| Author |
Topic: Low HR training/base-building ala Maffetone/Mark Allen |
StealthRunner
Cool Runner |
 posted May-10-2006 09:59 AM
  
Hello everyone! It's been such a long time since I have posted, I thought I would chime in and let everyone know what I have been up to. For those of you who don't know me, I'm an almost 54yo female who has been one of those on-and off type runners for the last couple of years. My last injury was a hamstring tear which left me off for six months. I came back and thanks to Jesse, used the Maffetone Method to go from zero to 50 miles per week in about four months and was able to run my first marathon last December. I didn't break any speed records that day, but I made it there injury free. A marathon was something I thought my body would never be able to do. Since then I have been training for my second marathon, the San Diego Rock and Roll, come June. I found that I had to starting running faster than my MAF on my long runs since it was taking me way to long. One of the major pit falls of being a slower runner.  But, I found by doing so, my MAF pace actually increased by about a minute. I was running in the thirteen's, now I am in the twelve's. Still slow but getting there. The only problem I did find was that after I started moving faster, it felt soooo good I just kept running even faster. Lets just say I easily found out I was ready to PR my 5k time. I did find I started to erode my aerobic base running faster two days a week, so I went back to just one. I was able to get my low- end aerobic pace back. Last week I ran a 23 miler in the heat of the day with no shade. I felt fine coming in and wanted to get it over with so the last mile I picked up the pace until I peaked it at a 8:30mm pace.(so much for MAF) I'm planning on another 20 miler this weekend then going pure MAF into my taper. I'm not sure if I will PR this marathon since it is a harder course, but my main goal is to run the course so I know what it's like then come back next year after more MAF training and PR it. My marathon pace is way off from my 5k times, so I have a long way to go. M observations have been that being older, I did need one faster run a week being (high-end aerobic) and strength training for the legs. Happy Maffing - Cathy[This message has been edited by StealthRunner (edited May-10-2006).] [This message has been edited by StealthRunner (edited May-10-2006).]
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2006 07:33 PM
Great to hear back from you, Cathy! Sounds like things are going
well and I'm glad you're sprinkling in some more aggressive stuff
(and seeing some payoff). I think the key is when you get to that
point (after you've put in a good 12-16+ weeks of sub-MAF only),
you add some more aggressive stuff in small quantities, probably
no more than 5-10% of your overall weekly volume. It may be just
the stimulation you need.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
roy c
Cool Runner |
posted May-13-2006 06:39 AM
Leitnerj
How long have you now been doing the maff training method?
Roy
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted May-13-2006 10:01 AM
I did my first MAF test today on a 1/10 mile crushed gravel track at the elementary school near my house. I believe it's an accurate distance. 58F/75% humidity/calm winds. I'm 34, but I'm using 145 as my MAF since I'll turn 35 in less than a month. I did a couple of mile warmup 21:05/131 (got to 145 at the end) and then set my alarm range for 143-147 and tried to stay within the beeps.Mile 1. 9:18/145
Mile 2. 9:32/146
Mile 3. 9:35/145
Mile 4. 9:45/145
Mile 5. 9:52/146 I just started staying strictly below MAF this week but I do have one data point to compare. 11 weeks ago I tried to find my lactate threshold with a 15 minute warmup followed by 7x1200m at increasing paces. My first interval was 146bpm average at 9:51 pace, so it seems like I've improved a fair bit since with my <150 (average ~140-142), cheating on long runs, and doing 2 marathons and a 10-mile race in 8 weeks program :-) I did my first two MAF runs this week and have been generally running under 140 and getting in 140-145 on the hills. My pace/heart rate splits for yesterday's 5-mile run were 11:02/128, 10:14/134, 10:17/136, 9:59/137, 9:56/140. The average was 10:19/136. Should I be getting closer to MAF with my averages? Do maffers with hilly routes try to keep their heart rate up on the downhills to keep their average up?
IP: Logged |
MM Hippo
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 01:47 AM
I'll toss one more question into this: just trying to understand.I'm not a MAF trainer, and at the moment am a poor candidate for one. I have a semipermanent injury that limits my weekly mileage pretty much regardless of pace. But I can dream of the surgery that is supposed to be available in 3-5 years and the ability to get my weekly mileage past 30. So as I look over all the stuff about MAF training, I'm nodding my head. I haven't really religiously tracked all this stuff, but have relatively good data. Everything pretty much makes sense. My race times pretty much line up with the charts, with the HM and marathon times being about 2 and 8 minutes slower than a straight line. That makes sense: I run absurdly few miles. But when I get to MAF pace, the needle makes this giant RRRIPP sound as it slides off the record. I'm 46, so MAF is 134, right? I've never actually done a MAF test (will soon fsure) but I can interpolate between 18 min/mi walking at 122 and 8min/mi marathon pace at 170 and get something like 14-15 min/mi for MAF. Oops! of 4 marathons last year, times were 3:30, 3:32, 3:37, and 3:47 (hills) So why is MAF so off in the weeds? I'm thinking there's a useful piece of info here. Thanks all.
------------------
ugly mug
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 11:11 AM
quote:
Originally posted by gregw:
Should I be getting closer to MAF with my averages? Do maffers with hilly routes try to keep their heart rate up on the downhills to keep their average up?
The game is to be below MAF, and maybe peaking out near the 145 on hills, or by the last mile in your run. So, what you are doing on your everday runs fits the "rules." Downhills are an opportunity to get some aerobic "intervals" in. By taking them a bit faster--basically practicing how you will do them in races--you will give your legs a nice stimulus, as they will be moving as if you are running at a high HR, but you will still be aerobic. Downhill repeats to stimulate the legs (turnover and all that). Maffetone mentions this in his book Training For Endurance--if you haven't read it, I recommend it, as that is where all this comes from. --Jimmy My Running World
Current Training
IP: Logged |
aharmer
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 03:25 PM
Recently experiemented with two theories, wondering if anybody has opinions on this.Three days ago I did a 10 mile MAF treadmill test. On that run I started fast so my HR was at 140 from the beginning. I continually came down in speed as needed until the end (the drift actually stopped at mile 7 and held until mile 10). My first mile was 6:40 and I gradually slowed down until my 10th mile which was 7:55. Avg pace=7:36, avg HR 138 Today I decided to try another approach. Again on the TM, I began at 7:30 per mile and decided to see how far I went before HR creeped up to 140. I only had time for 8 miles, but my HR never exceeded 140. It was right there at 140 by the end however, and I expect the next two miles would have drifted some amount. So my final results were 8 miles, avg pace 7:30, avg HR 131. My guess is that if I extrapolated this run out to 10 miles the average pace would be 7:33 and avg HR 133. Is one method preferable over another? Another MAFer inquired about running downhills faster to keep HR up...could my initial approach bring the same benefits? Should I take advantage of the ability to run 6:40 miles when I can? Hmmm.
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 03:46 PM
quote:
Maffetone mentions this in his book Training For Endurance--if you haven't read it, I recommend it, as that is where all this comes from. [/B]
Thanks. Like a good guinea pig, I've read the book. Most of it's covered in Jesse's FAQ and this thread, but it does include some rather odd chapters though like "The Short-Shoe Syndrome". I didn't find the science I was looking for, so I'm doing this somewhat in spite of the book and not because of it. I think there might be something here even though nobody has really explained it. Noakes's Lore of Running implies there's a neuromuscular aspect of running that's important and not very well understood. I think he's probably right. I did a longer run today (9 miles) and realized that the lower averages on my 5-mile runs were mainly an artifact of how short they were (duh). I did 2x4.6-mile loops today on a flatter course. The first was 48:04/135, the second 47:30/141. It felt like I was really working on the second loop. I've found an awkward zone somewhere around 140 where my breathing becomes a little harder but it's not quite hard enough to get into my old easy run groove.
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 03:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aharmer:
Is one method preferable over another? Another MAFer inquired about running downhills faster to keep HR up...could my initial approach bring the same benefits? Should I take advantage of the ability to run 6:40 miles when I can? Hmmm.
First, I have to say I'm quite jealous of your pace! Anyway, if you believe Maffetone, his book recommends taking 20 minutes to get to your MAF heart rate, so the second method is preferable by that standard. Based on personal experience I think he's right as well. It takes my heart rate that long to respond to the load (although my perceived exertion seems to react more quickly). It wasn't MAF training but when I was trying to do long runs in marathon training under 150 (MAF-5), it wasn't until I figured out to start very slow that I could make it the whole way without grinding to a halt. You more than pay for those early minutes at the end.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 08:50 PM
quote:
Originally posted by roy c:
Leitnerj
How long have you now been doing the maff training method?
Roy
I've done it, for the most part, for about a year, with periods
of months of exclusively low HR (nothing above MAF) and then "race"
periods, where I would run races about every week or two.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 08:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gregw:
I did my first two MAF runs this week and have been generally running under 140 and getting in 140-145 on the hills. My pace/heart rate splits for yesterday's 5-mile run were 11:02/128, 10:14/134, 10:17/136, 9:59/137, 9:56/140. The average was 10:19/136. Should I be getting closer to MAF with my averages? Do maffers with hilly routes try to keep their heart rate up on the downhills to keep their average up?
not a bad start at all. It doesn't make a difference at all if you keep
your average HR up - anything between 80% and 100% of MAF heart
rate will do it. Nonetheless, it's good practice to pick up your speed
on the downs and that's what you should be doing in races; otherwise
hills will kill your time. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 09:00 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MM Hippo:
I'll toss one more question into this: just trying to understand.I'm not a MAF trainer, and at the moment am a poor candidate for one. I have a semipermanent injury that limits my weekly mileage pretty much regardless of pace. But I can dream of the surgery that is supposed to be available in 3-5 years and the ability to get my weekly mileage past 30. So as I look over all the stuff about MAF training, I'm nodding my head. I haven't really religiously tracked all this stuff, but have relatively good data. Everything pretty much makes sense. My race times pretty much line up with the charts, with the HM and marathon times being about 2 and 8 minutes slower than a straight line. That makes sense: I run absurdly few miles. But when I get to MAF pace, the needle makes this giant RRRIPP sound as it slides off the record. I'm 46, so MAF is 134, right? I've never actually done a MAF test (will soon fsure) but I can interpolate between 18 min/mi walking at 122 and 8min/mi marathon pace at 170 and get something like 14-15 min/mi for MAF. Oops! of 4 marathons last year, times were 3:30, 3:32, 3:37, and 3:47 (hills) So why is MAF so off in the weeds? I'm thinking there's a useful piece of info here. Thanks all.
Hey 207! I'm sorry that I don't really understand your question, but
I surmise that you are trying to do a linear interpolation of pace w.r.t.
heart rate to come up with MAF pace, and if that's the case, I can
say without a doubt that this stuff ain't linear! If it were, it would be
so easy to figure out what's going on. Nonetheless, if you don't
spend any time running at low heart rates (actually, a *lot* of time),
then your heart rate will always be elevated, even during what seem
to be easy training runs. Whether your marathon times indicate
that this is a problem or not is not clear - it will depend on other
factors (as I list in FAQ #1). If really interested just out of curiosity,
go out and try a MAF test and see. You may indeed be at 14-15
min/mi, or you may be at 9, 10, or 12. Sorry if I misinterpreted
what you were asking. -188
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 09:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gregw:
Thanks. Like a good guinea pig, I've read the book. Most of it's covered in Jesse's FAQ and this thread, but it does include some rather odd chapters though like "The Short-Shoe Syndrome". I didn't find the science I was looking for, so I'm doing this somewhat in spite of the book and not because of it.
Yeah, I completely ignore a lot of the extraneous crap in his book,
such as the discussion about cheap shoes and so forth. If you want
good shoe recommendations from a HR training guy, get it from
Stu Mittleman in Slow Burn. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 09:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aharmer:
Recently experiemented with two theories, wondering if anybody has opinions on this.Three days ago I did a 10 mile MAF treadmill test. On that run I started fast so my HR was at 140 from the beginning. I continually came down in speed as needed until the end (the drift actually stopped at mile 7 and held until mile 10). My first mile was 6:40 and I gradually slowed down until my 10th mile which was 7:55. Avg pace=7:36, avg HR 138 Today I decided to try another approach. Again on the TM, I began at 7:30 per mile and decided to see how far I went before HR creeped up to 140. I only had time for 8 miles, but my HR never exceeded 140. It was right there at 140 by the end however, and I expect the next two miles would have drifted some amount. So my final results were 8 miles, avg pace 7:30, avg HR 131. My guess is that if I extrapolated this run out to 10 miles the average pace would be 7:33 and avg HR 133. Is one method preferable over another? Another MAFer inquired about running downhills faster to keep HR up...could my initial approach bring the same benefits? Should I take advantage of the ability to run 6:40 miles when I can? Hmmm.
Add variety whenever you can. Do it one way one day, the other
the next day. Eventually, you'll pick some days to keep the whole
run at 20 under MAF (believe it or not) because at some point, it
will actually become tiring to keep all of your runs right up at MAF.
I'm not sure one way is better than the other, but you'll probably find
that you like something about one way better.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-14-2006 10:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aharmer:
Recently experiemented with two theories, wondering if anybody has opinions on this.Three days ago I did a 10 mile MAF treadmill test. On that run I started fast so my HR was at 140 from the beginning. I continually came down in speed as needed until the end (the drift actually stopped at mile 7 and held until mile 10). My first mile was 6:40 and I gradually slowed down until my 10th mile which was 7:55. Avg pace=7:36, avg HR 138 Today I decided to try another approach. Again on the TM, I began at 7:30 per mile and decided to see how far I went before HR creeped up to 140. I only had time for 8 miles, but my HR never exceeded 140. It was right there at 140 by the end however, and I expect the next two miles would have drifted some amount. So my final results were 8 miles, avg pace 7:30, avg HR 131. My guess is that if I extrapolated this run out to 10 miles the average pace would be 7:33 and avg HR 133. Is one method preferable over another? Another MAFer inquired about running downhills faster to keep HR up...could my initial approach bring the same benefits? Should I take advantage of the ability to run 6:40 miles when I can? Hmmm.
As far as MAF tests go, I use the first method--although I warm up for two miles first, getting to MAF by the third mile. For daily runs, I prefer getting to MAF-15 (54% HRR) by the end of the 3rd mile, then keeping that pace--with a little speeding up if needed--maxing out at the top of the zone by the end. I figure that's better practice for races than slowing down continuously during a run. I try to keep an even pace in marathons, with a negative split from the first to second half. I prefer not to have my fastest mile be the first one in any race. I've tried that and it doesn't work for me.
--Jimmy
My Running World
Current Training
IP: Logged |
brittaH2O
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 01:19 AM
I am still a little confused about these numbers. I now run between 17-20 mpw. I consider myself to be in pretty good shape. Yet I look at my HR and it says otherwise. My max HR is 209. When I put on my HR monitor while getting ready for my run, it's not unusual for my HR to be 113 or so. It is impossible for me to do anything other than walk at a 60-70% HR. Yet I took my resting HR one morning and it was 54. What's up with these numbers!------------------
My This is ME
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 02:28 AM
Britta, is it hot where you run or do you consume caffeine before your runs? Both will raise your heart rate.My max hr is 187. My resting hr is 41. When I walk the dogs my hr is about 70. If I drink a diet soda before the walk it can average 95 beats a minute. Coffee would raise it even more.
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 07:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by brittaH2O:
I am still a little confused about these numbers. I now run between 17-20 mpw. I consider myself to be in pretty good shape. Yet I look at my HR and it says otherwise. My max HR is 209. When I put on my HR monitor while getting ready for my run, it's not unusual for my HR to be 113 or so. It is impossible for me to do anything other than walk at a 60-70% HR. Yet I took my resting HR one morning and it was 54. What's up with these numbers!
The heart rate monitor doesn't lie. If you have to walk to stay at your MAF or 70% and below, your aerobic system needs lots of work. When you get to the point where you are running everything and still staying below MAF, you can say without a doubt that you are in much better aerobic shape. Your RHR might be 54 now, but when your fit, it might be 44. Walking, my HR is 60-70 bpm, even on hot days. Keep at it. It really pays off. --Jimmy My Running World
Current Training
IP: Logged |
vashondan
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 09:23 AM
Had a hard time keeping my HR down this morning. The temp was almost 20 degrees warmer than usaul. Could this affect my ability to keep it down?
IP: Logged |
StealthRunner
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 12:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by vashondan:
Had a hard time keeping my HR down this morning. The temp was almost 20 degrees warmer than usaul. Could this affect my ability to keep it down?
Very much so if you are not use to it. I have been "heat training" for my marathon by wearing a black windbreaker and running in the heat of the day when I can. Horrible! I ran last night after dark and what a differance. I was amazed at how easy it was to keep the ole HR down. I put in a few striders a few times to just bring it up. I'm hoping for a cool marathon.
IP: Logged |
brittaH2O
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 01:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Cashmason:
Britta, is it hot where you run or do you consume caffeine before your runs? Both will raise your heart rate.My max hr is 187. My resting hr is 41. When I walk the dogs my hr is about 70. If I drink a diet soda before the walk it can average 95 beats a minute. Coffee would raise it even more.
Ok, it is very hot here. mid 80's. But I normally try to only drink water before my runs. I just don't get why my HR is so high all the time, except when extremely relaxed. Is it possible I just have a smaller heart than normal?
I'm torn between wanting to run and wanting to stay in the 70% range. The two do not coincide. It's frustrating. ------------------
This is ME [This message has been edited by brittaH2O (edited May-16-2006).]
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted May-16-2006 04:00 PM
Britta, Heat makes a huge difference. I can see my heart rate drop 3 beats a minute just running in the shade rather than in the sun on my trail runs.My heart rate is always much higher in the summer at the same pace just because of the heat. You will be able to run much faster and keep your heart rate in your target zone in the fall when temperatures drop. You have two choices right now. Run/walk slowly and keep your heart rate in the zone, or wait until fall to do heart rate training. Unfortunately, you don't get any adjustments to your target beats per minute just because it is hot or you are on meds that raise your heart rate or you drank caffeine. I know only heat applys to you, this info is for others that might read this. Best wishes. Cash
IP: Logged |
d3finition
Cool Runner |
posted May-17-2006 01:55 AM
i have been training on maffetone for about 2 months now and lately i've been experiencing leg fatigue after a run. the next day after the run my legs feel tired and exhausted but i ran the run under maf 162 (im 17 now). this has only occurred recently.do i need to take a few days break to let my legs recover? is this a sign that my aerobic strength is relatively a lot stronger than my legs? do i need to furthur strengthen my legs?
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-17-2006 06:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by d3finition:
i have been training on maffetone for about 2 months now and lately i've been experiencing leg fatigue after a run. the next day after the run my legs feel tired and exhausted but i ran the run under maf 162 (im 17 now). this has only occurred recently.do i need to take a few days break to let my legs recover? is this a sign that my aerobic strength is relatively a lot stronger than my legs? do i need to furthur strengthen my legs?
I definitely did hit this point at a time. I don't know that you need
to take off completely (that's up to you), but reducing mileage for
a week is probably in the cards. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
IP: Logged |
Noquickfix
Cool Runner |
posted May-21-2006 08:59 PM
Ended my 17 week Maffing streak today with a 10K race. I did this same 10K last year in 48:05. I finished today at 46:34. Considering I did a 20 miler Saturday, I can't complain about my performance. Not a big improvement in time, but, I really didn't expect to beat my time from the year prior. My legs felt strong at the end, my lungs didn't.
I plan on running a marathon in late October. Will running/cycling above (way above) MAF a couple of times a month until October have drastic negative impacts on my aerobic base? Would it be better to only allow my heart rate to go to certain level then back down? During the race today I averaged 183 bpm. My MAF 146.------------------
TrainingLog
IP: Logged |
 |
