| Author |
Topic: Low HR training/base-building ala Maffetone/Mark Allen |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
 posted Aug-15-2006 09:56 AM
   
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
I weigh myself during the run, especially the last three miles--maybe that's why I'm slowing down.Which brings me to this question: what's the best scale to use to weigh yourself while running? I find my mechanical medical scale a litlle cumbersome.
It takes a very crafty use of a set of springs with known spring
constants and carefully derived equations of motion.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-15-2006 12:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
It takes a very crafty use of a set of springs with known spring
constants and carefully derived equations of motion.
Thanks, but I left my Star Trek Universal/babel fish translator at the Starfleet meeting. Could you just give me a brand, ave price, and how to strap it on comfortably? --Jimmy Current MAF Training
My Running World
IP: Logged |
NGeorgiaTR
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-15-2006 01:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Yes. It's because you are running with your arm up. Try pretending to drink, and I'll think you'll find you'll see the same jump. It also illustrates why you should keep your arms low and relaxed when running.Also, I find if I put my Polar watch near the strap, it will BOOP and show me the time of day, tell me it loves me, and extrapolate the current probabilty of Patrick Swayze showing up just when my Daddy won't let me dance and saying "No one puts Jimmy in a corner." --Jimmy Current MAF Training
My Running World [This message has been edited by jjwaverly42 (edited Aug-15-2006).]
I see the response on the bike as well when it is mounted on the handlebars. I held my breath for 5 seconds while running on the treadmill this morning and saw the same jump. Just had to check. I also notice the same effect as jesse. These things are fun. Thanks guys.
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-15-2006 09:10 PM
Jimmy,The brand is Acme, the price is a kabijillion Warner Brothers Dollars. See Wile E. Coyote for instructions on how to strap it on. Once installed, take it for a test run with RoadRunner or Jesse.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-16-2006 12:32 AM
darn it - Cash gave it away. I was hoping Jimmy would
reinvent the wheel.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-16-2006 01:06 AM
Today, I gave up weighing myself during the run. People were peeking.
--Jimmy
Current MAF Training
My Running World
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-16-2006 02:15 AM
Jimmy,Suck in your gut, thrust out your chest, and be proud. Oh and yell "BEEP BEEP" as you pass the peekers.
IP: Logged |
marathonmommy
Member |
posted Aug-16-2006 03:32 PM
Hi Jesse and other MAFers,I have read this thread off and on for over a year. I definitely fall into the category of race times getting worse as the distance increases. I have been curious to really give MAF a try. My hesitancy has always been due to the fact that I run with a great group of runners and I love the comaradarie. I know I will have to give that up for a little while if I am truly going to do MAF. Here is a little bit of my story. I have run off and on since high school, but really dedicated since my first son was born 4 1/2 years ago. I started as a strictly 10 min/mile runner with 27 minute 5k. In January 2005 I started training for my first marathon. My times were: 57 minute 10k, 2:38 half marathon (first trail run, first half marathon =bad combination!) and then my marathon June 2005 was 5:11. It was miserable from mile 7 until the end. I had had a great 22 miler where I averaged 10 minute miles, so I had no idea what happened. After the marathon I kept improving my shorter distance. 49:13 for 10k, 24:10 for 5k and then 1:57 half marathon. I started training for another marathon. I did a 30k in 2:50, averaging around 9:15 min/mile. I had an awesome 20 miler that I averaged 9 minute miles. Then the marathon came and I did great for the first 18 miles and then something happened. I finished in 4:38, but still knew I could do better. I went to a pulmonologist and I was diagnosed with exercise-induced asthma! Wow! What a difference an inhaler makes! Also, I started Advair at the end of June. The result was that I had an awesome half marathon at 1:49! Finally, I felt my race showed my ability. So, here I am wanting to do another marathon next May. So, I want to build the best base I can. I do have a 10k in 6 weeks and it will be my last race until a 30k in March. So, I think I still have time to really MAF right after the race. My question is, should I start MAFing now even with the race coming up or should I wait?
Also, during the half marathon here are my heart rate averages, they are scary:
Mile 1: 7:52 175bpm
Mile 2: 7:53 185 bpm
Mile 3: 8:05 190 bpm
Mile 4: 8:06 194 bpm
Mile 5: 8:13 195 bpm (water stop in there)
Mile 6: 8:51 196bpm (water stop still in there)
Mile 7: 8:39 192bpm
Mile 8: 8:26 199 bpm
Mile 9: 8:38 200 bpm
Mile 10: 8:47 201 bpm
Mile 11: 9:09 202 bpm
Mile 12: 8:11 207
Mile 13.1 : 8:57 212 Total: 1:49:37 (chip time) Okay, so there you have it. I run at way too high of a heart rate and I have asthma. The crazy thing is I felt AWESOME in the race, except for mile 10-11. I slowed down just a touch and was able to regain my speed for the end. I would love to get my heart rate down so I can race at a lower heart rate. I believe MAF is the way to go. I am going to do a MAF test and I would love to hear any advice or encouragement. I love both Jesses (leitnerj and runawayjesses) stories and I hope I will be adding mine soon. Thanks for all of the advice. I would love any advice for the exercise-induced asthma also. Jesse, I keep forgetting how you manage yours. Can you let me know? Sorry this was so long. I can't wait to be on this journey with all of you. Sincerely, Kelly (formerly known as kelmarker)
My blogs www.seemommyrun.blogspot.com
www.marathonomommies.blogspot.com
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-16-2006 11:46 PM
Hey Kelly - glad to see you back! Sounds like you're doing
awesome. In short, I'd say you should start after your race.
Given that you've got the 10k and 30k, then the marathon,
all in very short order, it's too much to stay focused on MAF
during the time frame. Perhaps take 2 or 3 of your weekly
runs and try them either at exclusive MAF, or just the first
70-80% of these runs and the last part at race pace. This
will start to get you the feel for MAF in a benign way.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
mikeymike777
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-17-2006 10:03 AM
hey leitnerj, I have a question...Okay I haven't read the entire FAQ on the method you use, nor am I trying to use that method... but if I remember correctly, you talk about how the low HR stuff (along with not loading up on carbs prior to runs), forces your body to use fat as fuel for running, as opposed to glucose stores. But I was under the impression (and I got this information from a Discovery Channel show I saw a while ago about weight loss, so unfortunately I don't have a link to a study to show you or anything), that when you run, no matter what you do... you're (mostly) burning fat as fuel. The rationale in the show behind this, was that when you begin to run... at first your muscles can't handle it. And they do use glucose as fuel. But the more you run, the more your body adapts to it... and the mitochondria in your muscles begin to split and multiply in your muscles. And the mitochondria need the most effecient type of fuel in order to keep your body supplied with energy during a run. And the most effecient fuel your body has isn't glucose, but actually fat. So I was under the impressoin that no matter how you eat or train, most of the fuel while running comes from fat - not from glucose or carbs you just ate. Have you heard or read anything like this before? ------------------
Mike
Running Log
Newbie Wiki
My myspace [This message has been edited by mikeymike777 (edited Aug-17-2006).] [This message has been edited by mikeymike777 (edited Aug-17-2006).]
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-17-2006 12:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by mikeymike777:
hey leitnerj, I have a question...Okay I haven't read the entire FAQ on the method you use, nor am I trying to use that method... but if I remember correctly, you talk about how the low HR stuff (along with not loading up on carbs prior to runs), forces your body to use fat as fuel for running, as opposed to glucose stores. But I was under the impression (and I got this information from a Discovery Channel show I saw a while ago about weight loss, so unfortunately I don't have a link to a study to show you or anything), that when you run, no matter what you do... you're (mostly) burning fat as fuel. The rationale in the show behind this, was that when you begin to run... at first your muscles can't handle it. And they do use glucose as fuel. But the more you run, the more your body adapts to it... and the mitochondria in your muscles begin to split and multiply in your muscles. And the mitochondria need the most effecient type of fuel in order to keep your body supplied with energy during a run. And the most effecient fuel your body has isn't glucose, but actually fat. So I was under the impressoin that no matter how you eat or train, most of the fuel while running comes from fat - not from glucose or carbs you just ate. Have you heard or read anything like this before?
Fat is always part of the mix, but obviously your body is using more glycogen the higher in heart rate that you go, and as you start using more fast-twitch fibers. If the body was just burning fat, runners wouldn't hit the wall (glycogen depletion) during a marathon. The idea behind any low-HR training is to develope the slow twitch fibers as exclusively as possible for a period of time. These fibers are responsible for fat-burning and aerobic endurance. The more developed your aerobic system, the more fat you use and the less glycogen. The farther you can go at higher speeds without burning up your supply of glycogen. That's basically what this training is about. Plain and simple. --Jimmy Current MAF Training
My Running World
IP: Logged |
coho75
Member |
posted Aug-17-2006 01:55 PM
Thanks all for a great thread. I have a few questions - How long did it take any of you to get your heart rate under control (not having to walk)? In general, how many miles is ideal for this method of training to be beneficial -- does it take 10-15 miles/week or is 20-30 better?
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-17-2006 02:28 PM
mikeymike - I don't have much to add to what Jimmy said,
other than a minor blip. You will always be burning some
glycogen during a run, but above a certain heart rate
(anaerobic threshold), you will be burning 100% glycogen.
If you have a vo2max test done, it tells the whole story of
how much fat vs glycogen you burn at a given intensity,
in terms of a quantity called "respiratory quotient" or
"respiratory exchange ratio." You can do some googles
on these terms and dig up some info. Most runners, if
they haven't spent much time basebuilding, will burn more
glycogen than fat on a typical run.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-17-2006 02:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by coho75:
Thanks all for a great thread. I have a few questions - How long did it take any of you to get your heart rate under control (not having to walk)? In general, how many miles is ideal for this method of training to be beneficial -- does it take 10-15 miles/week or is 20-30 better?
Your two questions are connected. I cover this in the FAQ, but it can
be anywhere from 2 weeks to several months and it depends very much
on how much mileage you run. Many have said that they see significant
improvement after about 300 accumulated miles below MAF. The more
mileage, the better. At 15 miles a week, you may see very little change
(although some have).
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-17-2006 11:10 PM
Yesterday maf training run at 124 beats per minute which is 6 beats below my maf heart rate.One hour run on flat treadmill 4.78 miles. Today race 4.8 miles.(actual distance run 4.87 but race only 4.8 miles) Average 167 beats per minute. Time 42:32 on trails including going up 50 foot hill 3 different times on dirt same mile. Much of the run on grass and dirt and jumping tree roots. Improvement 17 and half minutes. Yesterday averaged 12:33 pace today 8 52 pace over almost same distance under much tougher conditions.. 43 Beats per minute faster. Perfect weather at 64 degrees dew point 54 percent Humidty 71 percent.
IP: Logged |
effzee
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 05:28 AM
I've ben experiementing with maf for two weeks and it's t-o-u-g-h, especially on my legs. I actually feel like I'm going to injure myself running this slowly, I get very stiff and feel uncoordinated. My maf is 138 minus 5 because injuries have been an issue for me most of my running life. Maybe I should add that 5 points back to the equation? It doesn't make much difference, though.I'm wondering about the formula itself. Why 180 minus age? This obviously means that your maf goes down a point every year. But isn't age somewhat relative? I'm 42 and recently topped my max HR at 195.The pace I feel really comfortable at is ~160bps which for me translates to almost exactly 6min./km, a little over 9 !/2 min./mile. It's the pace I slip into when I don't think too much, lol. I can maintain this easily on my 15-mile long runs with no drinking or eating. Am I in my fat-burning, aerobic mode anyway? How can I tell? And this pace seems to fall into the "junk" miles range mentioned here. What am I to make of all this?
IP: Logged |
effzee
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 06:28 AM
Just had another thought... What about a body-fat-measurement before and after a run, or a series of measurements, to determine what's being burned? Has this ever come up before or been tried? Is it a valid idea?
IP: Logged |
geez
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 09:03 AM
Question for Jesse or anyone else,
Background: I've been running for about 3.5 years, been Maffing since April. I've seen some improvemnet, not a lot, I run about 25-30 miles weekly. I ran my first marathon last February and I'm planning another next Feb.
I just joined a local running club so I can have someone to train with on my weekend long runs, question is if I run my week day runs at Maff or below is it ok to not Maff on my long run? Kind of use that as a "race". But not really racing, just a comfortable run, but not Maff. I've actually been doing this the last couple of weeks, I feel good, plus I think I'm improving more.
Thanks in advance 
Gina
IP: Logged |
kcy1998
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 11:42 AM
quote:
Originally posted by marathonmommy:
Hi Jesse and other MAFers,I have read this thread off and on for over a year. I definitely fall into the category of race times getting worse as the distance increases. I have been curious to really give MAF a try. My hesitancy has always been due to the fact that I run with a great group of runners and I love the comaradarie. I know I will have to give that up for a little while if I am truly going to do MAF. Here is a little bit of my story. I have run off and on since high school, but really dedicated since my first son was born 4 1/2 years ago. I started as a strictly 10 min/mile runner with 27 minute 5k. In January 2005 I started training for my first marathon. My times were: 57 minute 10k, 2:38 half marathon (first trail run, first half marathon =bad combination!) and then my marathon June 2005 was 5:11. It was miserable from mile 7 until the end. I had had a great 22 miler where I averaged 10 minute miles, so I had no idea what happened. After the marathon I kept improving my shorter distance. 49:13 for 10k, 24:10 for 5k and then 1:57 half marathon. I started training for another marathon. I did a 30k in 2:50, averaging around 9:15 min/mile. I had an awesome 20 miler that I averaged 9 minute miles. Then the marathon came and I did great for the first 18 miles and then something happened. I finished in 4:38, but still knew I could do better. I went to a pulmonologist and I was diagnosed with exercise-induced asthma! Wow! What a difference an inhaler makes! Also, I started Advair at the end of June. The result was that I had an awesome half marathon at 1:49! Finally, I felt my race showed my ability. So, here I am wanting to do another marathon next May. So, I want to build the best base I can. I do have a 10k in 6 weeks and it will be my last race until a 30k in March. So, I think I still have time to really MAF right after the race. My question is, should I start MAFing now even with the race coming up or should I wait?
Also, during the half marathon here are my heart rate averages, they are scary:
Mile 1: 7:52 175bpm
Mile 2: 7:53 185 bpm
Mile 3: 8:05 190 bpm
Mile 4: 8:06 194 bpm
Mile 5: 8:13 195 bpm (water stop in there)
Mile 6: 8:51 196bpm (water stop still in there)
Mile 7: 8:39 192bpm
Mile 8: 8:26 199 bpm
Mile 9: 8:38 200 bpm
Mile 10: 8:47 201 bpm
Mile 11: 9:09 202 bpm
Mile 12: 8:11 207
Mile 13.1 : 8:57 212 Total: 1:49:37 (chip time) Okay, so there you have it. I run at way too high of a heart rate and I have asthma. The crazy thing is I felt AWESOME in the race, except for mile 10-11. I slowed down just a touch and was able to regain my speed for the end. I would love to get my heart rate down so I can race at a lower heart rate. I believe MAF is the way to go. I am going to do a MAF test and I would love to hear any advice or encouragement. I love both Jesses (leitnerj and runawayjesses) stories and I hope I will be adding mine soon. Thanks for all of the advice. I would love any advice for the exercise-induced asthma also. Jesse, I keep forgetting how you manage yours. Can you let me know? Sorry this was so long. I can't wait to be on this journey with all of you. Sincerely, Kelly (formerly known as kelmarker)
My blogs www.seemommyrun.blogspot.com
www.marathonomommies.blogspot.com
Kelly,
Welcome Back! You are right about MAF being tough to run with other folks. I have been at it since January and have seen some big improvements. Remember that everyone is an experiment of one. I really do believe that a major contributor to my progress is the volume of mileage. Let us know how it Maf works for you.
kcy
------------------
My Running Page
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 04:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by geez:
Question for Jesse or anyone else,
Background: I've been running for about 3.5 years, been Maffing since April. I've seen some improvemnet, not a lot, I run about 25-30 miles weekly. I ran my first marathon last February and I'm planning another next Feb.
I just joined a local running club so I can have someone to train with on my weekend long runs, question is if I run my week day runs at Maff or below is it ok to not Maff on my long run? Kind of use that as a "race". But not really racing, just a comfortable run, but not Maff. I've actually been doing this the last couple of weeks, I feel good, plus I think I'm improving more.
Thanks in advance
Gina
You can do whatever you want. You ask if it is okay, what do you mean by that? Is it okay with you? What are your goals? What are you attempting to do by doing any miles at MAF and under? Are you commited to a full MAF program, or just in part? It's all up to you. Keep track of what happens with whatever your choices and experiments are, and over time, you'll figure it all out. Keep going.
--Jimmy
Current MAF Training
My Running World
IP: Logged |
kcy1998
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-18-2006 07:35 PM
Everyone!
Today was another milestone. I did a 8 mile run and the last 4 miles were run @ a 08:57 pace :-) while my HR was @ MAF! Since I am doing Chicago in less than 10 weeks I have been throwing in a Temp and other speed work. Not to mention finishing up my long runs @ MP. I am not staying 100% MAF. Since I started back on Jan 09 and I ran 4 miles at a 14:30 pace I figure success. Now hopefully I can achieve my goal of running Chicago at a 08:00 pace. I want to say a special thanks to Jesse and Jimmy who have provided a wealth of information. From my experience I say give MAF a try but remember everyone is an experiemtn of one!
kcy------------------
My Running Page
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-19-2006 12:58 AM
quote:
Originally posted by effzee:
I've ben experiementing with maf for two weeks and it's t-o-u-g-h, especially on my legs. I actually feel like I'm going to injure myself running this slowly, I get very stiff and feel uncoordinated. My maf is 138 minus 5 because injuries have been an issue for me most of my running life. Maybe I should add that 5 points back to the equation? It doesn't make much difference, though.I'm wondering about the formula itself. Why 180 minus age? This obviously means that your maf goes down a point every year. But isn't age somewhat relative? I'm 42 and recently topped my max HR at 195.The pace I feel really comfortable at is ~160bps which for me translates to almost exactly 6min./km, a little over 9 !/2 min./mile. It's the pace I slip into when I don't think too much, lol. I can maintain this easily on my 15-mile long runs with no drinking or eating. Am I in my fat-burning, aerobic mode anyway? How can I tell? And this pace seems to fall into the "junk" miles range mentioned here. What am I to make of all this?
Not much I can tell you other than to ask yourself why you are
considering MAF training. If there's no real reason, then I'd
recommend you pick the heart rate you like and use it and
probably not to bother with the heart rate monitor. It's not a
good way to go for someone who does not have good reasons
to do it. Out of the thousands of posts to this and previous
versions of this thread, that's been pretty consistent. The
way to tell what percentage of fat vs carb you use for fuel
in a run (this is not exactly the same as how much fat you have
burned, by the way) is to have a vo2max test done. They will
measure oxygen intake and CO2 exhaust and from this they
get a measure of respiratory quotient, which therein tells what
percentage of fat vs carb is used as a fuel source at your full
range of intensities (i.e., heart rates). Read up, think about
what reasons you would have for doing a MAF style of training
and decide for yourself if it's for you. If you're just walking at
the MAF heart rate, well, that can drive you away from such
an approach. I can spew out a few facts - (1) my max heart
rate is 210 or more and I run most of my training runs at
139 (MAF-10), whereas before starting MAF running, my runs
were at 160-195, (2) my first run at MAF heart rate on a treadmill
was at 3.7 mph to keep my HR below 145, (3) my overall
training pace is a good bit lower than it was before MAF
training, but I've blown away all of my old PRs in less than
one year's time slowing down, and (4) I do a good bit of
mileage and supplement with a lot of biking and swimming
as well, all below MAF. Yes, MAF goes down by a beat per year, but it's pretty much
in the noise. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-19-2006 01:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by geez:
Question for Jesse or anyone else,
Background: I've been running for about 3.5 years, been Maffing since April. I've seen some improvemnet, not a lot, I run about 25-30 miles weekly. I ran my first marathon last February and I'm planning another next Feb.
I just joined a local running club so I can have someone to train with on my weekend long runs, question is if I run my week day runs at Maff or below is it ok to not Maff on my long run? Kind of use that as a "race". But not really racing, just a comfortable run, but not Maff. I've actually been doing this the last couple of weeks, I feel good, plus I think I'm improving more.
Thanks in advance
Gina
I agree with Jimmy on his response. It's all in what you want to do.
If there's a reason you are doing MAF training and it supercedes all
other running desires and needs, then you'll want to stick with it.
If MAF running is kind of a novelty for you, then you'll certainly
get more enjoyment, at least for the moment, running with some
company. Keep track of what you're doing and see if it works for
you. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-19-2006 09:40 AM
quote:
Originally posted by effzee:
I've ben experiementing with maf for two weeks and it's t-o-u-g-h, especially on my legs. I actually feel like I'm going to injure myself running this slowly, I get very stiff and feel uncoordinated. My maf is 138 minus 5 because injuries have been an issue for me most of my running life. Maybe I should add that 5 points back to the equation? It doesn't make much difference, though.I'm wondering about the formula itself. Why 180 minus age? This obviously means that your maf goes down a point every year. But isn't age somewhat relative? I'm 42 and recently topped my max HR at 195.The pace I feel really comfortable at is ~160bps which for me translates to almost exactly 6min./km, a little over 9 !/2 min./mile. It's the pace I slip into when I don't think too much, lol. I can maintain this easily on my 15-mile long runs with no drinking or eating. Am I in my fat-burning, aerobic mode anyway? How can I tell? And this pace seems to fall into the "junk" miles range mentioned here. What am I to make of all this?
It's simple as pie. You either want to give MAF training a real go to see what happens, or you don't. If you don't, then by all means, have a great time doing whatever it is you like to do, and may you meet your goals, whatever they are. If you do, then the way it works is you take 180-age (with the add-ons or subtractions of beats for different runners), then stay below that number on all your miles for a period of time. Most are very slow at first, and it feels like your legs are getting stressed in a whole new way--because they are. You are running with mostly slow-twitch fibers for a change, which probably have not been worked like that before, and thus the whole new type of soreness. If you build your miles, the slowness will be temporary. You'll burn more fat in your fuel mix, and you'll have greater endurance. If you don't like using 180-age, try 65% MHR and below. That will keep you aerobic. I think that is the function of the formula. It keeps most runners down in that range. Maffetone ascertained it from all the runners he's worked with--found it worked pretty well as a guideline. So, basically, you are either doing the program, or your not. Just one or two runs out of five under MAF is not the program--that would be something else. Nothing I see that says you can't make your own up, it just wouldn't be MAF training. BTW, I don't believe there are any "junk" miles. If someone believes they are junk, why bother doing them? Good luck! --Jimmy Current MAF Training
My Running World
IP: Logged |
OnlyWhnChasd
Cool Runner |
posted Aug-19-2006 02:32 PM
Just wanted to check in with a 6-week update on my progress at MAF.Though I've been at it for a short time, so far I'm really encouraged by the progress I'm seeing. Six weeks ago when I started, my first week averaged a pace of 13:00. My average pace for this week was 11:01. This was the first week that I cracked 11:00 and that was a very exciting milestone for me. I did a 9 miler on Wednesday at 10:49 and finished up my week with 13 miler today at 10:56. I'm still a long way from my goal of 8:30, but since I just started MAF and have already seen progress, I'm encouraged that it may happen. So far I'm really loving MAF. Sure my runs take longer, but I feel so much better and so much more in control now than I did when all of my runs in the 170-178+ range (my MAF is 151 and I average 148 during runs). I don't dread my long runs anymore, I look forward to them. I no longer get the crippling fatigue I used to by the end and usually have more mental fatigue than physical. Best of all, NO injuries! Not worrying about speed has given me the opportunity to work on my form and become a better, more efficient runner. I'll be running a local HM on September 24 and will check in again after that. I don't really have a goal set for it yet. Really though, since I missed my last half due to injury, I'll be happy just making the race! Thanks for the great thread Jesse! Count me in as a MAF believer! Emy
IP: Logged |
 |
