I'm a 55M running the Richmond Marathon on November 14. I think I might have a chance at qualifying for Boston in 2028, maybe even with enough buffer to get in. Wondering whether other folks agree and whether anyone has advice on what pace I should start at.
BQ for my age is 3:30. 2028 buffer is obviously unknown but it's been 5 minutes +/- a little bit the last 2 years. Who knows for sure, but maybe I'd need to run roughly 3:25:00 or 3:24:30 to get in without the help of the lottery.
I'm in week 16 of an 18 week block. I've averaged 45 miles (72 km) per week. Peaked at 52 miles (84 km), 5 weeks >= 50 miles. Haven't missed a single week. My body feels great. No aches or pains. Strength training has helped there. I've kept it simple- one day of speedwork, long run is moderate effort or sometimes a bit more than than, otherwise easy miles.
Apologies if I'm looking for overly precise pacing advice, but small differences in strategy could make a big difference in outcome. I don't want to throw away a chance at 3:29 by foolishly going for 3:24:30. Just barely getting a BQ would still feel great, particularly given that a lottery has been added. More optimistically, I don't want to throw away a chance at 3:24:30 (a decent buffer) by getting greedy and going for 3:23:00 (a great buffer).
Attached is info from my last two long runs on Oct 24 and Oct 18 as well as from when I ran the Staten Island Half on Oct 11. I was mildly disappointed after my 1:38 at the Staten Half and was thinking 3:25 is unlikely and I should focus on sub-3:30. However, I was more encouraged after doing my last 2 long runs (20 miles at 8:13/mile, avg HR 163, 19 at 8:15, avg HR 159). Both those long runs were culminations of 50 mile weeks- not exactly fresh legs.
Max HR is ~195 judging from where it's hit at the end of an all-out 5k. 5k PR is 21:53 on a hot day last May. I'm pretty sure I could beat that by a decent amount on fresh legs on a cool day now, though.
I realize some might consider my recent long runs to be harder than is wise. A common rule of thumb seems to be that LRs should not be faster than 90% of race pace. It just...felt right to run them this hard, though. I didn't feel totally wiped out or particularly sore afterwards. Some might also think it was unwise to do 2 of them this hard within 6 days. I think I got away with it, though. I feel good. I wanted to build some muscular endurance and late-race toughness.
My taper is starting now and I promise I will cut back a lot and be sure to arrive at race day rested and fresh.
Another factor is that I did the long runs in stability shoes. It's hard to know for sure how much difference the carbon platers make but I would guess it's 10 to 15 seconds per mile for me (6 to 9 seconds per km). The mildly disappointing Staten Half was in the carbon platers, though.
It was 62F (17C) at the Staten Half with intermittent light rain. Some folks thought the conditions were very good, but I suspect I benefit more than the average person from cool, dry weather. My shoes got soaked and felt heavy at Staten. The weather was perfect for the long runs (around 40F or 5C and dry) so I wonder whether that's partly why they went well.
My long run route simulates the rolling hills of Richmond fairly well, around 500 feet of elevation gain and drop.
My current thinking for Richmond is to hold a 7:50/mile pace (4:52/km) for the first 20 miles. If I feel good, I'll try to do the last 10k at 7:40 or maybe even 7:30 pace and see if I can get a good buffer. If I'm fading, I'm hoping I won't totally bonk and that I'd be able to gut out 8:30s and hold on for sub 3:30.
Does that sound reasonable ?
I've done 3 marathons but haven't done one since 2009 and my best was 3:59, so I'm not very experienced. I'm in far better shape now than back then, though.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts !