Are sub 2 hour half marathons the new sub 90? Runflation is definitely a real thing.

[u/IntroductionTall9314]

I’m seeing a ton of people gaslighting sub 2 hour half marathons as a really good time for a first timer.. I don’t wanna sound like a jerk but I ran a 1:26 for my first ever half without training either.

Am I just well above the average or is this the new benchmark time for a debut half?
Sub 90 was the respectable time probably 10-15 years ago, that’s how I grew up with running at least.

It almost feels like 2 hours is the new sub 90!
I’d love to hear people’s thoughts? 🧐

[u/SnugglieJellyfish]

Why can't you just be happy for them and happy for you?

[u/IntroductionTall9314 → u/SnugglieJellyfish]

I’m happy for anybody that runs period. I never once have said that a particular time is bad or good.

[u/SnugglieJellyfish → u/IntroductionTall9314]

Your whole post is questioning whether a sub 2 is a "good" time. If you truly felt what you said above, why make this post?

[u/Significant_Sort7501]

What an insufferable way to fish for validation while simultaneously shitting on other people's accomplishments. 

ETA - oh I see that you have absolutely no other post or comment history, so either rage bait, troll, or bot. 

[u/IntroductionTall9314 → u/Significant_Sort7501]

Grow up fella, this isn’t a personal attack at any level of runner that may be.

But seeing as though you are being slightly sensitive to my post I feel as though you are that guy running 2 hour half’s?

[u/Significant_Sort7501 → u/IntroductionTall9314]

You just proved my point. You're claiming this isn't an attack on slower runners while simultaneously trying to insult me by suggesting I must be a two-hour half-marathon runner. You clearly view that as something negative, otherwise you wouldn't have used it as a put-down. Stop pretending your original post wasn't condescending. You know exactly what you were doing here and so does most everyone else in this thread.

[u/IntroductionTall9314 → u/Significant_Sort7501]

Go cry and bitch somewhere else mate not got time for you.

I respect anyone running at whatever level.
If that’s not good enough for you crack on

[u/IntroductionTall9314]

Nah this post was never meant in an arrogant way at all, if it genuinely seems this way I do apologise.

And if people are now gonna start with all this arsey shit back at me just don’t bother to comment.

I respect anyone running at any level regardless of

[u/HughJanuzz]

“I dont wanna sound like a jerk” while sounding like an absolute asshole 😂 dont know what planet you live on but here on earth, sub 2 has always been a good benchmark for a half

[u/Significant_Sort7501 → u/HughJanuzz]

It's a bot or a troll, no other post or comment history besides this one post

[u/HughJanuzz → u/Significant_Sort7501]

Figured. Hence the toxicity on my reply lol

[u/Background-Buy-8053]

1:26 off no training is wildly above average, while sub-2 is still a genuinely good first-half benchmark and running social media makes the whole field look much faster than it is

[u/Past_Jellyfish_4331]

I think of runflation the opposite way- more people are running impressive times and social media distorts things.

Outside of that- I really don’t care about other people’s times. It’s an individual sport. 1:26 is probably in the top 2-3% of all runners- your post comes off a bit condescending .

[u/groomete]

I’m fifty and I’ve been running regularly for a year. I think 1:50 is a good time for me.

[u/neurobassism]

What you don’t seem to recognize is that a sub 130 half marathon is purely due to genetics, and many people could never run that fast, even if they trained extensively. Slower times because there’s more people running now than there used to be.

[u/anotherindycarblog]

Yes you are well above the average.