Advertisement
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

124»

Comments

  • #92
    TFBubendorfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭TFBubendorfer


    04072511 wrote: »
    Lads this thread is blatently a piss take!

    And it took 7 pages for someone to point this out :eek:


  • #93
    tunney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    04072511 wrote: »
    Lads this thread is blatently a piss take!

    Some of the best threads are :)


  • #94
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    tunney wrote: »
    Some of the best threads are :)

    Like the 4 minute mile thread :)


  • #95
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    TFBubendorfer wrote: »
    And it took 7 pages for someone to point this out :eek:

    It may not have started out as a piss take, but that is what we turned it into.


  • #96
    shels4ever
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,598 ✭✭✭shels4ever


    Yep it's a bit of a piss take 7 pages aboud doing something that anyone who puts their mind to can do...

    what about 2:30 marathons must be worth another few pages ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Clearlier
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,461 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    bart simpson wrote: »
    he wasnt an ordinary guy

    The problem with this assertion is that it's a circular argument along the lines of:
    I know an ordinary guy who did 2:45 after two years of training
    He's not ordinary
    Why not?
    Because he ran 2:45 after two years of training....
    04072511 wrote: »
    Lads this thread is blatently a piss take!

    Yes, but most people secretly want to believe that they could do it. It's a chance to day dream.

    I was going to bring Steve Way up as an example of somebody who as an ordinary guy ran 3:06 but when he decided to find out what he could do ran 2:35 after 6 months of serious training. The thing is - I suspect most people would say that he isn't an ordinary guy. Is he not ordinary because he takes his training seriously though or because he has some extraordinary ability? I'd argue it's more the former than the latter although that's not to say that ability has nothing to do with it just that I don't see that he has some kind of freakish talent that puts him on a different level to most of the rest of us.


  • #98
    Rantan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 612 ✭✭✭Rantan


    rom wrote: »
    Oh sorry wrong person. I thought you may have been the guy who dresses as forest gump. my bad. then I was a long way behind so :(

    me too actually...I saw that guy in Kildare in May and passed him in dublin this year looking a bit wrecked near thte end...tough running in a pair of chino's I would imagine....


  • #99
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    Pronator wrote: »
    Still not sure its possible for someone to run a first marathon in 2.45?? I think this thread has said it all at this stage:eek:

    I ran my first marathon in 2:44. I had been running for 8 years at that stage though. If i had to run my first marathon after a year i may have managed 3:10-3:15.


  • #100
    rom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,147 ✭✭✭rom


    So 79 people ran DCM in sub 2:45 (as there is 3 WCH under that time). That's of 11720 finishers.

    So 79 runners minus the 12 Kenya's which leaves you with 67 runners.

    Thats .57 of 1% of finishers.

    Something tells me that those 67 are not "trying to get fit" or would start such treads.

    Its like saying how fit would you have to be to do the tour de france. The top percentage at any sport takes a little more than just hard work.

    IMHO you would have to go through a good few rocky style montages to get there.

    I suggest you start off with this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP3MFBzMH2o


  • #101
    ecoli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,762 ✭✭✭✭ecoli


    04072511 wrote: »
    Lads this thread is blatently a piss take!

    I have to say have alot more time for these threads in recent years just from experience.

    In college we had a kid with no major sporting background walk up to the athletics stand saying Im pretty fast can I join I wanna make the Ireland team.

    That would have been a piss take type scenario except that year he made the Ireland team and now is a sub 22 200m guy

    I know there is a difference between the aerobic base needed to be built up etc but for every one of these threads there can be a 00.001% chance they do it.

    Stick to a simple explain the difficulty in it point them in right direction and leave it at that. Its alot easier than spending page after page trying to slam them or any person with the notion of aiming for high standard (be it realistic or not)


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    bart simpson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭bart simpson


    Clearlier wrote: »
    Is he not ordinary because he takes his training seriously though or because he has some extraordinary ability? I'd argue it's more the former than the latter although that's not to say that ability has nothing to do with it just that I don't see that he has some kind of freakish talent that puts him on a different level to most of the rest of us.

    having the disapline to put in so many hours training is a talent

    being able to train smartly and knowing your body and training in sync with it is a talent

    being able to pace your race to get the utmost out of your body is a talent

    having the concentration and mental strength to keep a pace like that is a talent.

    and thats just some of the mental talent required, we might possess a body that is capable of doing sub 2:40 but do we have the mental qualities to do that? they are just as important.
    so i think he is on a different level to the rest of us, to say otherwise is just belittling his acheivement, and the acheivements of anyone slower than him

    if you met a guy that was a good guitar player, you would just say "your pretty talented" you wouldnt say "well if i played 20 hours a week id be as good as you" thats kinda what i getting at, some lads will get there quicker than others, thats natural talent, but if earned talent gets you to the same level thats even more impressive.


  • #103
    Clearlier
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,461 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    bart simpson wrote: »
    having the disapline to put in so many hours training is a talent

    being able to train smartly and knowing your body and training in sync with it is a talent

    being able to pace your race to get the utmost out of your body is a talent

    having the concentration and mental strength to keep a pace like that is a talent.

    and thats just some of the mental talent required, we might possess a body that is capable of doing sub 2:40 but do we have the mental qualities to do that? they are just as important.
    so i think he is on a different level to the rest of us, to say otherwise is just belittling his acheivement, and the acheivements of anyone slower than him

    if you met a guy that was a good guitar player, you would just say "your pretty talented" you wouldnt say "well if i played 20 hours a week id be as good as you" thats kinda what i getting at, some lads will get there quicker than others, thats natural talent, but if earned talent gets you to the same level thats even more impressive.

    I have a 4 year old son who recently started school and one of the things I'm working hard at is telling him that I'm proud of his hard work and avoiding completely suggesting that he's clever. If you've read 'Bounce' by Matthew Syed he outlines what a destructive thing it is to tell somebody that they're clever or have a talent. For that reason I'd be very cautious about telling anybody that they must be really talented. I'm not too fussed about people telling me that I'm talented at anything either. I'd much rather them recognise the work that I've put in to go to where I am. That's not to say that I think hard work is everything. I believe that both nature and nurture have a role to play in the development of a person and their abilities (more than ever since my 1 year old arrived into the world).

    Steve has said that he has some talent and he has but he also works ferociously hard at running and that's where your point about mental strength is relevant and I completely agree with you on that. If anything my point about Steve was that I don't think that he has some kind of freakish level of physical ability. I think that it's his hard work and dedication that have brought him to where he is.

    I don't think that it belittles Steve's achievements to suggest that they're mostly down to hard work. I think it makes more of them than suggesting that it's mainly down to some genetic talent that he has.


  • #104
    myflipflops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭myflipflops


    RayCun wrote: »
    About 70 men ran under 2.45 in Dublin last month, around 1% of the field?

    How many of the 99% dedicated 12-24 months of proper training with the specific goal of trying to run a quick time?

    I suspect about 1% of the 99%.

    The reason why more people (back to my standard: healthy males under 40) don't run sub 3 hours is that a tiny precentage of people actually train hard. This is not a criticism - lots of factors get in the way, life being the major one.

    Most people seriously underestimate their capabilities too. The evidence of this is represented all over this forum.


  • #105
    couerdelion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭couerdelion


    myflipflops wrote: »
    How many of the 99% dedicated 12-24 months of proper training with the specific goal of trying to run a quick time?

    I suspect about 1% of the 99%.

    The reason why more people (back to my standard: healthy males under 40) don't run sub 3 hours is that a tiny precentage of people actually train hard. This is not a criticism - lots of factors get in the way, life being the major one.

    Most people seriously underestimate their capabilities too. The evidence of this is represented all over this forum.

    "Whether you think that you can or that you can't, you are usually right" - Henry Ford.

    A lot to be said about the power of mental attitude. Although I won't be running a 2:45 anytime soon!


  • #106
    oxygen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 852 ✭✭✭oxygen


    04072511 wrote: »
    Lads this thread is blatently a piss take!


    Hey. This isn’t a piss take thread. I honestly was just wondering if it was in my capabilities with several months of training to hit a sub 2hr 45m marathon. I've read through all the replies, and am very sure that it isn’t within my capability. I was pretty sure after the first couple of replies tbh. It’s not just motivation or dedication, I work a full time job with a 2 hour commute each side, I think that limits the time I would need massively.

    I would like to think this thread morphed into what level of fitness is required to go below a 2hr 45m marathon and how much training is required for it. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that sort of a thread either.

    For the record, my aim is now just to complete the marathon in a relatively respectful time. I’m not considering the sub 2:45 automatic qualification time.

    Thanks to everyone for their reply, particularly those who said it was maybe possible. Unfortunately, I realistically don’t have the time or inclination :(


  • #107
    Pisco Sour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,029 ✭✭✭Pisco Sour


    oxygen_temp wrote: »
    Hey. This isn’t a piss take thread. I honestly was just wondering if it was in my capabilities with several months of training to hit a sub 2hr 45m marathon. I've read through all the replies, and am very sure that it isn’t within my capability. I was pretty sure after the first couple of replies tbh. It’s not just motivation or dedication, I work a full time job with a 2 hour commute each side, I think that limits the time I would need massively.

    I would like to think this thread morphed into what level of fitness is required to go below a 2hr 45m marathon and how much training is required for it. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that sort of a thread either.

    For the record, my aim is now just to complete the marathon in a relatively respectful time. I’m not considering the sub 2:45 automatic qualification time.

    Thanks to everyone for their reply, particularly those who said it was maybe possible. Unfortunately, I realistically don’t have the time or inclination :(

    You havent given us any information on how fast you can do 400m, a mile, 5k etc etc. If you did then we could give better answers.


Advertisement