posted Nov-19-2005 11:57 PM         

Sorry to hear about your injured ankle. I’m sending you healing vibes <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Remember, ice –elevation-stay off of it-and if it doesn’t seem to get better, MRI it. You may also want to wrap it in an ace bandage to keep the swelling down and to give it some support. Keep in touch! Cathy

 

posted Nov-20-2005 08:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
Jesse- Congratulations on your 50 miler. What a huge PR!

Sorry to hear about your injured ankle. I’m sending you healing vibes <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Remember, ice –elevation-stay off of it-and if it doesn’t seem to get better, MRI it. You may also want to wrap it in an ace bandage to keep the swelling down and to give it some support. Keep in touch! Cathy

---

yeah, I've been icing it frequently and the swelling has reduced. It
has turned from blue to red, which is a good sign. It's not too bad
to walk on it. I don't think I'm close to needing an MRI on this one,
fortunately. I'll try some gentle spin-biking later to see if I can start
to loosen up my quads which are ripped beyond belief from my
overindulgence on the trail.

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

MyStuff
 

posted Nov-21-2005 09:47 AM            

Best of luck with the ankle...I turned an ankle one year coming down off of Francinia Notch on one of my final training runs for the Hardrock 100 in Co. It was 4 weeks before the race! Icing and elevation and gentle walking allowed me to run the race as planned. The athletic body heals fast, especially one as young as yours, I was 52 when I turned mine.

Steve

 

posted Nov-21-2005 02:06 PM         

I was surprised cause I really didn't have to slow down my pace, granted I ran on the TM. But my AVG was about 146. Does that seem right, or should I be staying closer to the low end?

posted Nov-21-2005 04:26 PM            

I always start out very slow, below my low MAF number and do not let it start to ramp up until after about 10 minutes. That's to get your body into "Fat Burning" mode. Then I just run staying in the zone...some days I'll be near the bottom of the zone and others (probably when I'm tired or it's warm out), I'll be closer to the top and even go over a bit.

If you read Stu Mittleman's book, Slow Burn, he'll give you 5 additional points if your already a fit runner. Plus after you've gotten a little experienced using the monitor and start to "feel" your runs, he basically tells you to ignore the monitor and go by how your breathing is and your visual senses. If you are breathing low in the belly and are aware of your surroundings, you're in the zone. If you are starting to breath higher up in your lungs and you feel as if you are in a tunnel and everything is going by in a blur, then you are burning sugar and should slow down until you get to the previous state.

I have been running aerobically (Maff/Mitt) now for two years after almost 30 years of training hard and being in the off again/on again injury mode and I don't even wear my watch every day. I don't like to time my workouts at all and run by feel. I'll make a note of what time it is when I leave in order to get back when I need to, other than that I just get into a groove, get myself into a nice aerobic state where I'm just below the upper chest breathing, running in a tunnel mode.

Most runs I feel like I've done nothing afterwards...the exceptions are long runs and my one weekly tempo run. Yes, I like to do a tempo run at least once a week...I like a long run, a fast run and everything else is what I can fit in and how I feel that day pace....most times it's around the top of my aerobic zone.

It's really one of the most simplest training programs you can adopt and is very natural. You are almost always in a rested state, yet if you wanted to, you could catch that guy that just blew by you...and keep going!

Hope this helps!

------------------
Steve

http://community.webshots.com/user/ultrastevep
 

posted Nov-21-2005 04:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackster:
I have a HR question. I started HR training today. I was using Mark Allens formula which is 180 - age + 5 (that was my adj) so 153. According to Mark Allen as long as you stay below that number you can still work on your Aerobic system. 126 would be the low end.

I was surprised cause I really didn't have to slow down my pace, granted I ran on the TM. But my AVG was about 146. Does that seem right, or should I be staying closer to the low end?

---

One more thing...

I assume you are 32, based on your numbers. So according to Maffetone as long as you've been running 3 hours a week minimum, your zone would be 143-153. You can actually pick up the pace a bit, but you are running right in your zone!
According to Mittleman you take your 180-32=148. Add 10 to get your top aerobic or MEP (Most Efficient Pace) zone. So your MEP is 148-158, this is where you would run most of the time. Subtract 10 from that to get your MAP zone of 138-148, this is where you want to be when you are tired and need to run easily. Anywhere from 138-158 you are aerobic.

Now, if you do what I mentioned above, feeling your pace, with practice you might find your zones to be higher or lower. It is all personal, formulas are only to get you started. Find out your max HR and do the precentages and then you REALLY know your numbers. One good test I have heard is to run a 5K race, then run the last 100 yards all out and look at your watch as you cross the line and add 5 to that. This is as close to your max as you will get...

You are lucky, most runners find they have to slow way down to a crawl to stay in their zone, this tells me that you have been training right all along...

------------------
Steve

http://community.webshots.com/user/ultrastevep
 

posted Nov-21-2005 04:48 PM         

Thanks

 

posted Nov-21-2005 07:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ultrasteve:
Congrats on a huge PB! I saw your name in the results yesterday morning while browsing for some of my friends times.
Now you have to start thinking about the Massannutten 100 in Va...I've run it several times and it's a fun one!

Best of luck with the ankle...I turned an ankle one year coming down off of Francinia Notch on one of my final training runs for the Hardrock 100 in Co. It was 4 weeks before the race! Icing and elevation and gentle walking allowed me to run the race as planned. The athletic body heals fast, especially one as young as yours, I was 52 when I turned mine.

Steve

---

thanks for mentioning that - I've been continuously icing and the
racquetball is now gone! It doesn't hurt when I walk anymore either,
but it's still slightly tender to the touch. My quads, however, are
still completely trashed, but that goes with the territory. Hot tub
after swimming tomorrow, just as Cathy mentioned should help
work that out. I have been thinking about the VT100 or similar
and someone has convinced me to consider the WS100 and he
said he would crew. Fortunately, it wouldn't be for a year and a
half!

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

MyStuff
 

posted Nov-21-2005 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ultrasteve:
Jesse is the resident expert here

---

Now that's funny! Ok, I started the thread, I've put in many
a long-winded post, and I can describe what's happened with
me over the last 6 months in intricate detail, but saying "expert"
is a stretch. I would trust your advice far more than my own!

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

MyStuff

[This message has been edited by leitnerj (edited Nov-21-2005).]
 

posted Nov-22-2005 08:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
thanks for mentioning that - I've been continuously icing and the
racquetball is now gone! It doesn't hurt when I walk anymore either,
but it's still slightly tender to the touch. My quads, however, are
still completely trashed, but that goes with the territory. Hot tub
after swimming tomorrow, just as Cathy mentioned should help
work that out. I have been thinking about the VT100 or similar
and someone has convinced me to consider the WS100 and he
said he would crew. Fortunately, it wouldn't be for a year and a
half!

---

Good to see that you are considering a 100. I think this type of training is perfect for 100 mile preparation. While running up on a ridge at the Wasatch 100 in Utah this past fall I was so comfortable and just cruising along, knowing that the low HR training had prepared me well for the distance...it didn't help with the altitude, unfortunetly

You really ought to consider the VT100, it is well done and very runnable, but that's another forum.

Keep up the good work, you are an experiment for many readers of this thread!

------------------
Steve

http://community.webshots.com/user/ultrastevep
 

posted Nov-23-2005 03:25 PM         

I will continue for the 12-16 weeks and hope to log better to show my improvements more.

Is it okay to do the HR training on the TM? I will run my long runs outside for the most part but untill I get warmer running gear and the guts to go outside I am stuck on the TM. I know my pace will slow down but thats expected.

Also is the adj I made okay or I am only supposed to run below my MAD? Allens said if you work out 4+ days a week for over a year to add 5 beats. I have been running for a year 4-5 days a week but before I started running I worked out on various cardio/wieght machines. I get confused with whos fomula to use.
 

posted Nov-23-2005 03:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackster:
I hope its okay if I join in. I started the HR training on Moday and did my second MAF run today. My pace seem to be pretty good again. I am 27 so may MAF is 153 I adj 5 according to Mark allen's formula. I averaged around 155 with some dips. I didn't records my splits, I am not sure if my HRM had this feature yet. I just go it. Anyway all went well I noticed my last 1/2 mile I had to slow down quite a bit maybe 30sec/mile.

I will continue for the 12-16 weeks and hope to log better to show my improvements more.

Is it okay to do the HR training on the TM? I will run my long runs outside for the most part but untill I get warmer running gear and the guts to go outside I am stuck on the TM. I know my pace will slow down but thats expected.

Also is the adj I made okay or I am only supposed to run below my MAD? Allens said if you work out 4+ days a week for over a year to add 5 beats. I have been running for a year 4-5 days a week but before I started running I worked out on various cardio/wieght machines. I get confused with whos fomula to use.

---

Welcome. Of course it's ok to join in - there's no gatekeeper here!
It's fine to run most or all of your runs on the treadmill, even at 0
incline. As it comes time to prepare for a race, that's when you
need to focus on getting mostly road runs in. There was a runner
a dozen or so years back who did pretty much all of his training
runs on the treadmill, with the back propped up (don't try this at
home, kids) to emulate downhill running so that all of his runs would
constitute "aerobic speed work" and to get his quads in condition.
I believe he placed highly (if he didn't win all out) in the Olympic
trials. Unfortunately, I can't recall his name. Don't get fixated too
much on whose definition of MAF that you use - just pick one and
stick with it. If you find that progress is particularly slow, you may
want to jumpt down to a lower heart rate. good luck!

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

MyStuff
 

posted Nov-25-2005 11:02 PM         

[This message has been edited by tpr55 (edited Nov-26-2005).]
 

posted Nov-26-2005 06:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tpr55:
hey, jimmy (jjwaverly)- in perusing the running links you have on your profile/page (I've seen most of the articles at some point or another) I re-read the Mitochondria building article by Owen Anderson. This article seems to shout out that higher intensity training builds mitochondria, while most of the other readings would (even Pfitzinger, who I think tends to lean towards harder training in general) indicate that lower HR/intensity, longer sessions, etc. are what builds mitochondria. Did you also notice this ? I remain very interested in this whole general concept, and have been doing my own MAF program for almost two weeks, with frequent bouts of skepticism but hopes that I'm doing the right thing.

---

You haven't read Pfitzinger's article on base-building then, which
has been posted several times earlier in this thread:

Pfitz in Basebuilding.

Pfitzinger, in Advanced Marathoning, assumes you already have
a very strong aerobic base before beginning the training regimens.
He does then deviate into more of a "harder is better" approach
after that.

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

MyStuff
 

posted Nov-26-2005 11:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tpr55:
hey, jimmy (jjwaverly)- in perusing the running links you have on your profile/page (I've seen most of the articles at some point or another) I re-read the Mitochondria building article by Owen Anderson. This article seems to shout out that higher intensity training builds mitochondria, while most of the other readings would (even Pfitzinger, who I think tends to lean towards harder training in general) indicate that lower HR/intensity, longer sessions, etc. are what builds mitochondria. Did you also notice this ? I remain very interested in this whole general concept, and have been doing my own MAF program for almost two weeks, with frequent bouts of skepticism but hopes that I'm doing the right thing.

[This message has been edited by tpr55 (edited Nov-26-2005).]

---

The article basically says there is mitochondria building at lower and higher heart rates, and ultimately there has to be balance in one's training. I believe this as well. If I were to run everything all the time at my MAF and below, eventually I would reach plateau. It would be a strong, fat-burning plateau of great endurance, but still a plateau. The fast-twitch fibers need to be worked as well at some point. Common sense says that if all your fibers (fast and slow twitch) are built-up, then you are maximizing the potential of the muscle. It's a synergistic world down there in the fibers.

Sometimes, I see that some people misunderstand Maffetone. They think he prescribes ALL low-heart rate running (MAF and below). He doesn't. He basically prescribes an extended period of aerobic-baase training at MAF and below, and when you reach a plateau, add anaerobic zones and miles. Lydiard prescribes the same thing, though he is specific about the length of base-building (12 weeks), and doesn't
specify a lower aerobic zone, but a few perhaps a few (one higher for hard days and one lower for recovery).

Many old-timers that I've spoken to, who aren't all "scientificky" like many on this board seem to be (including me), basically say run long, run easy, and race often (there's your speedwork).

So, whatever is happening to this stuff in my legs called mitochondria, I have found great, injury free success keeping a balance. I believe in a aerobic base building period, then add races and a bit of speedwork.
My balance after the base building period is (over 7-8 weeks):

90% aerobic
6% Lactate threshold
3% tempo
1% v02 max.

--Jimmy

My Running World

posted Nov-26-2005 11:24 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tomrunsalot:
So, what would it mean to you if virtually every major middle and long distance runner in the world does not follow Maffetone? Bird? Cuckoo perhaps.

---

Doesn't negate what Mark Allen did, or what Jesse has done, or what Stu Littleman has done, or what many have done, or what I've done.

You have an axe to grind, Tom. You don't like what we are doing and think we are crazy and uninformed, and think your beliefs and methods are superior, and all this stuff is mumbo-jumbo. You've made yourself very clear about that.

--Jimmy

posted Nov-26-2005 01:45 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:

Sometimes, I see that some people misunderstand Maffetone. They think he prescribes ALL low-heart rate running (MAF and below). He doesn't. He basically prescribes an extended period of aerobic-base training at MAF and below, and when you reach a plateau, add anaerobic zones and miles. .....

---

...and that's consistent with my understanding. 12 weeks of base building sounds like a commonly prescribed period. But how quickly should you start to notice some improvements? And what if you don't see improvement, what might that indicate? I've only been at for a little less than two weeks, but so far don't see any changes in the metrics and didn't really expect to at this point. The plateau you speak of, I assume, will be when paces stop dropping at the same bpm's, right?
 

posted Nov-26-2005 02:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Doesn't negate what Mark Allen did, or what Jesse has done, or what Stu Littleman has done, or what many have done, or what I've done.

You have an axe to grind, Tom. You don't like what we are doing and think we are crazy and uninformed, and think your beliefs and methods are superior, and all this stuff is mumbo-jumbo. You've made yourself very clear about that.

--Jimmy

---

Good comeback. I posted that 5 months ago. I knew you HRM zealots are slow but this is ridiculous.

posted Nov-26-2005 04:39 PM            

7:04/164, 7:24/163, 7:52/161, 7:46/162, 7:44/163,
7:42/163, 7:29/163, 7:47/163, 7:38/163, 7:46/164,
7:42/163, 7:49/165, 7:52/166, 7:35/167, 7:11/168,
7:25/169, 7:24/170, 7:46/169, 7:46/169, 7:47/169,
8:02/170, 8:14/167, 8:00/167, 8:39/165, 8:34/167,
7:47/171, 2:34(7:52/mi)/178

Finally, now even my marathon time is getting closer to
where it should be. And I felt great at the finish and I'm ready
to get back running tomorrow!

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

MyStuff
 

posted Nov-26-2005 04:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tomrunsalot:

Good comeback. I posted that 5 months ago. I knew you HRM zealots are slow but this is ridiculous.

---

Hi Tom- glad to see you're still reading this thread!

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

MyStuff