FREE TOOL · FOUR PREDICTION METHODS

Marathon time predictor

The old version gave one aggressive answer. This one puts the famous models side by side, shows their disagreement, and asks whether your marathon-specific training can support any of them.

Finish time

Use a recent all-out race. Every result below is a fitness equivalence, not a marathon promise.

FOUR LENSES, NOT ONE ANSWER
RIEGEL 1.063:38:55Classic power law; often the fastest estimate.
DANIELS VDOT3:37:50Equivalent-performance model; assumes distance-specific preparation.
CAMERON3:43:08Distance-varying correction; usually more conservative across a large jump.
2× HALF + 10 MIN3:40:00Popular coaching rule of thumb; simple, not individualized.
MODEL SPREAD3:37:503:43:08

Pace spread: 5:10/km5:17/km. The spread shows model disagreement; it does not include your training gap.

MARATHON-SPECIFIC SUPPORT

Can your training support the equivalence?

Strong supporting preparation

No obvious gap in this short checklist. These thresholds are coaching prompts, not validated qualification cut-offs. Course, weather, injury history, taper and execution still matter.

What each prediction is actually saying

METHODSTRENGTHMAIN WEAKNESS
Riegel 1.06Simple, famous, easy to reproduceDerived from performance relationships; often too fast for recreational marathon conversion
Daniels VDOTConnects race performance and training intensitiesEquivalent performance assumes you are adequately trained for the target distance
CameronCorrection changes with distance rather than using one exponentStill based on a general performance curve, not your training log
2× half + 10 minEasy sanity check from a half marathonRule of thumb; unavailable from 5K/10K and not individual

The original page displayed classic Riegel and then added a fixed distance buffer. That looked reassuring but was not a recognized model. The replacement keeps each named method intact and shows the spread without pretending we know which one is yours.

Formula sources: Riegel uses T₂ = T₁ × (D₂/D₁)^1.06; Daniels VDOT combines a running oxygen-cost curve with the fraction sustainable for a race duration; Cameron uses a distance-specific correction instead of one fixed exponent. You can compare the implementation with the official VDOT calculator and this formula reference. We do not label proprietary watch or app predictions as one of these formulas because their full models are not public.

Why the fast prediction needs skepticism

In a study of 2,303 recreational endurance runners, Riegel was well calibrated through the half marathon but substantially underestimated marathon time; for half the runners it was at least 10 minutes too fast. A later review reported average Riegel error around 10% in a comparable recreational marathon setting. Vickers & Vertosick study · marathon recommender-systems review.

This does not make Riegel useless. It makes it a clean estimate of equivalent speed endurance under its assumptions—not evidence that a fast 5K runner has already built the legs, fuel strategy and accumulated training for 42.195 km.

The prerequisites the formulas cannot see

  • Consistent running volume. A recent race proves speed at that distance. It does not prove months of marathon load.
  • Long-run durability. Muscular damage, form deterioration and fuelling become materially different late in a marathon.
  • Strength and resilience. Strength work may support economy and tissue capacity, but it does not justify subtracting a fixed number of minutes.
  • Fuelling and hydration. A predictor assumes energy delivery does not become the limiting system. That has to be practised.
  • Health and injury continuity. Interrupted training can leave recent short-race speed intact while eroding marathon readiness.
  • Course, weather and execution. Elevation, heat, wind, pacing errors and the taper can easily outweigh a small difference between formulas.

How to turn the range into a race target

Prefer a recent half marathon over a 5K because the extrapolation is smaller. Start from the slower end of the model spread, then ask whether your long runs and weekly training make even that pace familiar. A goal pace should appear repeatedly in controlled marathon-specific work; it should not be selected because one calculator produced an attractive finish time.

Frequently asked questions

Why do marathon calculators give different times?

They model endurance decay differently. Riegel uses one power exponent, Daniels VDOT maps equivalent performance through oxygen-cost and duration equations, and Cameron uses a distance-varying correction. None can see your actual marathon preparation from one race result.

Is the Riegel formula too optimistic for a marathon?

It often is for recreational runners extrapolating from shorter races. A study of 2,303 recreational runners found classic Riegel predictions were at least 10 minutes too fast for half of the runners at marathon distance.

Which marathon prediction should I use?

Treat the formulas as a fitness-equivalence range. Give more weight to a recent half marathon than a 5K, and do not choose the fastest result unless marathon-specific volume, long runs, fuelling and health support it.

Does strength training affect marathon prediction?

A one-race formula does not include strength training. Strength can affect resilience, running economy and the ability to maintain form, but it cannot be converted honestly into a fixed number of minutes by this calculator.