posted May-05-2006 08:45 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Serious Runner:
As I've mentioned before, you can actually have a faster overall run by starting slower and building towards your MAF ceiling. I find that once I hit my MAF ceiling, it's hard to stay under without slowing down. By building towards it, I can run the same pace throughout the run.

---

This is very true, both in training and in a race.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 09:32 AM            

After reviewing recent workouts of your training log, why is it that you choose to train below Maf ? It would seem you would benefit more at Maf+5, not sub Maf. Have you achieved a target goal or pace at Maf?

------------------
TrainingLog

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 10:30 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noquickfix:
What is considered good aerobic condition? I would consider your condition excellent. With the volume of training you do I can understand how fatigue would set in, however, not at the pace you run. How can running below Maf (for you) be difficult? And, you run far below Maf, with exception to racing. If your pace was averaging six to seven m/m, (or the likes of Mark Allen's), at or below Maf, I can understand how it's difficult.

After reviewing recent workouts of your training log, why is it that you choose to train below Maf ? It would seem you would benefit more at Maf+5, not sub Maf. Have you achieved a target goal or pace at Maf?

---

It's all relative and it's all in the eye of the beholder. Fast for
one person is slow for another. A 7:30 mile for me is probably
comparable to a 5:20 mile for Mark Allen. I have good aerobic
condition and good endurance. I can keep going at a decent pace.
You're right - MAF for me should really be 180-age+5, but I run
most of my mileage at 180-age-5 and less. One reason to do that is that
I run on some very hilly courses and at that heart rate, I don't
have to slow down very much going up the hills (anymore) to keep
under the "full" MAF value.
Another reason is that my progress has been tremendous when
running at low heart rates. I just don't understand how all of my
race times keep getting better. As long as it works, I'm not going
to change anything. I presume that I'm continuing to develop my
aerobic system and keeping my muscles under minimal stress
at the same time. Another aspect is that I like about an 8:30 mile.
It just feels right to me. 7 minute mile feels too fast for me, except
in a race. I've gotten to the point where I can do a couple of miles
at 6:50-7:00/mile on the readmill at a heart rate of about 142 or so.
I really don't like to do it much longer and I get a bit stressed. I
don't get that way in races - it's almost as if I now have some kind
of instinct telling me not to push too hard in training - save it for
the races. It seems to work. Once or twice a week, I'll feel a little
bit tired and that's when my body seems to tell me that even the
139 heart rate I'm normally running is too fast. And then there is
the fact (a detail that you can't generally pull from my running log)
that periodically I run with some friends around here, generally
on the long runs. I always run with people who are slower than I
am (ironically, some are people who just one year ago were 15
minutes or more faster than I in marathons, regularly and now I'm
30 minutes or more faster than they). When I run with them, I'm
always under MAF. I'm pretty happy running anything faster than
about 10:30/mile. On trails it doesn't matter. Mark Allen said that
you should keep your basebuilding runs between 80 and 100% of
MAF, which I do, no matter which definition or equation is used.
I haven't gotten to the point where I need to do any more aggressive
stuff yet, but I run so many races, that part is taken care of. My
lactate threshold HR is about 177 and I ran my last marathon at an
average HR of 170 with the average over the last 8 miles or so
around 173.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 10:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by martinjames:
stupid question: is the goal to stay within x beats of the maffetone # for all runs? In other words, I start out and immediately go as fast as I can to get up to my number (138) and then I settle in, listening for the HRM beeps. Is this right and is this the same routine for all runs? Should there be recovery runs at a lower HR?

I like this method because it makes me slow down, although nowhere near as slow as some people seem to feel.

---

There's a figure in Maffetone's Training for Endurance shows a 10-15 minute warmup period ramping up to MAF and then a 10-15 ramp down period. I'm semi-maffing now (I haven't moved the heart rate alarm down from 150 to 145 yet, but I average about 140 bpm during my runs) and I've found the same thing Serious Runner has. If you start out too high, you'll be fighting the alarm the whole way and end up slower overall than if you started slowly. My best pace/heart rate runs start with the first two miles at about 130 and 135 bpm.

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 10:20 PM            

--Jimmy
Yep, that worked pretty well. I started out slower, 125-130 instead of 135-140 (MAF 140). I kept it there for 9 miles, then it started to drift up to the upper range. But I didn't hit the "plateau", where I suddenly have to slow dramatically to stay in zone, until mile 10 (instead of 5, like when I started out faster) Overall pace started out slower, but the average over 13 miles was 11:40, compared to 12:20 when I started out faster and had to slow down sooner. I didn't take a split, but I believe that my pace up till then (mile 10 plateau) was probably in the low 11's.
Now that my training runs are getting longer than 90 minutes I should start to see more benefit from this training. Right?

[This message has been edited by PerfesserR (edited May-05-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 10:53 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by PerfesserR:

Yep, that worked pretty well. I started out slower, 125-130 instead of 135-140 (MAF 140). I kept it there for 9 miles, then it started to drift up to the upper range. But I didn't hit the "plateau", where I suddenly have to slow dramatically to stay in zone, until mile 10 (instead of 5, like when I started out faster) Overall pace started out slower, but the average over 13 miles was 11:40, compared to 12:20 when I started out faster and had to slow down sooner. I didn't take a split, but I believe that my pace up till then (mile 10 plateau) was probably in the low 11's.
Now that my training runs are getting longer than 90 minutes I should start to see more benefit from this training. Right?

[This message has been edited by PerfesserR (edited May-05-2006).]

---

Good going. Do the same thing every time, and as you get more fit, you'll find you are speeding up in the final miles to get it up to the top. Ad also speeding up in the beginning to get to 125. It's the best feeling to keep an even pace, or a pace that picks up over time. Great training for races.

The odds are you'll see more benefit from longer training runs. They say 2 hours is better than one. Although sometimes that 45 minute recovery is exactly what is needed.

Keep going!

--Jimmy
My Running World
Current Training

IP: Logged

posted May-05-2006 11:08 PM               

Pace BPM
12:03... 110
11:06... 123
10:35... 126 (this is the mark I always try to make)
12:03... 128 (1.16 miles)
10:33... 131
10:36... 135
10:28... 137
10:27... 137
10:44... 140
10:43... 141

--Jimmy

My Running World
Current Training

IP: Logged

posted May-06-2006 11:21 PM               

should you feel tired and "can't go on anymore" after a long run? or should you feel as if you can still go on just a little more but you are tired already.

for a short run should you feel as if you havnt ran? or should you feel as if you are just beginning to feel tired but not tired yet

thanks in advance

IP: Logged

posted May-07-2006 05:56 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by d3finition:
i would like to how should u feel after a long run and a short run. im still in basebuilding phase and im only doing long and short runs all at a comfortable pace (currently with the maf training).

should you feel tired and "can't go on anymore" after a long run? or should you feel as if you can still go on just a little more but you are tired already.

for a short run should you feel as if you havnt ran? or should you feel as if you are just beginning to feel tired but not tired yet

thanks in advance

---

If you feel tired such that you can't go anymore on a long run,
then you're not running at a low HR (unless you've suddenly
added 5 or 10 miles to your long run distance at the same pace).
The pace should be much slower than you would be able to do
at that distance in a race, so therefore it should feel relatively
easy when you're done. By the time I finish a 20 miler at MAF
pace, I feel that I've had enough and within 20 minutes, I feel
like I've done almost nothing, but I also feel like I could go for
a lot longer.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-07-2006 07:24 AM               

Ran my first real race yesterday, Mini-Marathon in Indy (1/2 marathon).

Had good results. A little background.... Two years ago I ran the race in 2:13. Last year in 2:01. Both times result from a time when I used to just run all out on all my training runs, everyday.
This year I improved by 20 minutes - again been following the MAF thing for about 7 months.

overall place: 2143 out of 27628
division place: 306 out of 2079
gender place: 1872 out of 13293
time: 1:40:59
pace: 7:43
guntime: 1:43:11
5mtime: 37:36
10mtime: 1:16:27
last5k: 24:32
avg HR: 174 (MAF 145)

Overall, I felt great. The last two miles my legs started to ache a bit and my HR hit the low 180 mark.

This A.M. I feel a little popping in my left achilles which makes me worried but I am hoping this is to due the stress and nothing is torn (I imagine I would feel that intensely...) my calves were quite tight yesterday evening.

Overall very pleased with the progress and am going to continue with this to see just how far I can get. I should add that I only did about 4-5 speed (tempo) workouts in the last 6 months.

-Jay

edit - add HR avg
------------------
------------------
About Me ~~~ My Log ~~~Find a Race

[This message has been edited by hurryinhoosier (edited May-07-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted May-07-2006 11:18 AM            

IP: Logged

posted May-07-2006 12:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PerfesserR:
...Overall pace started out slower, but the average over 13 miles was 11:40, compared to 12:20 when I started out faster and had to slow down sooner...

---

Now I'm headed to Alaska to try to outrun a glacier...

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 12:11 PM            

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 12:12 PM               

After spending far too much energy trying to determine my appropriate target number, I've found the number and will be starting tonight. Mine will be an interesting experiment because I'll have two distinctly different individuals using the same guidelines.

I have been running for several years and while not elite by any means, can hold my own with a sub 1:30 HM and 3:09 full. I have no idea if MAF will help me. On the other hand, my wife has never run but has recently begun a run/walk program with the desire to gradually improve to a running program. She'll be using MAF from the beginning. If you are willing, I'd like to send periodic data for analysis. Thanks in advance!

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 12:20 PM            

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 06:57 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by aharmer:
Jesse, how would you prefer somebody send you data from their MAF experiment? This forum? Email?

After spending far too much energy trying to determine my appropriate target number, I've found the number and will be starting tonight. Mine will be an interesting experiment because I'll have two distinctly different individuals using the same guidelines.

I have been running for several years and while not elite by any means, can hold my own with a sub 1:30 HM and 3:09 full. I have no idea if MAF will help me. On the other hand, my wife has never run but has recently begun a run/walk program with the desire to gradually improve to a running program. She'll be using MAF from the beginning. If you are willing, I'd like to send periodic data for analysis. Thanks in advance!

---

It's all up to you - I'm happy taking it either way. Some people don't
like putting it out for all to see, but I think it's good for everyone to see
the mix of good and bad so that they can make informed decisions
as to whether it's for them. In either case, I'd love to data, and you'll
be a great new source, starting out with already good performance.
I would suspect that when you start, you won't have to go painfully
slow to stay under MAF either, which is certainly a plus.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 06:59 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by fredurie:
Urie - 58 - 18 @ around 6:35 - HR 126. I was actually working
pretty hard. It might have drifted at the end, as the temp went
from 43F to 58F.

---

What's that, 18 miles at 6:35 pace, HR of 126? 126 was at the
beginning, maybe a little bit higher at the end? It should drift
a bit over 18 miles even with a temperature change.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 07:01 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by kcy1998:
I have been doing the Maff thing for the past 17 weeks. Last Thursday I went out and ran 10 miles at Maff. Because I was out of town and COULD NOT run I did not run until Monday morning. By the time I completed mile 2 I was over Maff! I finished up with a total of six miles and my HR was 10 beats above Maff! I was surprised at how quick my aerobic fitness went south. Is this normal?
kcy

---

It will dip down after a few days of not running, but it will come back within
a few days.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 07:47 PM               

My initial HR trial is complete. I intentionally did the 5 mile trial on my TM in order to eliminate all possible variables. I will do periodic trials on the TM in order to evaluate fitness changes. How often would you do them? Monthly? Biweekly?

My intent was to gradually increase pace until my HR was near 140 (my target) and then begin the trial. I actually ran short of time so I began the trial when HR was at about 120. By 0.5 miles I had it very near 140.

Mile 1: 7:15, avg HR 130
Mile 2: 7:13, 138
Mile 3: 7:29, 138
Mile 4: 7:44, 138
Mile 5: 7:54, 138

Trial totals: 7:31/mile, 136HR

This is meaningless at this point, but I was so excited to begin I just had to send it on! Let me know if there is additional information you would like to have.

Adam

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 08:28 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by aharmer:
Jesse,

My initial HR trial is complete. I intentionally did the 5 mile trial on my TM in order to eliminate all possible variables. I will do periodic trials on the TM in order to evaluate fitness changes. How often would you do them? Monthly? Biweekly?

My intent was to gradually increase pace until my HR was near 140 (my target) and then begin the trial. I actually ran short of time so I began the trial when HR was at about 120. By 0.5 miles I had it very near 140.

Mile 1: 7:15, avg HR 130
Mile 2: 7:13, 138
Mile 3: 7:29, 138
Mile 4: 7:44, 138
Mile 5: 7:54, 138

Trial totals: 7:31/mile, 136HR

This is meaningless at this point, but I was so excited to begin I just had to send it on! Let me know if there is additional information you would like to have.

Adam

---

Cool, that's a good start. Do the trials every 3 weeks, but, if possible,
try to get in 7 or 8 miles. That way, there may be some drift from
beginning to end. For at least 9 weeks, preferably 12, keep all of
your mileage under the MAF heart rate, even up hills, and so forth.
It doesn't matter how much time you spend under, even well under,
just don't go over.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 08:55 PM               

I don't think most people run over 90% of max HR for 1:41. This would lead me to believe that perhaps my max is higher than the simple calculation.

Anyone else agree/disagree or have additional thoughts?

Party on..........

------------------
------------------
About Me ~~~ My Log ~~~Find a Race

*My sport is punishment for your sport*

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 09:33 PM            

Sign up another maffetone guinea pig. I ran a marathon on Sunday and sort of, kind of, maybe got the 4-hour monkey off my back. You can read my race report, but my official time was 4:00:02. My net was 3:59:56 on my watch. You can read
my race report if you like.
I think I'm a decent candidate for maff because my shorter distance PRs (47:21 10K and 1:19:25 10 miles) don't match up with my 4:00 marathon and I'm a relatively new runner.

My brief running history: started at 10mpw of Jan 2005 and went to 20mpw in 10 weeks following a Bob Glover schedule. Held at 20mpw for ~7weeks and started an 18 week Glover casual marathoner schedule which peaked at 40mpw for a fall marathon (4:49). All of this was done at what I felt was converstational pace, but I didn't use a HRM and almost certainly ran higher than maff. I recovered to 35 mpw in 5 weeks, held for a few week, and did a Pfitz 12-week <55mpw program using a HRM and his heart rate zones. I improved a lot and my 10K went from 50:13 to 47:21 and my marathon was 4:17 (hit wall, was 3:00 at 20 miles).

For the last 8 weeks, I've done a sort of a make it up as I go all really easy schedule trying to get mileage and recovery in. My weekly mileages peaked at 60 three weeks ago. Except for Sundays (long runs and a 10-mile race) plus one 4-mile tempo run, I've had the monitor set for <150, but have averaged in the low 140's (I only get >145 up hills). I haven't done a maff test, but started to monitor my standard 5 or 6 mile recovery run on the same course. Here are the paces/heart rate from March 27 to May 3: 9:53/142, 10:15/144, 10:02/142, 10:27/139, 10:28/141, 10:31/139, 10:03/140, 10:09/138, 10:05/141, 9:55/137, 10:04/140, 10:08/140. It's hard to detect any improvement there, but I've been cheating on long runs, slightly on hills (<150), and haven't given it much time.

Some questions:

I'm 34 (35 in a month). Should I just start with <145 or should I start lower? I feel pretty certain my lactate threshold is very close to 178 based on feel and heart rate during races. The 80% of LT in jesse's FAQ would be 142. I don't want to waste weeks at too high (or low) a heart rate and lower than maff seemed to help Jesse. Would a VO2max test settle this firmly or would it still be ambiguous enough, I'd have to experiment?

What mileage will I need to run to see improvement at maff pace? What kind of mileage can I reasonable build to for a marathon 25 weeks away and what should I recover to in say 5 weeks. My goal is to get my marathon time close to in-line with my 10K/10M time (i.e. <3:50). My weekly mileages for the last 8 weeks (includes last marathon recovery) were: 19, 37, 23+10-mile race, 51, 61, 45, 39, and 16+marathon.

I know there aren't definitive answers to these, but I'm looking for opinions.

Thanks,
Greg

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 10:01 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by hurryinhoosier:
As I noted, I just ran a 1/2 marathon. My average HR was 174. If my max is truly 188 ish (based only on the simple formula), then that would mean I ran the race at 93% Max HR.

I don't think most people run over 90% of max HR for 1:41. This would lead me to believe that perhaps my max is higher than the simple calculation.

Anyone else agree/disagree or have additional thoughts?

Party on..........

---

It most likely is higher. However, what's really important is where
your anaerobic threshold is. If your AT is close to your max heart
rate (mine isn't, but that doesn't say much), then you could well
be running at such a higher percentage of max, as long as you
were at least several beats below AT for most of the race.
Realistically, your max is probably in the high 190s or low 200s.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-08-2006 10:06 PM               

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted May-09-2006 07:18 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Hey Greg- first, congrats on cracking the 4 barrier - that's a big
accomplishment. What local race did you run? In either case,
I'd say you're safe with 145, but I would try to keep below 140
for most and let it peak out at 145 on hills, late in long runs, etc.
Try to stay as strict as possible for a while. Keep it simple.
Avoid carbs before runs, but if you need to take them in during,
by all means do so. I recommend not, but some people simply
need them. New G.P.s are always welcome!

---

Thanks. I ran the Potomac River Run. A great little race run on the Mount Vernon bike path. Weather was perfect and the people were wonderful. It's certainly not a flat course (as the flier says), but not horribly bad either.

I've avoided carbs before and during runs since last November (following Pfitz's article) and will continue to do so. I run in the morning and haven't been eating beforehand. On long runs I drank water and carried a Gu that I sometimes had at about 2 hours if I felt I needed it. The last two long runs where I kept myself below 150 the whole way I didn't need them. In the marathon I took in all the carbs I could -- four Gu's and all the gatorade I could tolerate.

Thanks for the advice. I'll probably do my first MAF test in a couple of weeks after I've recovered some more.

IP: Logged