posted Aug-26-2005 12:49 PM            

------------------
This is my Profile
 

posted Aug-26-2005 04:36 PM         

[This message has been edited by GrayBeard (edited Aug-26-2005).]
 

posted Aug-26-2005 05:05 PM            

I will see if I can find / order this 'Training for Endurance Athletics' by P. Maffetone if it's that good.
 

posted Aug-26-2005 06:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by GrayBeard:
I just ordered Maffetone's book Training for Endurance. I'm just curious as to what he says. I've gotten tons of info here and I appreciate every bit of it. A question though. If I were NOT looking to race seriously could I stay on the MAF system in theory forever? I'm talking more along the lines of entering a race ( say a 10K). In theory, hoping that at some point my pace would get down to say 10 mim/miles and the race would kind of be a fun run type of thing for me. Just curious as I'm more a fitness runner and at 52 I just want to stay injury free but test myself in a few races a year. Thanks!

[This message has been edited by GrayBeard (edited Aug-26-2005).]

---

Maffetone suggests that you can just stick with the approach forever
and just the periodic running of races will keep up your conditioning
for faster running. It's all in what your objectives are. At any point,
there should be a reason why you start to add speed training and
other such elements, such as a desire to see some particular
level of improvement which you may not get from the MAF training
alone.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-26-2005 08:00 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by susi:
There is also one called Serious training for endurance athletics. Is that one good too? It's not by Maffetone though.

I will see if I can find / order this 'Training for Endurance Athletics' by P. Maffetone if it's that good.

---

Hi!

Page back in the post, and you will find the title of the book by Phil Maffetone. It has to be by him. Don't get the other one you mentioned above, I have no idea what that is.

If you go to Amazon.com and put in a search for Phil Maffetone or just Maffetone, you'll find it! Just do a book search. There aren't any pictures on the cover, just the title.

If you have any difficluty, let me know.

Good Luck!

 

posted Aug-26-2005 08:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by susi:
There is also one called Serious training for endurance athletics. Is that one good too? It's not by Maffetone though.

I will see if I can find / order this 'Training for Endurance Athletics' by P. Maffetone if it's that good.

---

Just so you know, I found the book on Amazon.com I did a book search and put in Phil Maffetone. It's the first book listed. The title is: The Maffetone Method: The Holistic, Low Stress ....something something, to Exceptional Fittness.

posted Aug-26-2005 08:53 PM         

And Jesse, thanks. The MAF system is torture at first. I'm not past that stage yet but the feel of completeing a run and having felt like not really having done anything is great. The 3.7 miles I did yesterday allowed me to run for an hour. My "longest run" in quite some time.
 

posted Aug-27-2005 02:27 PM         

Imight be getting ahead of myself but when does one increase the speed? Thanks!
 

posted Aug-27-2005 05:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by wvdad:
leitnerj,
i wanted to tell you that you were right about my half marathon training.first 7 or 8 miles i did what i wanted as far as time but i was miserable.the rest of that race sucked until i crossed the finish line.first 10k split eas 1:01 and that included a lenghty trip to a porta john.ended up with a 2:37 finish but there were a lot of drop outs because of heat so i am still proud as can be since this was my first race ever.i want to bit the bullet and do this hrm training starting now so i can do this over the winter.what book should i order and hopefully before next spring hits i can be back at 8 or 9 minute miles.and did you drop mileage alot or did you just increase time to begin with.

---

Congratulations on getting through it - now you know what if feels
like to slog through the misery in a race and tough it out to the
finish. You've got a good benchmark to go by.
You can do anything now! Good luck on your training.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-27-2005 09:53 PM         

For me, the day after my treadmill run I started having hip pain with each foot strike on that side. I am a tall lanky runner with very long legs and a long stride. I was told by a coach that I tore my left hamstring when I switched over from TM running to running on the streets. My hamstring was unable to cope with my natural running stride when I went back outside. So, I am back walking as fast as I can up the hills, then jogging down them trying to stay within my set limits. I threw in a few strides just for fun for leg turnover. Fun. I decided that this will probably be a better workout for me than killing myself trying to jog on a treadmill with a sub-walking pace.
I did order two of Maffetone's books from pccoach. Distance training and one on nutrition.
 

posted Aug-27-2005 09:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
GreyBeard (love it) Don't worry yourself with your speed right now. You will find that over a period of time that you will need to increase your pace to keep your HR at the same level. It will happen, but unfortunately I can not tell you when. Everyone is different.

For me, the day after my treadmill run I started having hip pain with each foot strike on that side. I am a tall lanky runner with very long legs and a long stride. I was told by a coach that I tore my left hamstring when I switched over from TM running to running on the streets. My hamstring was unable to cope with my natural running stride when I went back outside. So, I am back walking as fast as I can up the hills, then jogging down them trying to stay within my set limits. I threw in a few strides just for fun for leg turnover. Fun. I decided that this will probably be a better workout for me than killing myself trying to jog on a treadmill with a sub-walking pace.
I did order two of Maffetone's books from pccoach. Distance training and one on nutrition.

---

Ah, sorry the TM didn't work out - I hope it didn't set you back too
much by trying it. I have no doubt that the hill runs are much more
beneficial, just much more frustrating as well, trying to keep the
HR under control. I think the best thing about maintaining the
HR over the hills is the wide variation of paces that you go through.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-28-2005 02:30 PM         

I was able to run Friday night after work. I ended up going almost six miles. It was such a beautiful evening to run! I ran a new route, more hills of course, around my local neighborhood. Jesse, I totally agree with you about running outside. The hills are great leg strengtheners too. It may be a wise choice for our TM runners not to run at the same pace for an extended period of time. That's a great way to get an overuse injury. We use our muscles differently with each change of pace. That may be something to consider when you’re running for an hour or more.

Good runs to all.
 

posted Aug-28-2005 06:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by susi:
Ok, I see them on Amazon, which one should I buy:
'Training for Endurance Athletics' by P. Maffetone
or
The Maffetone Method: The Holistic, Low-Stress, No-Pain Way to Exceptional Fitness

---

ORDER THE SECOND ONE YOU FOUND.
 

posted Aug-28-2005 07:20 PM         

I'm thinking of using Parker's Compelat Idiot HR Training. I already have the book. Has anyone had any luck with that program? Should I just run every other day? Thanks!
 

posted Aug-29-2005 06:38 PM            

Back when I started running again in my early recovery phase,
I had to set the TM at 3.7 mph to keep my heart rate at 145
for 2-3 miles. Today, I have more than doubled that, late
in my run, at a 142 heart rate, up to 7.6 mph. Here were my
results (mile splits/avg heart rate of split):

8:58/136, 8:19/141, 8:18/140, 8:18/138, 8:12/139,
7:52/142, 7:52/142, 2:14/141

Heart rate actually went down after I warmed up.
Note that I've now crossed the 8 min/mi barrier and
get miles 6 and 7 in faster than 8. Just for reference,
just before my injury, I was running the treadmill at a HR
of 144 @ 6 mph, so I have much better aerobic fitness
than I did at that time. Incidentally, I've been
mixing in a few faster (in some cases, just higher level
of effort) runs and rides in, for about 5-10% of my mileage.
Not sure if it's had an effect on things. I'm at the point
where I want to start getting the feel for more intense runs
again, in preparation for the races coming up.

I thought this would be a good time to summarize some of
my recent observations (some may be obvious to many,
and some may think they are nonsense, but here's what I
believe now after paying close attention to my heart rate
over many miles in the last several months):

1. If you put in a good deal of mileage exclusively below
MAF, you will definitely pick up speed at the lower heart
rates. I can't say much about if you put in very low mileage
(although I built up from low mileage initially and even saw
improvement at 10 miles a week - only when I was exclusively
low). I doubt it makes you "faster" but it will help you carry
out the short distance speed that you already have to longer
and longer distances.

2. There will always be a discrepency between treadmill
pace and outside pace when it is warm, humid, and/or
hilly. Your outside pace will always be slower at a given
heart rate (unless you do all of your running downhill).
It seems as though you can get acclimated to the high
temperatures and eliminate that mostly from the equation,
but humidity and hills will always slow you down, sometimes
by 2 min/mi or more.

3. There seems to be a point on a long run, probably dependent
on training volume, where heart rate becomes substantially
more difficult to control, well before you run out of glycogen
stores. The point seems to move a little bit further out each
subsequent run, but it's always there. For me, it happens
around 15 miles in mild temperatures.

4. Take a hill hard early in your run and the increase
in heart rate you experience cannot be made up. I did some
experimenting where I took a couple of early hills at a
decent clip (letting HR get to about 170 or so) and my overall
pace was diminished compared to runs where I controlled things
well on the hills. The lesson is that if you are in a race, take it
very easy on the uphills, particularly early on, and take advantage
of the downs. You will take a lot out of your race performance
with "early indulgence". A corollary to this is that when you
are climbing a steep hill, that ends on a downhill, let yourself
go down for a few seconds until you fully recover before picking
up the pace and you will maximize the benefit of the downhill.

5. After you have built a strong base over a few months,
a small percentage of more intense runs does not seem to
have a detrimental effect on the base built. However, early
on in the aerobic training period, it seems to set things back.

6. Mixing in swimming and cycling below MAF seems to be
a great supplement and protect the body from injury. As long
as you can keep from getting hit by a car. Swimming and
cycling alone will not maintain the running aerobic base if
you can't run for a while. However, they appear to close the
gap for a few days if you are recovering from a minor
annoyance.

7. Running at set heart rate ranges equalizes your training,
no matter what the conditions are. When you are supposed
to be taking it easy, you take it easy, if you are running hard
it will keep you at the right intensity level, helping you avoid
injury.

I'll probably have more that come to mind later.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-29-2005 09:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by reddiscoii:
Wow! Congratulations on your improvements! I just have a couple of questions for you (if you don't mind, of course)
1. What kind of a time frame was it from the start of your observations to the above post?
2. How much of your improvement do you think could be attributed to simply logging more miles? (i.e. Do you think that had you just run without any regard for your heartrate, with a similar buildup in mileage since your injury, you would have seen any of these improvements?)
Thanks!

---

I started running on and off while recovering from my
ice-slipping injury, mixing in elliptical and short runs in
late April/early May, then started dedicating myself to the low heart
rate stuff in late May (by the time I hit that point, I was at about
a 13 minute mile early in the run). So, with dedicated low heart
rate running, it
was about 12 weeks to get from 13:00/mi (for a few miles) to
7:52/mi (after 7 miles). Almost none of the improvement at low
heart rates can be attributed to logging more miles, other than
the fact that I would guess the improvement has moved along
more rapidly by logging more mileage. (Even that part is fuzzy,
however, because it is quite possible that I'm operating on an
elevated resting heart rate because of logging so much mileage).
I had gone through two marathons and I was averaging 50-60
miles per week before I started heart rate training last time and
still I was running most of my runs in the 170s at a pace around
8:40 for long runs and high 7s for shorter runs. Even with the
fitness that got me through a couple of marathons and marginally
competitive (compared to the average joe that shows up for
a race), I could barely walk at a heart rate of 135. Now, in cool
weather or on the treadmill, I can run about 8:30/mi at the
effortless heart rate of 135. In most cases, I don't believe you
will ever build the capacity to run at low heart rates without
spending a good amount of time running at low heart rates. I'm sure that
as with any rule, there are counterexamples, but if you look at
80% of the people that post in Basic Training that haven't tried
aerobic basebuilding in a dedicated fashion (which is not simply
running at < 75% max heart rate), they will all post something
to the effect that "I'm a statistical anomaly - I can't run at less
than 70% max heart rate." I said the same thing myself. However,
I had enough problems and lack of progress accumulating that
I was left with no choice other than bite the bullet and try it.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-29-2005 09:52 PM            

quote:

---

4. Take a hill hard early in your run and the increase
in heart rate you experience cannot be made up. I did some
experimenting where I took a couple of early hills at a
decent clip (letting HR get to about 170 or so) and my overall
pace was diminished compared to runs where I controlled things
well on the hills. The lesson is that if you are in a race, take it
very easy on the uphills, particularly early on, and take advantage
of the downs. You will take a lot out of your race performance
with "early indulgence". A corollary to this is that when you
are climbing a steep hill, that ends on a downhill, let yourself
go down for a few seconds until you fully recover before picking
up the pace and you will maximize the benefit of the downhill.

---

While I'm completely convinced that your approach to low HR training worked well for you, I'm still not convinced about the "detrimental" effects of training above MAF for some portion of my weekly mileage even early on. Seems to be some research that contradicts any negative effects from higher HR training although it seems clear to me that as I increase intensity, the total spent under MAF obviously gets much lower than you're logging.

One thing I'm sure of is that limiting runs to MAF lets you build mileage and time on your feet much quicker with much less chance of injury. I've added intensity with distance and ended up missing days due to joint pain and other injuries.

------------------
My Running Log
 

posted Aug-29-2005 10:29 PM            

....so, if I'm understanding you correctly, you added intensity and time and got injured/sore? Right? If you had been running with the MAFF formula, perhaps it would have given your tendons, muscles, and bones time to build strength to run later, faster, without getting injured. I hope I understood your post correctly.

I beleive some of the thoughts behind Maffetone, are simply that. While running at the lower HR, your building your areobic capacity, getting faster at that lower HR, while your body adjusts and strengthens to running and the pounding.

I do think, after many months of this, and good base is build, some time should be spend at higher HR. I did, some faster HR running after 5 months of Maff, and it was nice, but I sure felt strong doing this. My body was ready for it.

Remember, Maffetone is just one way. A lot of runners hate running slow, at first, but the results are nice when you see/feeling them happening when running this way.

All in all, I hope you manage to stay injury free, and can run in comfort.

 

posted Aug-30-2005 05:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgb2n:
Another very nice summary. #4 particularly resonated with me:

While I'm completely convinced that your approach to low HR training worked well for you, I'm still not convinced about the "detrimental" effects of training above MAF for some portion of my weekly mileage even early on. Seems to be some research that contradicts any negative effects from higher HR training although it seems clear to me that as I increase intensity, the total spent under MAF obviously gets much lower than you're logging.

---

This is absolutely true. If I implied otherwise, I was off the mark.
You really need to be exclusively low for at least a couple of months.
After about 8-12 weeks or so (who knows what the magic number is)
then you can start adding intensity and if you add too much, you will
likely slowly deteriorate your base. That's why you do this again
next season in the off-season. But, I think it's much easier the
second and subsequent times around.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff
 

posted Aug-30-2005 07:27 AM            

I'm leaning towards an interpretation something like "if you do not maintain sufficient time in lower HR zones". In other words, I'm not convinced its the intensity that deteriorates your base, only that you don't spend enough time in a base building zone.

There is an interesting set of articles here:

http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/Training.htm

That you may likely have already read on the correlation between mileage, intensity, and improvement.

Leitnerj, you have shown such tremendous commitment across your three sports that I'm wondering if your overall training volume would have produced similar results even with the introduction of more effort above MAF.

For my own part, I'm trying to increase my time spent training below MAF but not exclusively.

Boston, you're correct that I've had injuries by introducing too much intensity before my body had built up sufficiently. Unfortunately, I have a tendency to do it repeatedly

------------------
My Running Log
 

posted Aug-30-2005 01:23 PM         

Has anyone ever heard of him or done his program? Just curious it seems like an alternative for me. Thanks

Jesse, WAY TO GO!!! Great comittment and dedication. GOOD LUCK!