Think 2h30 to 3h seems like a really big range. 3h is a decent target for many club runners but hardly any will get near 2h30
lumping them all in one group and saying they averaged 68km per week, suspect that’s maybe doing a disservice to the 2h30 monsters?
Also I bet the association does not reverse: the average 2h45 marathoner may run 68km per week, but the average 68km per week runner likely won’t bag a 2h45…
Correlation does not equal causation
Looks pretty skewed to me. The peak do more, the 3:45 - 4hr plus do much less.
It also depends on how that work is made up.
Also there is a massively different response for different people. Population average really has little value. (Unless you are average or like being average.)
“Do average things… be average”
I wish! I’ve definitely been in the 50-75km category but I doubt I’d ever achieve that time. It does also need a certain amount of actual running ability.
Yes… looks like nonsense to me, random buckets of result time and training time / load verses outcome.
I’ll post my 8 week build for a 3:29:46 (a bit skewed as I had to fast track after illness)
There is a bit more insight into that in the links, relatively more in time Z1 (three zone model explained) the faster the athlete, relatively more time in Z2/3 the slower…
And 151,000+ kicks any other study’s sample size into the long grass
No causation attempted just correlation
Fair enough.
I will look at the detail if I have time or remember when I do have time.
There is the Giovanni Tanda’s research that stands up pretty well but needs an offset for some individuals (ends of the bell curve.)
Sub 4 runners average 42.2km per week over sixteen weeks. PYR structure.
Z1 (82% of 1hr pace (assumed 5:27/km) or 6:40/km, Z2 up to 5:30, Z3 <5:27/km
So in a 4hr30 week PYR 80/15/5
Z1 216mins, 3h36 at up to 6:40
Z2 41mins between 6:30 and 5:30/km
Z3 13mins at 5:27/km and below
And came up with four tiz workouts for a sub 4 marathon in a 4h30 running week
(1h06mins z1 used, 2h30 z1 remaining);
Let’s assume correlation IS causation for a moment, multiply by 16 weeks and hey presto a sub 4 marathon 
I ran a 3.38 on 15hrs notice without knowing the race even existed 
My plan was fairly simple, I just moved my legs as fast as they would go. Didn’t over complicate the matter with stuff like training 
how do you suppose you will hold 5:40 pace for 3hrs 59 minutes if you only do 41minutes a week
I guess you could add 1.5hrs in the long run at TMP which is 10miles or so but then the long run is gone.
As always, it’s not taking into account the runner’s history (both running and other sports).
I can run OK off very little mileage now because I still (somehow) have a bit of goodwill banked in the legs. Gonna be whole different story for a total newbie to running though.
Also I guess maybe crossover from other sports like cycling or - dare I say it - swimming?
Strava never lies and it looks like i averaged only 32.6km per week running over the last 16 weeks, which feels a bit disappointing. But it’s predicting a 3h32 marathon off that, we’ll never find out though as I sure ain’t running one any time soon.
Looking at my sub-3 last year.
16wk average - 55k
Arguably concentrated marathon build was actually 12 weeks
12wk average - 64k
Max week: 80k (4 of those)
Max 4 runs/wk, but cycling and swimming too.
And quite a bit of history in my legs.
The data doesn’t lie!
The data shows you what you choose to see
Lies, damned lies and statistics….
Funny you should say that, I found only one YouTube guy talking about that study and he clearly just used it to reinforce pre-existing bias and ignore the data that challenged the status quo, I won’t link it.
Found this surprising, from Garmin insights.
I didn’t think 32km per week running sounds like much, certainly not compared to some numbers on TT like Buzz’s
but apparently 99% of Garmin users average less.
I guess not every Garmin user runs, but even so- surprising. Maybe there’s some other explanation like not recording everything? 
I think probably just true that 32km is in the upper %
Even if that only counts active users I wouldn’t be surprised. I reckon 32km average over a long enough time would be in the top 50% of active triathletes, let alone the bulk of Garmin owners when include those who do a park run once or twice a month, or a few km during a gym session etc, and the large numbers who don’t do any running
