Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Nov 1;35(11):3218-3224.
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003199.

Predicting Recreational Runners' Marathon Performance Time During Their Training Preparation

Affiliations

Predicting Recreational Runners' Marathon Performance Time During Their Training Preparation

Jonathan Esteve-Lanao et al. J Strength Cond Res. .

Abstract

Esteve-Lanao, J, Del Rosso, S, Larumbe-Zabala, E, Cardona, C, Alcocer-Gamboa, A, and Boullosa, DA. Predicting marathon performance time throughout the training preparation in recreational runners. J Strength Cond Res 35(11): 3218-3224, 2021-The objective of this study was to predict marathon performance at different time points along the season using different speeds derived from ventilatory thresholds and running economy (RE). Sixteen recreational runners (8 women and 8 men) completed a 16-week marathon training macrocycle. Aerobic threshold (AeT), anaerobic threshold (AnT), and maximal oxygen uptake were assessed at the beginning of the season, whereas speeds eliciting training zones at AeT and AnT, and RE were evaluated at 5-time points during the season (M1-M5). Analyses of variance and hierarchical regression analyses were conducted. Training improved AeT and AnT speeds at M2 vs. M1 (p = 0.001) and remained significantly higher at M3, M4, and M5 (p = 0.001). There was a significant effect of time (p = 0.003) for RE, being higher at M4 and M5 compared with M1 and M3. Significant correlations were found between marathon performance and speeds at AeT and AnT at every time point (r = 0.81-0.94; p < 0.05). Speed at AnT represented the main influence (65.9 and 71.41%) in the final time prediction at M1 and M2, whereas speed at AeT took its place toward the end of the macrocycle (76.0, 80.4, and 85.0% for M3, M4, and M5, respectively). In conclusion, assessment of speeds at AeT and AnT permits for reasonable performance prediction during the training preparation, therefore avoiding maximal testing while monitoring 2 fundamental training speeds. Future research should verify if these findings are applicable to runners of different levels and other periodization models.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bale P, Rowell S, Colley E. Anthropometric and training characteristics of female marathon runners as determinants of distance running performance. J Sports Sci 3: 115–126, 1985.
    1. Billat VL, Demarle A, Slawinski J, Paiva M, Koralsztein JP. Physical and training characteristics of top-class marathon runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 2089–2097, 2001.
    1. Buman MP, Omli JW, Giacobbi PR, Brewer BW. Experiences and coping responses of “hitting the wall” for recreational marathon runners. J Appl Sport Psychol 20: 282–300, 2008.
    1. Coen B, Schwarz L, Urhausen A, Kindermann W. Control of training in middle- and long-distance running by means of the individual anaerobic threshold. Int J Sports Med 12: 519–524, 1991.
    1. Coquart JB, Alberty M, Bosquet L. Validity of a nomogram to predict long distance running performance. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2119–2123, 2009.

LinkOut - more resources