3 ms·

I think most people in reasonable, healthy shape can physically cross 42km. I don't mean at all to diminish it as an achievement to complete one in any time, bu

I think most people in reasonable, healthy shape can physically cross 42km. I don't mean at all to diminish it as an achievement to complete one in any time, but I think you are minimizing the effort many people put into training. The OP's amount is not an unreasonable weekly target for many people. IMO being "serious" as mentioned above is closer to a 2.5 to 3.5hr finish time.

zimpenfish 8y ago
> I don't mean at all to diminish it as an achievement to complete one in any time Good. > but Oh dear. > I think you are minimizing the effort many people put into training Nah. Just pointing out that people who say "you must do 80km a week to run a marathon" are talking gibberish. If they added "sub-3", sure, I'd accept that as probably valid (although I know people who do sub-3 without 80km a week.) Like I keep saying, it's all anecdata and there's no hard and fast rules yet people insist on pontificating as if there are.
- chrisfosterelli 8y ago
  > Oh dear. I hope you are't honestly try to claim I'm diminishing an achievement while simultaneously talking about how easy it is to do. > Just pointing out that people who say "you must do 80km a week to run a marathon" are talking gibberish Literally nobody has said this.