength to allow the body to sufficiently cope with such a dramatic increase in mileage it ultimately breaks down.

The idea is to stress the body and adapt by overloading and overcompensation within the body. If over done the body cannot adapt and get the benefits. Most coaches recommend no more that 20% - 25% of your overall weekly mileage should account for your Long Run.

Among the most common injuries in running are overuse injuries such as shin splints,runners knee etc. These are also among the most common complaints that beginners have and the reason for this is that they have not developed the muscular and skeletal strength and stability to cope with the training load which is why this needs to be gradually introduced.

Going from nothing to an 18 mile run in 10 weeks is just asking for trouble. Again you may get around but you are increasing the risk of putting your body through significant damage as a result and people need to be aware of this.

No Man, I'm not missing the point completely here. You can only train for distance by doing distance, that's something that must be respected for the get go. What I'm trying to get across here is that distance must be respected. You're stating that building to an 18 mile run in 10 weeks is asking for trouble. But if you can't do that, how will you introduce a taper before the race? And if you can cover more than two/thirds of the distance in training, how will you do it on the day?

The stresses of this program are accounted for by the incremental increases in distance over time AND a rejection of time objectives. There is zero emphasis on speed. This is very much a walk/run program and this also subtracts a great amount of unnecessary stress.

Also, remember that my comments are in the context of a four month program, which is what this thread is about. I'm sure you could devise a much richer marathon training program, but not in a four month limit. I recommend cutting out cross training in a four month period so that the athelete is spared additional stress. This is a short program, and hence is very focused on a single objective - building capability to do distance.

I appreciate your comments, and consider them valuable, but it is wrong for you to state that this plan is asking for trouble. This is a well regarded and well respected plan. If it's not to your taste that's fine, but it works and works very well. If you want to reject it as a concept, you'll have to find quantitative evidence which can counter the existing supporting data in its favour.

My concern with the content of some of your posts is that - although you clearly know your subject matter well - you may lead novice runners to believe that in a four month program they will be able to cross train and do other sports etc. For the short duration involved, it's not worth the risk and the benefits would be suspect.

This is a narrow program, a focused program, but also a highly successful program.