posted Dec-21-2005 10:51 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tpr55:
I'd like to see where you read anything like that; certainly not in any of the threads I've been studying here for months.

---

If this board was our only source of training info, we'd be the blind leading the blind.
Here are some references on physiological adaptations to running. These are just articles by coaches. There is likely more data in the scientific literature, which I haven't read.
************************
Maffetone:
http://rrca.org/publicat/slowdown.html
"Perform the MAF test regularly, throughout the year, and chart your results. I recommend doing the test every three or four weeks." [ my note: implies that testing more often doesn't allow for sufficient improvements to occur.]

Pfitzinger:
http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/basic.shtml
"The minimum amount of time to begin to see an improvement from training is about 6 weeks."

Daniel's Running Formula, 2nd Edition:
Page 11 has graphs and text that indicate adaptation to a particular training regimen takes about 6 weeks. On page 51 he indicates that training adjustments shouldn't be made more often than 4-6 weeks.

Hadd [(http://www.electricblues.com/Hadd.doc) distilled from a monster thread on letsrun.com] indicates that mitochondrial growth takes about 6 weeks and so improvements should be seen about every 6 weeks, with minor improvements every 3 weeks.
************************

In my earlier post I was just distilling the info I had read on how long it takes to see real improvement in performance. None of these sources indicate what the magnitude of the improvement would be, but that's reasonable since each runner is going to adapt at their own level. I gave my opinion on what I thought a minor and major change might be, but not the magnitude of those changes. In one of your earlier posts you indicate, as have others, you hadn't seen any improvement. I was offering an alternative measure to gauge whether or not you were making progress. This was based on my own, admittedly, limited experience.

--jm

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 12:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tpr55:
I hear you, but it seems everyone has their own adaptation to add to this training. Seems to me you're doing it one way or the other, controlling your HR at a certain level (MAF, for example) and monitoring the resulting pace results OR controlling pace at a set level and monitoring the resulting HR drift.......... similar, maybe, but not the same method. The former is Maffetone, the latter is what you're describing.

---

I think I've miscommunicated somewhere in this thread. I was describing two different things, one was a measure of improvement in aerobic fitness, the other was an approach to start training at lower HRs (whether MAF or not).

On the improvement measure: I was saying that a person, such as yourself or me, would probably start to see a more stable HR under MAF for a given pace before they saw a pace improvement. Within the limits of cardiac drift being able to maintain a stable pace vs. HR relationship over a 1 hour run is a reasonable indicator of aerobic fitness. This is definitely important for the folks training for marathons.

The approach to training I described and Maffetone's approach both prescribe running at a given HR. Maffetone's approach says run below your MAF HR regardless of pace or environmental conditions and you'll build aerobic capacity. The method I described was an interim method that allows someone to eventually train at or below MAF without a lot of walking. It is not targeting a particular pace and managing HR drift.

It is not an original approach and I didn't invent it. It is not Maffetone's method, but it is a way to get someone to run at low HRs whether MAF or not. It seemed appropriate for folks who have been running for a while, but training at too high an intensity to build a solid aerobic base.

Lot's of people become very frustrated with the initial slow paces associated with low HR training, not to mention possibly needing to walk. If someone has been doing all their runs at an HR of 150 and their MAF is 135 that's a big leap to make. By pushing HR down 5bpm at time it may be more tolerable and less frustrating. And in the long run more beneficial since they may be less discouraged by slowing down less or only incrementally. Eventually, they are doing their base training at MAF or below.

For my own case I am running to maintain a particular average HR for a given run. I've chosen 70% maxHR (132) as my initial target. Within a broad set of guidelines the 70%maxHR target is advocated by several coaches, including Daniels and Mcmillan. It is also coincidentally 5bpm below my MAF HR (137); it also gives me room on long runs to account for cardiac drift up to MAF. I adjust pace as necessary to maintain that HR. I notice improvements when I see little or no HR rise or pace slow down later in a run of 1 hour or more. This always occurs before a noticeable pace improvement.

Lastly, everyone has to adapt any proposed training method to their own situation. I bought into the low HR approach, but had to find a way to implement it that worked for me. What I'm doing now is strictly speaking the Maffetone approach. I'm running exclusively below my MAF HR and will do so for 12 or more weeks. How I got here wasn't radical, but obviously it wasn't Maffetone's approach either.

--jm

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 07:29 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by pace2race:
While my pace hasd below 11:00 - 11:15pm it has gotten much easier to stay within the MAF. At first I had to "run" and constantly check the monitor as I could quickly move above my max rate of 137bpm. I am now able to keep the same pace and average 131bpm and range from 128 - 136 bpm. was spent after both efforts. .

---

I too am new to this training and am experiencing very similar results so far. However, I am trying not to get freaked by this because I wonder if I am simply training myself to be lazy and run slow, without eventually seeing the benefits of a faster pace down the road
I am fairly recently feeling fully recovered from a couple of injuries and just started running fastish again. Had a new PR in a 5k and my training runs were moving along at a clip that I never dreamed possible.
Low HR training simply makes too much sense to ignore, so while I am committed to this training for a full 12 weeks, I can't help but wonder if I am doing the right thing. I DO love running the longer distances. I DO love being comfortable while running at the slower pace. I DON'T want to always be soooo sloooowwww.
Karen

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 12:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ksabbo:
I too am new to this training and am experiencing very similar results so far. However, I am trying not to get freaked by this because I wonder if I am simply training myself to be lazy and run slow, without eventually seeing the benefits of a faster pace down the road
... I can't help but wonder if I am doing the right thing. I DO love running the longer distances. I DO love being comfortable while running at the slower pace. I DON'T want to always be soooo sloooowwww.
Karen

---

Look at the success of the guy who started this thread. Based on that alone, you should be able to trust the process for 6 weeks. At that point see if you've made incremental progress. If so, do it for 6 more weeks. Then keep evaluating, and decide whether you're hitting your goals. This works for some and not others, but you definitely have to give it the time. Maybe a 6 week target will seem less daunting.

good luck.

-jm

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 12:34 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by junkmiles:

Look at the success of the guy who started this thread. Based on that alone, you should be able to trust the process for 6 weeks. At that point see if you've made incremental progress. If so, do it for 6 more weeks. Then keep evaluating, and decide whether you're hitting your goals. This works for some and not others, but you definitely have to give it the time. Maybe a 6 week target will seem less daunting.

good luck.

-jm

---

Thanks for the encouragement! I do look at the success of several runners posting in this thread and am encouraged. I will stick to it. I am already in week 3 and it is cold, wet, and icy outside. Do I really want to work much harder in this weather? I think not
I have to admit that I am already seeing some very positive results. This is a slow time of year for me (career wise, I'm a Realtor), so I have more time available than usual. I have been able to easily bump up my miles to 35-40 mpw. I am seeing less flucuation in HR on runs. It is easier to stay in the zone. I am beginning to master the rolling hills (ok, "master" may be a stretch ), at least I can better guage a pace that allows me to keep running for all but 3 of the largest/longest hills. My overall pace for shorter runs is already improving slightly, and my overall pace for longer runs of 10-13 miles doesn't decline as significantly as a couple of weeks ago. Lots of room for improvement, but each run seems to offer some new insight to me.

Love this thread,
Karen

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 04:09 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by junkmiles:

Lot's of people become very frustrated with the initial slow paces associated with low HR training, not to mention possibly needing to walk. If someone has been doing all their runs at an HR of 150 and their MAF is 135 that's a big leap to make. By pushing HR down 5bpm at time it may be more tolerable and less frustrating. And in the long run more beneficial since they may be less discouraged by slowing down less or only incrementally. Eventually, they are doing their base training at MAF or below.

I'm running exclusively below my MAF HR and will do so for 12 or more weeks. How I got here wasn't radical, but obviously it wasn't Maffetone's approach either.

--jm

---

Like another poster, it's difficult to warm-up in the freezing weather and time for me as a Mom is very tight. I am walking and frustrated - but I'm willing to do the MAF strictly - unless bumping my MAF # up by 5 bpm would help? I really want to build my aerobic capacity - if that means walking most of the time then so be it (although I notice I can stay jogging after about 50min!) It's hard for me to stay at 141, but I could easily stay running at under 145 - still slower than molasses - but then I'm out of MAF, I'm getting a headache, to bump bpm or not...

------------------
Each day is a gift from God, let's live like we believe it...

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 04:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by BJL:
Like another poster, it's difficult to warm-up in the freezing weather and time for me as a Mom is very tight. I am walking and frustrated - but I'm willing to do the MAF strictly - unless bumping my MAF # up by 5 bpm would help? I really want to build my aerobic capacity - if that means walking most of the time then so be it (although I notice I can stay jogging after about 50min!) It's hard for me to stay at 141, but I could easily stay running at under 145 - still slower than molasses - but then I'm out of MAF, I'm getting a headache, to bump bpm or not...

---

Hi BJL. You will probably see the best results by keeping your HR strictly under your MAF. But if there are days when it's too cold, I would get the HR just high enough to stay in a slow jog. Your HR may even drop a bit after you get warmed up. Why don't you try it?

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 06:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by BJL:
Like another poster, it's difficult to warm-up in the freezing weather and time for me as a Mom is very tight. I am walking and frustrated - but I'm willing to do the MAF strictly - unless bumping my MAF # up by 5 bpm would help? I really want to build my aerobic capacity - if that means walking most of the time then so be it (although I notice I can stay jogging after about 50min!) It's hard for me to stay at 141, but I could easily stay running at under 145 - still slower than molasses - but then I'm out of MAF, I'm getting a headache, to bump bpm or not...

---

I think it's likely that you'll see better gains if you stay under your MAF target, as stealthrunner indicated. Bumping your target up 5bpm is not adhering to the Maffetone approach, but it is, arguably, a way to ease yourself into it if you feel you are walking too much. I don't have any info on what is too much walking, so that is an individual judgment you have to make.

Time is a constraint for me, so a lot of my mileage build up is based on pace improvement and walking a lot didn't work well for me.

I started out my lowHR training at < 70% HRR, which was over my MAF HR by 8bpm. I saw some pace improvement over a few weeks, but it didn't seem significant. I got a treadmill and I decided to push the HR down to MAF or lower; and in the process of staying under things stabilized around MAF-5, which is also 70% of maxHR for me. I slowed down a lot, but I was still jogging 99.9% of the time. Outside I'd have to walk/slow way down near the top of a hill. My pace improved pretty quickly initially, mostly because of efficiency gains of my running on the treadmill.

HR vs. pace was steady on longer runs and pace dropped another full minute in a couple of weeks. I suspect that rate of improvement will slow from here, but it's a start that is encouraging. Based on initial results and my reading of other people's experience it isn't unreasonable to think I can improve my pace at MAF significantly over the next 3-4 months.

If you're running most of the time I'd stick with the MAF target and see how you progress over 6 weeks or so. If you are mostly walking then you'll have to decide if it is too much. Whichever decision you make you have to stick with it long enough to know if it is working.

good luck

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 09:10 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
Hello people- I just had to be the 800th post here. Jesse, don't you think that it is about time to start another part to this thead? It's getting kind of long!

---

Yeah, no doubt! Since I'm in cut-back mode right now, hardly running
at all, I don't have a whole lot new to post anyway. I'm just responding
to questions if I have something to contribute. This monstrous
thread is clearly developing a life of its own, which is great. I think it's
now Jimmy's turn to start the new one, as he has begun his basebuilding
for the next season and I believe his story will become the one of more
general interest because I think we'll see him follow the several weeks
of basebuilding with his nice multi-zone training approach. I think this
is the optimal way to go about pre-season and in-season training
(pre-season - build the base, strictly below MAF, in-season - multi-zone,
being sure to incorporate a significant % of mileage below MAF). For
me, this was more of a science experiment and since my goal was to
get from zero running off of the disabled list to a triple marathon in less
than 6 months, speed was the last thing on my mind. It just so happened
that the improvements I saw at low heart rates went well beyond anything
I ever expected, perhaps partially attributed to the extreme volume of
aerobic workouts I did (at the cost of having to start many days at
3 am). Whatever it was, I would never have been able to tolerate that
type of volume using my former training habits.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 09:21 PM               

------------------
Each day is a gift from God, let's live like we believe it...

IP: Logged

posted Dec-22-2005 11:21 PM               

Mile 1: 10:15/ ave. 133 bpm
Mile 2: 9:57/ ave. 136 bpm
Mile 3: 9:45/ ave. 138 bpm
Mile 4: 9:58/ ave. 139 bpm
Mile 5: 10:05/ ave. 138 bpm
Mile 6: 10:15/ ave. 139 bpm

This is at a 1% grade on the 'mill.

I don't so far feel any pressure whatsoever to bump up the pace. I do believe one has to stay strict and not deviate at all from the program! I'm going to stay with it for at least 16 weeks and probably longer. Maybe I'm lucky in that I don't have to walk at all so far, even on hills. I just slow down slightly for hills, wind, snow, whatever to stay in the zone. My aches and pains are gone and I feel great! So I definately fall into the group of people who in the past ran too many runs at too fast of a pace. I'll also post my progress maybe every 5-6 weeks. For those talking about "sort of " doing it or bumping up pace " slightly " why not just stay strict? Especially if you don't have any all important races in the near term?

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 12:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Since I'm in cut-back mode right now, hardly running
at all, I don't have a whole lot new to post anyway.
[/B]

---

I know what you mean. I'm almost three weeks out from running Las Vegas. I can still feel it in my legs. The first few weeks I hit the treadmill. But this week, since it has been so nice out, I hit the streets. I can really feel the impact in my lower legs. I did an easy five miles today going up and down the neighborhood looking at all the Christmas decorations. Some people sure go all out! I was able to average 15 beats below my MAF without walking. I figure that I have either improved my pace, or I have just learned to jog slower. I really need to get a new battery for my pace monitor. I will continue to jog at this lower HR until I feel I have totally recovered from the marathon. I hope that it doesn't take too long since I would like to do a half in March.

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 12:31 AM            

Lots of other folks have stepped up and contributed good info too.

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 08:38 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cashmason:
Its good to see Jesse posting here again.

Lots of other folks have stepped up and contributed good info too.

---

Thanks - I was actually on travel for the last several days
with limited to no access to internet. In either case, it seems
that the thread is well in control! I may try to build some FAQ
from the darkest depths of this thread. I'll see if somehow the
fine points can be captured in a good bit less than the 800 posts
that are comprised.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 01:04 PM               

I am frustrated. Plainly frustrated.

I keep hitting levels and they are hard to break through. I was on the treadmill for two weeks, 0% incline, just staying at Maff. and that was a 12:15 pace, maintained for 1 1/2 hours.

I go outside and run, and my heart rate sky rockets. I can't seem to even get close to Maff. I know there are more inclines that I'm probably not aware of, but this level is getting to me; who is a Maffetone supporter.

This is the second time I have built my base up using the Maffetone Method, so I know it works. My earlier posts have that information.

I'm not sure what the differences are in what I'm doing this time around, but getting to a faster level is harder. I will have to change my goals as far as a spring marathon goes. However, my goal for a fall one will stay in my back pocket until I can get this Maffetone issue figured out.

All I want is a 9:00 min/pace. That's it! Not looking for anything else. We shall see what January brings. Four more weeks of this; and the last week of December, too.

I'm not gonna give up............

Have a Wonderful Holiday Everyone, and a Healthy Injury-Free NEW YEAR, too!!

Boston....
.

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 02:09 PM               

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 05:52 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Yeah, no doubt! Since I'm in cut-back mode right now, hardly running
at all, I don't have a whole lot new to post anyway. I'm just responding
to questions if I have something to contribute. This monstrous
thread is clearly developing a life of its own, which is great. I think it's
now Jimmy's turn to start the new one, as he has begun his basebuilding
for the next season and I believe his story will become the one of more
general interest because I think we'll see him follow the several weeks
of basebuilding with his nice multi-zone training approach. I think this
is the optimal way to go about pre-season and in-season training
(pre-season - build the base, strictly below MAF, in-season - multi-zone,
being sure to incorporate a significant % of mileage below MAF). For
me, this was more of a science experiment and since my goal was to
get from zero running off of the disabled list to a triple marathon in less
than 6 months, speed was the last thing on my mind. It just so happened
that the improvements I saw at low heart rates went well beyond anything
I ever expected, perhaps partially attributed to the extreme volume of
aerobic workouts I did (at the cost of having to start many days at
3 am). Whatever it was, I would never have been able to tolerate that
type of volume using my former training habits.

---

Nothing wrong with a long thread that I can see, Jesse. The way I see it, you can come in anywhere in the thread and get the gist of things.Keep this monster going!

I won't be starting a new thread any time soon, as I've been doing Maffetone training, and will continue through to at least March, then get multi-zone (just a few marathon race-pace tempo runs at 7:50 pace, a half marathon tune-up race, and a couple of LT runs at 80-90% MHR) in the final 6 weeks before the Boston Marathon. I am considering no higher heart rates at all until the marathon, IF I find my training paces have dropped considerably--just to see what happens.

In the meantime, I'm getting through my two-week "off-season" by reading books about ultra-running. I recommend this one to everyone:

Running Through The Wall:
Personal Encounters With The UltraMarathon
by Neal Jamison

It's full of well-written personal stories by these extreme athletes, who endure an amazing amount of pain as they run 100 miles at a shot. I'm finding that their experiences are woking on my psych in a very interesting way. Their accomplishments are pointing me toward a greater human potential that is within each of us. I may never do an ultramarathon, but I'm beginning to believe that I can stretch my limits even further, mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Merry Christmas!

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 06:14 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Nothing wrong with a long thread that I can see, Jesse. The way I see it, you can come in anywhere in the thread and get the gist of things.Keep this monster going!

---

All right, Jimmy, message received. Focus will be on the FAQ.
However, you need to rhythmically post your progress as always!

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 07:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Behnke:
......... For those talking about "sort of " doing it or bumping up pace " slightly " why not just stay strict? Especially if you don't have any all important races in the near term?

---

Nice results. Congrats.

I'd agree that staying strict is the best approach if you buy into the general low HR concept discussed on this thread and the Maffetone approach specifically.

As someone on this thread who may have been construed to be "sort of" doing Maffetone, my position is if you pick a training strategy (Maffetone, Daniel's or whoever) you need to stick with it as strict as possible/practical for at least a couple of months to see whether it's working for you.

As far as I can see, an individual doesn't really need to buy the entirety of the Maffetone approach, but simply accept the underlying physiological justification for low HR training during a base building period. I haven't seen anyone on this thread who claims to be STRICTLY following his approach (e.g. no weights, no races, etc.), but folks here do seem to have positive results (e.g. leitnerj) with the general concept fof keeping the HR down.

My running earlier this year was definitely not Maffetone and I was not even thinking about using his approach (didn't really buy that his formula was anymore "scientific" than 220-age). Anyway, over the last couple of months I did find myself easing into exclusively training at lower HR. I was able to do it without having a frustratingly high amount of walking in my runs. Now I can say I am strictly doing Maffetone, where MAF HR is a strict upper limit. Although my adoption of this approach is more a byproduct of targeting my runs to avg. 70% maxHR, which for me happens to be MAF-5. I've got the luxury of time to base build at least the next 5-6months or until I plateau, whichever comes sooner. For me it is an experiment (like jjwaverly42) and I can only gain from the experience, even if I don't get significantly faster at lowHR.

I'm seeing some early results and hopefully that will continue.

good luck to all

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 07:27 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by junkmiles:

As someone on this thread who may have been construed to be "sort of" doing Maffetone, my position is if you pick a training strategy (Maffetone, Daniel's or whoever) you need to stick with it as strict as possible/practical for at least a couple of months to see whether it's working for you.

As far as I can see, an individual doesn't really need to buy the entirety of the Maffetone approach, but simply accept the underlying physiological justification for low HR training during a base building period. I haven't seen anyone on this thread who claims to be STRICTLY following his approach (e.g. no weights, no races, etc.), but folks here do seem to have positive results (e.g. leitnerj) with the general concept fof keeping the HR down.

---

I think these two points, while seeming somewhat contradictory
are key. IMHO, the biggest issue here is low heart rate - slow
twitch muscle fibers and fat for fuel. I believe the "no carbs
right before running" factors into that. Each time your heart rate
goes above, you negate some of the training effect. Run a
lot above and you will lose your base (for anyone that graphed my
MAF treadmill pace since May, if you do it again, you can see how
much my MAF pace fell off since my last marathon). Just as my
results were validating the positives, the aftermath has validated
the negatives. Weightlifting, I'm not giving up. However, I don't do
any lower body workouts. My legs get too big and I believe the cycling
I do easily takes care of leg strengthening and improves my aerobic
conditioning to boot. For those of you trying this form of training that
want to spend a lot of time doing leg weight workouts, I recommend
you try cycling instead. I'm certainly not going to buy crappy shoes at walmart either.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 08:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
I think these two points, while seeming somewhat contradictory
are key. IMHO, the biggest issue here is low heart rate - slow
twitch muscle fibers and fat for fuel. ..........

---

Not sure I agree that the points are contradictory, if taken as follows:

Point 1 - Whatever training regimen you choose you need to stick with it for a couple of months to really know whether it is working for you or not.

Point 2 - STRICT on this thread, seemed to me at least, to be keep your HR below your MAF HR on all your runs regardless of conditions. Much of the other stuff he proposes was not really a factor. To the best of my knowledge no one here has a coach, but if they did you can be sure the coach would be tailoring his training regimen to the needs and abilities of each runner. As individuals we have to do that for ourselves, but whatever we choose we need to give it time to work.

On a side note:
I'd like to add that the results you've shared here and jjwaverly42's experience both played a large part in my decision to push my training HR down. You both seemed (to me) to be individuals trying to do your best with your running; and you've both shown excellent results with your commitment to your respective approaches. You've inspired a regular guy to just try and do his best as a runner for no other reason than he can.

thanks

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 08:43 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by junkmiles:
Not sure I agree that the points are contradictory, if taken as follows:

On a side note:
I'd like to add that the results you've shared here and jjwaverly42's experience both played a large part in my decision to push my training HR down. You both seemed (to me) to be individuals trying to do your best with your running; and you've both shown excellent results with your commitment to your respective approaches. You've inspired a regular guy to just try and do his best as a runner for no other reason than he can.

thanks

---

right - just "seemingly contradictory" at first glance ...

And, I think the reason we've inspired a regular guy (as well as
a few other regular guys and women) is because it's clear that we're just
regular guys putting out our results as honestly as we can. No
superstars here (although I have been called a wacko). Welcome
to the club!

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Dec-23-2005 11:31 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Boston- do you think you might be on a plateau? Maybe it's
time. Perhaps you've got to start adding one or two more intense
runs each week. Hill intervals. Tempo run. Perhaps a fast finish
for the last 3 or 4 miles of your long runs. If you're staying strictly
low (which I know you are) and things aren't improving, that's the
likely scenario given that you've been doing this for a while. Of
course, you do want to make sure that you've got all injuries
and pains out of your system before jumping into that mode.

---

Hello, Jesse!

I was kinda thinking the same, but wanted you or someone to chime in and see if they were thinking the same thing.

When I did Maffetone the first time, after several months, I ran the last 4 miles nearly 8-10 beats above Maff. I think it is time to incorporate this, again... maybe 2-3 times a week.

I've noticed a drop in appetite, and weight, along with the plateau. Wine even turns me off lately! AND, I always had a glass of red in the evening!

Heck, I can't argue with that one, right? I feel good, real good lately infact.

Well, I'll try the above, and see how it goes in the next few weeks. I can't complain; I'm injury free and feeling so well. That's a gift, a real good gift!!!

Someday, we should sign up for the same marathon, as well as others on the this huge post and meet....it would be so much fun to put a name to a face!!

Boston~

IP: Logged

posted Dec-24-2005 09:53 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
right - just "seemingly contradictory" at first glance ...
No
superstars here (although I have been called a wacko). Welcome
to the club!

---

Oh...I thought I was a superstar...oh, well..but John Lennon said in his song Instant Karma:

"Who on earth d'you think you are,
A superstar?
Well, right you are."

So, thought...I was. John knows one when he sees one. And he could see everyone.

Oh, well...

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Dec-24-2005 10:38 AM               

I don't even mind including myself in this remark

Anybody taking the time and effort to exercise with a committment to improving health, performance, or simply enjoyment is a Superstar!

Surely those who may run a 10 minute mile are working twice as long as those who may run a 5 minute mile..anybody agree...Superstar! (This comment is not intended to take away from the speedsters, but rather to justy acknowledge the mid-packers and those who don't even race)

We get out year round in the heat, snow ice, lovely spring and fall weather, and persevere......Superstar anybody?

How many of us get up early or run late in the evening to minimize the impact on family and work time. Superstar!

How about Jesse, Jimmy, and many others for taking the time to patiently post and answer all these questions. Jesse expecially for not jumping at the antagnostic bait that pops up occasionally. Superstars in my book.

Thanks to all for participating and inspiring me.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, and God Bless ya all!
Karen

IP: Logged