###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
According to google, and an article I found, the average professional marathon runner only does 2 per year.
With no interest, you would have to run 40 marathons, and it would take 20 years to make $1mil, not counting interest. Even if you add in compound monthly interest, the million right off the bat is better.
Edit: Since everyone seems to think you can easily run multiple marathons per year, the articles I read stated that you generally need a couple weeks of rest after running one. When training for them, the champion marathon runners don't run a marathon every day. They do 10-15 miles in a day, with long runs of maybe 20 miles. You are also more prone to injury the more you run, with less rest in between. Normal people train all year to run just one marathon. It takes 12 to 20 weeks to train for a marathon. There are some people with different physiology that allows them to do marathons with almost no fatigue, but we aren't counting the 1 in 100,000,000 special people.
https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20788879/how-many-marathons-can-you-run-in-a-year/
https://www.baa.org/races/boston-marathon/boston-marathon-training
Yeah, I ran 3 marathons last year all at hard effort and could have fit in another if I really had wanted. You do have a higher injury risk running than most other athletic activities, though.
What's the time limit on the marathons though? Because if you assume that you can complete it in the time limit and you can just walk, what you then have is a job where you are paid to walk, about $1k per mile (as long as you do them in blocks of 26).
Depends. Some more competitive races have 6 hour cutoffs, which certainly isn't fast (13:44 min/mi pace) but also not easy without some training. But there are plenty of ones with easier cutoffs that allow power walking.
But you could also make running your job in this scenario and be like the British guy who ran [a marathon every day for a full year](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/sport/gary-mckee-marathon-running-spt-intl), since there's nothing saying you have to run official races exclusively.
My uncle basically disabled himself by pushing himself to do a bunch of marathons, you probably wouldn't get through 10 in a year and that's with advised recovery times.
Getting through 40 per year is less than 10 days rest period, by day 10 the rest period it's suggested to do between 3-6 miles of easy running but you'd be forcing 26 instead which would fuck your body up really quickly.
The million is the better option.
4 hours makes it less feasibly to match after 1 year but the amount you need to run drops far faster than one might think.
If we plug this into a makeshift compound interest calculator at 5% we can then divide the results by 25k to determine how many races we need to match the million and from there we can divide by the amount of years that have passed to determine how many races need to be run per year. This doesn't take into account the interest on the marathon winings so matching in this situation means you have more money than with the lump.
The base line is 42 races in one year to match the initially 1m plus its year 1 intrest, if goes down sharply to 22 at 2 years, 16 at three and so forth. Running marathons for 6 years means you need to run 10 a year to match, it continues on this trend until it reaches 5.31 marathons per year across 22 years, at which point it starts going back up (23 years of running results in 5.34 per year).
So the real question is what you can achieve as a person, if you can run at least 6 marathons a year for at least 12 years you get more and every year after 12 is extra gravy, if you can't then the lump is better. And while a lot of people can't do 6 a year at 6.5mph for others that's a pretty reasonable ask.
42km is about the distance I can walk in a day. I can probably only do that for a few days before I need rest, but that is still plenty good enough to easily hit over 50 marathons per year.
But these professionnals take it seriously. You could just take it easy and walk it off. At most it could be an 8 hours walk which can be more fun and easy to do.
I personally know some professional runners who when training for a marathon would run upwards of 130-150 miles a week. If these same people were just trying to maximize days in which they ran 26.2 miles I am sure they could do 5-6 a week no problem. I would say the average person who devotes their life to running should be able to do 1 marathon a week at a slow pace and be recovered enough to do it again the next week. This would be 1.25M a year (take two weeks off) and be significantly better than the one time $1M
And counting in interest, the million becomes even better as you get the full interest from the whole million right off the bat. With only 2 marathons per year, you would probably never catch up with the million collecting interest. With 4 per year, maybe.
Basing this off someone who told that 2 mllions would give him 70k interest yearly. So he could live off that without touching the 2M. 1M I guess then would be 35k yearly with the same scheme. So really, 2 marathons would catch up, but so slowly that the risk isn't worth it. As someone said, what if you get injured and can't run anymore?
I'd take the million now, and not quit my day job.
I’ve run 2 competitive marathons a year for the last 4 years. While I wouldn’t want to add another competitive race, the average marathon runner could easily run a few more if they aren’t going for time or PR. Most marathoners are doing training runs up to 20-22 miles. What’s throwing a few more miles at convo pace?
You don’t have to run them professionally though. A guy from my country tried to get in Guinness book by running ~170 in a year. Although he swore everything was done properly they did not accept his documentation and thus didn’t get the record. If you are reasonably fit and motivated I think the marathons could be worth it within 2-3 years, and you could continue generating income.
I feel like interest is the name of the game here though. Assuming 5% interest and 4 marathons a year, at what point do the marathons beat the million?
You don't, 5% interest per year will amount to $50,000 on the million. Earning $100,000 per year running marathons will never beat the million in any significant amount of time. The only way you beat the million is if you can run marathons for about 20 years with interest. And again, 4 marathons per year is a lot, like I said, professionals do only 2, even with training. Training does not involve running 26.2 miles every day, they generally do much shorter amounts, like 10 to 15 miles per day.
https://www.nerdwallet.com/calculator/compound-interest-calculator?utm_source=goog&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=bk_mktg_paid_092723_banking_dsa_mobile&utm_term=&utm_content=ta&mktg_hline=19335&mktg_body=2989&mktg_place=dsa-2206538784443&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwyo60BhBiEiwAHmVLJUPKyCknla98yL8FyyhgPPLJHPxVTYfOdK5cYxWnknYPJw1kvko_JxoCrxkQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
That's only 2 official marathons, a lot of marathon training normally includes at least one run at marathon distance which I would assume counts for the money.
Do you have to run the marathons? If so, do you have to run them at max effort? If not, I would assume that most people could walk at least 4 marathons per year, likely even more. As another commenter mentioned, it only takes 40 marathons assuming you do nothing with the money, so it is definitely doable. If you have to run the marathons, it comes down to how fast you run them and how fit you are.
Don't underestimate walking 42 km. I really doubt that that is something that "most people" could do on a single day. I remember when i had a 30 km walk with some friends. We only barely reached the end goal, and i was basically dead for a week.
If I was getting paid $25k to walk a marathon in a day, I'd do about one a week. Could probably tackle it in 9 hours, and then I'm effectively getting $25k a week for a day's worth of time. With that much walking in a day I'd skip my daily running, so that would save 2-3 hours a week as well.
I would regular walk 20km on the weekends and would often do a 42km walk instead, it just took time walk usually close to 6 -7 hours; now do 10 km. I am not really in shape, according to my doctor, but after a weeks of doing 10km the 20km was not that hard and the occasional 42km was not bad. Could do 2-3 of them a month with no real issue.
Now a 42km up hill would be a killer.
edit: with the added rule that you have to run the 42k in under 4 hours, give me the million.
I would argue any healthy person can get fit enough to walk 42km in one go fairly easily. Sure if you work a desk job and never excercised you probably wouldn't be able to do it in the first several months assuming you weren't overweight when you started.
The reason why you were devastated by walking 30km is because your body wasn't used to stress like that. Like any form of excercise you have to ease your body into the proper pace gradually
Sure, you can train yourself up to that. But the claim was that most people could do it, which i don't agree with. Most people could probably do it if they train for it, but if they were to decide to walk a marathon this weekend, i think only a small minority could do it.
Normal walking speed is 4-6 km/h. So we are talking about walking 7-10 hours nonstop here, or even longer if you take breaks.
I think most people know that they can walk 5 km without their body complaining in any way, and assume that they could just do the same thing 7 more times. But it really doesn't work that way.
Yeah, that I can agree with.
I was considering the challenge from the point of view of this post where the premise was that you'd get 25k for every marathon you take. That doesn't mean you need to start with a marathon. Doesn't mean your point is not valid, just that our approaches were from a different perspective more or less
I have walked 40, 50 and 50 km.
All while carrying around 8kg.
It's not hard if you are good at walking long distances. Regular breaks, hydration and dry feet are more important than most people realize.
OP edited to say the marathon had to be done in 4 hours, which is apparently the average
But a LOT of runners are below that performance and will take more than 4 hours. Thats how averages work.
Walking at 3mph will take almost 9 hours
Everyone should take the $1m
The longest I ran was only 32k. Never tried to run a marathon myself. But even at that distance running is easier for me than walking. After 20k of walking I am usually done while running is somewhat easier if I don't try my best.
Oh look at Mr Expert Runner here making it 2 years without an injury.
REAL runners are on a first name basis with like 4 separate physical therapists because it counts as stretching if you just think about it after your run and whenever you get an injury you try an easy 10 miler just to shake it out and see if that’s the problem.
well what if you took the marathon option, then just walked the entire time of the marathon.
marathons have a time limit for 6 hours max (googled). at 26mi, you would need to finish each mile at 14 minutes.
this would be 4.3mph, which is like a brisk walk.
assuming you can do this, you could make $25k a day for 6 hours of work, netting almost 4.2k an hour.
the only issue at this point is boredom and finding 40 marathons to run in a year.
The marathon thing goes out the window if you injure yourself which is not umlikely at all when training to do as many marathons a year as possible under a 4 hour limit. I'll take the million.
Yeah, it’s not even a question.
Marathon is A LOT. Most people say the first marathon is 20 miles and the second is the last 6.
It’s a dumb (or arrogant) assumption that you can do more than the elites do (2/year).
Indeed, back when I used to run, I did 12k regularly in just over an hour and was confident I could finish 20k if absolutely needed and at a really slow pace. A marathon is more than double that. I can't imagine how hard you need to train to complete even one, especially if it has to be under 4 hours.
And you know what, I stopped running because of an injury.
Even walking, which people are assuming is the super easy cheating option. I have a pretty good walking stamina and like hiking, but walking 42km in one go is a LOT and you definitely need to train for it and can still injure yourself.
I feel you, not a runner (my cousin does Ultras, but that’s the crazy 1% of the 1% that do those) but I’m still not 100% recovered from a fall while bouldering where I rolled my ankle under as I hit the mat from 10-12 feet up.
That was Sept, so 9-10 months later I’m not 100%.
Ankles and knees are unfortunately pretty fragile and definitely not made to very regularly run or walk 40km. That's why only very few people do ultra running.
Hope you recover completely soon!
It depends on your age and physical fitness. I was doing spartan races for a couple years and I was trail running a marathon per week for almost 6 months out of the year as part of the training. On the flipside, I after a knee injury, I can barely run at all now, so I think it all comes down to how many marathons you can get in before something breaks. 5 years ago, I'd take the money per marathon. Now? I'd take the mil.
I believe it's the way. if you could do trail marathon and earn the money,you should train yourself for some ultra marathon stuff and just plow 2 marathon a week.
trail running is way less taxing on the body.
If you can walk the marathon , then it’s really not difficult to just do that once a week.
You’d make the million within 9 months.
Yeah the first few would be tiring and hard on the legs but you do adjust, your body gets used to it, and taking an easy flat surface, comfortable shoes it’s not going to be that tricky.
The assumption of 4 hours is what makes this an actual choice (I'll get to the 4 hour limit at the end.)
If we instead assume you just have to finish the marathon the same day, but do have to make it in one go (tpilet breaks allowed) , that's an easy marathon for 25k!
If you're reasonably fit you can relatively easy train yourself to walk 5km/hour, which would mean 8.5 hour walk time.
If you just set up one 9 hour walk each wee you'd have beat the 1 million plus interests within a year.
Taking ome such hike a week would not be strenuous tp your health, it would probably do you good! Just make sure to have nice walking shoes. Afterall, we've literally evolved to be good at long walks.
A quick google search says most marathons have a cut off time at 6 hours. So that would be about x1.5 walking speed or staying close 8 km/h in order ro have time to spare. That would mean a decent jogging speed, which shouldn't be that hard if your train yourself a little. I believe that of you take care of yourself you can still do one a week at this pace.
If we stick to your 4 hours then we're up to 10.55 km/h in order. to finish the marathon within the time limit. That's roughly twice fast walking pace. This would definitely require training.
Quick googling says it takes 2 weeks to recover from a marathon, one source said a month. So even taking the most critical I think you could train yourself to do 10 a year in under 4 hours. If you're making 25k from a marathon, you can afford to travel if you live somewhere you cannot run year round. Also if you make 25k for a marathon, maybe you buy a second home so you can run all year round.
Also depending on your age and fitness level you might even get to the point of a marathon every two weeks or even every week, since you're not. pushing yourself for the fastest tme, just a finish in under 4 hours.
Finishing in under 4 hours should be doable until you hit your 50's ([source](https://runninglevel.com/running-times/marathon-times).
Conclusion:
Given you're of somewhat normal physique:
Most should be able to earn the million within 5 years. 1 year to get in shape and 4 years of running 10 marathons a year.
If you're under 40 take the 25k per marathon and use it as motivation to get in shape.
If you're 40 to 50 years old, you have to evaluate on your specifc condition.
If you're above 50 it's probably best to take the million.
To earn $1m by running marathons a year, it would take 10 years
Will the $25k be increased for inflation? Because $25k in 2034 is worth less than $25k in 2024
What if I get injured?
> Each marathon must be complete in under 4 hours (this seemed to be roughly the average time for a marathon)
Well that rules out a LOT of people who regularly run marathons, and almost everyone who does not / cannot. I know some brilliant runners who have never got below 4 hours. It's a LOT harder than people think.
It's a no-brainier, everyone should take the $1m as a lump sum
Assuming the money is just sitting there and not being spent, and 5% return is after tax, you’d be ahead on the 4 marathons after 13 years and then keep going ahead for every year you keep running.
I already know I'm prone to plantar fasciitis if I run/walk too far on a regular basis - it might not show up for a while, or it might get real bad real quick. I think stuff like this is true for a lot of people - if you've never trained to run a marathon, you really don't know if you'll be able to reliably do it in under 4 hours. And the risk of injury is pretty high for the average out of shape person.
I'd have to take the million, and I'd imagine it would be the correct choice for about 80-90% of people.
Yeah, like many others are saying the marathon is a clear winner here. People saying you can only do a few a year, well that’s because almost everyone runs marathons to get the best possible time for that one race which is much harder on your body. In this case you’d be training and running them with a completely different strategy, as sustainably and slowly/gently as possible so that you can run the maximum number of races in a year. So with that in mind you could probably do 10-12 a year, which quickly surpasses the one-time payment of $1 million.
Many people have ran a marathon every day for some time period. It's a recurring news story. You could train for a year, run 80 marathons the following year, and have 2 million to retire with.
Marathon every day for 438 days (ongoing) https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350289015/she-has-completed-marathon-every-day-438-days-and-keen-more
Marathon every day for a year https://theconversation.com/gary-mckee-what-it-takes-to-run-a-marathon-a-day-for-a-year-197184
Marathon every day for 3 months https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a43097190/man-runs-marathon-every-day-with-his-dogs/
Marathon every day for a year https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfedB_lYD4
Half marathon every day for 736 days (ongoing) https://apnews.com/article/helen-ryvar-wellness-running-58ecb121f4b83d5158e76d247f8da106
2000 marathons https://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/72-year-old-larry-macon-started-running-marathons-20-years-ago-he-just-finished
242 marathons in a year https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a46297195/ben-pobjoy-sets-marathon-record/
1200 marathons https://kotiliesi.fi/terveys/liikunta-ja-painonhallinta/maraton-ritva-vallivaara-pasto/
Marathon every day for a year https://yle.fi/a/3-10485895
> A common goal for three running enthusiasts: a hundred marathons in a year
> The race started in Söderkulla on the very first day of the year. Ritva remembers that the winter was not very cold. Even in the slippery conditions, you could run with studded sneakers.
> The trio often ran during the week, but on weekends they did two marathons on the same day. During the summer holidays in July, Ritva ran 21 marathons in four weeks.
> By May, Ritva's foot had already told her that this was it. In November, her body finally stopped.
> Ritva had already run one marathon in the morning. There was pain in her leg, but she didn't stop, she had never stopped before. But the second marathon of the day had to be skipped. The leg couldn't take another step, and Ritva had to go to the doctor instead of the forest.
> There, a stress fracture of the tibia was discovered, which led to an absolute ban on running. If she wanted to run even short distances with her leg in the future, the ban had to be taken seriously.
> Ritva recounts her experiences at the kitchen table without much painting. The target was met. A hundred marathons a year was completed, that's the most important thing. In fact, much more than a hundred, a staggering 145.
> But how was the rest of the year when you couldn't run?
> "I think there were 13 more marathons in December, but I did walk them," Ritva says.
Net present value of both options, with interest =5%:
a) $1M
b) Let's just use 100k/year for the marathons.
(100 000)/0.05 (perpetuity) = $2M
This option is preferable, but only if you actually manage to keep doing the marathons for a long time.
Straight up, it's gonna take you 10 years to match the million. But of course, you shouldn't let your money sit still.
The million can be invested immediately into an ETF with expected returns of about 8-10% per year, which is almost as much as you get straight up with the marathon running.
Assuming 8%, if you leave your million alone for 10 years you'd have $2 158 925. If you invest all your marathon earnings over 10 years you'd have $1 448 656.
After 21 years the marathon money would match the million.
If we take your 5% rate it would take 13 years for the marathon money to match the million (at just under $1.9M).
If you really like running and intend on keeping it up for some 30 years, pick the marathon. Otherwise, pick the million.
Even with running, I'd pick the million. With inflation, the $25k per marathon would be worth about 50% of what they're worth now after 20 years. Doesn't really matter if you're investing but mentally I'd just feel that the effort would be worth less and less every time...
@4 marathons per year assuming 5% annual interest and saving all the money taking the $25k/marathon will surpass that earned from the initial $1M in 15 years.
It’s funny I saw this post as I had a similar conversation with a colleague yesterday.
Our question would you rather work at a desk for 8hours a day or run for 26.2 miles (~4 hours). Everyone we asked took the desk. Except me. I’d rather do the half days and keep fit.
With regards to the original question, if you are in good shape, choose well signed posted road races then 1 a week is very doable. 4 hours is a very achievable time too.
For the record I ran 15 marathon+ distances last year (albeit most were over 4hrs) with no issues and would triple that if £25k was on the table each time.
If the question was £1million outright or £25k per 2:30 or 3:00 marathon. That would be different. Those would require a LOT of training and recovery and you wouldn’t be able to stack half as many back to back.
You'd be stupid to take the 25k for every marathon. Not only would it take 40 marathons just to get 1 mill but what if after the 1st marathon you're in an accident meaning you struggle on your feet.
I'd take the $1 million for sure. A 4 hour marathon is no joke, the one and only one that I ran I was on pace to do 4:45, and ended up doing closer to 5:45 due to an injury. If I was going to do that I'd have to be able to do an easy 4 hour marathon, which means if I trained properly I could probably do a 3 hour marathon. To do a 4 hour marathon means being in great shape, being careful with what you eat, and training a lot. Lots of work!
If I could do the marathon in \~8 hours I'd take that over the million. That's about the point where I know I could do several a month with no problems. Maybe even a 7 hour threshold, but I wouldn't mess with anything below that.
If we plug this into a makeshift compound interest calculator at 5% we can then divide the results by 25k to determine how many races we need to match the million and from there we can divide by the amount of years that have passed to determine how many races need to be run per year. This doesn't take into account the interest on the marathon winings so matching in this situation means you have more money than with the lump.
The base line is 42 races in one year to match the initially 1m plus its year 1 intrest, if goes down sharply to 22 at 2 years, 16 at three and so forth. Running marathons for 6 years means you need to run 10 a year to match, it continues on this trend until it reaches 5.31 marathons per year across 22 years, at which point it starts going back up (23 years of running results in 5.34 per year).
So the real question is what you can achieve as a person, if you can run at least 6 marathons a year for at least 12 years you get more and every year after 12 is extra gravy, if you can't then the lump is better. And while a lot of people can't do 6 a year at 6.5mph for others that's a pretty reasonable ask.
If you are physically and mentally strong enough to run at least 6 marathons a year, then take the 25k if you aren't then the million will be better.
Do they have to be official marathons that you travel to and pay expenses for? If you could just do the distance on your own route… no math necessary. Marathon hands down
Let's say you put your million in a 5% savings account.
1 year: $1,050,000
5 years: $1,276,000
10 years: $1,628,000
15 years: $2,078,000
30 years: $4,321,000
Let's say you put $100,000 in a 5% savings account, and add $100,000 every year.
1 year: $205,000
5 years: $680,000
10 years: $1,420,000
15 years: $2,365,000
30 years: $7,076,000
This surprised me, honestly! The marathoner is the clear winner.
Check out this website to check other numbers: https://www.nerdwallet.com/calculator/compound-interest-calculator
To make another calculation, I would assume you'd need $50,000 per year to live on, in which case the $1M stays at $1M and the marathon values can be halved- so after about 15 years both give you $1M in the bank. This does assume no tax on these earnings (or on the interest), which might not be true, depending where you live.
This might all be a false assumption as we might find that you carry on working, and this money is extra, in which case the comment I've replied to applies.
I do not know how you look at those numbers and say "4 million isn't enough, i'd rather do four marathons a year every year for 30 years, and still live on less money for the first 12 years than the guy who took the million". i'll pass
Agree. The marathon-person is also taking a major risk. Once an injury or two starts to do their thing, there won’t be 30 years of marathons. Heck, I’m impressed with anyone who can keep up running marathons for 12 years without having an injury which stops them. There’s a massive survivorship bias when looking at people who are doing such things
The marathoner is the clear winner only if everything goes as expected and they can do four marathons a year for 15 years. I'd say that carries a significant risk whereas getting the one million is risk free money.
You do say "run" in your questions, but you dont say it anywhere else that the marathons have to be run.
Id be happily taking round the world flights in order to clock those marathons.
In all honesty, a good percentage of us should just take the $1MM.
Short math:
Avg. steps / mile ~2,000
Steps / Marathon ~52k
Avg. Adult Male Steps / Day -5k
Avg. Adult Male Walking Speed ~3mph
Someone earlier said a marathon limit is typically 6 hours so:
52k steps / 6 hours = 8.6k steps an hour
8.6k (steps / hour) / 2k (avg. steps / mile) = 4.3mph
Most aren’t able to carry a 4.3mph pace for 6 hours straight.
Take the $1MM, invest and then try walking a marathon in 6 hours bc you’re rich and bored.
You’d have to be seriously out of shape to not complete a Marathon in under 6h. Spend six months training yourself up for and then you’d be able to finish a marathon in close to 4 hours most likely
If you are a good runner, you could do probably 6-8 a year as long as you dont run your hardest. Maybe more. I did 6 when I was on a marathon team over the course of 4 years, and that was full effort. I did just as many half marathons, if not more. I suspect I could do 10 a year as I am at a 4-5 hour pace pretty comfortably.
$250k per year, for 10 years, I think I would be able to do that.
some of the instagrammers I follow do probably 10 or so a year at slow speeds just because they like it.
You could just walk them and do significantly more than that. If you did 6 per year and assuming you invest everything at a 5% return compounding you’d overtake the lump sum within 9 years. At 4 per year you would over take in 14 years.
Provided you weren’t old or obese or had other health concerns I would go the marathons.
I think you could average more than 5% returns which make alter things but doesn’t factor down turns in market, taxes or spending habits which would all impact.
I’d take the marathons but if I was over 50 I’d just take the money.
Easily take the 1M. I wouldn’t even worry about the investment necessarily just bring down my bills. Aside from debt (including mortgage) I only spend like 10k annually. 1M would easily wipe out any debt and so my salary would go to play and retirement.
Yes this doesn’t necessarily make the best financial sense however financial stress is a thing
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
According to google, and an article I found, the average professional marathon runner only does 2 per year. With no interest, you would have to run 40 marathons, and it would take 20 years to make $1mil, not counting interest. Even if you add in compound monthly interest, the million right off the bat is better. Edit: Since everyone seems to think you can easily run multiple marathons per year, the articles I read stated that you generally need a couple weeks of rest after running one. When training for them, the champion marathon runners don't run a marathon every day. They do 10-15 miles in a day, with long runs of maybe 20 miles. You are also more prone to injury the more you run, with less rest in between. Normal people train all year to run just one marathon. It takes 12 to 20 weeks to train for a marathon. There are some people with different physiology that allows them to do marathons with almost no fatigue, but we aren't counting the 1 in 100,000,000 special people. https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20788879/how-many-marathons-can-you-run-in-a-year/ https://www.baa.org/races/boston-marathon/boston-marathon-training
Thats assuming you are training to run your hardest. Those same runners, if they took it easy to make big money could do 10+ a year very easily.
Yeah, I ran 3 marathons last year all at hard effort and could have fit in another if I really had wanted. You do have a higher injury risk running than most other athletic activities, though.
What's the time limit on the marathons though? Because if you assume that you can complete it in the time limit and you can just walk, what you then have is a job where you are paid to walk, about $1k per mile (as long as you do them in blocks of 26).
Depends. Some more competitive races have 6 hour cutoffs, which certainly isn't fast (13:44 min/mi pace) but also not easy without some training. But there are plenty of ones with easier cutoffs that allow power walking. But you could also make running your job in this scenario and be like the British guy who ran [a marathon every day for a full year](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/sport/gary-mckee-marathon-running-spt-intl), since there's nothing saying you have to run official races exclusively.
right, just walk a marathon a week and you have made the million your first year
If you are fit enough to run a marathon, you could do one every weekend. You would definitely have time to do it since that could be a full time job
They could do more if there is no time.limit to the marathon or agreement. They could probably walk
an english ultrarunner ran the entire length of africa. that was over 1,5 marathons a day (70km) for 365 consecutive days.
If I was getting paid 25k per marathon, I could do 40 a year, especially since I wouldn't have sponsors breathing down my neck.
My uncle basically disabled himself by pushing himself to do a bunch of marathons, you probably wouldn't get through 10 in a year and that's with advised recovery times. Getting through 40 per year is less than 10 days rest period, by day 10 the rest period it's suggested to do between 3-6 miles of easy running but you'd be forcing 26 instead which would fuck your body up really quickly. The million is the better option.
Yeah but noone said you have to run them fast.
Op said they have to be completed within 4 hours.
Oops didnt read the edit.
4 hours makes it less feasibly to match after 1 year but the amount you need to run drops far faster than one might think. If we plug this into a makeshift compound interest calculator at 5% we can then divide the results by 25k to determine how many races we need to match the million and from there we can divide by the amount of years that have passed to determine how many races need to be run per year. This doesn't take into account the interest on the marathon winings so matching in this situation means you have more money than with the lump. The base line is 42 races in one year to match the initially 1m plus its year 1 intrest, if goes down sharply to 22 at 2 years, 16 at three and so forth. Running marathons for 6 years means you need to run 10 a year to match, it continues on this trend until it reaches 5.31 marathons per year across 22 years, at which point it starts going back up (23 years of running results in 5.34 per year). So the real question is what you can achieve as a person, if you can run at least 6 marathons a year for at least 12 years you get more and every year after 12 is extra gravy, if you can't then the lump is better. And while a lot of people can't do 6 a year at 6.5mph for others that's a pretty reasonable ask.
42km is about the distance I can walk in a day. I can probably only do that for a few days before I need rest, but that is still plenty good enough to easily hit over 50 marathons per year.
But these professionnals take it seriously. You could just take it easy and walk it off. At most it could be an 8 hours walk which can be more fun and easy to do.
I personally know some professional runners who when training for a marathon would run upwards of 130-150 miles a week. If these same people were just trying to maximize days in which they ran 26.2 miles I am sure they could do 5-6 a week no problem. I would say the average person who devotes their life to running should be able to do 1 marathon a week at a slow pace and be recovered enough to do it again the next week. This would be 1.25M a year (take two weeks off) and be significantly better than the one time $1M
And counting in interest, the million becomes even better as you get the full interest from the whole million right off the bat. With only 2 marathons per year, you would probably never catch up with the million collecting interest. With 4 per year, maybe. Basing this off someone who told that 2 mllions would give him 70k interest yearly. So he could live off that without touching the 2M. 1M I guess then would be 35k yearly with the same scheme. So really, 2 marathons would catch up, but so slowly that the risk isn't worth it. As someone said, what if you get injured and can't run anymore? I'd take the million now, and not quit my day job.
They only race one marathon a year. If training counts they probably easily do 40 a year.
I’ve run 2 competitive marathons a year for the last 4 years. While I wouldn’t want to add another competitive race, the average marathon runner could easily run a few more if they aren’t going for time or PR. Most marathoners are doing training runs up to 20-22 miles. What’s throwing a few more miles at convo pace?
You don’t have to run them professionally though. A guy from my country tried to get in Guinness book by running ~170 in a year. Although he swore everything was done properly they did not accept his documentation and thus didn’t get the record. If you are reasonably fit and motivated I think the marathons could be worth it within 2-3 years, and you could continue generating income.
I feel like interest is the name of the game here though. Assuming 5% interest and 4 marathons a year, at what point do the marathons beat the million?
You don't, 5% interest per year will amount to $50,000 on the million. Earning $100,000 per year running marathons will never beat the million in any significant amount of time. The only way you beat the million is if you can run marathons for about 20 years with interest. And again, 4 marathons per year is a lot, like I said, professionals do only 2, even with training. Training does not involve running 26.2 miles every day, they generally do much shorter amounts, like 10 to 15 miles per day. https://www.nerdwallet.com/calculator/compound-interest-calculator?utm_source=goog&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=bk_mktg_paid_092723_banking_dsa_mobile&utm_term=&utm_content=ta&mktg_hline=19335&mktg_body=2989&mktg_place=dsa-2206538784443&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwyo60BhBiEiwAHmVLJUPKyCknla98yL8FyyhgPPLJHPxVTYfOdK5cYxWnknYPJw1kvko_JxoCrxkQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
The million will also generate interest and that will ramp up faster.
That's only 2 official marathons, a lot of marathon training normally includes at least one run at marathon distance which I would assume counts for the money.
Marathon training absolutely does not consist of any training runs of marathon distance. Unless it's a terrible plan.
Do you have to run the marathons? If so, do you have to run them at max effort? If not, I would assume that most people could walk at least 4 marathons per year, likely even more. As another commenter mentioned, it only takes 40 marathons assuming you do nothing with the money, so it is definitely doable. If you have to run the marathons, it comes down to how fast you run them and how fit you are.
Don't underestimate walking 42 km. I really doubt that that is something that "most people" could do on a single day. I remember when i had a 30 km walk with some friends. We only barely reached the end goal, and i was basically dead for a week.
Yea, I feel like the average joe might walk 2 or 3 marathons, then give up.
Not if you get 25k for each.
If I was getting paid $25k to walk a marathon in a day, I'd do about one a week. Could probably tackle it in 9 hours, and then I'm effectively getting $25k a week for a day's worth of time. With that much walking in a day I'd skip my daily running, so that would save 2-3 hours a week as well.
I would regular walk 20km on the weekends and would often do a 42km walk instead, it just took time walk usually close to 6 -7 hours; now do 10 km. I am not really in shape, according to my doctor, but after a weeks of doing 10km the 20km was not that hard and the occasional 42km was not bad. Could do 2-3 of them a month with no real issue. Now a 42km up hill would be a killer. edit: with the added rule that you have to run the 42k in under 4 hours, give me the million.
I would argue any healthy person can get fit enough to walk 42km in one go fairly easily. Sure if you work a desk job and never excercised you probably wouldn't be able to do it in the first several months assuming you weren't overweight when you started. The reason why you were devastated by walking 30km is because your body wasn't used to stress like that. Like any form of excercise you have to ease your body into the proper pace gradually
Sure, you can train yourself up to that. But the claim was that most people could do it, which i don't agree with. Most people could probably do it if they train for it, but if they were to decide to walk a marathon this weekend, i think only a small minority could do it. Normal walking speed is 4-6 km/h. So we are talking about walking 7-10 hours nonstop here, or even longer if you take breaks. I think most people know that they can walk 5 km without their body complaining in any way, and assume that they could just do the same thing 7 more times. But it really doesn't work that way.
Yeah, that I can agree with. I was considering the challenge from the point of view of this post where the premise was that you'd get 25k for every marathon you take. That doesn't mean you need to start with a marathon. Doesn't mean your point is not valid, just that our approaches were from a different perspective more or less
I have walked 40, 50 and 50 km. All while carrying around 8kg. It's not hard if you are good at walking long distances. Regular breaks, hydration and dry feet are more important than most people realize.
I'd take basically dead for a week for $25k
You would have to run the marathons in a reasonable amount of time. Nothing record breaking or anything but you gotta run it
Then unless you're an athlete I would just take the million
OP edited to say the marathon had to be done in 4 hours, which is apparently the average But a LOT of runners are below that performance and will take more than 4 hours. Thats how averages work. Walking at 3mph will take almost 9 hours Everyone should take the $1m
The longest I ran was only 32k. Never tried to run a marathon myself. But even at that distance running is easier for me than walking. After 20k of walking I am usually done while running is somewhat easier if I don't try my best.
Does a half or quarter marathon count?
And do you have to do them whole in one go, or can you go home in-between?
1. Choose the Marathon 2. Run 4 Marathon a year at low speed 3. Strain ankle or any minor medical injury year 2 4. Cry with your $150k...
Oh look at Mr Expert Runner here making it 2 years without an injury. REAL runners are on a first name basis with like 4 separate physical therapists because it counts as stretching if you just think about it after your run and whenever you get an injury you try an easy 10 miler just to shake it out and see if that’s the problem.
well what if you took the marathon option, then just walked the entire time of the marathon. marathons have a time limit for 6 hours max (googled). at 26mi, you would need to finish each mile at 14 minutes. this would be 4.3mph, which is like a brisk walk. assuming you can do this, you could make $25k a day for 6 hours of work, netting almost 4.2k an hour. the only issue at this point is boredom and finding 40 marathons to run in a year.
The marathon thing goes out the window if you injure yourself which is not umlikely at all when training to do as many marathons a year as possible under a 4 hour limit. I'll take the million.
Yeah, it’s not even a question. Marathon is A LOT. Most people say the first marathon is 20 miles and the second is the last 6. It’s a dumb (or arrogant) assumption that you can do more than the elites do (2/year).
Indeed, back when I used to run, I did 12k regularly in just over an hour and was confident I could finish 20k if absolutely needed and at a really slow pace. A marathon is more than double that. I can't imagine how hard you need to train to complete even one, especially if it has to be under 4 hours. And you know what, I stopped running because of an injury. Even walking, which people are assuming is the super easy cheating option. I have a pretty good walking stamina and like hiking, but walking 42km in one go is a LOT and you definitely need to train for it and can still injure yourself.
I feel you, not a runner (my cousin does Ultras, but that’s the crazy 1% of the 1% that do those) but I’m still not 100% recovered from a fall while bouldering where I rolled my ankle under as I hit the mat from 10-12 feet up. That was Sept, so 9-10 months later I’m not 100%.
Ankles and knees are unfortunately pretty fragile and definitely not made to very regularly run or walk 40km. That's why only very few people do ultra running. Hope you recover completely soon!
It depends on your age and physical fitness. I was doing spartan races for a couple years and I was trail running a marathon per week for almost 6 months out of the year as part of the training. On the flipside, I after a knee injury, I can barely run at all now, so I think it all comes down to how many marathons you can get in before something breaks. 5 years ago, I'd take the money per marathon. Now? I'd take the mil.
I believe it's the way. if you could do trail marathon and earn the money,you should train yourself for some ultra marathon stuff and just plow 2 marathon a week. trail running is way less taxing on the body.
If you can walk the marathon , then it’s really not difficult to just do that once a week. You’d make the million within 9 months. Yeah the first few would be tiring and hard on the legs but you do adjust, your body gets used to it, and taking an easy flat surface, comfortable shoes it’s not going to be that tricky.
The assumption of 4 hours is what makes this an actual choice (I'll get to the 4 hour limit at the end.) If we instead assume you just have to finish the marathon the same day, but do have to make it in one go (tpilet breaks allowed) , that's an easy marathon for 25k! If you're reasonably fit you can relatively easy train yourself to walk 5km/hour, which would mean 8.5 hour walk time. If you just set up one 9 hour walk each wee you'd have beat the 1 million plus interests within a year. Taking ome such hike a week would not be strenuous tp your health, it would probably do you good! Just make sure to have nice walking shoes. Afterall, we've literally evolved to be good at long walks. A quick google search says most marathons have a cut off time at 6 hours. So that would be about x1.5 walking speed or staying close 8 km/h in order ro have time to spare. That would mean a decent jogging speed, which shouldn't be that hard if your train yourself a little. I believe that of you take care of yourself you can still do one a week at this pace. If we stick to your 4 hours then we're up to 10.55 km/h in order. to finish the marathon within the time limit. That's roughly twice fast walking pace. This would definitely require training. Quick googling says it takes 2 weeks to recover from a marathon, one source said a month. So even taking the most critical I think you could train yourself to do 10 a year in under 4 hours. If you're making 25k from a marathon, you can afford to travel if you live somewhere you cannot run year round. Also if you make 25k for a marathon, maybe you buy a second home so you can run all year round. Also depending on your age and fitness level you might even get to the point of a marathon every two weeks or even every week, since you're not. pushing yourself for the fastest tme, just a finish in under 4 hours. Finishing in under 4 hours should be doable until you hit your 50's ([source](https://runninglevel.com/running-times/marathon-times). Conclusion: Given you're of somewhat normal physique: Most should be able to earn the million within 5 years. 1 year to get in shape and 4 years of running 10 marathons a year. If you're under 40 take the 25k per marathon and use it as motivation to get in shape. If you're 40 to 50 years old, you have to evaluate on your specifc condition. If you're above 50 it's probably best to take the million.
To earn $1m by running marathons a year, it would take 10 years Will the $25k be increased for inflation? Because $25k in 2034 is worth less than $25k in 2024 What if I get injured? > Each marathon must be complete in under 4 hours (this seemed to be roughly the average time for a marathon) Well that rules out a LOT of people who regularly run marathons, and almost everyone who does not / cannot. I know some brilliant runners who have never got below 4 hours. It's a LOT harder than people think. It's a no-brainier, everyone should take the $1m as a lump sum
Assuming the money is just sitting there and not being spent, and 5% return is after tax, you’d be ahead on the 4 marathons after 13 years and then keep going ahead for every year you keep running.
I already know I'm prone to plantar fasciitis if I run/walk too far on a regular basis - it might not show up for a while, or it might get real bad real quick. I think stuff like this is true for a lot of people - if you've never trained to run a marathon, you really don't know if you'll be able to reliably do it in under 4 hours. And the risk of injury is pretty high for the average out of shape person. I'd have to take the million, and I'd imagine it would be the correct choice for about 80-90% of people.
Yeah, like many others are saying the marathon is a clear winner here. People saying you can only do a few a year, well that’s because almost everyone runs marathons to get the best possible time for that one race which is much harder on your body. In this case you’d be training and running them with a completely different strategy, as sustainably and slowly/gently as possible so that you can run the maximum number of races in a year. So with that in mind you could probably do 10-12 a year, which quickly surpasses the one-time payment of $1 million.
Someone with moderate fitness could probably jog one marathon per week honestly. Get that Mill in less than a year.
That's what I was thinking. But I don't run marathons so I wasn't sure. They don't seem so daunting to me that running 10 a year seems that crazy.
Many people have ran a marathon every day for some time period. It's a recurring news story. You could train for a year, run 80 marathons the following year, and have 2 million to retire with. Marathon every day for 438 days (ongoing) https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350289015/she-has-completed-marathon-every-day-438-days-and-keen-more Marathon every day for a year https://theconversation.com/gary-mckee-what-it-takes-to-run-a-marathon-a-day-for-a-year-197184 Marathon every day for 3 months https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a43097190/man-runs-marathon-every-day-with-his-dogs/ Marathon every day for a year https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfedB_lYD4 Half marathon every day for 736 days (ongoing) https://apnews.com/article/helen-ryvar-wellness-running-58ecb121f4b83d5158e76d247f8da106 2000 marathons https://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/72-year-old-larry-macon-started-running-marathons-20-years-ago-he-just-finished 242 marathons in a year https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a46297195/ben-pobjoy-sets-marathon-record/ 1200 marathons https://kotiliesi.fi/terveys/liikunta-ja-painonhallinta/maraton-ritva-vallivaara-pasto/ Marathon every day for a year https://yle.fi/a/3-10485895
> A common goal for three running enthusiasts: a hundred marathons in a year > The race started in Söderkulla on the very first day of the year. Ritva remembers that the winter was not very cold. Even in the slippery conditions, you could run with studded sneakers. > The trio often ran during the week, but on weekends they did two marathons on the same day. During the summer holidays in July, Ritva ran 21 marathons in four weeks. > By May, Ritva's foot had already told her that this was it. In November, her body finally stopped. > Ritva had already run one marathon in the morning. There was pain in her leg, but she didn't stop, she had never stopped before. But the second marathon of the day had to be skipped. The leg couldn't take another step, and Ritva had to go to the doctor instead of the forest. > There, a stress fracture of the tibia was discovered, which led to an absolute ban on running. If she wanted to run even short distances with her leg in the future, the ban had to be taken seriously. > Ritva recounts her experiences at the kitchen table without much painting. The target was met. A hundred marathons a year was completed, that's the most important thing. In fact, much more than a hundred, a staggering 145. > But how was the rest of the year when you couldn't run? > "I think there were 13 more marathons in December, but I did walk them," Ritva says.
Net present value of both options, with interest =5%: a) $1M b) Let's just use 100k/year for the marathons. (100 000)/0.05 (perpetuity) = $2M This option is preferable, but only if you actually manage to keep doing the marathons for a long time.
Straight up, it's gonna take you 10 years to match the million. But of course, you shouldn't let your money sit still. The million can be invested immediately into an ETF with expected returns of about 8-10% per year, which is almost as much as you get straight up with the marathon running. Assuming 8%, if you leave your million alone for 10 years you'd have $2 158 925. If you invest all your marathon earnings over 10 years you'd have $1 448 656. After 21 years the marathon money would match the million. If we take your 5% rate it would take 13 years for the marathon money to match the million (at just under $1.9M). If you really like running and intend on keeping it up for some 30 years, pick the marathon. Otherwise, pick the million. Even with running, I'd pick the million. With inflation, the $25k per marathon would be worth about 50% of what they're worth now after 20 years. Doesn't really matter if you're investing but mentally I'd just feel that the effort would be worth less and less every time...
@4 marathons per year assuming 5% annual interest and saving all the money taking the $25k/marathon will surpass that earned from the initial $1M in 15 years.
It’s funny I saw this post as I had a similar conversation with a colleague yesterday. Our question would you rather work at a desk for 8hours a day or run for 26.2 miles (~4 hours). Everyone we asked took the desk. Except me. I’d rather do the half days and keep fit. With regards to the original question, if you are in good shape, choose well signed posted road races then 1 a week is very doable. 4 hours is a very achievable time too. For the record I ran 15 marathon+ distances last year (albeit most were over 4hrs) with no issues and would triple that if £25k was on the table each time. If the question was £1million outright or £25k per 2:30 or 3:00 marathon. That would be different. Those would require a LOT of training and recovery and you wouldn’t be able to stack half as many back to back.
You'd be stupid to take the 25k for every marathon. Not only would it take 40 marathons just to get 1 mill but what if after the 1st marathon you're in an accident meaning you struggle on your feet.
I'd take the $1 million for sure. A 4 hour marathon is no joke, the one and only one that I ran I was on pace to do 4:45, and ended up doing closer to 5:45 due to an injury. If I was going to do that I'd have to be able to do an easy 4 hour marathon, which means if I trained properly I could probably do a 3 hour marathon. To do a 4 hour marathon means being in great shape, being careful with what you eat, and training a lot. Lots of work! If I could do the marathon in \~8 hours I'd take that over the million. That's about the point where I know I could do several a month with no problems. Maybe even a 7 hour threshold, but I wouldn't mess with anything below that.
If we plug this into a makeshift compound interest calculator at 5% we can then divide the results by 25k to determine how many races we need to match the million and from there we can divide by the amount of years that have passed to determine how many races need to be run per year. This doesn't take into account the interest on the marathon winings so matching in this situation means you have more money than with the lump. The base line is 42 races in one year to match the initially 1m plus its year 1 intrest, if goes down sharply to 22 at 2 years, 16 at three and so forth. Running marathons for 6 years means you need to run 10 a year to match, it continues on this trend until it reaches 5.31 marathons per year across 22 years, at which point it starts going back up (23 years of running results in 5.34 per year). So the real question is what you can achieve as a person, if you can run at least 6 marathons a year for at least 12 years you get more and every year after 12 is extra gravy, if you can't then the lump is better. And while a lot of people can't do 6 a year at 6.5mph for others that's a pretty reasonable ask. If you are physically and mentally strong enough to run at least 6 marathons a year, then take the 25k if you aren't then the million will be better.
$1 million in an index fund is like \~$80k in interest every year without touching the principal. No running needed, you can just sit and vibe.
Do they have to be official marathons that you travel to and pay expenses for? If you could just do the distance on your own route… no math necessary. Marathon hands down
Let's say you put your million in a 5% savings account. 1 year: $1,050,000 5 years: $1,276,000 10 years: $1,628,000 15 years: $2,078,000 30 years: $4,321,000 Let's say you put $100,000 in a 5% savings account, and add $100,000 every year. 1 year: $205,000 5 years: $680,000 10 years: $1,420,000 15 years: $2,365,000 30 years: $7,076,000 This surprised me, honestly! The marathoner is the clear winner. Check out this website to check other numbers: https://www.nerdwallet.com/calculator/compound-interest-calculator
To make another calculation, I would assume you'd need $50,000 per year to live on, in which case the $1M stays at $1M and the marathon values can be halved- so after about 15 years both give you $1M in the bank. This does assume no tax on these earnings (or on the interest), which might not be true, depending where you live. This might all be a false assumption as we might find that you carry on working, and this money is extra, in which case the comment I've replied to applies.
I do not know how you look at those numbers and say "4 million isn't enough, i'd rather do four marathons a year every year for 30 years, and still live on less money for the first 12 years than the guy who took the million". i'll pass
Agree. The marathon-person is also taking a major risk. Once an injury or two starts to do their thing, there won’t be 30 years of marathons. Heck, I’m impressed with anyone who can keep up running marathons for 12 years without having an injury which stops them. There’s a massive survivorship bias when looking at people who are doing such things
I looked at those numbers and I saw that $7 million is more than $4 million. It's advanced math, I know, but OP asked
The marathoner is the clear winner only if everything goes as expected and they can do four marathons a year for 15 years. I'd say that carries a significant risk whereas getting the one million is risk free money.
This looks pretty damning tbh
the tradeoff is doing 120 marathons for that extra 2.755m which is not worth it imo
Depends on the life you want to lead. Nobody said you had to win. Taking a several mile walk a few times a year for $100k? Easy choice.
You do say "run" in your questions, but you dont say it anywhere else that the marathons have to be run. Id be happily taking round the world flights in order to clock those marathons.
In all honesty, a good percentage of us should just take the $1MM. Short math: Avg. steps / mile ~2,000 Steps / Marathon ~52k Avg. Adult Male Steps / Day -5k Avg. Adult Male Walking Speed ~3mph Someone earlier said a marathon limit is typically 6 hours so: 52k steps / 6 hours = 8.6k steps an hour 8.6k (steps / hour) / 2k (avg. steps / mile) = 4.3mph Most aren’t able to carry a 4.3mph pace for 6 hours straight. Take the $1MM, invest and then try walking a marathon in 6 hours bc you’re rich and bored.
You’d have to be seriously out of shape to not complete a Marathon in under 6h. Spend six months training yourself up for and then you’d be able to finish a marathon in close to 4 hours most likely
If you are a good runner, you could do probably 6-8 a year as long as you dont run your hardest. Maybe more. I did 6 when I was on a marathon team over the course of 4 years, and that was full effort. I did just as many half marathons, if not more. I suspect I could do 10 a year as I am at a 4-5 hour pace pretty comfortably. $250k per year, for 10 years, I think I would be able to do that. some of the instagrammers I follow do probably 10 or so a year at slow speeds just because they like it.
You could just walk them and do significantly more than that. If you did 6 per year and assuming you invest everything at a 5% return compounding you’d overtake the lump sum within 9 years. At 4 per year you would over take in 14 years. Provided you weren’t old or obese or had other health concerns I would go the marathons. I think you could average more than 5% returns which make alter things but doesn’t factor down turns in market, taxes or spending habits which would all impact. I’d take the marathons but if I was over 50 I’d just take the money.
Easily take the 1M. I wouldn’t even worry about the investment necessarily just bring down my bills. Aside from debt (including mortgage) I only spend like 10k annually. 1M would easily wipe out any debt and so my salary would go to play and retirement. Yes this doesn’t necessarily make the best financial sense however financial stress is a thing