Is this excessive?

[DisneyRunner]

A little background first. Person "X" started running in 2007 and has no knowledge/experience with running. The goal is to qualify for Boston. This is what person "X" has completed this year.
1. A half marathon on 2.14.10
2. A half marathon on 2.28.10
3. A half marathon on 5.1.10
4. A half marathon on 9.19.10
5. A full marathon on 10.10.10
6. A half marathon on 11.6.10
7. And planned is a full marathon at the end of January
I think this schedule is opening up person "X" for injury. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

 

[Donald Duck]

Eh, it depends. It's certainly a full schedule but not too outrageous. I think it really depends on the individual and if they can take that much. Of course there is the possibility for injury, but that's a possibility for anyone one of us who hits the road everyday.

I say if "X" wants to, go for it. It's ambitious and I'm sure they are well aware of that, but they should also be aware of the risks. Again, it depends on the individual.

 

[Donald Duck]

Oh, BTW, perhaps I'm being biased...but I like excessive

 

[Kamikaze]

Does person X have a time goal? Or just qualify and finish?

 

[joel_maxwell]

I think it is doable.

Im doing a Full, Half and Half with only a few weeks between.

Just be smart and dont ruin the future races with a bad decision to try a timed goal if you need to just cruise one for the fun of it (Yes, this is pot, me, calling kettle black, me) which would be very hard for me to do too.

 

[DisneyRunner]

Oh, I forgot a race. A half on June 6. Person "X" would need to run a 3:45 to qualify. The PR for "X" is around 4:06. It would be unlikely the goal is just to finish.

 

[MCC1]

It really all depends, the red flags would be that the subject is a new runner so may not have the foundation to handle the workload, and the window between the Oct. marathon and the November 1/2 means there isn't time for a full marathon recovery and then ramp up for a good 1/2...if they're not hammering all the 1/2's this might be OK, but for a Boston qualifier (not sure the age of the subject so what time they're going for), they'll need to set aside a window to ramp up for that and be methodical about where they put the 1/2's in for the best training affect.

 

[MCC1]

...I see the time goals now in the last post...

 

[Phonedave]

A little background first. Person "X" started running in 2007 and has no knowledge/experience with running. The goal is to qualify for Boston. This is what person "X" has completed this year.
1. A half marathon on 2.14.10
2. A half marathon on 2.28.10
3. A half marathon on 5.1.10
4. A half marathon on 9.19.10
5. A full marathon on 10.10.10
6. A half marathon on 11.6.10
7. And planned is a full marathon at the end of January
I think this schedule is opening up person "X" for injury. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

So their full is the one they will use for qualifying ?

As others have said, if they just use the 1/2's as training runs, and not trying to set PR's then there is no problem. If they are pushing each and every race, then they are not allowing enough time to taper, race, and recover.

-dave

 

[DisneyRunner]

The person runs each race competitively. At this time, I'm hearing about a few body parts that ache.

 

[dreamfinder]

Pushing that much to qualify for Boston may be a stretch. Not completely out of touch, but not knowing what base they have and what other shape they are in it could leave them open to injury. Not necessarily the mileage, but the mileage with speed with no chance for rest.

 

[JillC LI]

It really depends on what level of fitness the runner is maintaining between all those races. Ultra runners do far more mileage than that without injury, but the key is staying at a consistent level of fitness. If each race is longer than what the runner is doing in training, that might be a problem, but if the training mileage was comparable to the racing mileage, I's say perhaps not.

 

[lukacseven]

A little background first. Person "X" started running in 2007 and has no knowledge/experience with running. The goal is to qualify for Boston. This is what person "X" has completed this year.
1. A half marathon on 2.14.10
2. A half marathon on 2.28.10
3. A half marathon on 5.1.10
4. A half marathon on 9.19.10
5. A full marathon on 10.10.10
6. A half marathon on 11.6.10
7. And planned is a full marathon at the end of January
I think this schedule is opening up person "X" for injury. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

I think the missing info is how much the person trains between races and how intense their training is. If they are running 10-12 miles as a long run every weekend, then running 2 halfs in 2 weeks is not a big deal. The other races seem to follow a realistic schedule. I know if I am training for a half, the month leading up to the race, I am running at least 10-12 miles on Sundays.

 

[Main Street USA]

Like some others have said, it depends on the runner. I ran a very hilly half last weekend, and up until today I thought I had hairline fractures in my legs below both knees. I had pain I had never felt before from this one half, so obviously for me, doing that many half marathons in such a short amount of time would be NUTS. I would be severely injured by the end of the 3rd or 4th for sure.

 

[Yoop33]

Oh, I forgot a race. A half on June 6. Person "X" would need to run a 3:45 to qualify. The PR for "X" is around 4:06. It would be unlikely the goal is just to finish.

Is this a personal best for a Half or a Full?? based on the info provided, it would appear these numbers were for a Half which would not qualify for Boston. When is X wanting to run in Boston? The submission process for Boston this coming april is already closed but if that 4:06 is for a full marathon then it leaves plenty of time to shave 20 min and qualify for Boston in 2012.
I would recommend a running group for X is he/she doesnt already have one. They can typically provide training programs tailored to coming races