posted Jan-08-2006 11:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Run Page Run:
Hey Steve, I run on the dirt/gravel roads on our local National Forrest-- which i've been hunting on for over twenty years--- and there are a bunch of trails where people ride horse back all through the smallest national forrest in the country of 13,000 acres and I thought about you guys and after mile one on the dirt roads i said what the heck and hung a right on a trail. My wife gave me some NB 907's for Christmas and man do they feel good, even on asphalt but I put them and this old bod through the test on them trails. Man was that a fun new experience and I kept my maff around 130 and was running in some hills to and sloshing through the horse tracks in mud etc. and did it ever give me a work out. I could tell my legs period got a workout but it really worked on the stabilizing muscles in my lower legs and my footpod registerd four miles on the trails and i did another three on the roads. I thought about you Ultra runners as i jogged through the woods, and man was it a serene, and i invisioned myself in the lead on mile 99 of an ultra race lol. which made me start running too fast but i caught myself pretty quick and slowed to my Maff. I'm definatly going to make these trails part of my running lifestyle after that and can't wait untill the next time i can hit them. Just thought i'd share my experience with you guys for it definatly works our bodys different than a road or tread mill run and may add spice to our runs. Take care all, Page

---

Page...Shhhhh, we try to keep this a secret! Don't want too many runners on the trails, you know

I ran roads and road races for almost 15 years before I tried running on some trails back in the late 80's. As the years went by, I started to train and race more and more on the trails and today it is all I do. My favorite event is the 100 mile trail race because I get to spend more than a day out on the trails in the mountains....and keeping with the thread's subject, I have found that LHR training fits very well in this sport because it teaches you patience and also trains your body to burn fat. You have an almost never ending tank of fat to burn and will only hit the wall (or bonk) if you venture into the land of sugar burning (high HR).

Best of luck with the trail running, keep up the Maffetone training and try a trail ultra someday!

Steve

------------------
Steve
My User Profile

My Photo Page
 

posted Jan-08-2006 11:07 AM            

Thanks for doing this!
Steve

------------------
Steve
My User Profile

My Photo Page
 

posted Jan-08-2006 11:41 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sibelius:
Hi Folks:

Quick question/observation on Low Heart Rate training during long runs.

I did a 21 miler yesterday and tried to keep HR in target range. Things went relatively well for the first 15 miles or so. Then I began to see ever increasing degridation - especially for mile 20 & 21. In order to keep in my target range the last two miles I would have needed to go from a wog to a walk. I decided to keep the wog going but the HR ended up about 10 beats over target at the end. It's very frustrating as I now wonder if I just blew the aerobic benefits of the entire run.

I have gotten to the point where I can keep all my week day runs (all done on a gym treadmill between 6 and 10 miles) within my target. It's the very end of the long runs on weekends (all done outside from 16M - 22M) that are becoming the issue.

Is anyone else experiencing this? What is the best course of action? In the future, should I walk the last few miles if I need to in order to stay within target range? Is my problem "normal"? Or is it indicative of really poor aerobic fitness? I'd like to think I would improve on long runs but I am noticing that this is becoming a tough hurdle for me to clear.

---

My though to adding more mileage and what has worked for me: Run to the point where you can¡¦t control your HR any longer. Then just start walking for more mileage. Yesterday I ended up walking for three more miles after a 10 mile run that I was scheduled for. I had the time and just felt like going more. I didn¡¦t want to run because it has been so HOT around here, and I¡¦m just starting to add more mileage since a marathon I ran in December. I think a lot of it is just time on your feet, and besides, it¡¦s just x-training time. Like Jesse has already stated, it will be much easier next time around.

Here is a web-site with some pictures of a trail of a half-marathon I¡¦m thinking about running in March. http://socal.hiking.info/la/la-cbcynsspr.html I just wanted to prove to you people that there really are some beautiful areas in Los Angeles County around where I live. The park is located in Agoura about 20 miles from me. I just wish I had someone to run this with all the time. I¡¦m too afraid to do this alone. ƒ¼

posted Jan-08-2006 12:09 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by camy:
What exactly are the "attributes" of LT-HR?

When I was 2-3 months into running, I did a 5k TT (not race) in 29:49 min. My aveHR for that run was 186 and the last 15 min were above 190. I certainly considered myself "untrained" as I still do.

Also, about that time (the following week), I have a 52 minute "easy" run where I averaged 174 including the warmup. The last 34 minutes of this were all above 175. Again, this was my easy run and my notes say it felt easy.

I have also done a few max HR tests several different ways and I've always been right at 201-202.

I've read that LT is the HR/pace you can hold for about an hour. This, for me has always been 180+ or 90% of my max HR.

Now, I can run my easy runs at about 155 +/- 5 bpm, sadly, at about the same pace as that 174 average run, but I'll take the 20 bpm lower HR.

Am I way off base on this stuff?

---

Sorry for the slow response, I forgot to get back to this. anyway, here's my stab at answering your questions.

You aren't off base, but your high HR during the 5K TT and other runs indicates something other than a high lactate threshold. Remember HR is a proxy for effort it is not the 'thing' that causes lactic acid to be produced. If HR was actual trigger then we'd all lock up watching a scary movie.

LT or Lactate Threshold is the transition point (or range) where lactic acid starts to accumulate because it is being produced faster than the body can clear it. Eventually, the increased acidity (i.e. too many protons) in the muscles inhibits contraction and you lock up. In practice, LT is an indicator of how much cardiovascular capacity we can utilize in a sustained effort and thus is a strong indicator of performance, especially for endurance athletes. This is in contrast to VO2max, which tells us how much capacity we have.

That's why a well-trained runner with lower VO2max, but higher LT will probably perform better than a lesser trained runner with higher VO2max, but lower LT. LT can be raised through training significantly (upwards of 50%), while VO2max is genetically determined and supposedly can increase up to about 20% through training.

A key goal of base building (i.e. improving aerobic fitness) is to increase the leg's ability to produce energy without building up lactic acid. Maximizing LT is important for distance runners because a well-trained runner will run a marathon just below LT (so you want it high as possible). When correlated with HR, LT can be north of 90% maxHR for an elite runner, while it's typically below 75% maxHR for poorly trained runners or even lower for sedantary people.

5K and 10K's are usually run well above LT. In fact, pace at LT is often given as 12-20s slower than your 10k pace (about your 15K pace). Average HRs during shorter events tend to be higher than for longer events (5K>10K>HM>Marathon).

Slow runs at high HR is an indicator of being aerobically unfit. If you have poor aerobic fitness your heart stroke volume is lower, which means your heart beats faster to deliver a given amount of oxygen to your leg muscles. However, your leg muscles are also inefficient and can't use the oxygen being delivered. So your heart is pumping faster to deliver oxygen your legs can't use and your HR will be high relative to your actual muscular effort. Muscular effort is what drives the production of lactic acid, not your HR.

Proper base building will:

1) increase stroke volume of the heart (pump more oxygen at lower HR)

2) enable muscles to extract more oxygen from blood (increase capillary density in muscles) and

3) enable muscles to use oxygen delivered to create more aerobic energy (i.e. through increased density of mitochondria).

In addition to improving your aerobic pace these adaptations also enable you to produce less blood lactate at a given pace. Fat burning never produces lactic acid, so training your body to use more fat at increasing levels of effort will necessarily lower blood lactate levels at higher efforts. So now you can run faster at all HRs with less discomfort. Threshold training will further raise your LT and improve the body's ability to clear the byproducts of anaerobic energy production. Remember LT occurs, roughly speaking, when the production/Clearance ratio exceeds 1 and there is accumulation. If you improve the denominator your LT also goes up, although you may produce more lactic acid your body can clear it better.

I've seen the figure of LT pace/HR being what one could sustain for an hour run also. Elite runners can run well above LT for an hour. Not sure how accurate it is for new runners, since many couldn't run for an hour. I tend to think this figure applies to runners with at least some level of training.

Here are a couple of ways I've seen to estimate your LT:

1. Do a 30min TT and take the average HR over the last 20min. Run this at the max pace you can sustain for the whole time trial. If you're slowing down, you went out too fast. If it is too easy you're going to slow.

2. Do an all-out 8min run. Your average HR over this run is also near your LT. Chris Carmichael uses this approach

Do the above on a track or flat road course. Once you have your LTHR then you can set up zones relative to that.

The fact that you can run at 155 what used to take HR174 means pushing you easy run HR down is working for you. I think if you stick with this lowHR training you should be able to run your old 5K pace (from your TT) at HR145 or lower. Even with a maxHR above 200, you should eventually be doing easy runs below 145. Jesse has hit 210, does his easy runs below a MAF of 144 (if not lower) and started out doing 17min/mi. After a few months he was running sub 7:30 miles at MAF HR. Stick with it and keep pushing the HR down, you won't regret it.

good luck.

--jm
 

posted Jan-08-2006 09:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by flynnmcmahon:
Maybe this is totally obvious, but I have been earnestly doing low HR training for a week now. On and off before but something always got me sidetracked. Anyway, when I started up again, I barely had the energy to do 2 or 3 miles! It was awful! So the other day I was so frustrated with running, I hopped on the upright stationary bike at the gym and I rode that for half an hour on level 10. My HR stayed around 130. When I got off the bike I felt really good, so I tried a little run on the treadmill. Well, before I knew it, I had run for 30 mins and it was easy! My HR barely got above 135. (My maff is 140) and I felt great. Stopped just because the daycare at my gym was closing. Well yesterday, I decided to do the same sorta thing. Biked 30mins and than ran @ 5.0 (which sadly is not too to slow for me and my slow running style) but this time, my HR stayed below 140 (in the past 5.0 on the tmill could easily get my HR up over 150, pathetic I know) anyway. I felt awesome after 30 mins of bike and 60 mins of run!Thats 90mins of cardio.
Question is, why could I barely run for 20mins before but after 30mins of cycling with some solid resistance make me able to run forever???

---

I would say it's the proper warmup (not too intense, but just enough)
that you get from a brisk bike ride, that you probably never give yourself
when running. While suggested to start your runs a good 10-15 beats
below MAF to get warmed up, that may be barely a walk for many,
and for others, (we) just go right up to the MAF almost from the start.
I do experience the same thing as well, likewise with a swim.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-09-2006 05:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by flynnmcmahon:
thanks lietnerj, so if I were try to "warmup" like that with just running and no cycling what would you suggest? As I mentioned my maff is about 140. I am 36 with years of illness, overtraing symptoms, etc..At least a couple times a week, I do like the Brick concept of cycling and running in the same workout, but for those days I can only run, what do you think would get my bod to the same place?

---

Nothing complicated, just start out slowly, if you can keep a HR of around
10 beats under MAF for the first mile or so, that should give you a similar
effect that you're getting from the bike. I love bricks and reverse bricks, too. I like to come home from a 20 mile run and follow with a long bike
ride. I mix up bike and run frequently.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-09-2006 08:00 AM            

I am indoors because of all the ice...I don't want to strain the knee again. I have decided to NOT run the marathon in 6 weeks, much too soon after the fall I had. So it's all pointing for Hardrock in July...and also I have been invited to a 72 mile run in the Massanuttens in Va. in Feb. that I might go down and do.

...so yesterday I did a 2 hour TM workout doing what I did most of last winter. It's basically preparing my legs for the climbing and jogging that we do in the 100 mile trail runs.

I start by walking for 5 minutes, gradually ramping up the tempo to 4 mph. I then jog slowly (around 5mph, 12mpm) keeping my HR at around high 120's. After 10 minutes of this, I drop the pace back down to 4mph (15mpm) at a 15% grade and walk for 5 minutes. My HR actually climbs into the upper 130's during this walking as it is actually more difficult than the running stretches. I will do this for 5 minutes, then drop the grade to 1%, jogging at a clip that will keep me about 135. (My Maffetone upper number is 133 and Mittleman is 137 at 54 year's old). These are the numbers I got when I started running this program 2 year's ago and kept them there. My running pace on the mill yesterday was between 10 and 11mpm to keep it at 135...

I did this over and over until two hours were up and after I had finished did not even feel as if I had done anything. I think I could have continued all day!
Knee feels good, cardio feels good and I feel like I properly prepared for moving as quickly as possible for my races. Realize that my pace would give me about a 20 hour 100 mile finish....which would win most of the races I run, so I am confident that the pace is correct.

While doing this I watched Adrenaline Junkie ;-) It was Ozzie Osbourne's son, jack, climbing El Capitan after just one week's training. This is a climb up a sheer cliff wall that took them four days to compete, sleeping in hammock like devices that hang from ropes hammered into the rock! And I thought running two days at altitude was hard!

Steve

------------------
Steve
My User Profile

My Photo Page
 

posted Jan-09-2006 08:13 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by flynnmcmahon:
Can you explain physiologically, why this has to happen to have a good run?

---

Not sure what you mean....but I am an ultrarunner, specifically specializing in the 100 mile trail runs and learning how to run efficiently at a very easy pace and burning fat while doing this is very important.

Back when I raced on roads, it was more important to get efficient to run fast, so that I could race long. Now that my races can sometimes last up to 2 days, I have to space out the fat fuel to last that long. Yeah, I can eat food, but with that comes possible nausea from not digesting food properly. If I train my body to burn fat as fuel, running at a low HR, I can go on for days without much more than liquid fuel, which I don't mean sugary Gatorade, but a maltodextrin drink I use.

Anyway...I am training my body to adjust to the different terrain of powerwalking uphills and then switching to running over and over for hours on end. If I were training for a marathon, I would be trying to improve my pace at a lower HR with as little walking as possible and over the course of several months, hoping my pace was getting faster and faster.

In ultrarunning, you need to train your walking muscles as much as your running muscles.

Does this answer your question?

------------------
Steve
My User Profile

My Photo Page
 

posted Jan-09-2006 09:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Camy- so are you saying that right now your approach is to run all
runs at 70% HRR, and then the same for swimming and cycling?

---

quote:

---

Are you carefully tracking your pace per mile, avg heart rate, etc., as you go along? Are you measuring rest heart rate each day, or just using the best value you've obtained? One thing that I consider "opposite" in the Karvonen approach is that if you are sick, overtrained, or otherwise have a high resting heart rate for a day, it would raise your heart rate limit for that day. So, for example on a day when I'm at my training peak, well-rested, low RHR (38), 70% HRR is just over
158 (MAF for me is 144 if I don't add or subtract anything). I've had days (oddly, when in peak training after a "rest" day), where RHR would be up to about 52 (right now it's higher for me as I cut back mileage a lot and got sick recently - two things which happen together for me!). So, on those days, my 70%HRR is 163.

---

My RHR doesn't move much, at most 4 bpm. I usually check it 2 or 3 times a week. I'm a gadget geek and I always run with a GPS and HR that I download to my computer, so I have records of everything I've done since March.

EDIT: Thanks so much for the FAQ. I haven't been able to go through it yet, but your efforts are greatly appreciated.

[This message has been edited by camy (edited Jan-09-2006).]
 

posted Jan-09-2006 11:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ultrasteve:
Not sure what you mean....but I am an ultrarunner, specifically specializing in the 100 mile trail runs and learning how to run efficiently at a very easy pace and burning fat while doing this is very important.

Back when I raced on roads, it was more important to get efficient to run fast, so that I could race long. Now that my races can sometimes last up to 2 days, I have to space out the fat fuel to last that long. Yeah, I can eat food, but with that comes possible nausea from not digesting food properly. If I train my body to burn fat as fuel, running at a low HR, I can go on for days without much more than liquid fuel, which I don't mean sugary Gatorade, but a maltodextrin drink I use.

Anyway...I am training my body to adjust to the different terrain of powerwalking uphills and then switching to running over and over for hours on end. If I were training for a marathon, I would be trying to improve my pace at a lower HR with as little walking as possible and over the course of several months, hoping my pace was getting faster and faster.

In ultrarunning, you need to train your walking muscles as much as your running muscles.

Does this answer your question?

---

Hi Steve,

As you know, I've been reading tales written by you and other runners in Beyond The Marathon. I've noticed that a lot of the runners chow down on all sorts of food (including sandwiches, pizza, etc.) while running these ultras. You mention that you don't really do that, and just use a non-sugary energy drink. Have you tried the other way (chowing down)?
Were you doing Maffetone at the time? What's the difference in the two refueling methods?

When I read that Dean Karnazes will eat a whole pizza, or even Big Macs, while running, I wonder if that is dragging him down a bit, and if his body is really digesting it properly.

--Jimmy

My Running World

[This message has been edited by jjwaverly42 (edited Jan-09-2006).]
 

posted Jan-09-2006 12:26 PM            

I have been thinking a lot lately about the impact on MAF of resting heart rate. My resting heart rate is 70. I know this seems pathetically high for a runner who does 40+ miles per week but so be it - thats what it is and I have to live with it. Anyway, I have noticed that Jesse and others on this board who have had success with MAF seem to have fairly low resting heart rates. I'm wondering if there is a correlation here? Are folks with a low resting heart rate at an advantage with MAF because their level of exertion using the MAF formula (180-age) is slightly higher than folks who start off at a higher base heart rate? I am also wondering if folks with a high resting heart rate would be better served going to % Heart Rate Reserve instead.

My unadjusted MAF (139) corresponds to approximately 60% Heart Rate Reserve which is, I believe, categorized right on the line between low and medium intensity. For those of you with low resting heart rates, what %HRR is your MAF?

I'm not sure if it matters or not, but I thought I'd throw this out there and see if it merits further discussion.
 

posted Jan-09-2006 01:45 PM            

There’s no set answer and it all depends on your goals – what distances of races you want to do, etc. The more aerobic volume you do, likely the faster and more significant progress you will see. There is some question as to what kind of progress you can make on only 10-15 miles per week. However, at that volume, you may be better off just taking it easy on most of your runs, rather than following a strict heart rate regimen. This type of mileage is not enough to support speed work nor to gain optimal race performance, so pace capability should not be an issue. If you are just trying to solve some of the other problems about fatigue and pains mentioned above, you can probably just find a heart rate 10 or 15 beats above MAF and stick with that for a while. If you are just doing low mileage because “your body can’t take it,” following this method carefully should enable you to increase your mileage.

Jesse thanks for the FAQ column. However I'm stuck in the 10-15 mile a week group. What is the minimum mileage one should be running weekly to show benefitsfrom MAF type traing? Oh, and I jsut turned 53 and was curious about your remarks concerning the unknown effects from thos over 55 and those under 18. Thanks. You're providing a great service.
 

posted Jan-09-2006 03:04 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Nothing complicated, just start out slowly, if you can keep a HR of around
10 beats under MAF for the first mile or so, that should give you a similar
effect that you're getting from the bike. I love bricks and reverse bricks, too. I like to come home from a 20 mile run and follow with a long bike
ride. I mix up bike and run frequently.

---

Thanks leitnerj: can you explain physically, why this type of warmup seems so necessary in order to have such a good run?

posted Jan-09-2006 06:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sibelius:
MAF and high resting heart rate.

I have been thinking a lot lately about the impact on MAF of resting heart rate. My resting heart rate is 70. I know this seems pathetically high for a runner who does 40+ miles per week but so be it - thats what it is and I have to live with it. Anyway, I have noticed that Jesse and others on this board who have had success with MAF seem to have fairly low resting heart rates. I'm wondering if there is a correlation here? Are folks with a low resting heart rate at an advantage with MAF because their level of exertion using the MAF formula (180-age) is slightly higher than folks who start off at a higher base heart rate? I am also wondering if folks with a high resting heart rate would be better served going to % Heart Rate Reserve instead.

My unadjusted MAF (139) corresponds to approximately 60% Heart Rate Reserve which is, I believe, categorized right on the line between low and medium intensity. For those of you with low resting heart rates, what %HRR is your MAF?

I'm not sure if it matters or not, but I thought I'd throw this out there and see if it merits further discussion.

---

In fact, you've got the chicken and the egg switched. I withered
my aerobic base away with all of the races at the end of the season
and then, further, I cut back my mileage in everything,
and my RHR subsequently went up, along with my pace at low
heart rate. I didn't check it constantly, but it was up to around 60.
Now that I'm rebuilding, I'm back to around 50 and my pace is
gradually improving again, but I'm not nearly where I was a month
and a half ago. So, I say that the more aerobic mileage you do, the
lower your RHR goes (not the lower your RHR the better the progress
you make).

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-09-2006 06:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ultrasteve:
Had a great workout yesterday....

...

I did this over and over until two hours were up and after I had finished did not even feel as if I had done anything. I think I could have continued all day!
Knee feels good, cardio feels good and I feel like I properly prepared for moving as quickly as possible for my races. Realize that my pace would give me about a 20 hour 100 mile finish....which would win most of the races I run, so I am confident that the pace is correct.

...

---

excellent, Steve! I definitely need to try that approach during my
rebuilding. Even I, who demonstrated a lot of patience going through
this for many months, sometimes have a tough time keeping way
into the low HR zone. Glad to see you're back up and running again!

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-09-2006 06:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by bluecru:

Jesse thanks for the FAQ column. However I'm stuck in the 10-15 mile a week group. What is the minimum mileage one should be running weekly to show benefitsfrom MAF type traing? Oh, and I jsut turned 53 and was curious about your remarks concerning the unknown effects from thos over 55 and those under 18. Thanks. You're providing a great service.

---

Unfortunately, items 6 and 8 in the FAQ are my best stabs at your
question. There's clearly no right answer. I think 15 miles per week
is good for getting running enjoyment, maintaining fitness, and
relieving stress. There's a good chance it won't lead to specific
improvements on a significant scale for most people. For some
it may. Alas, it's all trial and error. Please continue to check back
in and let us know how you are doing and maybe we'll be able to
answer this type of question at some point.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-09-2006 07:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by flynnmcmahon:
Thanks leitnerj: can you explain physically, why this type of warmup seems so necessary in order to have such a good run?

---

Nothing special, just a light, low impact warm-up to ensure that you
will be starting well into your aerobic zone, burning mostly fat. Many
ways to skin that cat!

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-10-2006 05:22 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tpr55:
jesse, wondering how you exported the graph files from CR that you used at the end of the FAQ........

---

Kind of a kludge, actually. I just printed to pdf, then used a converter
to change them over to jpg.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
 

posted Jan-10-2006 05:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
Hello everybody. Gee people, I really blew my Maffetone workout this evening. I decided to run the treadmill at the gym since it was so windy around here. Has anybody tried to jog slooooooow when everybody else is running at the same cadence of about a 100 miles an hour? Needless to say, I picked up the same turnover rate as everyone else. Only my treadmill was moving at around a 13mm pace. It reminded me of someone with one foot on the break, and one foot on the gas. The wheels were spinning, but I was going no where. After about three miles of this, I gave up. I decided that I would rather deal with the wind. So I left the gym and headed outside to the streets. That's when it happened. Somebody took the foot off the break while the other was still on the gas. There was no way this lady could slow down! I haven't run this fast since my last 5k a good year ago. I even blasted up a good size hill. Since I was only wearing my chest strap, I had no idea what my HR was. The run ended up being a fast three miler. I just wish that I had worn my distance/pace/HR monitor. I'm sure I PRed my 5k time tonight. So yes people, even 53 YO ladies can improve their times by following the Maffetone method. Looking back in my log book to a year ago, I found that I can now run a pace at 118 BPM which then was 130 BPM. I've been at this since last September after a 6 month lay-off.

---

sounds great - you've been due a speed workout for some time!

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ