| Author |
Topic: Low HR training/base-building ala Maffetone/Mark Allen |
CSuzette
Cool Runner |
 posted Apr-21-2006 08:58 AM
  
quote:
Originally posted by Noquickfix:
Heat and humidity concerns. I 've done a couple of runs in the late afternoon and I've noticed my times slow down. There is little info. about this in the faqs. list so I thought I'd post to see what other people may be experiencing with rising temperatures. Up to now, the temps. (around Chicago) have been in the 60's or below, but when it climbs into the mid 70's, my heartrate starts to elevate. Once the summer heat & humidity arrives, will our systems acclimate and things even out, or how much time will we sacrifice to maintain MAF? Maybe I've had a couple of bad days when I took advantage of the nice weather, but I'm a bit concerned. If I have to slow down due to heat and humidity, I doubt I'll see any progress by slowing 30 sec. a mile. I hope this doesn't push me to extremes measures to keep cool, but I may break-out the umbrella hat, or worse, the giant, foam, cowboy hat.
It's all relative. So long as you maintain your exertion level (pulse rate) you are working in your zone, so even though you are slower when it is hot you will still be faster when it is cooler. The blood diverts to the skin when it is hot, so you have less oxygen to play with.
IP: Logged |
kcy1998
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 12:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by CSuzette:
It's all relative. So long as you maintain your exertion level (pulse rate) you are working in your zone, so even though you are slower when it is hot you will still be faster when it is cooler.The blood diverts to the skin when it is hot, so you have less oxygen to play with.
CSuzette,
This is interesting to know as I will be having the same problem during the summer. Thanks for reminding me about the blood to the skin thing resulting in less oxygen for the muscles.
Thanks,
kcy
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 12:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Noquickfix:
Heat and humidity concerns. I 've done a couple of runs in the late afternoon and I've noticed my times slow down. There is little info. about this in the faqs. list so I thought I'd post to see what other people may be experiencing with rising temperatures. Up to now, the temps. (around Chicago) have been in the 60's or below, but when it climbs into the mid 70's, my heartrate starts to elevate. Once the summer heat & humidity arrives, will our systems acclimate and things even out, or how much time will we sacrifice to maintain MAF? Maybe I've had a couple of bad days when I took advantage of the nice weather, but I'm a bit concerned. If I have to slow down due to heat and humidity, I doubt I'll see any progress by slowing 30 sec. a mile. I hope this doesn't push me to extremes measures to keep cool, but I may break-out the umbrella hat, or worse, the giant, foam, cowboy hat.
The game is to keep in your zone. If your body is reacting to heat and humidity, keep in your zone. Compare the marathon times between this year's Boston Marathon (55 degrees) and the last two years (85º+, and 70º+). This year, a course record was set--club members who ran it last year, beat their times by 5-6 minutes this year. Heat is a factor in races and training. Whether you're keeping under MAF or even in a 80-90%HRR zone, you have to adjust for the heat. You will acclimate. My pace times always go down in the summer, the same as winter. Their is an initial slowdown, then the progression resumes. Good luck! --Jimmy
My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment
IP: Logged |
Tchuck
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 03:23 PM
For key work outs, I am a believer that if you slow your pace to stay at a specific hr,it will affect your training stimulus and performance in races. On long runs, it may have less of an effect but why slow down. That just teaches you to slow down when its warm/humid.
One should focus on pace and not 100% on HR. I say this and I actually follow a HR training plan. My running coach Tinman told me for example if I am running a MP tempo run at 85% of max HR for 5 miles and at mile 3 my % HR starts to drift up, just maintain the pace and let it drift, don't slow down.------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
Tchuck
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 03:25 PM
For key work outs, I am a believer that if you slow your pace to stay at a specific hr,it will affect your training stimulus and performance in races. On long runs, it may have less of an effect but why slow down. That just teaches you to slow down when its warm/humid.
One should focus on pace and not 100% on HR. I say this and I actually follow a HR training plan. My running coach Tinman told me for example if I am running a MP tempo run at 85% of max HR for 5 miles and at mile 3 my % HR starts to drift up, just maintain the pace and let it drift, don't slow down. I would assume Mr. Maffetone would disagree?????
I also think it depends on your level of fitness and what your goals are. I want to teach my body to hold pace and run faster in the heat, not slower. ------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
kcy1998
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 05:02 PM
Tchuck,
I thinkg that on a run @ MP you are correct about keeping the pace. If the run is for basio aerobic base building then probably keeping it in a specific zone so one does not go anaerobic is probably the thing to do. Just my two cents.
kcy
IP: Logged |
balazsrauz
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 05:50 PM
Can base building be done with cross training ? It'd seem logical that 6-8 hours of hiking has at least the same cardiovascular benefit as a long run.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 07:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Noquickfix:
Heat and humidity concerns. I 've done a couple of runs in the late afternoon and I've noticed my times slow down. There is little info. about this in the faqs. list so I thought I'd post to see what other people may be experiencing with rising temperatures. Up to now, the temps. (around Chicago) have been in the 60's or below, but when it climbs into the mid 70's, my heartrate starts to elevate. Once the summer heat & humidity arrives, will our systems acclimate and things even out, or how much time will we sacrifice to maintain MAF? Maybe I've had a couple of bad days when I took advantage of the nice weather, but I'm a bit concerned. If I have to slow down due to heat and humidity, I doubt I'll see any progress by slowing 30 sec. a mile. I hope this doesn't push me to extremes measures to keep cool, but I may break-out the umbrella hat, or worse, the giant, foam, cowboy hat.
When you are early in this form of training, your pace may be
affected by 2 minutes per mile, unfortunately.
FAQ item 13: 13. Do I reset to a higher heart rate to account for illness or significant heat and humidity? No, you always need to stay under no matter what is causing the rise. You will acclimatize to the weather. It takes a couple of weeks of
consistent running in the warm weather and your pace will mostly
catch up to where it was. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 07:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Tchuck:
For key work outs, I am a believer that if you slow your pace to stay at a specific hr,it will affect your training stimulus and performance in races. On long runs, it may have less of an effect but why slow down. That just teaches you to slow down when its warm/humid.
One should focus on pace and not 100% on HR. I say this and I actually follow a HR training plan. My running coach Tinman told me for example if I am running a MP tempo run at 85% of max HR for 5 miles and at mile 3 my % HR starts to drift up, just maintain the pace and let it drift, don't slow down. I would assume Mr. Maffetone would disagree?????
I also think it depends on your level of fitness and what your goals are. I want to teach my body to hold pace and run faster in the heat, not slower.
Not only would Maffetone, Mark Allen, and most others disagree,
but I certainly would, wholeheartedly! If you don't slow your pace
down in warmer weather (the assumption being that the weather is
warmer than what you are acclimatized to), then you will simply
crap out early or achieve heat exhaustion. It's very simple. Try
it yourself - train in 40 degree weather, then go to Honolulu the
day before and run the marathon. You will definitely not do near
your capacity. No matter what form of training, one has to adjust
pace for warm weather or humidity (once again, compared to
what that person is used to). This is not a Maffetone thing -
this is also explicitly stated by Pfitzinger in Advanced Marathoning.
As far as aerobic base building goes - indeed, if you run the
same pace causing higher heart rates, you will definitely not
achieve the aerobic base training effect that is suggested by
this approach. If you can train in low temps and suddenly run
a marathon in high temps, then you've got an enormous talent
and I can tell you this - it's a very rare talent.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
Noquickfix
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 08:38 PM
Thanks for the replies on the heat and humidity issue. I just wanted hear some reassurance that the body will acclimatize and things will shake-out in two or three weeks. There will be no need for enormous hats this summer.
IP: Logged |
raubalazs
Member |
posted Apr-21-2006 09:32 PM
leitnerj,You say not to have carbs 3 hours before the run. If you're going on an early morning run is it OK to have a big dinner the night before ?
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 09:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by raubalazs:
leitnerj,You say not to have carbs 3 hours before the run. If you're going on an early morning run is it OK to have a big dinner the night before ?
Are you being facetious? The point is that, theoretically, if you take
in carbs within approximately 3 hours of your run, you will be encouraging
your body to use carbs, rather than fat, for fuel. So, if you're going
to eat a big dinner at 3 am and start your run at 5 am, then you'll be
contradicting the approach. However, a big dinner before midnight
and a run after 3 am will ensure that you can meet this criterion. As
long as you sleep at least 3 hours, you should be pretty safe. Just
to be clear, after I finish my activities for the day, I eat a lot. Then I
eat a lot the rest of the day, then I eat a big dinner. Then I eat snacks
after dinner. Plenty of carbs, protein, fats, the whole works. I'm sorry-
I probably don't understand what you are asking. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
Tchuck
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-21-2006 10:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
Not only would Maffetone, Mark Allen, and most others disagree,
but I certainly would, wholeheartedly! If you don't slow your pace
down in warmer weather (the assumption being that the weather is
warmer than what you are acclimatized to), then you will simply
crap out early or achieve heat exhaustion. It's very simple. Try
it yourself - train in 40 degree weather, then go to Honolulu the
day before and run the marathon. You will definitely not do near
your capacity. No matter what form of training, one has to adjust
pace for warm weather or humidity (once again, compared to
what that person is used to). This is not a Maffetone thing -
this is also explicitly stated by Pfitzinger in Advanced Marathoning.
As far as aerobic base building goes - indeed, if you run the
same pace causing higher heart rates, you will definitely not
achieve the aerobic base training effect that is suggested by
this approach. If you can train in low temps and suddenly run
a marathon in high temps, then you've got an enormous talent
and I can tell you this - it's a very rare talent.
Jesse, Just to clarify. I totally agree with the above if you are racing. Yes, you must account for heat and humidity and accept your time/pace will be lower. If you train in 40 degrees and are trained to do a 7 min. pace and travel and its 70 degrees, you better not start at 7 min pace or you are in trouble. But if one is training and has a warm day, you can push through it unless of course your runs are incredibly long. Jesse, I know you train for long periods of time and I am on a different level. BUT training is training and not race like pace (in fact much less) so one can get through the work out and maintain pace assuming the distance is within reason. But if it is a struggle, by all means slow down.
------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 12:45 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Tchuck:
For key work outs, I am a believer that if you slow your pace to stay at a specific hr,it will affect your training stimulus and performance in races. On long runs, it may have less of an effect but why slow down. That just teaches you to slow down when its warm/humid.
One should focus on pace and not 100% on HR. I say this and I actually follow a HR training plan. My running coach Tinman told me for example if I am running a MP tempo run at 85% of max HR for 5 miles and at mile 3 my % HR starts to drift up, just maintain the pace and let it drift, don't slow down. I would assume Mr. Maffetone would disagree?????
I also think it depends on your level of fitness and what your goals are. I want to teach my body to hold pace and run faster in the heat, not slower.
Now, take my Boston Marathon example. 2003-2005 were warm years over 70º. The winners were from hot countries. The winning times went as follows (lots of elites really fell back--slow time all around):
Year Male female
2005 2:11:45 2:25:13
2004 2:10:37 2:24:27
2003 2:10 11 2:25:20 This year was 55º. Meb wore a hat and gloves the whole race.
2006 2:07:14 2:23:38 Three male runners broke 2:10 Now, these elite guys slow themselves in the heat. Marathon world and course records generally are never set on hot days. Now, us average amateur runners who are working on a whole other fitness level, probably need to be slowing down as well in the heat. What goes for races goes for training I would think. The point being that a HR monitor will help you run the right pace for any zone in which you are working. If you are running intervals at 90-95% in 80º weather, you'll probably have to slow down a hair to stay away from the 100% mark. If you are supposed to be aerobic, and you're going anaerobic because of the heat, then maybe one is not getting the desired benefit from the workout. If you're doing intervals at 5k race pace, and suddenly because it's hot, you are actually running at a pace for a hot day 1k, then one might not be getting the proper training effect.The same goes for MAF and below. It keeps you from overtraining on hot days. The HRM will also speed you up on the cold days to make sure you're working hard enough to stay in the zone of your choice. Seems simple to me. Then again, I'm a smartypants. :> ) --Jimmy My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 06:15 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Tchuck:
Jesse, Just to clarify. I totally agree with the above if you are racing. Yes, you must account for heat and humidity and accept your time/pace will be lower. If you train in 40 degrees and are trained to do a 7 min. pace and travel and its 70 degrees, you better not start at 7 min pace or you are in trouble. But if one is training and has a warm day, you can push through it unless of course your runs are incredibly long. Jesse, I know you train for long periods of time and I am on a different level. BUT training is training and not race like pace (in fact much less) so one can get through the work out and maintain pace assuming the distance is within reason. But if it is a struggle, by all means slow down.
That goes back to part 2 of what I was saying. If you are following
this approach to build your aerobic conditioning, you must slow
down to keep your heart rate in the zone. If you let it climb, you
will not see the aerobic base building effect. As backwards as much
of this approach seems, a key part of it is staying under the MAF
heart rate in your training runs, no matter what it takes. If you are
going over, you are following a different training approach (which is
fine, but you won't be getting the associated results and you won't
be running a low respiratory quotient, training your body to use
mostly fat for fuel). Keeping in mind, that fundamentally, this is
a basebuilding approach, one can move on to any traditional form
of training after the base is built (if desired). For myself, the results
have been so good, I continue to build the base. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
tigger
Member |
posted Apr-22-2006 07:03 AM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
If you are going over, you are following a different training approach (which is
fine, but you won't be getting the associated results and you won't
be running a low respiratory quotient, training your body to use
mostly fat for fuel). Keeping in mind, that fundamentally, this is
a basebuilding approach, one can move on to any traditional form
of training after the base is built (if desired). For myself, the results
have been so good, I continue to build the base.
Not true! Just because you don't follow this guy's formula doesn't mean you won't get the results. Lydiard's running plan, (and Mafetone is simply a slight variant) suggests running at a higher pace. Pfitzinger recommends a faster pace as well. He says running too slowly will cause problems with running form. I'm not saying this is a poor way to improve, just that it's not the ONLY way. I have been following the Lydiard route with good results.
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 09:07 AM
I think the point has to be made that this thread is about Maffetone training, which has its set of guidelines. If you're not following the guidelines, then you are doing another form of training. Doesn't mean its bad, or it won't work. It just ain't Maffetone training, which is the subject of this thread.
So, if you aren't really doing Maffetone training, perhaps another thread can be started.The Coolrunning forum has unlimited space for threads of all kinds of heart rate training. --Jimmy My Running World
IP: Logged |
tigger
Member |
posted Apr-22-2006 10:22 AM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
I think the point has to be made that this thread is about Maffetone training, which has its set of guidelines. If you're not following the guidelines, then you are doing another form of training. Doesn't mean its bad, or it won't work. It just ain't Maffetone training, which is the subject of this thread.
So, if you aren't really doing Maffetone training, perhaps another thread can be started.The Coolrunning forum has unlimited space for threads of all kinds of heart rate training. --Jimmy My Running World
"If you let it climb, you will not see the aerobic base building effect." Excuse me for pointing out something that is incorrect, but suggesting that only Maffetone training will produce aerobic improvement is just plain wrong. In my previous post I referred to other methods (one of which you have linked on your website) to demonstrate that they will work equally as well. That is direct evidence that Maffetone is NOT the only way to improve aerobic base. So I fundamentally disagree that Maffetone is the ONLY way. I have no interest in debating whether Maffetone will or won't work. Personally I would question any method that replaces a formula with a formula to determine training HR, but as you say that's for another thread. If attempting to correct a false statement is off topic then I apologize for disturbing your thread with the truth and will leave. [This message has been edited by tigger (edited Apr-22-2006).]
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 10:30 AM
Don't take it personal. Life is too short. Just making an observation that several of us, including me, are getting off-topic here. Since I'm only half-maff these days, I took my own advice and started another thread. Feel free to go on in, as the thread covers all the bases.--Jimmy My Running World
IP: Logged |
tigger
Member |
posted Apr-22-2006 10:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Don't take it personal. Life is too short.
--JimmyMy Running World
Agreed! I follow this thread because I fundamentally agree with aerobic training during base building. There are several aspects of Maffetone that contradict other methods and therin lies my decision to go a slightly differently route. Heavy emphasis on "slightly".
IP: Logged |
kcy1998
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 11:05 AM
I am going to put my 2cents into this debate. Right now I am using the Maff approach for my base building. My two previous Marathons have ended in a diaster. I have a friend who tried Maff and it did not work for him. I am having some success with the Maff approach. Do I think that Maff is the only program that could work for me. NO! I had to choose one and give it a try because what I was doing in the past was not working. Is Maff the only one. Everyone needs to find what works for them.
kcy------------------
My Running Page
IP: Logged |
Tchuck
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 11:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Serious Runner:
Your MAF HR is 80% of your maximum? Even giving myself the 5 extra bpm, I'm still at 73% of maximum.Anyway, the more important question is has your racing improved? I like your idea of the 200m repeats because I feel that speed is a use or lose proposition. I also agree with your philosophy about running slightly faster a couple of times/week without going anaerobic. Your post was what I was trying to get at when I mentioned doing quality work earlier. I try to do 100m strides after many easy runs just to get some turnover.
Ran a PR 5K today in 19:40 beating my previous best by 18 sec. and I have not peaked yet. Still have 5-6 weeks to go. I am ecstatic ------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 01:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tigger:
"If you let it climb, you will not see the aerobic base building effect."Excuse me for pointing out something that is incorrect, but suggesting that only Maffetone training will produce aerobic improvement is just plain wrong. In my previous post I referred to other methods (one of which you have linked on your website) to demonstrate that they will work equally as well. That is direct evidence that Maffetone is NOT the only way to improve aerobic base. So I fundamentally disagree that Maffetone is the ONLY way. I have no interest in debating whether Maffetone will or won't work. Personally I would question any method that replaces a formula with a formula to determine training HR, but as you say that's for another thread. If attempting to correct a false statement is off topic then I apologize for disturbing your thread with the truth and will leave. [This message has been edited by tigger (edited Apr-22-2006).]
As Jimmy mentioned, *in the context of this thread*, when I
make a statement such as "you won't achieve the aerobic
basebuilding effect," that is not to imply that you will not develop
your aerobic system or you will not aerobically condition yourself,
or whatever, it just means that you will not likely see the same
aerobic basebuilding effect as described by Maffetone or Mark
Allen. (Since this is a thread about Maffetone and Mark Allen's
training methods, I don't feel that I need to caveat everything I
need to say just to make sure someone can't "catch me" on
something.) I would say this is particularly the case for the people
who really need this type of training - those with very poor
aerobic conditioning. For example, those just like I was and
just like many of the others here. In the previous version of
this thread and in many similar threads, over and over again,
the people that ran well above the zone (and I'm not necessarily
talking about running 5 or 10 beats above - I'm talking about
making a 15, 20, or more beat adjustment for heat) simply did
not see significant progress. Is it possible to build an aerobic
base by running at higher heart rates? Sure. Many people
do. I can tell you
this - I've tried this method in a half-assed way, letting my
heart rate rise on hills, letting my heart rate get high in
heat, etc., and I really didn't see any progress. When I started
doing this rigorously is when I started to see substantial
improvements. That's what this thread is about. The biggest
"customer" for this is the guy or girl who runs, say, a 5k in
21 minutes, but can't get the marathon faster than 4 hours,
then trains harder and harder but gets worse, then gets
injured. For this type of person I say, "I was you" and "Here's
what worked for me." And then if they say "but I don't like
doing that so I decided to do it differently" I can say back
"that's fine - I don't care if you follow a different approach,
but you probably won't see the same trends that I saw."
Incidentally, you're following a different but related approach.
How much pace improvement have you seen at very low
heart rates after 5 months or so of training? How much has
your marathon time improved over that period? 10k time?
10 mile time? Have you completely eliminated the need to
take in gels during a marathon? These are some of the
progress markers. Now, a little bit more about heat. A couple of years ago, back
before I had done anything to develop my aerobic system,
when I would eke out marathons in the 4 hours+ time frame,
I was extremely sensitive to heat. So much so that it would
add about 1/2 hour or more to my marathon time, even if
I had been running in warm temperatures for the last couple
of weeks. And I'm just talking about any temperature over
about 60. Several
weeks ago after consistently training in temperatures of 40 degrees
and below, I found myself at the Lower Potomac Marathon where
the temperature hit 82 degrees about half way into the race.
This was one week after I PRed in another marathon with a
time of 3:19 (temperature was 30 degrees). I ran a 20 mile training run the day before Lower Potomac. I finished Lower Potomac in 3:29, with
a smile. A mere 10 minutes off of my PR the week before, with a
temperature 50 degrees higher. So, while I always slow down in training
to account for the heat, I no longer am extremely sensitive to it,
even without any period of heat acclimation - running on a suddenly hot
day. Just to be clear, within this thread, I try to convey the optimal
way to follow *this* approach. I certainly don't claim *this* is the only
approach nor that one can't make adjustments. But if someone asks
me whether certain adjustments are consistent with the approach,
then answer is generally simple. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Apr-22-2006 01:23 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tigger:
Agreed! I follow this thread because I fundamentally agree with aerobic training during base building. There are several aspects of Maffetone that contradict other methods and therin lies my decision to go a slightly differently route. Heavy emphasis on "slightly".
I think the best way to inform the coolrunning readership of what
kind of results a type of training is enabling is to open up all
aspects of your results before and after training, your running
log, and everything, so that people can see the entire context
and make informed decisions about what is right for them. There
was actually a thread started a couple of weeks ago on Lydiard
training progress that I had hoped would develop a life of its own -
you might consider reviving it and post how things are going. I
would guess with a few folks' posts, it should easily become as
popular as this one. I think the reason that one started to fizzle
along with the Parker thread was that people were not consistently
presenting results there. I think that's what makes this thread
unique and popular - many people put up their results, good and
bad, so that everyone has a chance to see some real world
examples. Good luck. There's no doubt Lydiard knew what he
was talking about. The difficult thing for some people is understand
exactly how hard they have to push to follow his approach.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
tigger
Member |
posted Apr-22-2006 04:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
As Jimmy mentioned, *in the context of this thread*, when I
make a statement such as "you won't achieve the aerobic
basebuilding effect," that is not to imply that you will not develop
your aerobic system or you will not aerobically condition yourself,
or whatever, it just means that you will not likely see the same
aerobic basebuilding effect as described by Maffetone or Mark
Allen. (Since this is a thread about Maffetone and Mark Allen's
training methods, I don't feel that I need to caveat everything I
need to say just to make sure someone can't "catch me" on
something.) I would say this is particularly the case for the people
who really need this type of training - those with very poor
aerobic conditioning. For example, those just like I was and
just like many of the others here. In the previous version of
this thread and in many similar threads, over and over again,
the people that ran well above the zone (and I'm not necessarily
talking about running 5 or 10 beats above - I'm talking about
making a 15, 20, or more beat adjustment for heat) simply did
not see significant progress. Is it possible to build an aerobic
base by running at higher heart rates? Sure. Many people
do. I can tell you
this - I've tried this method in a half-assed way, letting my
heart rate rise on hills, letting my heart rate get high in
heat, etc., and I really didn't see any progress. When I started
doing this rigorously is when I started to see substantial
improvements. That's what this thread is about. The biggest
"customer" for this is the guy or girl who runs, say, a 5k in
21 minutes, but can't get the marathon faster than 4 hours,
then trains harder and harder but gets worse, then gets
injured. For this type of person I say, "I was you" and "Here's
what worked for me." And then if they say "but I don't like
doing that so I decided to do it differently" I can say back
"that's fine - I don't care if you follow a different approach,
but you probably won't see the same trends that I saw."
Incidentally, you're following a different but related approach.
How much pace improvement have you seen at very low
heart rates after 5 months or so of training? How much has
your marathon time improved over that period? 10k time?
10 mile time? Have you completely eliminated the need to
take in gels during a marathon? These are some of the
progress markers. Now, a little bit more about heat. A couple of years ago, back
before I had done anything to develop my aerobic system,
when I would eke out marathons in the 4 hours+ time frame,
I was extremely sensitive to heat. So much so that it would
add about 1/2 hour or more to my marathon time, even if
I had been running in warm temperatures for the last couple
of weeks. And I'm just talking about any temperature over
about 60. Several
weeks ago after consistently training in temperatures of 40 degrees
and below, I found myself at the Lower Potomac Marathon where
the temperature hit 82 degrees about half way into the race.
This was one week after I PRed in another marathon with a
time of 3:19 (temperature was 30 degrees). I ran a 20 mile training run the day before Lower Potomac. I finished Lower Potomac in 3:29, with
a smile. A mere 10 minutes off of my PR the week before, with a
temperature 50 degrees higher. So, while I always slow down in training
to account for the heat, I no longer am extremely sensitive to it,
even without any period of heat acclimation - running on a suddenly hot
day. Just to be clear, within this thread, I try to convey the optimal
way to follow *this* approach. I certainly don't claim *this* is the only
approach nor that one can't make adjustments. But if someone asks
me whether certain adjustments are consistent with the approach,
then answer is generally simple.
Well....since you asked....I posted my results some time ago in the Lydiard thread and also in my own thread titled "Richard99". Check it out if you're interested, but briefly, yes I have seen substantial improvement by running at relatively low HR since January. No, I haven't raced in that period, but even Maffetone recommends (I think) absolutely no racing during basebuilding. My previous race results suggest some shortfall in aerobic fitness but not nearly as much as your 5k runner example. I chose to try to improve because I saw an opportunity to do it through increased base miles at an easy pace with the added benefit of lost weight. (7 lbs since Jan 1) My MHR is 184 (measured) and my RHR is around 45 to 47. I try to run around 140 (75% of MHR) on average for an easy paced run. Sometimes I'm a little more and sometimes a little less, depending on how I feel when I start. I've held that HR for up to 2.5 hours over hilly terrain. I have a couple of questions you may be able to answer. First, why should anyone use a generic formula to calculate their aerobic running zone? How does this account for variation in individuals? At its core the maffetone recommendation is really no different than 220 minus your age times XX%. This leads to some people over training and others undertraining because of the great differences in heart rate across the population. For example, take a 20 year old newish runner with a MHR of 180. Using maffetone his recommended zone is 160, which is 89% of MHR. That's pretty much at LT for most runners. A similar 20 year old runner with a MHR of 220 would be running at 73% of his MHR. Why not get more specific and use your own observed MHR to calculate training zones? Second, what about the effect of stressors such as heat? Pfitzinger advises adding a few beats per minute to your training zones to account for heat. It seems to me that the aerobic component of heart rate is only one (albeit the major one) component. Maffetone fails to account for any of the others. Third, Lydiard said his method was NOT LSD. He said runners would gain aerobic benefit from slow running, but it would take longer to achieve the same benefit they could get from running near their maximum steady state. Fourth, the maffetone method recommends base building for 3 to 6 months. What then? Surely one maxes out their aerobic benefit at some point and has to move onto improving other systems, such as VO2 max. I think somewhere you mentioned that you are still base building after several years of this method. Do you mean you are still increasing weekly mileage? If not, then what are you defining as base building?
I should add again that I absolutely agree people who run 21 minute 5k's and 4 hour marathons are badly underdeveloped aerobically. And I agree they will not benefit from more speedwork and eventually they will get frustrated and quit or will get injured and will be forced to quit. And I also agree that any improvement they can gain will be from more easy paced miles. Where I mildly disagree is that maffetone is superior to other aerobic training regimes. (You said above "when I make a statement such as "you won't achieve the aerobic basebuilding effect," that is not to imply that you will not develop your aerobic system or you will not aerobically condition yourself, or whatever, it just means that you will not likely see the same aerobic basebuilding effect as described by Maffetone or Mark Allen." This is the opposite of what Lydiard said about running at lower than your maximum steady state effort. He said it would take longer at lower pace to achieve the same effect.
Overall maffetone appears to me to be a spinoff from Lydiard, but a very conservative one (and based on an apparently generic and arbitrary formula) that leaves plenty of (perhaps too much) margin for safety. In some respects that makes it well suited to older runners who don't want the stress of fast paced training, or runners who want to focus on marathons or longer distances. I don't think we are very far apart in our approach to improving, but I believe one can get better results by more closely following Lydiard's advice. I would be interested in how Dr Phil's formula was developed. Do you know?
IP: Logged |
 |
