How true is this? I don't know where she finds her information. When I trained for my first marathon I did three long runs that were 20 or more.
I did just fine on my first marathon after doing a 20 mile, 21 mile, and 22 mile run during my training. My marathon time was 4 hours and 7 minutes and I had no injuries
Does anyone have any info on this subject? Thanks.
I've completed three, and in my opinion, as long as they are spaced out, it won't give you any grief. I think many people are adequately trained for the first long run, and if they try a second and third too close to their first, they could get injured... not enough rest. My first marathon I only did 1 long run (21). The second I think I did 2 or three (can't remember) and I know last year I did 3 long runs (the second one I had to stop at 17, so I felt I needed to do another just for my mental preparation)......
Are you training now for a marathon?
(I am doing a 1/2 on the 16th...)
I've done 3 marathons, none at any great speed but always crossing the finish line well ahead of the cone truck. Your friend isn't wrong; I read similar theories on training. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any great consistency in what the best training program is. A lot of plans build up to one long run of 20 miles several weeks before the marathon, then start tapering down to give your body a bit of time to rest. Others have the longest run being the full marathon distance, or have several 20+ mile runs before the taper. It may be that there's no hard and fast rule that fits everyone.
For what it's worth, my feeling would be that for a first time marathoner, the "one run of 20 miles" is best. The extra conditioning from additional 20+ mile runs aren't enough to make up for the risk of overtraining/injury.
So you can log your weight -- which allows you to do the following:
- Plot your weight curve
- Analyze the trend of your weight (see under Recent in the figure above)
- Determine the projected target date (see under Overall in the figure above)