posted Jan-10-2006 12:02 PM            

I've been doing all of my runs at MAF-15. I do about half of my running on a treadmill, and I'm usually at least a minute/mile slower on it. So over the last 4 weeks my weekly average pace has gone up and down a bit. I think on average, I'm about 1:30/mile faster on the treadmill over the 4 weeks (12:45 - 11:15), and :20/mile faster outside (10:45 - 10:20). My average weekly HR has gone down (137, 136, 136, 134) over this time, and when I look at how much time I spend in each HR zone, I'm spending more and more time in the lower zones each week. So I think I'm generally headed in the right direction.

I've been able to run more than normal; I've been over 5 hours each week which puts me at 28-32 miles, and I've been running 6-7 days per week. I feel good and have even done a few doubles for the first time with no problems. Starting today I am bumping all runs to MAF-10.

A few other observations:

* I'm surprised to be faster outside than on the treadmill at 0% incline. I attribute it to the cool temps, but it's entirely possible my treadmill is not calibrated properly.

* I hate getting passed by everyone!

* I need to start adding more variety to my routes - I run the same loops every day. I think more hills are necessary. I'm sure I'm slowing my progress by not having a true long run, but I can't fit more than 75-90 minutes into my schedule. Oh well - I'm not training for a marathon.

* My monitor sucks. I use the Garmin 301, and the HR jumps around all the time. It'll jump from a steady 138 into the 150s, and if I slow down just a bit, it will drop to the high 120s. I'm sure it's somewhere in the middle the whole time, but it makes it very difficult to stay on pace when it jumps around so much. It will also spike into the 200s a couple of times per run. Other days it will read perfectly, so you can't trust the da*n thing. Frustrating.

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 02:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by portlander:
* My monitor sucks. I use the Garmin 301, and the HR jumps around all the time. It'll jump from a steady 138 into the 150s, and if I slow down just a bit, it will drop to the high 120s. I'm sure it's somewhere in the middle the whole time, but it makes it very difficult to stay on pace when it jumps around so much. It will also spike into the 200s a couple of times per run. Other days it will read perfectly, so you can't trust the da*n thing. Frustrating.

---

I also use a 301. I suggest you try an electrode gel on the sensors. I use buh-bump, and it makes a marked difference.

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 06:21 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by msteed:
I also use a 301. I suggest you try an electrode gel on the sensors. I use buh-bump, and it makes a marked difference.

---

I second that motion. Makes a major difference. Sometimes
between completely working and completely not working.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 06:50 PM            

I am hoping this is just because my legs and heart are not used to going at this pace. But my perception was that this was a fairly hard effort, and that I must have been over my AT, regardless of what the HRM said.

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 07:00 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by portlander:
It's been a month, time to post my progress. I don't have my log handy, so I can't put all the numbers in this post.

I've been doing all of my runs at MAF-15. I do about half of my running on a treadmill, and I'm usually at least a minute/mile slower on it. So over the last 4 weeks my weekly average pace has gone up and down a bit. I think on average, I'm about 1:30/mile faster on the treadmill over the 4 weeks (12:45 - 11:15), and :20/mile faster outside (10:45 - 10:20). My average weekly HR has gone down (137, 136, 136, 134) over this time, and when I look at how much time I spend in each HR zone, I'm spending more and more time in the lower zones each week. So I think I'm generally headed in the right direction.

I've been able to run more than normal; I've been over 5 hours each week which puts me at 28-32 miles, and I've been running 6-7 days per week. I feel good and have even done a few doubles for the first time with no problems. Starting today I am bumping all runs to MAF-10.

A few other observations:

* I'm surprised to be faster outside than on the treadmill at 0% incline. I attribute it to the cool temps, but it's entirely possible my treadmill is not calibrated properly.

* I hate getting passed by everyone!

* I need to start adding more variety to my routes - I run the same loops every day. I think more hills are necessary. I'm sure I'm slowing my progress by not having a true long run, but I can't fit more than 75-90 minutes into my schedule. Oh well - I'm not training for a marathon.

---

You've really got things down and you're definitely going in the
right direction. I think you'll be thrilled when you start passing
all the folks that are passing you now, especially the ones that
you pass in the next race! I don't think you would "undo" anything
that you've accomplished if you were to work in a couple of runs
per week at MAF-5 - MAF (but I certainly wouldn't want to spoil
your current approach for base building).

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 07:43 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by portlander:
Follow up to earlier update. Today's run outside at 143bpm was so HARD. Over the last month I have been staying under 138 (MAF-15), and last week my avg HR was 134. After a slow mile warmup I tried to stay at ~143bpm (MAF-10). I felt like I was really working hard, my breathing was heavy, my legs were tired. I think I went well over 143 several times during the run, but the overall average was 140bpm. The good news is that I was about :40/mile faster than my outdoor pace over the last week and about 1:30 faster than TM pace.

I am hoping this is just because my legs and heart are not used to going at this pace. But my perception was that this was a fairly hard effort, and that I must have been over my AT, regardless of what the HRM said.

---

Sounds like a good thing. There's a point where everything
starts to "reverse." Instead of always feeling like you're going
too slowly, you feel like you're too fast. I'm not sure if you've hit
that point or not and there may be a subtle difference since you've been
targeting "really low" heart rates. I know that I've always had a
"good feeling" about a pace of about 8:20/mile. Before doing this
stuff, that pace was at a very high heart rate. When I hit that point
at MAF HR, it was the best feeling in the world. Well, guess what -
it wasn't long after that before I moved into the 7s, peaking out at
around 7:15-7:20 for my fastest miles on the treadmill. Although
I had run faster than this in short races through 10ks, it didn't
feel comfortable in training. It was hard work. I didn't like it. I now had to
change my mentality to "oh, no, you're not going fast enough -
pick it up to get that heart rate up." Believe me, that's a good thing.
While it may be a sign that you haven't done any "hard" running
recently, it's also a sign that the aerobic fitness is kicking in and
you now "know" how to run aerobically. It's a lot easier now to
push yourself to get that heart rate up to MAF than it was to
try to keep it down. And that push is what's really going to help
you in the marathon. Mile 20 - no longer will you have the problem
that your carbs are about depleted. No longer will you be running
out of aerobic capacity (heart rate screaming). Now it's just plain
ol' fatigue. The first two you have little to no control over. No
carbs - too bad. No heart rate left - too bad. Fatigue - ah, yes,
just dig deep inside yourself and you can take care of that one.
If you're wearing the HRM in the race, you're looking down and saying
"jeez- why can't I get it over 150???" But you'll find a way.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 09:01 PM            

Anyway, I am going to keep working at 143 for now and see how it goes. One run is certainly too early to tell!

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 09:15 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 09:22 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by portlander:
Thanks Jesse - I hope you're right. This might sound crazy, but I have a concern that I'm one of those really low max-HR people. I haven't seen my monitor go above 175 (I'm 32) for any sustained time - even in the 2 5ks that I wore it. I never bothered to do a max test when I first got it, because I wasn't basing training on HR.

Anyway, I am going to keep working at 143 for now and see how it goes. One run is certainly too early to tell!

---

If you've been keeping 15 under for a while, you should easily
compensate for a potentially low HRmax. You're definitely right though-
you don't want to make too many judgments too quickly from a few results.
You've got to look at the big picture over time.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 09:29 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by portlander:
Thanks Jesse - I hope you're right. This might sound crazy, but I have a concern that I'm one of those really low max-HR people. I haven't seen my monitor go above 175 (I'm 32) for any sustained time - even in the 2 5ks that I wore it. I never bothered to do a max test when I first got it, because I wasn't basing training on HR.

Anyway, I am going to keep working at 143 for now and see how it goes. One run is certainly too early to tell!

---

I just went back and read Hadd's article and it says that if HRMax
is around 173 (not sure where that specific # came from), then
training heart rate should be 125 or below. Ouch. See where you
are in a few weeks. If progress is strong, keep going. If stagnant,
you may either want to determine your max or try the 125 target
(by then it may not be too bad).

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 11:17 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.

---

Jesse's experience illustrates the exact adaptation that you are trying for with aerobic training: increased stroke volume. RHR goes down with increased aerobic fitness because the heart pumps more blood/oxygen per stroke and so has to beat less per minute.

Your %HRR will go up in absolute terms with higher RHR.
5bpm difference in RHR accounts for about 2bpm in HRR target at the low end (60-75% range).

For maxHR185 and RHR of 70:
60%HRR would be about 139 (75% maxHR).

For maxHR 185 and RHR 45:
60%HRR would be about 129 (70% maxHR).

Also, I believe VO2max workouts will also improve stroke volume, but I could be mistaken on that.

--jm

IP: Logged

posted Jan-10-2006 11:29 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
I second that motion. Makes a major difference. Sometimes between completely working and completely not working.

---

I use liquid dish soap or hand lotion and works pretty well (and is cheap).

------------------
Me ~~~ Find a Race
Base Building Graph ~~ My Log

IP: Logged

posted Jan-11-2006 06:06 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Yeah, I do know what you mean. This is more of a forum. We've
been down that path before and never could figure out how to
make it one. The length is out of control and who the heck
can jump in new and catch up on everything. Hopefully I'll
get an FAQ done soon that will at least start to simplify things.

---

Well I managed to read all 42 pages over the Chirstmas hols, what with all the links etc it took some doing, but was very interesting. Ordered the book "The Maffetone Method" and found very little new in it!!

Those that what to read it all can, others will jump in with a question, some will skim read. Jesse, your 'blog' was probably the best read, and others who have followed...

I began MAF at the end of November and am now finally seeing the improvements. I have a 1/2M planned in March, so will know for real then.

ukboy
ps Jesse, I did finally get my login to work!

IP: Logged

posted Jan-11-2006 06:56 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by uk boy:
Well I managed to read all 42 pages over the Chirstmas hols, what with all the links etc it took some doing, but was very interesting. Ordered the book "The Maffetone Method" and found very little new in it!!

Those that what to read it all can, others will jump in with a question, some will skim read. Jesse, your 'blog' was probably the best read, and others who have followed...

I began MAF at the end of November and am now finally seeing the improvements. I have a 1/2M planned in March, so will know for real then.

ukboy
ps Jesse, I did finally get my login to work!

---

Excellent - glad you were finally able to get your account to work!
Good luck in your half preps - glad the progress is starting to appear.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-11-2006 10:00 PM            

Here’s my story. After getting a heart rate monitor, I started training a few weeks ago, first for 10 days at MAF +5 (using Mark Allen’s criteria) then, after reading the importance of being conservative, at MAF (136) for another 10 days. I run the same route two or three times a week and log my times, so I couldn’t help noticing that I had actually gotten consistently slower (approx. 30 sec/m) the first ten days at MAF+5 and then gradually slower still the next ten days (from 10:30 to 11:00 min pace) while running at MAF. Is this normal?

I have run about three years at @15 mpw and the past few weeks have increased my mileage to nearly 25 mpw with time spent running up from less than 2 hours a week to over 4 hours. The pace is slow, but maybe the extra mileage has tired me more than I realize? Even though I used to run normally about 3 miles at 7:30 pace, I now walk a lot some days--whenever my monitor starts beeping--especially up hills. I figured I was a good candidate for improvement since I probably have never run much below AT and because I have never built a base. I have only raced a few races but ran my last race, a 5K in 20:14, a couple years ago and can run a sub 6 min. mile. I thought I was in good shape for an old guy (44 years-old) until I started this MAF wogging.

Do I need to change anything? How much might I slow down before seeing improvements? Thanks for the help.

IP: Logged

posted Jan-11-2006 10:21 PM               

I have run about three years at @15 mpw and the past few weeks have increased my mileage to nearly 25 mpw with time spent running up from less than 2 hours a week to over 4 hours. The pace is slow, but maybe the extra mileage has tired me more than I realize? Even though I used to run normally about 3 miles at 7:30 pace, I now walk a lot some days--whenever my monitor starts beeping--especially up hills. I figured I was a good candidate for improvement since I probably have never run much below AT and because I have never built a base. I have only raced a few races but ran my last race, a 5K in 20:14, a couple years ago and can run a sub 6 min. mile. I thought I was in good shape for an old guy (44 years-old) until I started this MAF wogging.

Do I need to change anything? How much might I slow down before seeing improvements? Thanks for the help
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would not worry about things too much given that you have only been at this a few weeks. I've been doing this (Low HR Training) for about 6 weeks and have noticed that things can fluctuate fairly dramatically on a day by day basis - and that's primarily using a treadmill. Since you seem to run your routes outside, you have a bunch of other variables (temperature, humidity, wind) to worry about in addition to how your body is feeling. Since you also went from MAF+5 to MAF, I would expect you to get a bit slower as you lowered your target HR.

In my training, I noticed that I also got a little bit slower for the first few weeks before I stabilized. I would imagine that you should try not to measure progress on a day to day basis - it will drive you crazy. Put the log sheets away and give it a good 8 to 10 weeks before you make any judgements.

Like you, I have been able to dramatically increase my mileage using this training (up to 50M+ per week). Even if you decide to go to a slightly different plan (like Parker's multi zone training), the strong base building should help out.

Good luck

IP: Logged

posted Jan-11-2006 10:23 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by GForce1:
Thanks, everyone, for this great board. I’ve read the 260,000 plus words, some of them twice, and can’t believe all the information now crammed in my head. Where was that well-done FAQ section a few weeks ago when I began reading this tome!

Here’s my story. After getting a heart rate monitor, I started training a few weeks ago, first for 10 days at MAF +5 (using Mark Allen’s criteria) then, after reading the importance of being conservative, at MAF (136) for another 10 days. I run the same route two or three times a week and log my times, so I couldn’t help noticing that I had actually gotten consistently slower (approx. 30 sec/m) the first ten days at MAF+5 and then gradually slower still the next ten days (from 10:30 to 11:00 min pace) while running at MAF. Is this normal?

I have run about three years at @15 mpw and the past few weeks have increased my mileage to nearly 25 mpw with time spent running up from less than 2 hours a week to over 4 hours. The pace is slow, but maybe the extra mileage has tired me more than I realize? Even though I used to run normally about 3 miles at 7:30 pace, I now walk a lot some days--whenever my monitor starts beeping--especially up hills. I figured I was a good candidate for improvement since I probably have never run much below AT and because I have never built a base. I have only raced a few races but ran my last race, a 5K in 20:14, a couple years ago and can run a sub 6 min. mile. I thought I was in good shape for an old guy (44 years-old) until I started this MAF wogging.

Do I need to change anything? How much might I slow down before seeing improvements? Thanks for the help.

---

Don't take any of this to mean that you're in "bad" shape, especially
if you can run a 20:14 5k, even if you were 20 years younger! Your
aerobic conditioning may be poor to fair, but that's a different story.
I don't think you should steadily be getting slower, at least not if
you're at the right heart rate. I don't think it's because you're more
tired either. Try going to MAF-5 and stick with it for 3 weeks and
see what happens. That would be my suggestion, anyway, for
what it's worth. For some reason, there also seem to be progress
issues with always running the same distance, over and over again,
so be sure to mix things up a bit. While the treadmill can be
unbearable, it is good for equalizing all environmental factors,
so if you can access one, you might try that for a few weeks.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-12-2006 07:51 PM               

Ok, seems to work now!
------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

[This message has been edited by leitnerj (edited Jan-12-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Jan-12-2006 08:16 PM            

Was wondering what kind of improvement would be reasonable over a 3 week period. 20 seconds per mile? More, less?

Not sure what to expect and I know it will vary with each person and perhaps over an extended period of time as well.

Thanks

Cash.

IP: Logged

posted Jan-12-2006 08:30 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cashmason:
I had that problem yesterday Jesse. Seems to be better today.

Was wondering what kind of improvement would be reasonable over a 3 week period. 20 seconds per mile? More, less?

Not sure what to expect and I know it will vary with each person and perhaps over an extended period of time as well.

Thanks

Cash.

---

It can be all over the place, even for the same person. I can sit here
and talk about it, but everything's better by example than by my
long-windedness. Click on the FAQ link then scroll down and look
at my 2005 pace trend chart, which shows my average weekly pace
on treadmill runs (doesn't show my fastest pace, just avg over the
week). You'll notice periods of very little improvement and even
some periods where it worsened, then you'll see periods of almost
drastic improvement. You can also play around with all kinds of
plots from my running log to see trends.

Or, you can have fun with this one. You can track my base
"rebuilding" starting around December 5 or so. Plot my daily
pace on treadmill runs from December 5 until today. You should
keep in mind that there's a sketchy block in December where I
cut running way back and, henceforth, got sick, so things really
fell apart. So now I'm building back again and it is slow moving!
I'm back to the old exercise of patience. And, to make everyone
feel better - even I still question on a daily basis whether it's
going to work! Fortunately, I know the answer.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Jan-13-2006 06:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cashmason:
I had that problem yesterday Jesse. Seems to be better today.

Was wondering what kind of improvement would be reasonable over a 3 week period. 20 seconds per mile? More, less?

Not sure what to expect and I know it will vary with each person and perhaps over an extended period of time as well.

Thanks

Cash.

---

I think 3 weeks may be a bit short to account for real improvements, especially if you are basing your assessment on a MAF test every 3 weeks. If you are going to track that often then I think you are better off tracking pace as a weekly average and comparing that over time as Jesse did. I find if I just use the MAF test it depends on whether or not I have a good day.

In my case I log data on every run and prefer to track the trend (no less than week over week). However, it does take some discipline to not let the daily fluctuations bother you ( I often fail at this aspect).

I also purposely plan on some slower days so it softens the psychological blow. That is, I tend to do my short easy runs about 20-40s slower than my medium long runs. Even on my long runs I'll throw in a few miles of running at the upper end of my target range. On the recovery runs (short-easy) I'll target an avg HR in the MAF-10 to MAF-5 range. On the medium & long runs, I'll target MAF-5 and let it drift up to MAF depending on circumstances. Sort of a multizone HR approach within the MAF guidelines. This approach also forces me to not push the pace every run. I usually try pushing the pace when it stabilizes (steady HR for 1 hour) or I notice a HR drop (relative to pace) for at least 2 runs in a given week.

As a point of reference over the last 4 weeks of training I've had an absolute pace gain (slowest run to fastest run) of about 1:15 and a weekly avg gain (1st avg week to last avg week) of about 45sec. Note this trend is over 6 calender weeks, but I lost 2 weeks due to being sick over the holidays. Within a given week there were daily fluctuations of 10-20s, with one day 45s slower than the fastest (in a single week). That big gap may be due to the fact that I started including my warmup miles in my computation (makes the avg pace suck, but I'm focused on the trend which is decidedly downward).

To help with the mental discipline I also use varying criteria to measure my progress:

1. pace improvement (the gold standard)
2. stable HR over 1hr, plus subjective assessment of run
3. lower HR for a given pace (even if slower).

This approach can be demoralizing if you are used to running faster all the time. I found (find) it tough, but I'm trusting in the success of the other folks on this board and devising my own success criteria to get through the slow period.

--jm

IP: Logged

posted Jan-13-2006 08:10 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Jan-14-2006 12:56 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cashmason:

Was wondering what kind of improvement would be reasonable over a 3 week period. 20 seconds per mile? More, less?

Not sure what to expect and I know it will vary with each person and perhaps over an extended period of time as well.

Thanks

Cash.

---

12/23/05 12:15/147, 13:25/147, 14:43/146
01/14/06 11:39/146, 12:43/147, 13:21/147

I'm really happy with the results sofar and I don't expect results to continue improving at this pace.

Additionally, I'm not just running because I can't run enough at MAF to get the job done without causing too much stress on my legs. So I've added swimming and riding the exercycle at the gym to my routine. I hope to be up to 25 mpw running by the end of the month though.

------------------
Me

My Log

IP: Logged

posted Jan-14-2006 03:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Run Page Run:

....What do y'all think? Thanks, Page

---

You may be spending more time than you think outside your target zone. With an avg HR within 1-2 beats of MAF HR you may be running at higher HR for a non-trivial portion of your run. Remember your MAF HR is supposed to be your upper limit, not necessarily an average for a given run. Maybe you should try to maintain a lower avg HR. Don't sweat the pace and don't let it rise above your target.

Could be other issues, but without more info that is hard to evaluate. Worse case is your body isn't responding to this type of training and you'll have to reevaluate your approach.

--jm

IP: Logged

posted Jan-15-2006 10:43 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Run Page Run:
Hey everybody, I have been running with a hrm and at a maff of 130 since 11/10/05 and I really haven't seen much improvment in my pace, but I can run more often. On that first run i ran six miles at an avg. pace of 12.20 and an avg hr of 129. On 12/10/05, i ran five miles with an avg pace of 12.00 and an avg hr of 132. Then on 1/5/06 i ran 57 mins at our local track at an avg pace of 14.00 and a hr avg of 129. Ok I have to back up a couple days...on 1/3/06, i ran six miles....half on dirt roads and half trails....for 82 mins. avg pace 13.00 min...and avg hr 129. , 1/2/06 i ran 87 mins., six miles at an avg pace.13.36 and avg hr 129. and on 1/10/06 ran 4.0 miles at 12.22 pace and avg hr 129. Sorry about the skipping around and i ran more days than what i wrote here but just threw these in. It seems like i'm going @ss backwards instead of making gains to me....What do y'all think? Thanks, Page

---

Hi Page-

First, I do agree with jm's response - in particular it's really hard to
tell whether you are consistently under the target heart rate from
what you've provided. Also, it's not clear from what you've presented
that everything has been fully equalized in terms of temps, terrain,
etc. The only way to really judge whether you are making progress
is to make sure you are staying strictly below MAF (and for some,
it may be necessary to go down by 5 beats or so if the aerobic system
has only really been developed in a very minimal sense). If you can't
do it on a treadmill, you need to hit a track or other true, dead flat
course in virtually identical conditions each time, and you'll need to
log the pace per mile and average heart
rate (or overall heart rate profile) over each mile, to see whether
you're low at first and climbing rapidly and, say, your first mile or
two are improving, but the overall average is not, and so forth. Of
course, the ultimate test is in a race, comparing to how you did to
a previous year in the same race, same conditions, but that's not
going to give you a relatively short-term progress report.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged