Half marathon as predictor of marathon time

ittakestwo

Van.Bosch wrote: »

I am similar to this, my head knows "you'll be wrecked at about 34/35 so you'll be walking from there"

How do you beat this?

It is physical not mental. You are not in the condition to go past 35k if you have to stop then. As said before but cant be excepted by some on here, we are all physically different with different characteristics. You can follow the same training plan as an other and they will be able to do the 42k and you wont be able to do it. You will probably have to put more work in than others to get to 42k, Do you just one marathon a year? Like me I believe we have to do more than one a year if you want to run the 42K without stopping.

RayCun

ittakestwo wrote: »

It is physical not mental. You are not in the condition to go past 35k if you have to stop then. As said before but cant be excepted by some on here, we are all physically different with different characteristics.

If you have to stop at 35k no matter how fast you have been running up to then, that's not physical.

Put it like this, suppose someone told you they just couldn't run a 10k. They ran one once, got to 9k in 35 minutes, then had to walk. They tried again a year later, got to 9k in 40 minutes, and then had to walk.
Would you say, "yeah, I guess you just can't run more than 9k!"

squinn2912

I agree with that. How can the body physically stop at a time or distance? I think that is nonsense. Mental preparation is key here. If you believe you will run the whole thing then you will. If you have it in your head that you'll be 'chilling and stretching' then the decision is already made. To do well at marathons you need to want to be there and I think the desire is questionable here. It's a pity because you have clear talent. My advice would be to plan to complete the marathon at a goal time, train accordingly - take your watch for time, pace and distance, work out what is going to get you there, make up mantras for when the going gets tough (we all feel like we're being crucified at 20 miles) and consider taking gels to help fuel - as far as I remember that's one thing unmentioned in this thread of late. I've aways taken powerbar and I take either 4 or 5, usually 5.

ittakestwo

It is physical.... when you stop running its be cause you can't go further..... The way he can go is by probably putting a lot more work in than the average runner has to do and probably do more than 1 a year if that what he is doing to run it all. Again some people can get away with running the whole marathon on 50km a week of training and a BMI of over 30. Others might have do twice as much a be in much better shape. Building endurance is not uniform for everyone, it is a spectrum,.... bottom line.

RayCun

ittakestwo wrote: »

Building endurance is not uniform for everyone, it is a spectrum,.... bottom line.

Sure, people train differently, people adapt differently. But there's nothing magical about the marathon distance, or the 35k mark, or the 9k mark. Completing any distance is a matter of setting a pace that is sustainable to the end, and you improve that pace by doing the appropriate training. That training might be a bit different for you than for me, but not hugely different.

If you decide now that you are going to blow up at 35k, then you are going to quit at 35k.

ittakestwo

Under your logic you could tell a person who has done no training to run the marathon and of course they can go 42k because it just a matter of mental strength and telling yourself you can....but we both no that is a extreme case of bull****. They would have to train up to run it, they would have to train up to get endurance to run it. It is a spectrum how easily how people can build up endurance. There is outliers at one end who find it extremely difficult too while at the other end there are people who can do it on less than 50k a week of running.

RayCun

ittakestwo wrote: »

Under your logic you could tell a person who has done no training to run the marathon and of course they can go 42k because it just a matter of mental strength and telling yourself you can....but we both no that is a extreme case of bull****.

No. I'd tell someone who hadn't done any training that they'd be able to walk the whole thing (assuming they are reasonably healthy) and that starting at a walking pace would be much better than starting off at a run.

Attitude is hugely important in running though. We rarely reach our physical limits, we reach a point where the imagined pain of continuing is worse than the imagined pain of failing.

If you go into the race telling yourself that you are incapable of running past 32k or 35k, then you don't see walking past that point as failure. You've set the pain of failure at zero, so the pain of continuing must be greater.

That doesn't mean it's all about mental strength and believing that you can. The faster you run in the first 30k, the more the last 12k is going to hurt, and everyone has a level where 'wanting it' won't keep them running at the same pace. But equally, everyone has a pace that they could sustain for the full 42k.

squinn2912

Of course everyone will be training differently in order to achieve different results but as Raycun says the difference isn't all that much. If you're a 1.22 runner and you're blowing up during the marathon at about a mile further than your easy training run then unless due to an injury it is because you chose to give up. If you want to convince yourself that you have some physical limitation to excuse that then work away but I don't agree with you at all. Other people often seem to have it easier and I've had it leveled at me on occasion that someone is as good as me and training far more but can't get my marathon times. I tell them that they don't know how much I train and that I measure diet, sleep and water intake as well as investing in mental preparation. I would urge you to read Iron War. Brilliant insight into physical vrs mental.

Lazare

With your talent and my attitude we could do great things.

zulutango

I ran 1:25 a few weeks ago. Is a sub 3 hour marathon (late february 2018) doable off the back of this, based on the empirical evidence gathered on this thread?

squinn2912

zulutango wrote: »

I ran 1:25 a few weeks ago. Is a sub 3 hour marathon (late february 2018) doable off the back of this, based on the empirical evidence gathered on this thread?

Yes. Of course it is doable. It would be a help if you've done a marathon before as it's a whole new pain

Damo 2k9

Im not a seasoned runner by any means, but I thought id throw my .2 in here. Started running in may, im fairly young and have a decent build for a runner (Lanky and skinny!!). Have decent 5k, 10k and HM times (19:35, 44:55, 1:35:00) throughout different stages of the year. Id completed HM distance a couple times in the training, no bother. Only made it to 17 miles as longest distance due to injury (which probably effected the day itself), and boy did that show on the day.

1:35 x 2 + 20 = 3:30 marathon. No chance for me I thought, slightly annoyed at myself because im fairly competitive with myself!

Ended up getting sub 4 (3:57), I reckon with a bit more experience and DEFINITELY more miles at longer distances I could actually shave a lot off this time. The legs just werent up to it after the 17, theyve never felt that before. I wrote this post just to give a background as to why im agreeing with squinn2912 above, it really is a whole new pain, the distance has to be treated with the respect it deserves.

squinn2912

You're exactly right! I remember thinking that marathon was just a case of HM x 2. Learned the hard way that it isn't. Theres nothing to say you can't be pound for pound better at or more suited to marathon as your distance (I think that's true of me) but you really need to experience it yourself before you understand it. In other distances a niggle or sniffle can put you off a bit but in the marathon they usually mean targets dropped

hot buttered scones

hot buttered scones wrote: »

HM = Charleville
M= DCM

2015:

HM: 95
M: 219
HMx2: 190
Diff: 29
19/95 = 20%

2016:

HM: 92
M: 202
HMx2: 184
Diff: 18
18/92: 20%

2017:

HM: 87
HMx2: 174
Prediction:
0.2 x 87 + 174 = 191.4 (3:11)

I can squeeze a minute off that I hope.

2017:

HM: 87
HM × 2: 174
M: 189
M-(HM×2)=15

(15/87)×100=17%

The way I figure I need to either run a 1:23 half for a sub 3 full or work at decreasing that percentage a lot. But a 1:25 half would give a percentage of 6% - which seems like too much. Perhaps a flat marathon would give me a better chance.

adrian522

Yeah, you are probably not comparing Like with Like there with Charleville being flat and a very fast course and DCM being neither of those 2 things.

squinn2912

Well done in DCM that's a nice way to measure your progress. 87 to 83 is a massive jump and based on the last few years it might take two more steps. Your times suggest that your training is bringing you along well anyway. It will happen for you when you fully believe it and when there's no fear. I personally don't think you need to run under 1:25 in order to get the sub3. It's ok for me to think that because it was true for me. One factor is that your HM will be a B race and forms part of your training. The marathon is AAA and you will have the taper etc all done for it so go out and back yourself. I'd advise you to plan to race conservatively, with a keen eye on the weather. I hope you're enjoying a well deserved rest now though!

wiggy123

have to do at least 1 if not 2--23+mile training runs on the lead up to a marathon! anything less distance wise-is not good. no matter how much you run! because you get a point-re mile 22/23.. and it the head that goes! me personally anyway! Only ever did 1 marathon-Dublin 2015.. got nice time of 3.08! was a third year thing, re running wise(best year of running ever-got a 16.51(5km) 37(10km) 62(10miler)1.21(half marathon)- not got back to those heights since, re family/injury/laziness...time wise! plan to do another one next year!

El Caballo

adrian522 wrote: »

Yeah, you are probably not comparing Like with Like there with Charleville being flat and a very fast course and DCM being neither of those 2 things.

+1 and I also think you are well capable of 1:23 in the half, maybe not right now but not a million miles away either. dropping 5 minutes off your half the way you did this year would hint that you are not yet anywhere close to your limits. Your taper situation was far from ideal on top of all that so you are probably a bit closer to 3 than you may think.

akeady

Many interesting posts.

Anyway:

HM (2012) 1.52 (1.51.44)
M (2012) 4.04 (4.03.37)
2 * HM = 3.44
Diff 20

20/112 = 18%

This year, apart from some treadmill stints, for various bad reasons I didn't get to run at all between the HM (my worst in 6 years) and the M and hadn't gone over the HM distance since the marathon last year, so my expectations weren't high, but as I'd entered I was determined to do it:

HM 2.12
M 4.52
2 * HM = 4.24
Diff 28
28/132 = 21%

I've got the "Advanced Marathoning" book - I just have to read it, train and get back to 2012 fitness and break the 4 hours. Maybe I'll start with the Clontarf half next month, to finish the year on a high!

ATB,
Aidan.

hot buttered scones

adrian522 wrote:

Yeah, you are probably not comparing Like with Like there with Charleville being flat and a very fast course and DCM being neither of those 2 things.

I've been thinking along the same lines

squinn2912 wrote:

Well done in DCM that's a nice way to measure your progress. 87 to 83 is a massive jump and based on the last few years it might take two more steps. Your times suggest that your training is bringing you along well anyway. It will happen for you when you fully believe it and when there's no fear. I personally don't think you need to run under 1:25 in order to get the sub3. It's ok for me to think that because it was true for me. One factor is that your HM will be a B race and forms part of your training. The marathon is AAA and you will have the taper etc all done for it so go out and back yourself. I'd advise you to plan to race conservatively, with a keen eye on the weather. I hope you're enjoying a well deserved rest now though!

I do have half an idea to focus on half marathon training for the first half of next year to see what I can do with a half as an A goal race. I've registered for the Berlin half in April, but I have to soet out the logistics first.

El Caballo wrote:

+1 and I also think you are well capable of 1:23 in the half, maybe not right now but not a million miles away either. dropping 5 minutes off your half the way you did this year would hint that you are not yet anywhere close to your limits. Your taper situation was far from ideal on top of all that so you are probably a bit closer to 3 than you may think.

I agree re: the taper. I also got a stitch during DCM which definitely cost me some time - at least a minute. I'm looking at Frankfurt next year for a shot at sub 3. Although I'm in Edinburgh at the moment and of course I had to look up the marathon course - mostly flat, but the first 5 miles are downhill. I'd have some negotiations to do first though!

Wottle

hot buttered scones wrote: »

I do have half an idea to focus on half marathon training for the first half of next year to see what I can do with a half as an A goal race. I've registered for the Berlin half in April, but I have to soet out the logistics first.

If I can help, feel free to send a PM, I'm going over for my 3rd half and have done the marathon a couple of times.