Sports Medicine

, Volume 47, Issue 9, pp 1739–1750 | Cite as

How Biomechanical Improvements in Running Economy Could Break the 2-hour Marathon Barrier

  • Wouter HoogkamerEmail author
  • Rodger Kram
  • Christopher J. Arellano
Review Article


A sub-2-hour marathon requires an average velocity (5.86 m/s) that is 2.5% faster than the current world record of 02:02:57 (5.72 m/s) and could be accomplished with a 2.7% reduction in the metabolic cost of running. Although supporting body weight comprises the majority of the metabolic cost of running, targeting the costs of forward propulsion and leg swing are the most promising strategies for reducing the metabolic cost of running and thus improving marathon running performance. Here, we calculate how much time could be saved by taking advantage of unconventional drafting strategies, a consistent tailwind, a downhill course, and specific running shoe design features while staying within the current International Association of Athletic Federations regulations for record purposes. Specifically, running in shoes that are 100 g lighter along with second-half scenarios of four runners alternately leading and drafting, or a tailwind of 6.0 m/s, combined with a 42-m elevation drop could result in a time well below the 2-hour marathon barrier.


Metabolic Cost Support Body Weight World Record Ethylene Vinyl Acetate Ethylene Vinyl Acetate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors thank Owen Beck, Len Brownlie, Dan Judelson, and Geng Luo for fruitful discussions, Elissa Johnson for illustrations, and Sean Hartnett for the Berlin 2014 split time data.

Compliance with Ethical Standards


No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this article.

Conflict of interest

Wouter Hoogkamer and Christopher Arellano have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review. Rodger Kram is a paid consultant to Nike, Inc., which is engaged in a sub-2-hour marathon project. The views expressed in this manuscript do not represent those of Nike, Inc.

Supplementary material

40279_2017_708_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (185 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 185 kb)


  1. 1.
    Joyner MJ, Ruiz JR, Lucia A. The two-hour marathon: who and when? J Appl Physiol. 2011;110:275–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weiss M, Newman A, Whitmore C, et al. One hundred and fifty years of sprint and distance running—past trends and future prospects. Eur J Sport Sci. 2016;16:393–401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hill AV. The physiological basis of athletic records. Lancet. 1925;206:481–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kennelly AE. An approximate law of fatigue in the speeds of racing animals. Proc Am Acad Arts Sci. 1906;42:275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu Y, Schutz RW. Prediction models for track and field performances. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci. 1998;2:205–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caesar E. Two hours: the quest to run the impossible marathon. New York: Simon & Schuster; 2015.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tucker R, Santos-Concejero J. An imminent sub 2-hours marathon is unlikely: historical trends of the gender gap in running events. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. Epub 14 December 2016.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hutchinson A. What will it take to run a 2-hour marathon. Runner’s world.
  9. 9.
    Nike introduces breaking2: the quest to break the two-hour marathon barrier. Nike News; 2016 December 12.
  10. 10.
    Germano S. Adidas, like Nike, is working on sub-2 hour marathon project. Wall Street J. 2016 Dec 16.
  11. 11.
    Sub2. Countdown to the first sub2hr marathon: no longer a matter of if but rather when.
  12. 12.
    Péronnet F, Thibault G. Mathematical analysis of running performance and world running records. J Appl Physiol. 1989;67:453–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Joyner MJ. Modeling: optimal marathon performance on the basis of physiological factors. J Appl Physiol. 1991;70:683–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Joyner MJ, Coyle EF. Endurance exercise performance: the physiology of champions. J Physiol. 2008;586:35–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shaw AJ, Ingham SA, Atkinson G, et al. The correlation between running economy and maximal oxygen uptake: cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships in highly trained distance runners. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0123101.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bassett DR, Howley ET. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and determinants of endurance performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32:70–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coyle EF. Integration of the physiological factors determining endurance performance ability. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1995;23:25–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Williams KR, Cavanagh PR. Relationship between distance running mechanics, running economy, and performance. J Appl Physiol. 1987;63:1236–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fuller JT, Bellenger CR, Thewlis D, et al. The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners. Sports Med. 2015;45:411–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hoogkamer W, Kipp S, Spiering BA, et al. Altered running economy directly translates to altered distance-running performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:2175–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    El Helou N, Tafflet M, Berthelot G, et al. Impact of environmental parameters on marathon running performance. PLoS One. 2012;7:e37407.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Di Prampero PE, Atchou G, Brückner JC, et al. The energetics of endurance running. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1986;55:259–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith CGM, Jones AM. The relationship between critical velocity, maximal lactate steady-state velocity and lactate turnpoint velocity in runners. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2001;85:19–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Poole DC, Burnley M, Vanhatalo A, et al. Critical power: an important fatigue threshold in exercise physiology. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:2320–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Frederick EC, Daniels JT, Hayes JW. The effect of shoe weight on the aerobic demands of running. In: Bachl N, Prokop L, Suckert R, editors. Curr Top Sports Med Proc World Congr Sports Med. Vienna: Urban and Schwarzenberg; 1984. p. 616–25.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Franz JR, Wierzbinski CM, Kram R. Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44:1519–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pugh LG. Oxygen intake in track and treadmill running with observations on the effect of air resistance. J Physiol. 1970;207:823–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Steudel-Numbers KL, Wall-Scheffler CM. Optimal running speed and the evolution of hominin hunting strategies. J Hum Evol. 2009;56:355–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Daniels J, Krahenbuhl G, Foster C, et al. Aerobic responses of female distance runners to submaximal and maximal exercise. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1977;301:726–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Daniels JT. A physiologist’s view of running economy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1985;17:332–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Batliner M. Does VO2 increase linearly with speed in average and sub-elite distance runners?. Boulder: University of Colorado; 2013.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Margaria R, Cerretelli P, Aghemo P, et al. Energy cost of running. J Appl Physiol. 1963;18:367–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Léger L, Mercier D. Gross energy cost of horizontal treadmill and track running. Sports Med. 1984;1:270–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jones AM, Doust JH. A 1% treadmill grade most accurately reflects the energetic cost of outdoor running. J Sports Sci. 1996;14:321–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kyle CR, Caiozzo VJ. The effect of athletic clothing aerodynamics upon running speed. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1986;18:509–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    McMiken DF, Daniels JT. Aerobic requirements and maximum aerobic power in treadmill and track running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1976;8:14–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tam E, Rossi H, Moia C, et al. Energetics of running in top-level marathon runners from Kenya. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012;112:3797–806.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pugh LG. The influence of wind resistance in running and walking and the mechanical efficiency of work against horizontal or vertical forces. J Physiol. 1971;213:255–76.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Di Prampero P. The energy cost of human locomotion on land and in water. Int J Sports Med. 1986;07:55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pollock ML. Submaximal and maximal working capacity of elite distance runners. Part I: cardiorespiratory aspects. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1977;301:310–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Larsen HB. Kenyan dominance in distance running. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2003;136:161–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Daniels JT, Gilbert J. Oxygen power: performance tables for distance runners. Tempe, AZ: Daniels and Gilbert; 1979.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Brueckner JC, Atchou G, Capelli C, et al. The energy cost of running increases with the distance covered. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1991;62:385–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nicol C, Komi PV, Marconnet P. Effects of marathon fatigue on running kinematics and economy. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1991;1:195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kyröläinen H, Pullinen T, Candau R, et al. Effects of marathon running on running economy and kinematics. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2000;82:297–304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lacour JR, Bourdin M. Factors affecting the energy cost of level running at submaximal speed. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115:651–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Arellano CJ, Kram R. Partitioning the metabolic cost of human running: a task-by-task approach. Integr Comp Biol. 2014;54:1084–98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kram R, Taylor CR. Energetics of running: a new perspective. Nature. 1990;346:265–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Teunissen LPJ, Grabowski A, Kram R. Effects of independently altering body weight and body mass on the metabolic cost of running. J Exp Biol. 2007;210:4418–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Aaron EA, Johnson BD, Seow CK, et al. Oxygen cost of exercise hyperpnea: measurement. J Appl Physiol. 1992;72:1810–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Aaron EA, Seow KC, Johnson BD, et al. Oxygen cost of exercise hyperpnea: implications for performance. J Appl Physiol. 1992;72:1818–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Farley CT, McMahon TA. Energetics of walking and running: insights from simulated reduced-gravity experiments. J Appl Physiol. 1992;73:2709–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Judelson DA, Maresh CM, Anderson JM, et al. Hydration and muscular performance: does fluid balance affect strength, power and high-intensity endurance? Sports Med. 2007;37:907–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Coyle EF, González-Alonso J. Cardiovascular drift during prolonged exercise: new perspectives. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2001;29:88–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Armstrong LE, Whittlesey MJ, Casa DJ, et al. No effect of 5% hypohydration on running economy of competitive runners at 23 degrees C. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38:1762–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Beis LY, Wright-Whyte M, Fudge B, et al. Drinking behaviors of elite male runners during marathon competition. Clin J Sports Med. 2012;22:254–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Pavei G, Biancardi CM, Minetti AE. Skipping vs. running as the bipedal gait of choice in hypogravity. J Appl Physiol. 2015;119:93–100.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kerdok AE, Biewener AA, McMahon TA, et al. Energetics and mechanics of human running on surfaces of different stiffnesses. J Appl Physiol. 2002;92:469–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Tung KD, Franz JR, Kram R. A test of the metabolic cost of cushioning hypothesis during unshod and shod running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014;46:324–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    International Association of Athletics Federations. Competition rules 2016–2017. Monaco: International Association of Athletics Federations; 2015.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Chang YH, Kram R. Metabolic cost of generating horizontal forces during human running. J Appl Physiol. 1999;86:1657–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Vernillo G, Schena F, Berardelli C, et al. Anthropometric characteristics of top-class Kenyan marathon runners. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2013;53:403–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Brisswalter J, Hausswirth C. Consequences of drafting on human locomotion: benefits on sports performance. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2008;3:3–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    International Association of Athletics Federations. Records and lists: top lists. Senior outdoor half marathon men.
  65. 65.
    Kyle CR. Reduction of wind resistance and power output of racing cyclists and runners traveling in groups. Ergonomics. 1979;22:387–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Davies CT. Effects of wind assistance and resistance on the forward motion of a runner. J Appl Physiol. 1980;48:702–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Snyder KL, Farley CT. Energetically optimal stride frequency in running: the effects of incline and decline. J Exp Biol. 2011;214:2089–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Minetti AE, Ardigò LP, Saibene F. Mechanical determinants of the minimum energy cost of gradient running in humans. J Exp Biol. 1994;195:211–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Minetti AE, Moia C, Roi GS, et al. Energy cost of walking and running at extreme uphill and downhill slopes. J Appl Physiol. 2002;93:1039–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Myers MJ, Steudel K. Effect of limb mass and its distribution on the energetic cost of running. J Exp Biol. 1985;116:363–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Martin PE. Mechanical and physiological responses to lower extremity loading during running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1985;17:427–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Saltin B, Larsen H, Terrados N, et al. Aerobic exercise capacity at sea level and at altitude in Kenyan boys, junior and senior runners compared with Scandinavian runners. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1995;5:209–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Brüggemann G-P, Arampatzis A, Emrich F, et al. Biomechanics of double transtibial amputee sprinting using dedicated sprinting prostheses. Sports Technol. 2009;1:220–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Weyand PG, Bundle MW, McGowan CP, et al. The fastest runner on artificial legs: different limbs, similar function? J Appl Physiol. 2009;107:903–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Beck ON, Taboga P, Grabowski AM. Reduced prosthetic stiffness lowers the metabolic cost of running for athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations. J Appl Physiol. 2017. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00587.2016.
  76. 76.
    Frederick EC, Clarke TE, Larsen JL, et al. The effects of shoe cushioning on the oxygen demands of running. In: Nigg BM, Kerr BA, editors. Biomechanical aspects of sports shoes and playing surfaces. Calgary: The University of Calgary; 1983. p. 107–14.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Worobets J, Wannop JW, Tomaras E, et al. Softer and more resilient running shoe cushioning properties enhance running economy. Footwear Sci. 2014;6:147–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Frederick EC, Howley ET, Powers SK. Lower O2 cost while running on air cushion type shoe. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1980;12:81–2.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Roy J-PR, Stefanyshyn DJ. Shoe midsole longitudinal bending stiffness and running economy, joint energy, and EMG. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38:562–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Madden R, Sakaguchi M, Wannop J, et al. Forefoot bending stiffness, running economy and kinematics during overground running. Footwear Sci. 2015;7:S11–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Integrative PhysiologyUniversity of Colorado, BoulderBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health and Human PerformanceUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations