Have any of you ran a marathon?

[0098386]

I haven't yet but I plan on training and doing one in the next couple of years. My folks used to do them and I'm pretty good at the stuff too (after no training I decided to give it my all one evening on cross country, came 2nd out of 60).
Maybe by next year I'll be able to say yes.

 

[spencers]

If so, I need to ask you a question. What was it that made you run your first marathon. I'm sure that there were moments before where you said "I think I'll run a marathon." and you ended up not doing it due to other things going on in your life. I've come to the conclusion that there will always be something else going on in my life. I'm starting a marathon training program. But i'd like to know what it was for those of you that ran a marathon that got you to stick to the marathon training program... Just luck? Or was there something that got you to finally stick to the program?

I absolutely love running. My peers are my motivation. Music is too. Nike+ helps.

I ran my first half marathon a couple months ago on a whim. I didn't do a training program.. Just stuck to my normal running routine of 6-8mi every other day or so, with long runs on the weekend.

I'm planning on doing a full marathon this autumn/winter, and fully intend on using a program. 13 miles was fine.. But 26? Yeah, I'll need some training.

 

[4JNA]

run forest, run...

...You really do want to get a solid, adequate training schedule in though. The difference between being in good shape and being ready to run a marathon is hard to overstate.

fully agree with this statement. running for fitness and training up for a full are way different. general rule of thumb would be to be running more than 35 miles per week for several months as a base PRIOR to starting to ramp up for a full.

...Second being that marathons are not good for you. They are a mental challenge, but they are not good for you physically.

don't agree with this one. if you have done a good job training for it and getting ready, it's just another race. if you run the full without the proper training, then yeah, you might do yourself some damage.

...It's cool to run a full marathon once or twice in a lifetime and it's cool to be able to go through "the wall", but running a marathon is a major stress on your body, so you should not do it too often. From what I've read, running for 2-2.5 hours is the most one should do, after that it does more harm than good.

as above, it's all about the training and prep work. it is a major stress, and most pro/coaches would limit the number of fulls you run in a calendar year, but that's to achieve full recovery before training up for the next. don't run/train in a weakened condition as it were.

i ran 3 fulls with several months between in '95, and then ran a full and an ultra (50 miles out to the turn around point, then back) in '96 with no problems. i think it comes down to body type and interest. i can't bench more than about 200lbs, but i can run forever. just my 2 cents.

a quick bit on training, it's more than just putting in miles. that's important, but so is the stretching, and just as important is the strength training. running by itself tends to develop specific groups of muscles in the legs, and strength training to counter balance that is really important. running intervals, running hills/steps, doing tempo work, and working on proper form are all equally important. to do it right and be ready to go takes a bunch of work, but i say worth it in the end.

last, get fitted by an expert that can recommend the correct shoe for your foot. the teenager working at foot locker in the mall is not the correct answer. they should be able to help you pick the correct 'last', evaluate your stride/strike, and pick a shoe that matches your (under/neutral/over) pronation. anything else, you're just asking for pain/injury. there is no 'best' shoe, only 'best shoe for you' and anyone who says different is working on commission...

i'm getting ready to run a full this fall, and can't wait. nothing like race day and a free shirt at the finish line! best of luck.

 

[mkrishnan]

don't agree with this one. if you have done a good job training for it and getting ready, it's just another race. if you run the full without the proper training, then yeah, you might do yourself some damage.

There's some interesting contention about this... there have been some studies suggesting that a fair number of amateur marathon runners may have elevated plasma homocysteine levels, which are a marker of acute vascular trauma, up to 24 hours post-race, but there hasn't been tons of research to clarify things like what exactly constitutes a "well-trained" amateur runner vs. an under-trained one, whether this makes a difference, whether the presence of this molecule in the plasma is really an indicator of vascular distress or not in this case, etc.

 

[Manatee]

I ran several marathons when I was in my mid-20s, in the 1980s. I started running after college to meet people and keep my weight down. I ended up running with a bunch of people in a local club, and a few had decided to aim for a fall marathon. A bunch of us signed on, even though it was our first year running. About 30 of us ended up running that marathon. Everyone finished. I cried when I finished my first marathon. I'd always been a poor athlete as a kid. The achievement amazed me. I owe of lot of it to that group who helped me train. We all helped each other.

I ran several more marathons over the next few years, improving my time, but never having the same amazing feeling I had in the first one. Eventually I switched to bicycling because the running was so hard on my knees and hips. Something was always hurting.

 

[Tomorrow]

No, but one time I ate a 5 lb. burrito in 11 minutes

I just snorked iced tea. Nice one.

I don't understand the running of the marathons, especially those who don't aim to actually win the race. Seems like you could get there much faster and easier if you drive, but hey, to each his own. *shrug*

 

[4JNA]

There's some interesting contention about this... there have been some studies suggesting that a fair number of amateur marathon runners may have elevated plasma homocysteine levels, which are a marker of acute vascular trauma, up to 24 hours post-race, but there hasn't been tons of research to clarify things like what exactly constitutes a "well-trained" amateur runner vs. an under-trained one, whether this makes a difference, whether the presence of this molecule in the plasma is really an indicator of vascular distress or not in this case, etc.

i had seen a couple references to this as well, but most ended up looking like this;

Conclusion

An increase in plasma tHcy concentrations was observed after a marathon race in non-professional not well-trained male athletes performing strong physical activity. The potential physiological or pathological implications of this finding are unknown.

the bold/underline is mine. i'll stick to proper training/prep, and you'll have no problem. until they prove me wrong anyway.

i've also seen several that make the same connection to coffee and significant increase in protein in the diet (think atkins). the coffee link is weird because in double-blind controls, they have shown that the pill form had only about 25-50% the effect of paper filtered coffee with the same caffeine levels. sure would hate to give up coffee...

there has also been mention that some of these results might be linked to low levels of b9 (folic) b6 and b12, so eating healthy while working/training at an elevated level is also a must! can't eat like crap and run full races.

 

[mkrishnan]

i'll stick to proper training/prep, and you'll have no problem. until they prove me wrong anyway.

That's why I mentioned the lack of understanding of what constitutes "proper training." I mean, if proper training constitutes being able to run like Paula Radcliffe, I'll assume we're both out. I don't have access to the article that specifically had the "not well trained" disclaimer in the abstract, but I'm assuming they mean something more sophisticated than "I think I'm pretty well trained," which is going to be a pretty Lake-Woebegonian distribution in marathon runners....

There's at least one study I did have access to, though, that characterised training level... the marathoners they looked at were spending a mean weekly training time of some 5-10 hours and had been running distance for a mean of 7 years, and they report that 45 of 46 had increased homocysteine levels, although there was a range... (and, as I previously noted, it's not even really clear that elevated homocysteine in this content really constitutes vascular distress that is clinically concerning).

Like I said the first time, it's far from compelling data at this time. All the research on running is screwy, and it's very hard to say that athletic people who've been running for a long time, if anything, don't do better than most everyone else. I don't intend to stop running anytime soon, that's for sure.

 

[DoNoHarm]

I think the "is running good for you" argument boils down to "how much"... The human body was designed to run long distances. Every feature of the lower limb is optimized for this function (very beautifully). I have read studies confirming that daily running, up to a point, will be very beneficial for a myriad of reasons - even for your knees. The body needs (and has evolved to expect) constant stimulation to certain areas for daily maintenance. The line where the drawbacks begin to outweigh the benefits changes from person to person and lifestyle to lifestyle. Nevertheless, more studies should be done to indicate where that line lies for everyone.

 

[DoNoHarm]

one week on the marathon training schedule so far......