Climbing equivalent of running a marathon?

Do we mean running a marathon race, with all the support, or running the distance of a marathon? Is an unsupported marathon “trad running?”

IMO you guys are overthinking this a bit. A sub 5 hour marathon is probably like doing ~2000ft of 5.9/10 in a day. For some people this is a casual day, for others this would be a life goal, much like the 5 hour marathon. But, on average, I think many climbers could achieve this with intentional effort and a reasonable training block lead-up. See: Horseshoe Hell.

Tal Mwrote:

IMO you guys are overthinking this a bit. A sub 5 hour marathon is probably like doing ~2000ft of 5.9/10 in a day. For some people this is a casual day, for others this would be a life goal, much like the 5 hour marathon. But, on average, I think many climbers could achieve this with intentional effort and a reasonable training block lead-up. See: Horseshoe Hell.

So something like Epinephrine?

Might not be a bad comparison, though I still think climbing that requires far more skill than putting one foot in front of the other for 26.2.

Permabetawrote:

So something like Epinephrine?

Might not be a bad comparison, though I still think climbing that requires far more skill than putting one foot in front of the other for 26.2.

The hardest part of comparisons like this is that multipitch climbs like this often require “other” skills such route finding, rope management, anchor building, etc. whereas running a marathon doesn’t require any actual skills aside from being able to run for a little over 26 miles, and arguably some mental fortitude . 

Permabetawrote:

So something like Epinephrine?

Might not be a bad comparison, though I still think climbing that requires far more skill than putting one foot in front of the other for 26.2.

No, because Epi has, what, like maybe 500ft of climbing in those grades, if that? Keep in mind a 150ft 5.9 pitch does not equal 150ft of 5.9 climbing. You’re not likely to happen your way into the equivalent experience unless you find yourself doing huge days out - big walls, big multipitch link ups, horseshoe hell, etc

I don’t think anyone has ever claimed a marathon is a skill based activity rather than a physical one. 

I have seen mont blanc via the goutier route in a day requiring a similar level of fitness to a marathon. Of course climbing a mountain has a lot more nuance than that but I think it's a good base, 4000m of elevation gain and no technical difficulties. 

Snake Dike. 

M Awrote:

I think this is a good start for comparison, but it misses the effort of getting in shape. I could (and have) climb Cathedral Peak off the couch with no problem. I could not run a marathon off the couch. 

I think this is a key for any comparison. Trying to equate a run and a climb, of equal time, doesn’t work.

I only completed one marathon (2:21) but my legs felt as beat up as I did after 11hrs on the nose, maybe even a bit more. If I would have trained for climbing as much as I did for running, the niad would have been even easier (and obvi faster). Does this mean it would take doing the Double to make my body equivalently tired?  Might actually be the equation but I think that shows the question to be not valuable from a data/analytical perspective. Cool to think/talk about? Sure. Just so difficult to compare that it ends too convoluted to hold real world value. 

You had an Olympic trials qualifying marathon on the first go and just said that’s cool and left it there? lol. 

Spopepro O.wrote:

You had an Olympic trials qualifying marathon on the first go and just said that’s cool and left it there? lol. 

If it’s him, not some pretender who assumed his name, then yeah, that’s a totally believable time for that caliber of runner. 

Google is your friend.

Permabetawrote:

5 hour marathon is a long, very brisk walk. But it takes time, is painful, and not everyone can do it. So maybe a climb like the E face of the Third Flatiron?

I don't think the Third Flatiron is a direct comparison.

The challenge seems to lie in maintaining continuous forward movement for five hours. For most competent climbers, completing the Third would take closer to 1-2 hours car-to-car.

A better comparison might be tackling the Flatirons Quinfecta with continuous movement—no or minimal belay breaks—which would align more closely with the intended effort.

A lot of responses here are including running/walking/upright locomotion as part of the answer which is cyclical and a bit of a cop out. Purely from a climbing standpoint I think the equivalent of a true road marathon with aid stations, help, etc. has to be something done on TR or easy leads(easy meaning easy to do not easy grade-wise), any multipitch or logistically challenging situations adds far to many complexities into the equation. 

That being said I would say something like 15-25 60-120ft pitches would be loosely equivalent to a marathon. Fast and strong climbers could do all 5.11/12 climbing and do one every 10 minutes to finish in roughly 3 hours. Slower and weaker climbers would take longer and climb easier grades, and probably finish somewhere in the 5-8 hour range. However the feeling of success, soreness, pump, etc would be quite similar to finishing a marathon. 

highaltitudeflatulentexpulsionwrote:

If it’s him, not some pretender who assumed his name, then yeah, that’s a totally believable time for that caliber of runner. 

Google is your friend.

Point taken, but I wasn’t calling anyone a liar. Either it was made up, or it was someone who was capable of being on the World Cup/olympic circuit and just decided one race was enough and they didn’t want to, which is a highly unusual decision. Google did also provide why that might have been…

Some Grade VI and VII climbs require 12 hours of climbing for days carrying packs . High altitude is exhausting too.

Gloweringwrote:

Snake Dike. 

Yeah, that felt like more than a Marathon! 

Spopepro O.wrote:

…just decided one race was enough and they didn’t want to, which is a highly unusual decision….

Not at all. 2:21 is a pedestrian time (thousands easily accomplish this every year), as is a 10+hr niad (probably hundreds accomplish this each year).

Back to the OP’s question, there are so many parameters to control for, it’s a complicated question. Ideally you’re training for running the same level as for climbing. During the actual “equivalent” climb, you’re going nonstop, just as you would a marathon. Unless you’re TC/AH, I doubt you can keep your HR above 165 the entire time, so that’s yet another complication (running a high level marathon you will be 165-180 for 2+hrs).

The more I think about it, I feel like an IAD wall of sufficient size (25+ pitches?) will reasonably approximate the abuse of a marathon, for the weekend warrior or casual athlete type. But if you’re overtrained (relative to the other sport) in one, then the equation becomes very complicated. 

At first glance, the Nose speed record sounds marathon-ish since the peak performers are completing it in 2 hours. But for one, the competition for the Nose speed record pales in comparison to the number of athletes competing in the marathon world wide. A 2 hour speed climb of the Nose is no where near human potential in terms of physical exertion. But it's not a good comparison because it requires so much skill to complete. For instance, I've been climbing for over 10 years and couldn't get up the nose in 3 days!

24 hours of horseshoe hell also feels like a massive endurance challenge similar to a marathon, but the time frame is absurd and it's not continuous effort.

I kind of like the idea of the Flatirons Quinfecta because it is at a difficulty level that is so low that anybody could learn the skills to do the climbing itself in a few days. But it's not long enough because the top performer (Kyle Richardson) can do it in 1:42. Again, the competition is so much lower than that of the marathon that the time would definitely drop if we had 100 years of intense competition. Let's be honest though, the quinfecta is half trail running since the FKT starts at the trailhead. Kyle only climbed for 56 minutes on his quinfecta if you look at his splits. I estimate that there is something like 4500ft of climbing in the quinfecta. If Kyle can climb that in 56 minutes, then we would need something like 10,000ft of flatiron level difficulty climbing stacked together for continuous climbing to give us a marathon equivalent activity.

And instead of rest stations with gatorade, I'll take a 10,000ft auto belay!

Christian Heschwrote:

Not at all. 2:21 is a pedestrian time (thousands easily accomplish this every year), as is a 10+hr niad (probably hundreds accomplish this each year).

That’s really not true. It’s in the 99.95% of all folks who are competing in majors, and the number goes up from there adding non-majors. Saying it’s pedestrian is like saying anyone can climb 5.14 if they just were willing to try (and yes… I recognize people have said that here). I don’t think many people in this thread can run 5:20 mile pace for 200m. If you were fast enough to have to provide whereabouts, it’s no where near pedestrian. 

Spopepro O.wrote:

That’s really not true. It’s in the 99.95% of all folks who are competing in majors, and the number goes up from there adding non-majors. Saying it’s pedestrian is like saying anyone can climb 5.14 if they just were willing to try (and yes… I recognize people have said that here). I don’t think many people in this thread can run 5:20 mile pace for 200m. If you were fast enough to have to provide whereabouts, it’s no where near pedestrian. 

Agreed that marathon pace is probably like sub 5 hours on the Nose. 

Spopepro O.wrote:

I don’t think many people in this thread can run 5:20 mile pace for 200m….it’s no where near pedestrian. 

And I don’t think many people on this thread can lead 5.12+ on gear. You are defining “good/elite” a LOT more broadly than I would. There’s 5,000+ people in the world who can run that pace for an hour. There’s probably an equal percentage of climbers who can climb 5.12. Both are not generally considered elite.

Jabroni, I want to agree but the problem is that a team who is competent enough for a 5hr niad doesn’t actually feel super beat up by that effort. Almost anyone, assuming they put in moderate/hard effort, does indeed feel beat up by 26mi, no way around that. So it’s complicated bc it takes a lot more volume of climbing to beat up an equally competent climber.

Edit: recently had some friends go 5hrs on the nose and they would both tell you that they didn’t feel very bad at all…. but would have been trashed for days if they ran 26mi, at any pace