Winnable Marathon in 2:53
Started by
NKOTB
, Jul 10 2012 03:21 PM
14 replies to this topic
Support our Australian advertisers:
#2
Posted 10 July 2012 - 03:58 PM
Glowworm Tunnel! 
The winning time at the SMC marathon in January was 2:58.
There are probably numerous country marathons that could be run with a low 2:50, depending on who shows up to race. Hunter Valley, Macleay, Mudgee at a guess, without going back over past results.
Personally, I don't see the point.
The winning time at the SMC marathon in January was 2:58.
There are probably numerous country marathons that could be run with a low 2:50, depending on who shows up to race. Hunter Valley, Macleay, Mudgee at a guess, without going back over past results.
Personally, I don't see the point.
#3
Posted 10 July 2012 - 04:17 PM
Is Paul it does depend on who shows up.
I will confess I've won a marathon in 3.16 and that was Jindabyne about 10 years ago. There were other runners and during the race we had sunshine, hail, a snow blizzard, torrential rain and strong winds and then finished in sunshine.
I will confess I've won a marathon in 3.16 and that was Jindabyne about 10 years ago. There were other runners and during the race we had sunshine, hail, a snow blizzard, torrential rain and strong winds and then finished in sunshine.
#7
Posted 12 July 2012 - 01:21 PM
Thanks for the responses. Once in a while, you like to turn up for a race and think you can win it. Of course it depends on who turns up, because you can get a very good runner who turn up to do a 2:50 long/hard_training run. Actually, I was looking at the Gold Coast Marathon results and wonder why there aren't more than 3-4 male Africans (sub 2:10 PB) runnning. Prize money ??
A 3:00 marathon was described to me as a respectable time, and 2:53 is 10 seconds per km faster so really is a "quick" time, thus a mara should be winnable. Just my thoughts.
New_Kid
A 3:00 marathon was described to me as a respectable time, and 2:53 is 10 seconds per km faster so really is a "quick" time, thus a mara should be winnable. Just my thoughts.
New_Kid
#9
Posted 14 July 2012 - 06:55 AM
Very few marathons are won over 2:50 & if the winning time is slower than that there is usually a reason - hilly, hot, snow etc or it's a low key event used by most as a training run & the winner has often run a lot faster in major races. I ran consistently around 2:53 & only won a few women's events & my highest outright placing was 5th at Traralgon so 2:53 is not particularly quick even for women if you're thinking about winning. Your friend is probably better off working on getting faster & if he is in the right place, with the right form, against the right people then he might get a win. I think I'd rather have had a fast time than a low place (unless I was at Olympic level running for a medal in a championship event!)
Lindy
Lindy
Edited by Lindyk, 14 July 2012 - 09:54 AM.
#10
Posted 14 July 2012 - 09:15 AM
blair, on 12 July 2012 - 08:25 AM, said:
Toowoomba, depending on who turns up
#14
Posted 14 July 2012 - 11:33 AM
#15
Posted 31 August 2012 - 06:38 PM
Hi veryCoolRunner
Online entries to the 20th Anniversary of the Christmas Island Marathon are now open:
Go to http://christmas.net...s/whats-on.html for more information, or check at the Facebok Events page: https://www.facebook...42632272512021/
...and yes, you have a very good chance of a podium finish :-) We have Open and Masters categories too.
See you here?
Online entries to the 20th Anniversary of the Christmas Island Marathon are now open:
Go to http://christmas.net...s/whats-on.html for more information, or check at the Facebok Events page: https://www.facebook...42632272512021/
...and yes, you have a very good chance of a podium finish :-) We have Open and Masters categories too.
See you here?














