posted Jul-15-2006 05:22 AM               

I've been reading this great thread for a few weeks now. (I think it should be a forum on it's own).

I want to get into MAF training and one of the major atttractions to me was a correlation I saw to Chinese philosphy. Yes, really, lol.

The idea of activating your internal fuel system and reducing your dependence on fuel from outside sources is very similar to our goals in Qigong practice.

It's Yin/Yang. Yang is everything that burns hot and quick and Yin is everything that burns slowly, or cools, and lasts longer. Yang is agressive and damaging; Yin is passive and nurishing. I believe (know) that switching over to Yin can have much broader, positive, long-term health consequences for practitioners than they may expect.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that this isn't anything new to the Chinese. It's been researched and practiced for a few thousand years.

Regarding avoiding carbs before a run, 2,500 years ago, there were warnings against taking in the "five grains" (carbs) for just the reasons it's recommended here. They didn't have microbiologists and chemists to analyze and "explain" their experiences, but they were no less systematic and scientific in their approach. And, apparently, accurate

IP: Logged

posted Jul-15-2006 10:33 AM               

Yes I do think a fan does make a difference. It provides a slight cooling effect. I have definately noticed a difference in my HR from doing treadmill runs with or without a fan. The thing I have noticed and really like about this type of training is that you let your body tell you how fast to run. It will be interesting to see how my paces react when the fall and eventually winter set in. I suspect to see a pretty good pace improvement in the late fall/early winter but wonder when it will level off or even go the other way. I think that the pace won't fall off again until it hits around or below 20F and I have extra clothes on!

IP: Logged

posted Jul-15-2006 03:42 PM            

It basically cools you off, and as we know, heat raises your heart rate and slows your pace.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-16-2006 01:07 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrAl:
I'm just about to give this up. I've been running for about 7 years but I have real problems with improving pace and distance, so I read the MAF thread, got the Maffetone book, and in May I started. I run exclusively on a treadmill in a controlled environment so I should be pretty consistent in improvement, or so I would think.

I started off with running 18 minute miles. My schedule is to run 90 minutes, 5 days a week, at whatever best pace I could keep while in my MAF zone (133-143). Before I gave blood last week, I had "improved" to 17 minute miles. That's frustrating in itself because I've been at it for 230 miles at that point. Since I've given blood, and taken a few days off to recover, I'm running 18+ minute miles again. At this stage by the end of my run I've got the treadmill at under 3 miles an hour. It's really pathetic.

I'm about ready to give up. I've been running for so long and I see little to no improvement. Is it my schedule? I'm 6'3", 225 pounds so maybe I should lose weight? I just don't get it. I'm very consistent in my schedule and methods and yet I see most everyone have great results in the same period of time and I've regressed further past where I started.

Any advice from anyone?

---

Have you done a MaxHR test and a resting HR test? Maybe you have a high HR and you're not even working? I'm 5'11" and 200 lbs so I'm probably fatter than you are and I'm seeing progress. Another thing to try, if you're HR is "normal" would be to run LESS. Maybe to 90 min twice a week, 60 once, and 45 twice or something similar. Is it possible you're overworking? Feel tired at all or suffer from a cold ever? (I'm grasping at straws, obviously.)

IP: Logged

posted Jul-16-2006 08:00 PM            

I am training for the Chicago Marathon. I've just started using a heart rate monitor and stumbled onto this thread.

I've added some speed work to my training and I'm feeling exhausted and sore all the time. I'm afraid I will get an injury but I really want to improve my time.

1) I have 13 more weeks until the race. Is this enough time to make some improvements in my race pace using this method while still following a marathon training schedule?

2) Should I still follow the marathon training schedule for mileage?

3) I used the 180-age-0 to get to 144 bpm this is the highest the heart rate should go?

4) I run with a group for my long runs. If my HR should slightly creep toward the end of the run will i negate my efforts?

Thanks for any help

IP: Logged

posted Jul-16-2006 08:34 PM            

About 5 years ago I decided to run MAF for about 3 months exclusively. For me this was 130-140. At first I was running 10-11 minute miles and sometimes slower. I started in the dead of winter which in the San Francsco Bay Area means cool weather but no snow and only moderate rainfall.

It was tough. I primarily stayed on flat courses. To break it up I would often run 4-5 miles in the morning and another 4-5 in the afternoon. I ran 4-5 days a week and took the other days off. I mostly trained alone because none of my friends would train with me. That's how slow I was.

I did add a wrinkle of my own. Every several weeks I would run a 70-75% of max heart rate test effort over 5 miles. My HR during this test was 150-158. Over the 3 months this run, which started at about 42 minutes dropped to 38 minutes and change. Then after 3 months I added another wrinkle. Every 3-4 weeks I ran a hard 2 mile time trial. The first trial was 12:48. The second was 12:22. My last was 12:03. All other runs were at 140 or under.

I eventually paced a friend through a 5K running 19:07. It was not all out (I stayed with him) but I knew that if I had pushed I would have been back under 19 minutes and close to my course PR of 18:53 which had been done 5 years earlier.

The point? I did get faster. Significantly faster. My daily pace got down close to 8:30 a mile but stayed woefully (for me) slow. The key is that I got faster.

I believe the critical thing is not the MAF number but rather how slow you can run that will bring about this improvement. I found that for me when my slow runs got faster everything got faster. 140 was my number but it might have been 144 had I tried that. In any case, I just followed the formula and gave it a try.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-16-2006 10:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by VikeKingDan:

Have you done a MaxHR test and a resting HR test? Maybe you have a high HR and you're not even working? I'm 5'11" and 200 lbs so I'm probably fatter than you are and I'm seeing progress. Another thing to try, if you're HR is "normal" would be to run LESS. Maybe to 90 min twice a week, 60 once, and 45 twice or something similar. Is it possible you're overworking? Feel tired at all or suffer from a cold ever? (I'm grasping at straws, obviously.)

---

Nope, not grasping at straws. I've been working it through in my head for a while and I just can't get what's wrong. I feel great after all my runs and I don't have problems with being sore at all. However, your suggestion to run less is something I'm going to look at. My brother-in-law is a serious marathoner and he suggested I do marathon training, not for the express purpose of running a marathon but to break up the types of runs I do weekly.

I am going to take a week or two off MAF just to enjoy running at a normal pace (well, for me, it's slow no matter what but at least it won't be glacial). I re-evaluate at that time.

Thanks for the advice and kind words to everyone who's replied.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-17-2006 12:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by runninlaw:
after blowing out another pair of very expensive shoes rather quickly, my running store and coaches said it was probably from running too slow (thus impairing my optimal gait and braking instead of accelerating).

---

They are making excuses for their expensive crappy shoes.

The reason shoes cause braking is because they are designed impropertly with high heel lifts. Of course if the heels are built up an inch they are going to hit the ground first, causing not only braking of your stride but also injuries to your feet, knees, legs, hips and back. After getting an expensive pair of running shoes 15 years ago that curled up in three weeks, and were 95 bucks in a running store, I haven't been in another one since.

I looked in every store in town including my first visit to Walmart and found a pair of shoes there for 8.68. I ran in them a couple days then went back to W and got seven more pair of them, all eight pair of them costing less than the one pair that curled up from the running store, and every single pair of them lasted much longer.

Since then I have gotten all of my running shoes from Walmart, except now the price has gone up. I got another of that same pair of shoes a few days ago and this time it was 9.68. The price had gone up a dollar in the last 15 years.

Interestingly, W now carries a full row and a half jammed packed with running shoes, costing between 11 and 31 bucks. Unfortunately many of them have the standard running shoe "features", rigid top of the heel curving sharply in, too much heel lift etc, however most have plenty of toe room.

The shoes I get are not really called running shoes but I like them the best, and they are the least expensive of the bunch.

------------------
Henry Rono in Training
http://run-down.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=25194#25194

my profile
http://interwovendesign.com/kick/userdisplay.php3?username=johnlvs2run

IP: Logged

posted Jul-17-2006 12:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maroo:
OMG--what a doofus! I am so sorry about the triple-post, but NOTHING was happening for ages when I submitted the reply, so I clicked again--and again! Oops! I guess it just takes extra long to submit when a thread is this long. Sorry.

---

That's happened to me too. I've discovered if you click "edit", which is the middle button at the top of your message with the pen on it, there is a "delete this message" box that pops up with the screen, that you can check then click ""submit now" and the message will then disappear.

------------------
Henry Rono in Training
http://run-down.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=25194#25194

my profile
http://interwovendesign.com/kick/userdisplay.php3?username=johnlvs2run

[This message has been edited by johnlvs2run (edited Jul-17-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 04:56 AM            

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 06:54 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by VikeKingDan:

Have you done a MaxHR test and a resting HR test? Maybe you have a high HR and you're not even working? I'm 5'11" and 200 lbs so I'm probably fatter than you are and I'm seeing progress. Another thing to try, if you're HR is "normal" would be to run LESS. Maybe to 90 min twice a week, 60 once, and 45 twice or something similar. Is it possible you're overworking? Feel tired at all or suffer from a cold ever? (I'm grasping at straws, obviously.)

---

It won't have too much to do with what your max heart rate is, unless
you have a very *low* max heart rate, in which case one needs to
target an even lower training heart rate. My max heart rate is over 210
whereas the predictor would say 184 for me. Now, it does have a lot
to do with where your anaerobic threshold is (for all cases that I've seen
for people with "very high" max heart rates, the anaerobic threshold
has been a lot lower, i.e., 30, 40, or 50 beats, than the max). However,
there have been a few (runawayjesse, I believe was one) posters who
have been successful with using slightly higher targets and I believe
each one of them was either in the low 20s or high 50s, considered
sort of the end of the age range for Maffetone's studies. There have
also been a couple (or maybe it was really just one) who saw no
progress at all or even got worse - the one I remember the most was
only running 20-30 miles per week at the peak. But you are correct
in trying to look at a number of extraneous factors that would likely
come into play. I do believe there has to be some underlying reason
for not seeing any progress.

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 06:57 AM            

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 07:02 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Relja:
Question for Leitnerj or someone who tried this: did someone try to run at even lower pulse than Maf pulse? For example: if my Maf pulse is 140 than maybe is possible to achieve even better results to start with lower pulse, let's say 100. This will be very slow at the begining , 10min/mile or even slower. Is it possible to improve at such low heart rate?

---

I saw the most progress when I ran all of my mileage at MAF-5.
Nowadays I run most at MAF-10 and frequently much lower than
that.

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 08:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by RUNSUB3:
Now please take this lightly because I am in no way an expert, nor have I been using this method for a long time (2 months). I can only speak from personal experiences. While I think 40 beats is too low(100bpm) to see any real improvement, I have had great results running 10 to even 15 beats lower than my MAF HR. My MAF is 150 so I run at an avg. of 135-140. Once again I am no expert, just my opinion.

---

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 08:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
I saw the most progress when I ran all of my mileage at MAF-5.
Nowadays I run most at MAF-10 and frequently much lower than
that.

---

I also see better progress at lower than MAF(I hold it at MAF-10).Did Maffetone explain in his books and articles why not run at even lower HR? I read some but didn't find anything about it.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 10:59 AM            

Of course if you always run the same pace all the time then your heart rate will stay much in the same range each time.

Another thing is your training is built up like the foundation of a house. If you can run for 8 hours at a HR of 105, then it's not going to be much of a problem to run for 2 hours at a HR of 140 or higher. On the other hand if you get stiff and sore running for an hour at 105, then 140 and above is going to be a problem as there is not much foundation to support it.

------------------
Henry Rono in Training
http://run-down.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=25194#25194

my profile
http://interwovendesign.com/kick/userdisplay.php3?username=johnlvs2run

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 11:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Relja:
Question for Leitnerj or someone who tried this: did someone try to run at even lower pulse than Maf pulse? For example: if my Maf pulse is 140 than maybe is possible to achieve even better results to start with lower pulse, let's say 100. This will be very slow at the begining , 10min/mile or even slower. Is it possible to improve at such low heart rate?

---

Low HR training:

Tuesday

AM 9 @ around 8:10, 71F and 83%, HR 92.

I must have got a bump off the 20 miler, or the vit E is
working.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 12:39 PM            

Plain and simple you must be an Alien with that low a heart rate while running.

For those of you who don't know, Fredurie is in his mid 50's and really runs those sort of times at that heart rate.

My plan is to come to Canada, race you with a piece of Krytonite in my pocket. I figure you must be Superman in disguise.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 03:06 PM               

Are these low heart rates a product of loads of training, or is he really an Alien?

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 06:34 PM               

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 09:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by corland14:

I read this thread daily and often wondered if fredurie's post were a playful joke.

Are these low heart rates a product of loads of training, or is he really an Alien? [/B]

---

Fredurie is the ultimate Maffer. He has been at it for years. I would never ever even think of running with him. I would never get close enough to him for Kryptonite to do any good! I believe his regular training paces are at a 4:50-5:00 mm. But seriously, this just proves that even an elite runner trains at very low heart rates at least some of the time. Maybe if we get lucky, he will throw some training tips our way. Hum, I wonder how much of his running is under MAF.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-18-2006 10:13 PM            

I don't think he can sprint on a hot day and get his heart rate up to Maf.

I think he has been among the top 50 runners in Canada for the last 40 years and is genetically gifted and well trained.

Trying to compare yourself to him is like trying to ride with Lance Armstrong or throw a baseball like Roger Clemmens.

Those of us with normal genetics and normal training aren't gonna come close. But how often does someone of that caliber even chat with we mere mortals.

Note: sometimes Fred's opinions are way different from the rest of us, probably because he can do things running, that our bodies can't do. And I still learn from him, even though I can not do what he can.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-19-2006 02:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by fredurie:
Low HR training:

Tuesday

AM 9 @ around 8:10, 71F and 83%, HR 92.

I must have got a bump off the 20 miler, or the vit E is
working.

---

Fredurie what is your min and max HR? And can you tell us your age and results this year(in short)?

IP: Logged

posted Jul-19-2006 11:03 AM               

------------------
My Profile

IP: Logged

posted Jul-19-2006 01:28 PM            

IP: Logged