Doing it again

My first FLM last year, 4hrs 1min 17s chuffed that i fininshed then depression that i had not gone under the 4hr mark. Put in for it again this year to see if i can beat it, it gets addictive. Doe anyone else feel this way?


  • Clifford

    It does get addictive. I've run 5 times in the last six years (4 golden bond places) and each time I swear I'd never do it again. I'll be devistated if I don't get a place in 2003. Fingers crossed!

    Good luck

    Jason L
  • WombleWomble ✭✭✭
    My first London Marathon in 1995 was one of those 'things to do in life' (I beat the ad by a few years). I never had any intention of even keeping up running. Trouble is, I kept going and have only missed one since (mixture of ballot place, gold bond and one football challenge place before you all start screaming). For heavens sake don't beat yourself up for missing a time on your first try. You should be proud of doing so well. And yes, I will be doing it again next year. Worst thing for me was taking until this year to beat my 1995 time!
  • Obviously hits different people in different ways. I really disliked London because of the crowds and haven't done it a second time. Lots of my club mates do it again and again and wouldn't even consider doing any other marathon!!
    Different strokes for different folks!
  • I didn't particularly enjoy the crowds either Dangly. The first year I did it, I loved it. I suppose it was because of it all being new to me, plus there were quite a few thousand less running.

    However, last year I hated the pushing and barging and runners cutting in front of me and then not being able to maintain their pace, so I had to go round them again. Also, I didn't feel too well this year so that may have contributed to my overall opinion of the race. I would also say though that it was dangerous in places and I saw more than one person tripped over!

    Mind as you say there are runners in my club who just love doing London and I expect I'll get dragged into the build up and end up doing it again-then moan after!
  • I think all of the baove postings are absoluteyl relevant...I have done the London noe 4 times, hate the people that think they are better than they are, you expend so much energy trying to get round them, had my name on my vest this year, made a real difference....The people I know who do or have done London end up saying "Have you entered for next year" rather than "Are you going to enter"...It is addiction for some and a turn off for others....I don't think it is a PB course, but if you treat it as a training run, you can have a ball, as I did this year!
  • I did my first london this year and loved it. As a Personal trainer I had three clients running as well at different abilities and we all had a ball! I have to agree with some of you on the people dodging.Whatever posesses someone to come to a complete stop in the middle of the road with a couple of thousand people right behind I will never know. Id like to think i could improve my time again next year but it is too busy. Anyone done the Nottingham marathon??
  • This years FLM was my first marathon and although as I hobbled along the embankment I was muttering about limiting myself to halfs in future, within hours of finihing, I'd decided to do it again next year. I have been promised a club place for 2003 so fingers crossed.

    As regards the crowds, I started from the Blue start and didn't think it was too bad, but then more people were passing me that were being passed by me. Discarded drinks bottles were a constant hazard though as were runners suddenly cutting across to the drinks stations. Constant vigilance paid off.
    For me, the biggest attraction to London is the support from the crowd. The first 10k went by in a hand slapping blur. I was initialy a little dissapointed to finish in 4.50 as I felt I could beat 4.30, but on reflection I realize that finishing at all is the biggest achievemnt.

  • My 1st LM aged 22 was 4:01,
    Now aged 40 I ran 2002 FLM in 2:47,
    So dont give up, it only gets better with age.
  • Talking about times at London;how about this for coincidence? I first did London last year and finnished in a time of 3:51:50.Not bad,I thought,that'll do me but after a couple of days I started thinking about this years London.O k,nothing strange in that I hear you say.However after a lot more training I did this years London and my time was EXACTLY the same ,down to the second!!! 3:51:50.Spooky or what??? now I'll just have to do next years' London to beat my time,wont I??? For everyone doing next years'-have a good one and if your hanging about at the finnish at about 3;50-ish then who knows,we might just meet? cheers,Alan
  • Did it in 1999 in 3:56:26 but was miffed cos finishing photo showed 4:13 and some seconds due to fact it took me 16 minutes to get to the start. Applied every year since but not got in. Trying again this year and hoping to do 3:30. Ho hum
  • 2002 was my first FLM. I reckon I must have been having a bad day cos by half way I was saying "never again". Finished in 3:48:05, which I've been told was good for a first timer, but still swore never again. However,it's taken me nearly 6 months to finally think, yeah, I'll do it again, I know I can do better. Am I mad?!?!?! Also hoping for a 3:30, maybe see you at the finish Andy Hoban!
  • HI Clifford, I`m Afraid I do`nt agree with Cheeky, I believe that London is a good course for a P.B., I`ve done 11 Londons ,my first was 2hours 55 mins, my best was 2 hours 40 mins, my last was 3hours 30 mins, 3 months after a cartilage opperation,I never ran it again after that,but I honestly believe the finish on the Mall, rather than on the bridge,makes for a better faster finish.I`m now 65 years of age and just into my 3rd week back training after a 5 year lay off,my pace at the moment is 7.6 m.p.m, so maby next year I might get the chance to make it an even dozen in london, good luck, run your own race,and run it even.
  • On the subject of times, my first and only London marathon in 2001 was officialy clocked at 4 hrs,46 seconds, the time on my certificate and exactly the time that showed when I came accross the finish line. What I have since wondered about, is why the 6 minutes it took me to get to the start line (due to the large number of runners) was not subtracted from the 4 hrs, 46 seconds. Is this official London marathon policy or was I just unlucky?

    Has anybody else experienced the same?


  • Apparently it wasn't until this year that they started to record your time from the "start line" rather than the gun. I also did it in 2001, but had 16m30s added to my time because that is how long it took me to get to the start line.
    The first half was one of the best experiences of my life and the second half one of the worst. I got sick from Liquid Power and ended up walking almost all of the second half of the race because my stomach hurt so much when I tried to run again. Also got really cold through the Isle of Dogs because I was walking, which did not help the muscles. Finished in 6h45m31s and am proud of that even though it is a bad time, because I finished even though I felt terrible.
    Sent an application in for FLM 2003 to see if I can actually do it properly once and hope to finish in less than 5 hours. If I do, then it is unlikely that I would run it again.
  • I ran 3 marathons between 1992/3. The memories never really ever get forgotton and I have always felt a tug in my brain whenever I have seen the marathon on TV ever since...and here I am with my girlfriend entering into next years FLM and wanting to do it all over again!!!

    you can run...but you can never hide! its always out there...waiting!!!!
  • Mark - how would they know it took you 6 minutes to get over the start line ??

    They used timing chips this year so that all the times recorded are actual from crossing the line to finishing on the Mall.

    The photos then do show the correct time, but digitally superimposed. And loadsa runners have complained that they wanted to see the Big Gantry clock showing their (incorrect time) - you just can't please people !!!
  • DustinDustin ✭✭✭
    Did it in 94/95/96/01/02

    I have experience from both sides re the crowds.In 94 was a first so was on a high, yes it took 10 mins to cross the start but what do you expect ? Finished in 3.58 by the clock, very pleased, sub 4 for a debut is impressive in my book.
    95 +96 ran for charity so wasn't superfit and just enjoyed it (4.02 + 4.30 - back from injury)

    Applied every year and by 01 wanted to run again (had given up football and was fitter than any other time) Got in on a charity place last minute and had to start in pen 8 or 9 (the back) , took 10 minutes to cross the start line and overtook thousands along the course.Taking into account the crowds the jostling and meandering I probably ran nearer 28 miles. Clocked 3.45.

    Got in through the ballot in 02, started in pen 3 , less than 90seconds to cross the line and no crowds - most people were running at a similar pace - I've ran local races <1,000 people with worse congestion.
    Finished in 3.31.

    Sure discarded drinks are a problem but one must be a little naive to think otherwise.

    The chip timing has done away with the problem of 'time taken to cross the start' and the photos now come with the actual time rather than finish time, letters in both RW +RF afterwards showed that some runners would still prefer the clock in it.

    You can't please everyone, but I've learnt that if you start at the right place it is a course for a pb, the crowds are phenomenal, but you must go into it expecting some jostling near the start.

    Yes I'll do it again but probably only through the ballot - there are many other courses I want to run as well.

  • London 2001 was my first marathon and I thought it was a fantastic experienced, crowded roads included. I am by no means obsessed with time but I was proud to have finished in sub 4 hrs on my debut marathon and then a little dissapointed that my official time did not reflect this achievement. I have entered through the ballot again this year, so fingers crossed, I will be able to run again and clock a "real" time.

    Good luck to everyone who will be running.
  • Thanks too!
  • Ran 2002, my first marathon. I had initially thought i could do it in 3.30 but then when I entered I didn't know much about running (thought I could just calculate my time based on a five mile run!) Still was on target for 4hrs making 2hrs 7seconds at halfway. Then the 'war' wound kicked in at 15 miles. My physio had advised me to aim at 4.30 prior to the race and I decided that since I was enjoying the crowds I should take his advise so calculated that I could walk for 3 minutes at every mile marker for the last ten miles so as to reduce strain on the injury (apologies if I am one of the people who stopped dead in thier tracks that the club runners are moaning about). Still I completed in 4.26. Cried tears of joy as I collected my medal (22 years of saying next year I'll run it), and could walk down the stairs forwards the following day!

    I've entered next year but only so that I can beat that 4 hour time. Also I have now got a bee in my bonnet to do London to Brighton and need to get a sub 3 hour marathon for this. (and in the future fancy the Paris to London that some of runners are discussing elsewhere on this site - subject to the wifes not filing for divorce at the mere mention!)

    I did hear London is for posserseginnersfund raisers, other marathons (Nottingham etc.) are for serious runners after a decent time. But working at Tower Bridge and running the mid five miles a couple of times a week as part of my training how could I not enter London.
  • NessieNessie ✭✭✭

    Just tell your wife you are taking her for a romantic weekend in Paris (driving there of course). Once there, you can nip out for a run while she's shopping (i.e. the marathon - I'm sure she'll manage to spend 4 hours shopping), then casually ask if she'll drive a bit of the way back, as you and some friends want to jog a bit in the French (then English) countryside. By the time you get to London, she'll be so impressed that she will be egging you on round the marathon. ;-)

  • I'll be running again next year - just heard this morning that I have a definite Gold Bond place with Anthony Nolan.

    I hadn't run since school last time (2001), though I was going to the gym three times a week (and not enjoying it). Gave up the gym, and trained for FLM instead. My longest run in training was 18 miles, and was managing a steady 9 min/mile pace throughout.

    A fortnight before, the dodgy disc at the base of my spine went: I managed, through use of my physio's exercise regime, to get it straight in a few days, and ran anyway. This was probably my biggest mistake.

    On the day, I blew up totally, my legs were in agony, and I took an hour longer to finish than my training times said I would.

    Seeing the physio a few days later to see why my legs were still in so much pain, she explained that it was my disc that was the problem, not my legs - it was "reflected pain" I was experiencing - and that I probably shouldn't have run. And then put my back straight (again).

    So my aim this time is (a) to work on my back and ensure that it's strong enough to cope, (b) start training earlier (done that), and (c) assuming I manage (a) and (b), to beat my previous time by an hour!
  • I ran my 1 and only marathon in 1992 in 4hrs 27m and still have great memories of the day.
    Have a charity place for 2003 and feel i must break the 4hr mark.
    Have started training in eager anticipation and have my first 1/2m on sunday.
    Roll on April 13th
  • If anyone is thinking of training for the FLM, around about December issue, RW run a printed programme to get you round in certain times, and I have to say they are excellent. It takes a lot of the thinking out of what you need to do and gives you a great programme by whuch to follow. The only difficulty is fitting it in!
Sign In or Register to comment.