posted Aug-21-2005 06:05 PM            

When I use that formula (180-53=127) and then add 5, I get 132 for target HR ...( as per Maffetone article <http://www.rrca.org/publicat/slowdown.html> )

Using 132 as target HR, I find that I am running at about my regular training pace (9-9.5 mm) for longish runs (8-12 mile) not painfully slow .... apparently a different experience from most.

1. Does this indicate that maybe I've got a good aerobic base already, or that I'm somehow just an anomaly or that the formula doesn't work for everyone?

2. If this means that I have a good aerobic base, should I start doing some more strenuous work-outs to get faster (I'd like to be able to comfortably run a sub-4 hr marathon a year from now), or just keep running at my Max Aerobic HR?

I'm 53, been running for 2 years and have been doing 35-45 per week this summer, have resting HR of about 45. I mostly run at 9-9.5 mm, no real speed work.

IP: Logged

posted Aug-21-2005 08:00 PM               

It sounds like you do have a good aerobic base, but the best way
for you to tell if you're ready to move out of the MAF zone is by
looking at your race times, if you have any. Have you done any
1M, 5k, 10k, or longer races? We can look at how your times
project out and that will be a good indicator. It is definitely not
an indicator that you are an anomaly! There's no rule that says
that starting to run at low heart rates will always be painfully slow; it
just happens a lot of the time because most people that start on
this type of training recognize that they've never spent any time
running at a truly low level of effort. Take it as a good thing! It
may also be an indicator that you really don't need a heart rate
monitor to train.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-22-2005 08:00 AM               

Why would a one minute rest have this much effect?

IP: Logged

posted Aug-22-2005 06:42 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nathan Arizona:
Can any of you HR experts explain the following: On Saturday, I was doing a 70% HR run (9 mi.) on the treadmill at the Y. I was settled in at about 146 bpm at 6.8 mph on the treadmill. I had tweaked it up to 6.9 a time or two but the rate would creep to 148, so 6.8 seemed to be the "sweet spot." At 1 hour the treadmill cut off automatically, it couldn't have taken more than a minute for me to reset it. After the reset, my heartrate stayed under 140, so I bumped up the pace. I finished the run (last 2 mi.) at around 7.3 mph.

Why would a one minute rest have this much effect?

---

You recover quickly! I think you've got a good race strategy.
There are always some mysterious things that happen with heart
rate, that's a certainty!

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 07:45 AM               

I decided to reread Maffetone. I read it two years ago when I first started building a base, and then marathon training.

I'm reading some things that are reminding me of what I'm doing since I'm back to base building after recovering from ITB.

First, I *forgot* that your max in Maffetone is the highest HR number to go to....and that you are suppose to stay under that as low as 10 beats. Meaning, my 180-age is 134.....so, my zone should be set at 124-134. I did add (mentally that is) 5 beats to that higher number, because I don't have an injury right now. However, actually, I'm not suppose to do that! I was to subtract 5 for having an injury in the past year! But, for right now, I'm *cheating* a tad. I'm already into this over 6 weeks, and will just try to stay under a bit more.

I like reading the case studies Maffetone puts the through the book when stating how his method works. It is clear, for me, that I will have to run like this for at least 6 months. Some people make progress faster and he suggests 3-4 months.

It's a good book just to have a different view of running if your not *into* this method. For some, it may be the turning point to try something new. I have all the other books as well: Jeff Galloway, Pfitzinger, Parker, Higdon, Edwards...........next to Maffetone, I like Parker's!! Great book to read, and makes so much sense, too!

Something also that has happened is since I have a sinus infection my HR has gone up. I noticed it last week at the very beginning of the infection coming on. As the week went, the HR went up, and up. As of Sunday, it was 10-12 beats higher and I just couldn't bring it down. I felt my breating and effort was the same as normal, but the HR was up in 150's!! Maffetone talks about this in his book too!! You can tell when something isn't right just by your HR. Now that I'm on an antibiotic, it will be interesting to see how long it takes to come back to normal when I run.

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 02:13 PM               

Should I try "running" at my MAF say today, and tomorrow just walk the 3 miles on the TM? Would running at a 75%MaxHRR and then walking the next day @ 65% MaxHRR do the trick (like jimwaverly did)? This is really aggravating and getting me down. I DO want this to work. I'm just stymied as to what to do. Thank you all for any comments.

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 03:13 PM               

I would like to experiment with Maffetone's system, though it would put me at a heart rate which I currently can't maintain while running, even slowly (142)

I have been told by local runners that HR training where we live is tricky, because the altitude makes it more difficult to maintain the "recommended" rates (we run at 7000-8000 ft).

Have any of you ever seen any resources/references on how to adjust Maffetone's numbers for altitude? Do we get an extra 5 beats up here, or anything like that? Or do we just suck it up and try to get down to that HR, no adjustment allowed?

Thanks --
pug

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 03:24 PM               

On the other, having your HR go up within a 1/4 mile....did you start too fast? Coffee, andy meds before hand, was the temp./humidity higher? Lots of things can effect your HR. Try and stick with it. I know your frustration only so well!!

When I first did this nearly 2 years ago, it was grueling. Truly, I never thought it was going to work. I trudged along like all of you just beginning. Remember, you have start somewhere. I walked in the beginning, too....a lot up hills. It's had to *jog* a 14 min. pace!!! TRY to keep things in perspective. When someone says they had progress in two weeks, yours might be 3 or even 4. But when it starts, it keeps going. Sometimes, you may even a plateau, but that usually happens months into the program.

Did you get the book yet?. It's a great resource. I mentioned earlier that I am reading it for the 2nd time, and I have referred to many, many times.

Hang in there.

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 05:05 PM               

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 07:49 PM               

{I was practically walking at first, too. I felt like I was wasting my time....but I called my friend who recommended it, and she just told me to keep going....I'm glad I did! Before I knew it, I had to run fast, downhills, just to keep my HR from dropping drastically!}

Believe me, I know it is frustrating. I've been exactly where you are. If you have never build a base, beginning to develop one means sticking with it, no matter what your HR is.

Do you have anything to lose by trying it? If anything, you'll be able to report back on this thread how it has worked for you and inspire others.

Get the book and read it. (I forget if you said you already have it, and if you do, sorry for saying it again!!)

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 09:55 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by bluecru:
Hi! I've been extremely frustrated of late. I did a MAF run last week 3 miles @3.7 mph on the TM. I posted it somewhere here. My MAF is 128. I was able to keep the MAF at or below 130. The next day I did the same thing and my MAF was over 135 within 1/4 mile. Same conditions as the day before.

Should I try "running" at my MAF say today, and tomorrow just walk the 3 miles on the TM? Would running at a 75%MaxHRR and then walking the next day @ 65% MaxHRR do the trick (like jimwaverly did)? This is really aggravating and getting me down. I DO want this to work. I'm just stymied as to what to do. Thank you all for any comments.

---

Hi bluecru. When you did the "next day" run above, are you saying
it was also on the treadmill? Did you happen to check your rest
heart rate each day? Did you warm up (even more) slowly for a
a few minutes before starting to track things? I'm pretty sure I
recall when Jimmy (jjwaverly) first started up, he followed Hadd's
approach of staying exclusively below 70% HRmax, but he can
confirm or deny that. If you were to start running regularly at
75%max HRR (which is a high level of effort) that will not work
your aerobic system and for a new runner it will be mostly
anaerobic. However, all that means is that you won't see the
type of training effect indicated by Maffetone's program. It doesn't
mean that's the "wrong" way to run or that you won't see improvement.
There is one thing absolutely for sure - it will not benefit you whatsoever
to analyze your Maffetone progress on a daily basis, especially
when you are just starting out. Things will go up and down for
a bit and you can only really tell how things are going by watching
the trend over about 3 week periods, assuming you are are
remaining exclusively below the MAF. I might suggest that
at the moment, this approach may be frustrating you to the
point where you might want to table it until you have a strong
reason to do it. Of course, that's up to you. It's certainly not
worth it if it's likely to discourage you from running. Give Jimmy's
multi-zone training a try, or better yet, leave the heart rate monitor
behind for a few weeks, see what happens, and maybe pick it up
later.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-23-2005 10:06 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by puglogic:
Hi MAF'ers...looking for a resource, and I wonder if any of you have seen one.

I would like to experiment with Maffetone's system, though it would put me at a heart rate which I currently can't maintain while running, even slowly (142)

I have been told by local runners that HR training where we live is tricky, because the altitude makes it more difficult to maintain the "recommended" rates (we run at 7000-8000 ft).

Have any of you ever seen any resources/references on how to adjust Maffetone's numbers for altitude? Do we get an extra 5 beats up here, or anything like that? Or do we just suck it up and try to get down to that HR, no adjustment allowed?

Thanks --
pug

---

Hi pug- as boston mentioned, Maffetone does address the issue
of altitude, as well heat, humidity, hills, illness, overtraining,
blah, blah, blah, and the answer's always the same (unfortunately) -
slow it down and keep under MAF. Easier said than done, I know.
In fact, if you read Mark Allen - he says he tries to keep between
80 and 100% of MAF. 80% of MAF - at times very difficult to
walk at that heart rate. As a side note, if you do all of your running
at altitude and you have for quite a while, you will have acclimatized
for the most part and the altitude should not have too significant of
an effect. Nonetheless, you may be able to get some results by
spending several weeks at MAF+5 and then trying to work your
way down from there. The way to tell is by looking at how fast
your heart rate climbs. If you start at MAF+5 and run for around
5 miles, you're probably fine for the approach if your heart rate
doesn't rise by more than 1 or 2 beats over the duration for a
constant pace. If it rises a lot, then it's a sign that you're too high
and you'll want to try to cut it back. Good luck, whatever you
try.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-24-2005 07:33 AM               

Yes Jesse, the run was the day after the first run. As I recall all other conditions were the same. However, I did not do any type of warm up!! At 3.7 mph on the TM would a warm up consist of walking for 5 minutes or so? Didn't even enter my mind to do so at that low speed! No, I didn't check my heart rate either. I'm assuming I should have?

[QUOTE][b]There is one thing absolutely for sure - it will not benefit you whatsoever to analyze your Maffetone progress on a daily basis, especiallywhen you are just starting out.
[b][QUOTE]
I see your point here. However, I was just being mindful of the HR reading and got discuoraged because it went up so quickly.

What I would like to do is get to the point where Boston 124 is or was at. Use the MAF style of running and get to at 10:00 min/mile pace. I'd be satisfied with that. Being that a 5 or even a 4 mile run right now is a "long" run I want to build the miles and at the same time stay injury free. I'm willing to commit the time because looking at other posts I've never, ever had a "base" to speak of. Thanks for any feedback, you guys have been great so far!

[This message has been edited by bluecru (edited Aug-24-2005).]

IP: Logged

posted Aug-24-2005 06:29 PM               

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-24-2005 11:31 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 08:43 AM            

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 02:44 PM            

Did a 3.7 mile TM run using the MAF rate of 128. I noticed several things and have a couple of questions .I started @ 3.8 mph. Feeling pretty good. HR was low for the 1st mile (in the 110-115 range). I drank some but not enough I guess because by 2 miles the HR was 122 (thereabouts). By 2.4 miles it was around 129-130 and spiking to 132. I dropped the speed to 3.6. From there the rate stayed around 127-130. A bit over the MAF rate @ 130 but it always lowered itself after a minute or so. I finished pleasantly at 3.6 miles mph and a rate of 129. Funny, my rate went down at around 3.1 miles to 125. Stayed there for a bit but started to rise again to the 129-130 range right towards the end. In any case, a 3.7 mile run in 59:20. I'm pleased!

Regarding my pace/ distance:
1: Should I run the distance I did today for all my runs? (I've been doing only 3 miles to date). If not
then:
2: Should I do a shorter run ( say 2 or 2.5 miles) and kind of consider that an easy day? I'd consider that a "foundation run" ie. building off of the longer runs.
3: Should I stay at 3 miles for the runs or just run for an hour regardless of the speed?
4: I'm having trouble recording time/splits. I have a Forerunner 201. but I doubt it will pick up a signal in my basement. Anyonee have any ideas? Thanks as always!

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 08:58 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by reddiscoii:
Alright, Alright... You win Maffetone. The official training starts next week. I have also been focusing on increasing to 90 rpm. Unfortunately, this also pumps up my pulse. Do I let 90 go by the wayside for now, or do I get good at 90 first, then concentrate on my pulse? (Or do I stop over-thinking everything and just go run?)

---

What I have seen is that any time you try anything new, whatsoever,
it pushes heart rate up - increasing turnover rate, raising knees a bit
higher, minor stride adjustments, etc. Henceforth, you don't want to do
both at the same time. It's your choice which you might want to focus
on first. As far as increasing stride
rate - if you end up fixating on the 90, you likely will have a hard time
keeping your heart rate down as well, but I wouldn't discourage you
from experimenting.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 09:02 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by GrayBeard:
Hey folks. Been awhile since I posted. I haven't done much running of late due to family circumstances. So I hopped on the TM today and did a MAF run.

Did a 3.7 mile TM run using the MAF rate of 128. I noticed several things and have a couple of questions .I started @ 3.8 mph. Feeling pretty good. HR was low for the 1st mile (in the 110-115 range). I drank some but not enough I guess because by 2 miles the HR was 122 (thereabouts). By 2.4 miles it was around 129-130 and spiking to 132. I dropped the speed to 3.6. From there the rate stayed around 127-130. A bit over the MAF rate @ 130 but it always lowered itself after a minute or so. I finished pleasantly at 3.6 miles mph and a rate of 129. Funny, my rate went down at around 3.1 miles to 125. Stayed there for a bit but started to rise again to the 129-130 range right towards the end. In any case, a 3.7 mile run in 59:20. I'm pleased!

Regarding my pace/ distance:
1: Should I run the distance I did today for all my runs? (I've been doing only 3 miles to date). If not
then:
2: Should I do a shorter run ( say 2 or 2.5 miles) and kind of consider that an easy day? I'd consider that a "foundation run" ie. building off of the longer runs.
3: Should I stay at 3 miles for the runs or just run for an hour regardless of the speed?
4: I'm having trouble recording time/splits. I have a Forerunner 201. but I doubt it will pick up a signal in my basement. Anyonee have any ideas? Thanks as always!

---

I would try fixing on the one hour time. It will give you good measuring
stick to go by. Just don't analyze on a daily basis. Check on things
every 3 weeks or so. Yeah, your forerunner ain't gonna help you in
the house. Does your HRM not record splits?

Also, if you notice things jumping around a lot, you may want to do
a brisk warm-up walk (or an exercise bike or something) for a good
5-10 minutes (more if you can) before actually starting. There are
a lot of transients until you are warmed up.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 09:53 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 09:54 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by GrayBeard:
Ok about the hour run or even walk. It'll be a good way to judge progress. Every 3 weeks taht you refer to, do I see where I am then or do a test? I forget about that part. I did walk for 5 minutes before "running" today but it wasn't at all "brisk". Thanks!

---

If you're just running the treadmill each day, you don't have to do
a special test - just see what your pace is each mile and overall.
Nothing fancy required. It helps to build up your heart rate gradually
at the beginning of each workout.

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

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Aug-25-2005 10:02 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Aug-26-2005 12:48 AM               

http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/An%20Analysis%20of%20Hadd's%20Approach%20to%20Distance%20Training%20part%202.htm

IP: Logged

posted Aug-26-2005 05:39 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by susi:
Check out this site and tell me what you think... very interesting and it's contradicting with what HADD says:

http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/An%20Analysis%20of%20Hadd's%20Approach%20to%20Distance%20Training%20part%202.htm

---

I've read that a while ago. I'm a PhD rocket scientist and I certainly
don't understand it! There were many issues I had with Hadd's
approach, which is why I stopped following it. I consider Maffetone/Mark Allen as a
basebuilding approach where you would generally start to add more
traditional training after you have trained yourself to run well at low heart
rates. As I've mentioned earlier in the thread, I believe the Maffetone's
approach is no different than what Pfitzinger mentions in this article:
Pfitz on base building. After you've finished building the base, then you decide
whether you want to start getting more intense or continue on if you
like the progress you've been making. I would say that article applies
most to very high performance runners and elites. I believe that everyone
can get a benefit from training themselves to be able to run at low
heart rates, then moving on to whatever training they would like to
employ.

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

MyStuff

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

IP: Logged

posted Aug-26-2005 07:42 AM               

IP: Logged