Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

How fit would you need to be to do a marathon in 2hour 45minutes

24

Comments

  • #32
    Top Honcho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3 ✭Top Honcho


    Obviously if he was to even contemplate giving this a shot he couldn't just start on an advanced programme it would be baby steps only.

    Fantasy island and with all the time and motivation to do it what would the ultimate plans be to prepare for this target.

    Nov-Dec - plan??

    Jan - April - plan??

    May - Oct - plan??

    Might give more people an idea of the dedication and work involved


  • #33
    ecoli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,762 ✭✭✭✭ecoli


    Top Honcho wrote: »
    Obviously if he was to even contemplate giving this a shot he couldn't just start on an advanced programme it would be baby steps only.

    Fantasy island and with all the time and motivation to do it what would the ultimate plans be to prepare for this target.

    Nov-Dec - plan??

    Jan - April - plan??

    May - Oct - plan??

    Might give more people an idea of the dedication and work involved

    Nov- Jan Build miles slowly. This is ten weeks so you would want to be up to about 50 or so per week consistently.

    Feb - May Continue to build while adding tempo work and hills. Aim would be to be up around 80-90 week in / week out.

    Jun - Nov begin Marathon specific training

    Again I would stress that there is no margin for error with a person going from nothing to this level. Normally I am not one to profess the use of HR stuff but given that you need to make every mile count suggestion would be to follow Hadd's HR basis would be the best approach in this case

    (there is a link in Beep Beeps thread)
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055618298&page=65


  • #34
    bart simpson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭bart simpson


    if you are an average runner you will need run 2/3000 miles a year for 3 years, if you did 9000 miles in 4 years you would have a better chance. but there is stilll a big possibility that you still wont break 2:45
    2:45 is a time that is held in great esteem by nearly all marathon runners, and people that complete a sub 2:45 on their debut or second marathon are usually not average, they have showed talent and have accomplished achevements at shorter distances
    it is worth noting that in the early days of marathon running sub 2:45 would have being a World Record!!!

    and as others have said the commitment required to undertake such training means that a sub 2:45 marathoner cannot be completed by an average person because average people dont undertake such a challenge.


  • #35
    drquirky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭drquirky


    Ha-

    This thread is interesting. I have a huge amount of respect for someone who has run 2:45 after my recent Dublin experience. I went in reasonably confident of breaking 3 hours based on the fact that I've run some decent times on lower distances in the past. I've run 4:40 in the mile, high 15's for 5k (both a good few yrs ago) and a decent 1:22 in the HM not 8 weeks before my DCM sub 3 attempt- still I got to mile 20/21, blew up and hadn't a hope of going through the 3 hour mark- in fact I got passed by the 3:15 pace group coming up to the finish line!

    All this is to say that the marathon is a totally different animal to anything you have probably ever experienced. To get to the kind of time you are looking at- it would require imo a few years of build up and experience building. Also I agree with the comments on smart training- its only in retrospect I see the huge deficencies in my training that reared their head with a vengance on marathon day!


  • #36
    Pronator
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Pronator


    tunney wrote: »
    Completely disagree. I know very average athletes who train hard but not stupidly and ran 2:45 in DCM - main thing was smart

    I know superior athletes who trained much harder but more stupidly and only ran a 2:3x.

    With discipline and work and an intelligent I don't see why its impossible. I'm surprised more people don't do it to be honest.

    The reason why more people don't do it, is because it is bloody hard, it takes a certain type of individual and I'm not talking solely about athletic ability.

    I'm sure if you look at each individual in DCM 2011 that broke 2:45 this year they were at the very least a decent club runner and not a first time marathoner.

    People that have not run marathon's, do not understand them. You can follow all schedules in the world but nothing perpares you physologically for the last 10k of a marathon.

    Yes I agree, that people should train smart but it's unrealistic to think that someone who has not done a marathon before, would sub 2.45 in their first marathon. I'm not saying impossible, I'm saying highly unlikely unless you are a lot more talented than you are letting on.

    A sub 3 hour attempt for a first marathon is a massive target and few do it, sub 2.45 is altogether a different agenda.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    billyhead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,095 ✭✭✭✭billyhead


    tunney wrote: »
    Completely disagree. I know very average athletes who train hard but not stupidly and ran 2:45 in DCM - main thing was smart

    I know superior athletes who trained much harder but more stupidly and only ran a 2:3x.

    With discipline and work and an intelligent I don't see why its impossible. I'm surprised more people don't do it to be honest.

    Have to agree here. I ran a sub 2:55 marathon in New York a few years ago (1st marathon) with max mileage per week of about 50 miles nearly half was my long run at the week end approaching the event. I had only taken up the sport about 9-10 months prior to the event. I also know someone very close to me who had a crappy diet and also had a poor quality training regime who consistenly entered and ran marathons under 2hrs 50 minutes so it can easily be done.


  • #38
    lamai
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 312 ✭✭lamai


    When I first read the OP post I thought it would get laughed at. Shows how much I know. I thought that all the running in the world would get you now where near 2.45 even 3hrs unless you had a talent for running.


  • #39
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    oxygen_temp wrote: »
    Hey

    I dont know much about marathon times, other than the Average is over 4 hours and the fastest was just over 2 hours.

    How fit would you need to be to complete a marathon in less than 2 hours 45 minutes? Thats the automatic qualification time to allow you to be entered in for a second NYC marathon in a row. Im automatically qualified for this year, since I have been refused 3 times in a row from the lottery.

    You wont do it unless youre a very talented runner. To achieve a 2:45 in your first year of running youd need to have the potential to run 2:20 in 5 years time. Very few people have that potential. To run 2:45 you need to run economically. A major factor in running economy is the amount of time teh athlete has been running. Generally the athlete will improve with consistent pressure year on year, usually having a breakthrough after 3 years when his skeleton has adapted. Subsequent breakthroughs are then more easily achieved as his body can take more mileage now.

    If you dont have running economy you need to force it with very high mileage. If your skeleton, muscles etc cant take the high mileage youll get injured.

    The only hope is if youre a very efficient natural runner. Then youll have decent economy and be able to take the training to reach 2:45 in one year.

    Youll have to have the talent to potentially run under 2:20 in 5 years though for the above reasons.


  • #40
    MrThrifty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭MrThrifty


    billyhead wrote: »
    Have to agree here. I ran a sub 2:55 marathon in New York a few years ago (1st marathon) with max mileage per week of about 50 miles nearly half was my long run at the week end approaching the event. I had only taken up the sport about 9-10 months prior to the event. I also know someone very close to me who had a crappy diet and also had a poor quality training regime who consistenly entered and ran marathons under 2hrs 50 minutes so it can easily be done.

    Hmmm... Would be curious of your age and also general sports background and fitness prior to taking up running. Also, it sounds like you were well guided in terms of your training programme prior to the marathon. Good for you on your time though!


  • #41
    heffsarmy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 911 ✭✭✭heffsarmy


    Loads Off these bull**** threads, what does it take sub 3hrs, sub 2.50, sub2.30...do it and tell people how you done it, not many of those threads. At the end of the day it boils down to hard training, nothing comes easy. If your good enough to run sub 2.45 off 'gaa' training, keep going you will be running for Ireland in a few years.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    thirstywork2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭thirstywork2


    RunForestRun wrote: »
    you can do it in 70 seconds, it would suggest that you have basic speed and can therefore work on endurance.

    While I agree with most of what you say Runforestrun I don't believe 70seconds is basic speed and doesn't really have a huge bearing on running a sub 2.45 marathon


  • #43
    bart simpson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭bart simpson


    i do think people that dont know the sport really do under estimate what is involved in it, a lot of people outside the sport think that "hunger" a few months training and the rocky tune on the i pod and they will only be a half hour behind the kenyans!.....it will get you to the finish line fair enough, but just finishing is a challenge, 2:45 is a sport!
    there no way ya could listen to music doing a 2:45, it would take a hell of a lot of concentration, it would be hard to keep that concentration for that long in your first year of running, im running 3 years and broke 3, i would be delighted to get to 2:45 in four years time if i put in the effort, but 6:15 minute miles is super fast!....how much would genetics come into play in a time like 2:45? a lot on here said that an average healthy young male with good training and proper attitude can break 3hrs, could the same be said for 2:45?.....i hope the answer is yes, but i do have my doubts


  • #44
    Krusty_Clown
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,530 ✭✭✭✭Krusty_Clown


    bart simpson wrote: »
    how much would genetics come into play in a time like 2:45?
    I don't think any genetics comes into running 2:45 (bearing in mind I haven't achieved the goal, I'm still three minutes off), but a propensity for avoiding injury (i.e. smart training) helps greatly.


  • #45
    bart simpson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭bart simpson


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    I don't think any genetics comes into running 2:45 (bearing in mind I haven't achieved the goal, I'm still three minutes off), but a propensity for avoiding injury (i.e. smart training) helps greatly.

    when do you think genetics begin to become a big factor? it must be 2:40 surely?


  • #46
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    I love these threads.


  • #47
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    bart simpson wrote: »
    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    I don't think any genetics comes into running 2:45 (bearing in mind I haven't achieved the goal, I'm still three minutes off), but a propensity for avoiding injury (i.e. smart training) helps greatly.

    when do you think genetics begin to become a big factor? it must be 2:40 surely?
    That is not a constant number, but will usually be found as about 5 minutes faster than the pb of the person being asked the question.


  • #48
    Top Honcho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3 ✭Top Honcho


    A lot of posters suggesting smart training for this what does this involve??


  • #49
    drquirky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭drquirky


    billyhead wrote: »
    Have to agree here. I ran a sub 2:55 marathon in New York a few years ago (1st marathon) with max mileage per week of about 50 miles nearly half was my long run at the week end approaching the event. I had only taken up the sport about 9-10 months prior to the event. I also know someone very close to me who had a crappy diet and also had a poor quality training regime who consistenly entered and ran marathons under 2hrs 50 minutes so it can easily be done.

    Really? I went back through your posts and you said a few years ago that you ran your 1st marathon in 3:02....which is it?


  • #50
    tunney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    drquirky wrote: »
    Ha-

    This thread is interesting. I have a huge amount of respect for someone who has run 2:45 after my recent Dublin experience. I went in reasonably confident of breaking 3 hours based on the fact that I've run some decent times on lower distances in the past. I've run 4:40 in the mile, high 15's for 5k (both a good few yrs ago) and a decent 1:22 in the HM not 8 weeks before my DCM sub 3 attempt- still I got to mile 20/21, blew up and hadn't a hope of going through the 3 hour mark- in fact I got passed by the 3:15 pace group coming up to the finish line!

    Really sounds like you didn't do the training.
    Pronator wrote: »
    People that have not run marathon's, do not understand them. You can follow all schedules in the world but nothing perpares you physologically for the last 10k of a marathon.

    I think most of the posters here have run marathons.

    I also disagree with the "last 10km" business. If its that bad for the last 10km then you've not done the miles, the training or lived the lifestyle to let you go out at the pace you were aiming for at mile 1.
    T runner wrote: »
    If you dont have running economy you need to force it with very high mileage. If your skeleton, muscles etc cant take the high mileage youll get injured.

    +1
    It can be forced but F me it hurts.


  • #51
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    tunney wrote: »
    Spade a spade - as far as marathon running goes 2:40 is a good club level nothing more.

    :rolleyes: So there are only 70 "good club level" marathon runners in Ireland.

    You keep using these words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    tunney wrote: »
    Spade a spade - as far as marathon running goes 2:40 is a good club level nothing more.

    That means there is only one "good" runner in my current club at the moment then out of several hundred members?

    Yes, that person is faster than the rest of us and would be good if more people could run faster. The rest of us following in his wake are far from rubbish though, well my own mediocre efforts excluded.


  • #53
    Brianderunner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,049 ✭✭✭Brianderunner


    RayCun wrote: »
    :rolleyes: So there are only 70 "good club level" marathon runners in Ireland.

    70 good club runners that did the marathon this year. Agree with Tunney on this one, over 2'45 cannot be considered good club standard. Neither can over 60 mins for 10 mls, over 17 mins for 5k etc. Just look at the world records for some perspective.


  • #54
    TheRoadRunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,983 ✭✭✭TheRoadRunner


    bart simpson wrote: »
    there no way ya could listen to music doing a 2:45

    ha, i beg to differ.

    OP give the 2.45 marathon a lash and as heffsarmy says let us know how it goes. Impossible to say if you could do it or not when you have provided very little info about your physical well being etc. Also would need to run with somebody for a while before getting an idea (and a very vague one at that) of their true ability.


  • #55
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    All depends on your definition of "good" and of "club runner".

    Club runner = someone that runs for a club.
    Good = not entirely sure, but I'd say that calling less than 1% of club runners as "good" is not fair on the rest.

    Agreed that doing a 2:40, whilst out of the reach of many on here even, is not that great a time in National or even Regional standards. It is still a bloody good speed. and most "club runners" are never going to get anywhere near it.

    You can complain that marathon running times in general have declined with these mass participation, just get round wearing a daft outfit races. But if any section of the population is actually going to be putting in anywhere near the required training for a marathon then it is these "club runners", if the vast majority of them are still not able to get close to a 2:40 then I'd rate that time as a step above "good" at least.


  • #56
    tunney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    robinph wrote: »
    That means there is only one "good" runner in my current club at the moment then out of several hundred members?

    Yes, that person is faster than the rest of us and would be good if more people could run faster. The rest of us following in his wake are far from rubbish though, well my own mediocre efforts excluded.

    Using McMillian (which all of ART seems to love so why not) - the equivalent time for a 2:40 marathon in 10km and 5km is 34:00 and 16:30.

    Not that impressive.

    Could I run 2:40 (34 or 16:30) - nope, but am I a good club runner? Nope.


  • #57
    MrThrifty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭MrThrifty


    tunney wrote: »
    I also disagree with the "last 10km" business. If its that bad for the last 10km then you've not done the miles, the training or lived the lifestyle to let you go out at the pace you were aiming for at mile 1.

    ??? For anyone running their first marathon, the last 10km can and usually is a big deal. Even if the person has done long runs in the weeks building up to the marathon, these might be ~20 miles at most, meaning that the person has NEVER run a full 26 miles. There is therefore a possibility that they will run into problems during the last 6 miles/10km then, whether that's injury related or just down to fatigue. Bear in mind here that even if the person sets out at the right pace, the actual weather conditions on the day (e.g. hot day, or very cold day) or even nerves can have a significant bearing on what happens towards the end of the race.

    I was in a running club for years and have seen runners new to marathons do all the 'right' training prior to one and still 'hit a wall' or suffer from an injury etc. at the end. These runners would have been well advised by previous marathon runners with VERY high placement (as in top 10) results. I presume that comes under what people seem to be terming here 'smart' training!

    Marathons are a challenge on the body... If doing one for fun, then grand, you'll likely get through it no probs. But if doing one seriously to break a particular time like 3 hours, then that's a different story. I've seen high placed runners take a month to recover properly afterwards (some catch a cold or virus immediately after that takes them down for a bit, others might just be worn out, others might suffer an injury (DESPITE all good training practices) etc.).


  • #58
    TheRoadRunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,983 ✭✭✭TheRoadRunner


    MrThrifty wrote: »
    ??? For anyone running their first marathon, the last 10km can and usually is a big deal. Even if the person has done long runs in the weeks building up to the marathon, these might be ~20 miles at most, meaning that the person has NEVER run a full 26 miles. There is therefore a possibility that they will run into problems during the last 6 miles/10km then, whether that's injury related or just down to fatigue. Bear in mind here that even if the person sets out at the wrong pace, the actual weather conditions on the day (e.g. hot day, or very cold day) or even nerves can have a significant bearing on what happens towards the end of the race.

    I was in a running club for years and have seen runners new to marathons do all the 'right' training prior to one and still 'hit a wall' or suffer from an injury etc. at the end. These runners would have been well advised by previous marathon runners with VERY high placement (as in top 10) results. I presume that comes under what people seem to be terming here 'smart' training!

    Marathons are a challenge on the body... If doing one for fun, then grand, you'll likely get through it no probs. But if doing one seriously to break a particular time like 3 hours, then that's a different story. I've seen high placed runners take a month to recover properly afterwards (some catch a cold or virus immediately after that takes them down for a bit, others might just be worn out, others might suffer an injury (DESPITE all good training practices) etc.).

    The point tunney is making is that if you do hit "the wall" you have either gone off faster than you had planned on or haven't trained hard enough for that pace. I've hit the wall more times in training than racing therefore training hard enough ensures I don't hit the wall in competition!


  • #59
    Rantan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 612 ✭✭✭Rantan


    I think OP should give up his ambition to run a sub 2.45 marathon..............................................and focus on running a 4 min mile instead...................it would be much more achievable...................................................in the long run!!


  • #60
    TheRoadRunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,983 ✭✭✭TheRoadRunner


    Rantan wrote: »
    I think OP should give up his ambition to run a sub 2.45 marathon..............................................and focus on running a 4 min mile instead...................it would be much more achievable...................................................in the long run!!

    True, sure it's only a mile. Real athletes run the marathon, pussys run the mile


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    MrThrifty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭MrThrifty


    TheRoadRunner wrote: »
    The point tunney is making is that if you do hit "the wall" you have either gone off faster than you had planned on or haven't trained hard enough for that pace. I've hit the wall more times in training than racing therefore training hard enough ensures I don't hit the wall in competition!

    Out of curiosity, for your first marathon, did your training at any point prior to it involve running a full 26 miles at marathon pace? If not, then I rest my case.

    Agree that heading off faster than planned can lead to this but there are lots of subtleties too (e.g. weather conditions on the day, meals prior to race, nerves etc.) that can lead to it.


Advertisement