Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Whats the one thing you wish you'd known before your first marathon...
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
I walked a bit in my first (4:31), but I really mean a bit (in the tunnel so no one could see me)...
However, I agree about rushing into marathons. I did and havent been back to the big one since - I've tried, but I just cant get over the trauma of the whole thing. The run and the recovery.
So I've stuck to shorter distances.
Would I be a better runner if I hadnt done the marathon (which seems to be your implication)? No.
I learnt a lot about myself, I learnt a mental toughness I didnt know I had. Most importantly, it gave me the desire to be better. I've never failed at something in such a spectacular manner before.
Do I advise people not to do a marathon first? No. I think if they are itching then they should do it. If only to learn the lessons I did.
My best adivce to newbie marathon runners is - you will more than likely suck, you will hurt, but like hangovers you will forget and you will be back (someday).
"to run a marathon you have to break the 4hr barrier otherwise you will have walked some part of the race" - is possibly the most ridiculous statement I've ever seen on this forum PJL. It may mean they haven't run at a speed fast enough to satisfy your elitist attitude, but to claim they couldn't possibly have run the whole way if they take that long is just obviously an attempt to belittle people who aren't as good at running as you. I think comments like that could potentially put people who are getting into the sport off and have no place on here. I also suggest you should look up the dictionary definition of running - I don't think it puts a speed limit on it.
Thanks to everyone else on this thread for some great tips by the way!
A little bit of an over reaction perhaps, Daren?
My first marathon was over 4 hours but I cant see how I would have been surprised/offended if someone thought that was slow - it was slow, I'd have been more surprised if they thought otherwise.
Whats an 'elitist attitude' in your book? Is it thinking that 4hrs 30mins is better than 5hrs or that 3hrs 30mins is better than 4 hours? Well, the fact is that it is. So in basic terms you've got to be either elitist or a bit dim tbh. Or is 'elitist' just a term you use as a form of insult?
And why would someone be 'put off getting into the sport' because some random person thought that 4hrs was a benchmark for a decent marathon?
I agree that it was a daft comment but your response was probably equally daft! Imho of course....
At times you'll feel fantastic, on top of the world, running smoothly - it doesn't last. At times you'll feel leaden, dreadful and clumsy - that doesn't last either !
Tower Bridge - a big highlight, and somewhere that I've always found to be quite an emotional part of the course (I think that it's because with the crowds it's the closest feeling you get to being a 'proper' sportsperson) But don't get carried away and speed up - it's not quite the half way point and there's a long way to go.
Big Ben never appears to get any bigger as you run along the Embankment.
Enjoy the bands and activities going on along the course if you can. In 2006 they laid on some Japanese drums under one of the underpasses that were hammering out a terrific noise - I wanted to stop but ego had got the better of me as I'd just been overtaken by a man carrying a stepladder on his shoulders.
Speed is relative is it not? My fast pace will be someone else's slow... doesn't mean that I am not working just as hard as the speedy person when running.
Tip: don't read forums that tell you that your too slow to be classed as a runner.
I found the tone and content hugely insulting and I'm what would be classed as a quicker runner apparently.
Why should you only run a marathon to beat some arbitrary time? My first marathon was more about the challenge of conquering 26.2 miles not will I run as fast as my body can possibly go. It was a perfectly valid experience then as it is now that I am trying to conquer times instead.
Many runners I train with will struggle to get under 4 hours but will run every step of the way and put in just as much effort as I will - just slower. They are racing.
Non of what PJL said was based on facts just opinions contrary to the "So before you make any comments on what is considered running or so called running the marathon please check your facts"
Parkrunfan, firstly I'm aiming for a 3:30 first marathon so I wasn't personally offended by PJL's 4-hour comment if you think that's what made me bite, but I just thought that John66 had every right to be angered by the condescending, arrogant and aggressive tone of PJL's posts. I just didn't think there was any need for it on a thread that was supposed to be about giving first timers tips and encouragement, that's all.
And to be honest, for London the average time is around 4:20-4:30, so I believe 4 hours would be classed as 'better than average' for the event, not 'slow'.
Ah well, I dare say I'll get over it!
LOL at the have to break the 4hour bit. The official VLM" Good for age" time for me is 4.15.
If any member would care to read any of Hal Higdons or any other respected writer on athletics its a recognised fact that those runners who finish the 26.2mile course in any marathon in over four hours have not run the entire distance.
A persons pace for a 4 hour marathon indicates that someware during the race they have had to walk usually due to fatigue.
I wrote the article having read several books as well as other internet forums regarding correct pace judgement for running a marathon.
Ive run a fair number of marathons and have been running for 32yrs so i have some knowledge of what running a 26.2mile race involves.
If my comments appear to be arrogance to some then its not intended but its scientific fact that the pace of a four hour marathon runner is not considered running the entire distance.
I remember you from the Great North Run thread a year or so ago. You got people's backs up there too, as I recall.
twaddle.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0723710#m_en_gb0723710Oxford dictionary definition of "run":
move at a speed faster than a walk, never having both or all the feet on the ground at the same time:
I am not intending to walk and i will be around 4 hours 45 . I may run slow than some others, but i am still going to run the whole thing, you are talking absolute twaddle to say you must have walked to get over 4 hours.
I cant really see what point you're trying to make with this one.
For a start, I could go and run a marathon in over 4hours and run every step so this 'scientific fact' is a wee bit ropey.
Also, a 'scientific fact' cannot be defined by something that is 'not considered'. Proof man?? Stats? Evidence?
Running a fair few marathons over 32 years doesnt exactly help in developing a reasoned argument by the looks of it........
Peter, I just don't understand why you keep trying to defend a completely indefensible and illogical argument.
I am genuinely confused about exactly what it is you're trying to say... for instance, if a runner takes more than four hours to complete a marathon but runs even pace throughout (say 9.5 minute miles) are you saying they have, according to your 'scientific' facts, actually 'walked' the whole way because they weren't going fast enough to be classed as 'running'? Or are you just saying you don't believe that they actually ran even pace and they must have walked at some point to take that long? Please enlighten us...
I just don't understand how this person's input could be considered a tip to newbie marathoners, which is essentially what this (up-till-now) very helpful thread was for
.
They did the same thing on the Great North Run thread a year or so ago ... popped up out of nowhere, slagged off every aspect of the event, and then once he'd irked everyone, disappeared.
Understandable if the thread had been along the lines of 'over-rated races' or whatever - they're allowed their opinion of course ... but it was just a very jarring couple of posts, since the rest of the posts were people talking about their training, giving advice to those new to the event, etc.
Anyway, getting back to useful info for people attempting the marathon for the first time!
I would say one of the most important things to concentrate on is trying to run as near to 26.2 miles as possible.
By just going with the flow, especially with all the crowding in that London event, you can easily end up running well in excess of 27 miles. Ask most people finishing a marathon whether they fancy running another mile and you'll see why it is pretty important to concentrate on minimising the distance.
Fortunately, in London at least, they help you out by painting a 26.2 mile line (used to be blue but I dare say its now redwith the virgin sponsorship) representing the 'racing line'. Use it.......
not wishing to drag this superb thread down.....
However, there is a Runners World 4hr30 Pacer group, which i fully intend to RUN with, are you saying that the representatives of this magazine are not runners then ?????
Personally I find your comments insulting, and could understand how newer members to the sport could become upset by comments like yours.
Just because someone cannot run as fast as another person, what gives anyone the right on a open forum to suggest they are not runners/running the marathon ????
According to Hal Higdon and Jeff Galloway both experienced writers and runners who have contributed greately over the years to athletics magazines 4 Hours is the dividing line between Marathon Runners and Marathon Survivers whilst 3hr 30 is the dividing line between marathon runners and marathon racers.
Its all relative with most serious club runners considering the 9 minute pace to run a four hour marathon pretty slow.
For a beginner a four hour or better marathon is a major achievement but very few first time runners will ever get close to four hours simply because their bodies have yet to condition themselves to run or jog such a long distance.
I still know one or two serious runners who have been running as long as i have who have still not done a marathon simply because they realise what it takes in training.
They prefer the shorter distances of 10k and Half Marathon.
If first time runners realised what it takes to train for a marathon then people would then treat the distance with more respect.
I waited 8 years before i attempted my first marathon a long time i know but i did 3hr 43 over a tough hilly Snowdonia course and enjoyed it enough to have done every single Snowdonia Marathon since.
What's wrong with walking? I did my first marathon in 3:08, which included walking at about miles 8, 12, 18 and 24.
Some schedules recommend walking breaks as a route to success, as they spare your legs and allow you to maintain about an even pace right to the finish.
Now, the highlighted part is a sensible comment and very reasonable and anyone thinking of doing a marathon for the first time would do well to take note.
It is more refreshing to see that sort of thing than endless 'encouraging' voices telling anyone and everyone 'course you can do it' and glossing over how tough the whole thing is.
However, you are not doing yourself any favours by keeping quoting these artificial time barriers/cut off points that somehow divide one class of runner from another. Quoting 32 years of running as you did didnt seem to have any purpose other than to try to give yourself some sort of extra credibility.
I ran my first marathon in 1984, it doesnt give me any more right to talk bollocks than if it had been in 1994 or 2004!
Ah, that old chestnut!
Theres nothing wrong with walking at all, its a very healthy activity and a great leisure activity. Its also great for getting you to the shops and a whole host of other useful destinations.
BUT, as has been debated may many times - you did your first marathon in 3:08, you didnt run your first marathon in 3:08. If you're happy with that, thats fine.
And fair play if they are!! I'm worried about wearing the right kit never mind adding to the load. How do people wear fancy dress is beyond me
Great thread for us newbies, really appreciate the tips from you guys and gals....well most of you anyway
There's a new fool in town... love the use of the middle name too
Peter John Lewis. Classy. Like the shop.
To say anyone doing a marathon over 4hours can't have been running the whole way is hilarious. Ever heard of the concept of...a slower runner? Or an older runner?
My club had 7 women doing over 4hours, none of them walked a step.
PJL
I ask again, you...hal higden/jeff galloway, or any one else you wish to quote... are saying that the Runners World own pacing groups that are over 4hrs are simply not runners ?????
Where is the dividing line between RUNNING & JOGGING.