UKH

Which one is "easier"?

I ran a sub 4hr marathon a few years ago, and as a slow person it was the hardest thing I've ever done.

On paper the Bob Graham (sub 24 hours of course) sounds easier, in a slow and steady kind of way.

Does it require the same 4 months of dedicated training as the marathon, or would it be worth a crack if you're in decent shape? Like, a few weeks of extended hiking/ fell runs then go for it.

Basically, how much training should I do?

Aged 38 I ran London in 2h 54m, a year later did the BGR in 23h 39m. Hope this helps...

Edit: probably more helpful to say I tried the BGR in the Marathon year as well, dropped out at Esk Pike due to the heat and lack of water - then again it was only a week after doing the Sligachan Horseshoe.

I love the enthusiasm! On one hand, given the road crossings it's possible to give it a bash and drop out if/ when you need to. 

On the other, 26 miles on roads is a good start point but nowhere near equivalent to a BGR. The 27,000' (edit: and descent) of ascent is the main difference :-D

Some great resources and tips here: https://forum.fellrunner.org.uk/showthread.php?13490-Training-plan-for-BGR

Obviously "easier" can be different for different people, but across a large population, I'd be quite confident to say the 4 hr marathon is far easier than a sub 24 BGR. Lots of people train for far more than 4 months and still don't succeed (as in, a whole year of training, or more, peaking with a BG attempt).

Statistics between fell and road running are hard to draw comparisons, given the vastly different population sizes, but some statistics that spring to mind:

- On average, 1 in 3 BGR attempts is successful

- Only 2700 people have completed the BGR (based on club data, will be slightly more to include unverified and solo rounds)

These figures can easily be spun to help many points of view, but I'll give you my take (irony noted):

Almost everyone who sets out for a BGR will consider themselves well prepared, but most fail. This could be from something random, like weather, injury, etc, or they simply weren't as well prepared as they thought! With a road marathon, the overriding factor for success is just are you good enough. After all, far fewer opportunities to twist an ankle! So even if you were to assume that the two are the same physical difficulty, the chance of success on the BGR will surely be less.

Also, nearly 13000 people finished under 4 hours in just the 2022 London Marathon. Clearly many more people road run than fell run, but that should give you an indication as to how common it is to achieve that time. 

Another thing to consider about a slow and steady approach is that you have to be steady on some very tough terrain, where it's hard to maintain even 3mph. Billy Bland famously walked the round in 22 hours, but he did so by walking uphill faster than almost anyone else can - that's what you get from being a good enough runner to set a time that wouldn't be beaten for 36 years!

HOWEVER: none of that is to say it isn't worth a go! I think it would be naïve to expect it to be straightforward, but if you are a runner much more suited to long distances then there's every chance that you will find the BGR easier than measly marathon Given the optimal time of year for BGR seems to be around June, maybe it's worth training for a while and giving it a go then, to maximize chance of success? And if it doesn't work this year, you may well be hooked and keen to give it another go!

Good luck I would love to be proven completely wrong!

Thanks!

This is exactly the kind of personal context I was looking for 👍

Sounds like some earnest training might be in order...

Not a lot can go wrong in 4hrs. A lot can go wrong in 24hrs.

I was reasonably fit, living in London, did a few weekends hill walking here and there, trained for and ran Turin Marathon in 3:30, we 'had a crack' at the BG.  '3mph how hard can it be??'.

We bailed at the end of leg 1, throughly broken and about an hour behind schedule.

The BGR is much harder than a 4 hour marathon.  More hours training, more months training, more skills to learn.  

Apples Oranges.

Have you done an ultra? Your body will go through a hell of a lot more in 24hrs of an Ultra or BG than a 4 hour marathon.

I couldn’t disagree more with the first part of this statement more. They are very different beasts, but so much can go wrong racing a marathon.

They are very different challenges tat each need to be taken seriously in their own way. There will people who have completed very fast marathons, but couldn’t do a BG and people who have done marathons slower than 4 hours and have completed a BG.

 >> '3mph how hard can it be??'.

 My thoughts exactly! Before this thread...

Having done both I would say the marathon was far tougher for me (though I was aiming for sub 3 rather than sub 4 and ended up with a respectable and painful 2.51 in London and then promptly retired from road marathons!) - the BG is just like a very long day in the hills, lots of walking uphills and lots of eating involved, pace so much slower than road running pace and definitely had some low points and luck with the weather. Depends if you have a background of long days in the hill eg winter climbing which is great training in terms of length of day and suffering! 

That's a different question you're answering though. I expect you could have trotted round a sub 4 marathon and found it way easier than a BG.

I reckon that everything that could go wrong in a 4 hr marathon could also go wrong in a BG plus a whole lot more besides!

But I agree that they're so different that comparison isn't particularly illuminating.

You'll hear stories of people doing a BG off the back of very little or no training and stories of well trained and experienced runners failing on it. Most of the former need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

I'd say that if you're already someone who is used to big hill days (i.e. 12 hrs on your feet and not crippled from it the next day) and have a bit of running experience then you should be able to prepare for a BG in 4 months and have a decent chance of doing it.

My sister's marathon PB is 3.23. At 70 she can still do 4.00. She wouldn't be able to do the BG in 48 hours let alone 24. 

It's all about hill "running" ability. 

They are quite different things to compare. A 4hr marathon doesn’t mean you can do the BG. Doing the BG doesn’t mean you can run a 4hr marathon. 

That said, the overall effort, physical and mental, required for a BG is in a completely different league to a 4hr marathon IMHO. As such, I’d argue the marathon is the “easier” of the two. 

Most definitely.

The OP doesn't seem to have a grasp of how much ascent/ descent there is on something like the BG, most marathons are essentially flat in comparison

As per the various other comments, it’s an impossible comparison to make, as each involves a very distinct skill set. In addition to that, your background/base is going to make a massive difference. 

Looking at it the other way around, I haven’t done a marathon, but if I did I’d have to completely change the training that I do, because a lot of what I do is geared towards big rounds - hence I’d be extremely slow!! That said, if I did decide to do one I’d be putting in a solid 12 week training block at a bare minimum, so that I could specifically work on my pace.

In light of this, I certainly wouldn’t recommend doing any less than this for the Bob Graham, and even then - that’d be a bare minimum. Why? Because you can’t just build a bigger base overnight - and that’s what’s going to pay dividends on something like the Bob Graham.

In terms of figuring out where you’re at, go and recce one of the legs. It should feel easy-ish at the actual Bob Graham pace and don’t be tempted to go too much faster. Use these recces to get the route and your systems dialled and when doing one leg feels fine, try linking two.

The Bob Graham isn’t an experience to be rushed - it’s one that’s best savoured. I’d also argue it’s one to be enjoyed and if you don’t have that base, there’s a distinct chance it’s going to hurt, and much though I love type two fun - type one is better.

Good luck - it really is an amazing experience!!!

I couldn't agree more!

Reading through some threads of your experience was what inspired me to start considering it, so thanks!

Although they're ultimately futile I rather like these equivalence discussions.

I was just thinking about it from the stand point of who each would be a realistic goal for. 

I reckon a 4hr marathon would be a realistic goal for almost any man between the ages of 20 and 45 provided they weren't too overweight, didn't have any health conditions, had a history of some sort of regular physical activity and were willing to follow a training programme. The BG heaps quite a lot of extra layers on top of that.

To everyone saying you can’t compare, think of it this way.

If someone with no road running experience who had just got round a BG said they wanted to do a 4h marathon, what training would you suggest?

‘Id suggest 8-10 weeks building up the road miles, 2-3 runs a week with the longest being around 3 hours, a couple of weeks before.

The other way round, same question?

I’d suggest 6 months building up the ascent 3-4 runs a week, until you get a 3 month block with 3000m ascent a week and your longest run being two 8h+ days consecutively a couple of weeks before.

So on that way of thinking I’d stick with my previous suggestion the BG is harder.

Ive done a couple of 3:30 marathons and a BG.

I can run a 330 marathon off the couch and have run 245. In fell running terms I'm often top 10 in smaller races, was top 15 in this year's cadair race. Could I do the bob graham? No chance. I've a 5 hour engine max and then I'm done. 

Without being disrespectful I don't think you can compare the two.

Love to hear if you do though as I've always fancied a big round.

If you live darn sarf, training for the BG is harder. No big hills, no way to recce legs easily, etc.

If I lived near the lakes, I'd definitely be doing as Rob suggested and trying a leg or two together to see where I'm at. I'd recce all the legs, probably more than once! I'd love to do it.

I've done some hilly trail ultras in the south east but the amount of ascent on the BG is a whole other ballgame!

If you're not near the lakes, I'd enter some local 50K (and build up to 50 mile/100K) trail ultras to see how you get on with the longer duration/nutrition mental battle etc. I guess being able to do a 100 mile trail ultra with some hills in it under 24 hrs would be a good comparator?

If you are after some inspiration do read “Feet in the Clouds”

https://richardaskwith.co.uk/books/feet-in-the-clouds/

Will give you an idea as to how hard the challenge is for someone pretty fit and very motivated.

If everything goes well on a 24hr round it can feel like it wasn't that hard. After all, you really shouldn't be blowing out your arse at any point. However if things start to go wrong it can feel like a shitshow death march!

My CRR went like a dream. No issues at all. I was tired afterwards and had slightly sore legs. By midday the following day I felt fine and went on a club run a few days later.

My BG was horrific. It was about 30 degrees and I probably started a little fast. I had dizzy spells and felt sick at Dunmail raise. It had cooled by Wasdale and I knew I had a decent buffer but all that kept me going was the thought of not having to go back and try again. I'd been hoping for a time about 19hrs and that was definitely a realistic goal given previous performances but in the end I was happy just to finish within the 24hrs and not die from heat stress. I could barely walk for 5 days after.

Loads of good advice already but I'll chip in anyway. When looking at building your base, think of the numbers in terms of time on your feet & ascent, not miles covered. 

That best applies if you can train on the fells or similar terrain. The old benchmark of 10000 ft per week for a good few months was seen as the minimum if you wanted to get round. Training on the fells, you'll reach that at around 30 miles per week. 

Building up the time is important too. Leg 1 or 2 (clock wise), at a get round pace, will take around 4 hrs. Once that feels ok, extend up to 6, 8 then 12 hour days. Once you've done a few 12 hr days with 10000 ft (or more) of ascent, having kept yourself fed & hydrated so you feel ok at the end, then your probably ready for a go.

I've missed a trick here with my initial response - how about helping me get round the Joss Naylor challenge in May/June? You would get to see some of the BG hills, get a feel for the terrain, and only have to do 48 miles/17,000 ft ascent in the 24 hours I'm allowed at my advanced age.

Coincidentally, my Garmin today is suggesting I still have a 4 hour marathon in me!

There would be some carrying of food and water but I reckon I can manage the navigation myself..

And regarding the BG itself, go anticlockwise - unlike most attempts.

Ha, i was actually beginning to think of doing the Joss as i never got myself sorted enough to do a BG, i looked at it and the cut off for sub 55 age groups are brutal, i might try the BG after all!

Oh wow, that's fantastic!

This thread has also reminded me that I really need to finish off the article/series I started to write on how to approach the various Big Rounds. I made a good start around 12 months ago, then for one reason and the next it fell by the wayside. Having just had another look I'm already 4500 words in and barely felt like I'd scratched the surface!!

Will put a bit of time into it as/when I can, although I'd love to finish the piece I've been working on about this year's Spine Challenger too...

Where does all the time go?!

Run the first 26 miles of BGR in sub 4 hours and you’ll have your answer 

This thread has been gold, thanks everyone!

With all this info, and being realistic, my current situation means that if I want to set myself up for success, then an attempt this summer isn't optimal.

I'll start by checking out some of the legs as suggested and take it from there. You never know, but targeting 2024 seems a better option.

@petemeads - that's a very generous offer Not sure if I'll be around, but will get in touch if I am. Either way, best of luck!

@rob - can't wait to read the article

Sub 4hr marathon involves training and then careful pacing. Very few manage a negative split which hugely helps gets your best time.

BG needs a lot of application, planning, and obsession.

What about doing the Welsh 3000's this year instead. It's about half the accent and half the mileage. If that goes well do the BG next year.

I'm doing the Welsh 3000's it in April (but to make life easier I'm doing it over 2 days). 

This thread has inspired me however. Could up my game for the following year.

Interesting thought...

I think there's a lot to be said about having inspirational milestones in the lead-up to doing something big like the Bob Graham. The Welsh 3000s is a perfect example of that, and if the Bob Graham gives you an excuse to do it under the guise of 'training' then it's gifted you a great day out.

I'm not sure where you or the OP are based, but as someone that's based in the Peak District (an area not overly endowed with actual peaks) there's actually a fair few fun days to be had which act as good stepping stones towards the Bob Graham. The Kinder Dozen is the most popular, which involves 24ish miles and 3200ish metres of ascent, across a blend of rough and runnable terrain, going up and down Kinder via pretty much every way possible!!

If you're interested in that, or any other ideas, check out the 'Other Challenges' tab on the Dark Peak Bob Graham page: https://www.dpfr.org.uk/pages/view/bob-graham

Thete is physical hell and mental hell. I've done a few ultras including European mountain events and love them.

I don't think that I have the mental fortitude to cope with the monotony of a much shorter marathon non far easier going. My head starts to shut down before I hit the 10km mark on tarmac.

I would be grateful of feedback from those two who downvoted my reply

Rule No. 1 of UKC, don't talk about voting

Rule No. 2 of UKC, don't talk about voting

Rule No. 3 of UKC, don't talk about voting

I downvoted this. It just came across as condescending and rather elitist for my liking. Maybe the OP does have a grasp of the ascent/ descent, maybe he doesn't. I'm probably being overly sensitive on account of my man-flu to be fair.

Edit

I'll give you an upvote on your last comment to balance it out

Again missed the boat on a lot of the thread, but I'd listen to ablackett pretty well!

Some people can knock out a BG off a few months training (Covid I did a good 3 months' training, max run length 6.5h, all training in the North York Moors, lots of esoteric climbing done) then as soon as restrictions were lifted trotted around the BG in 17h40). Training for a sub-2h45 marathon took about the same amount of time. But then again I have 12+ years of built up Fell training, supporting lots of rounds, mountain marathons, long fell races.

Plenty of 4h marathon runners will have got around the BG, but they'll have plenty of fell experience and fitness built up - so it depends whether you've got some of this or starting on the ground floor.

What I'd suggest (and have suggested to a friend looking at the BG) is get training, up your climb, then try to get to the lakes March/April onwards and have a go at some of the legs, progress to double legs, see how the body reacts and feels. Then you'll have a better idea as to whether it's doable in later summer 2023, or if you want to wait until 2024.

Setting a timelimit, or wanting to do something in a short timeframe doesn't really fit in to the ethos of the rounds IMO. Most of the excitement is in the building of fitness, learning the routes, learning about yourself and your body, making friends and connections.

Don't go chasing it, let it come to you and it will do.

I’ve never done a 24 hour marathon, 9.5 hours is the longest I’ve done, that was 50 miles with 10,000’ of ascent, so hilly, but not BG hilly. That was a lot easier than racing a marathon, admittedly, quite a bit faster than four hours.

Marathon in 4 isu much much much much MUCH easier