| Author |
Topic: Low HR training/base-building ala Maffetone/Mark Allen |
jabernstein
Cool Runner |
 posted Oct-30-2006 01:31 PM
  
Instead of buh bump, saliva or dish soap, go to a pharmacy and buy generic EKG/electrode cream or gel. It works great and costs about $1.95 for 8 oz. (It is the same as buh bump at a fraction of the cost.)
IP: Logged |
jabernstein
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 01:38 PM
To get a great reading on your HRM, instead of buh bump, saliva or dish soap, go to a pharmacy and buy generic electrode cream or gel. It works great and costs about $4 for 9 oz. It is the same as buh bump at a fraction of the cost. I've been using it for years
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 03:36 PM
I use the Garmin 301 and love it. It gives distance and time and by pushing a button I can see heart rate and average pace and even the distance back to my car or home if I told the garmin to remember those locations.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 06:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gregw:
A week ago Saturday, I do a 9 mile warmup (under MAF) and run 3.5 miles at 7:50 pace and 170 bpm. Today 170 is worth at best 8:45 min/mi from the get go. I don't think I'm sick. I did 3 near identical 6-mile runs on Tu/We/Th this week at 9:35mm/140bpm, 9:33mm/139bpm, 9:35mm/141. Mr. Consistent. Today when it counted? Well, that's another story.The *only* thing I can think of that's in common with MCM 05 and 06 (where I had another miserable effort) is my attempt to carbo load. Maybe I over did it. I also woke up and ate at 4:30 (race ended up starting at 8:35). I normally run on an empty stomach and have had some terrible runs in the afternoon after lunch. I don't know. I'm really grasping. I'm also not sure I'm really a "taper guy." I feel like such a slug by race day. Who knows.
Other than the fact that you didn't meet your primary goal, it doesn't
look all that negative to me. Clearly you really didn't push hard for
the first few miles, and I would guess it has to do with that MCM
mob. Next, it takes a while to really learn how to run a marathon
by heart rate. There's really no reason to assume that you can
go with a heart rate target and that will mean anything at all. It's
taken me about 5 or 6 marathons to really get the marathon by
heart rate thing down. I definitely think you should give NCR
marathon a run and I bet you'll see improvement for many reasons,
especially if you feel fully recovered already. I don't do well by
tapering either, but I really don't have much to taper from since
I don't do much in the way of aggressive training. Since I run by
pure endurance and little speed, tapers just take away from my
conditioning. I think this was just your first step to some significant
improvements in marathon running, and there will be many more
learning experiences I'm sure.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 08:16 PM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
I definitely think you should give NCR
marathon a run and I bet you'll see improvement for many reasons,
especially if you feel fully recovered already.
Well, I definitely don't feel fully recovered already! I can barely walk. This feels just like the last 3 and I'll probably shuffle around a few miles on Wednesday. I'd try tomorrow, but my quads are so week, I'm afraid I'll mess up my knee. Maybe I'll use the elliptical. I can't believe you ran 3 marathons in a row. That's insane! Anyway, I'll think seriously about giving to give the NCR marathon a shot. I'm supposed to run a 5K turkey trot the Thursday before that Saturday, but maybe I'll bag it. I kind of like the idea of running a "casual" marathon to work the kinks out. Hopefully I have the miles in the bank to try such a thing. I have the Disney Goofy challenge (which I'm not doing seriously), so this would be 3 marathons in 10 weeks. Can't believe I'm seriously thinking about this. I really don't think the HRM kept me down in this thing. I was fading at Hains Point (~18) and HRM or not I couldn't keep pace. There's something else. Not sure how to figure it out except to experiment. OK, I'm rambling. Thanks for the advice. Greg
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 09:35 PM
Ok, I'm noticing we're reaching "that point" in this thread again
where it's taking so long to get a post up and it's probably affecting
the rest of the site as well. I think this weekend it will be time to
start the thread anew. I like to get the old one copied first.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-30-2006 10:31 PM
Good idea, Jesse. Getting slow. Losing it's sharpness!--Jimmy Current Marathon Training
My Running World MAF training source:
Training for Endurance by Phil Maffetone
IP: Logged |
Boston124
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-31-2006 08:54 AM
Hey ~~Okay, first, Jesse, don't roll your eyes as you read this. You probably thought I already bought one, right??!! I have been looking at HR/speed/distance running watches for quite sometime! I think I have narrowed it down to either the Garmin 305, or Polar r200sd or s625x ( I hope I have those model #'s right!!) My main criteria has been to find a watch that will show when I have gone a mile and tell me the average HR for that mile and the miles thereafter. Lots of my running routes I don't know the distance and have to get in the car and find the mileage. So, as I run along, I want to look at the watch and see that I have gone *X* miles, When I get back from the run, I want to see a list of the miles, pace, and average HR for each mile. I watch all the posts here, and see lists that other posts. I want to be able to do that as well. So, before this major purchase I thought I'd ask this group of runners what they use, if they like it, are sorry they purchased what they did and what they would get instead. Thanks
Kris
IP: Logged |
breger1
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-31-2006 09:04 AM
The Garmin 305 does all you are looking for and more. I love mine and can't imagine running without it!Bill ------------------
Bill's Profile
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-31-2006 01:00 PM
Does the Polar 200sd allow the data to be uploaded to a computer? If so, is this an additional purchase? I personally have a Garmin 305 and have had great results with it so far. I use sportstracks.com for my software with it. Very good stuff. 
IP: Logged |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
posted Oct-31-2006 01:21 PM
I have the Garmin 301 and love it. The 305 is better than what I have.Polar has a better heart rate monitor and the strap is more comfortable. The footpod on the Polar will work on a treadmill. The Garmin is GPS and won't work on a treadmill.( It will show that you stayed in the same spot). The Polar is harder to upload data to your computer. The Polar watch sometimes locks up. Actually both Garmin and Polar can do this but I have seen more complaints on the Polar. With the Garmin you can tell it to remember where your house is, or where your car is parked or where your hotel is. And you can hit a button and it will tell you how far it is back to your marked spot (house car etc) and it will have a little arrow point the direction back to your home. That is as the crow flies though straight line from you to marked spot. You may have to go around buildings or hills. You can also bring up a screen with little dots that show the path you took. You can retrace your route that way. Polar can't do that. Polar is better at giving you instaneous pace. All gps units including Garmin are not so good at instant pace, but are good for average pace over say the last mile. Both are good units just depends on what extra features you want. I think Polar is discontinuing the 200rs and going with the new 400/800 models. I heard Garmin just came out with a footpod as an extra to the 305 and 205, that would give you instant pace and treadmill data, but have not seen any reports on it yet.
IP: Logged |
purfledspruce
Member |
posted Oct-31-2006 03:09 PM
I have a Garmin 305 and I love it. I did have a problem with it, it worked for a while but then it was "seeing" 5 satellites with black bars and another 3 satellites with clear bars and still wasn't locking on...but I emailed garmin and they immediately replaced the HRM. It's pretty amazing that a watch can communicate with satellites traveling 7.5+ kilometers per SECOND, and are hundreds of kilometers away (I don't remember the altitude of the GPS birds, but they're at least 600km up...) However, to measure a route's distance, you don't need a watch that can measure it. Just go to "www.routeruler.com" -- you can download a program that will let you load a map (you can take any .bmp map or use one from their website) and you can figure out how far you ran. I used it to verify that a 1/4 mile track is 1/4 mile on the outside lane but not on the inside lane...so it's pretty accurate. -Jason
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-01-2006 09:27 AM
"Running this way wins you no races or admirers. You impress no one by running gently and running long, because you go against the grains of both the serious runners and the confirmed non-movers."I thought this was an apt quote for maffers. It's from Joe Henderson's Long Run Solution (not to be confused with his more popular Long Slow Distance). It's a nice little book. It's more about running as a part of life than running as a part of a training program. [This message has been edited by gregw (edited Nov-01-2006).]
IP: Logged |
purfledspruce
Member |
posted Nov-01-2006 01:13 PM
Jesse,Since you want to start a new thread, and I assume you'll start the new one the same way that you did this one--with a link to your FAQ--I was wondering if you'd be interested in any comments on your FAQ before we start the new thread. Of course, if you don't want to change anything, feel free to say: "Lump it, Jason, I've already done a lot of work on this simply to help people!!" As someone completely new to Maffetone four weeks ago, I would have liked to have seen at least three other questions answered there (that you've answered on this forum quite a few times): Q) What does MAF stand for?
A) Maximum Aerobic Function, it's the heart rate at which you reach your maximum aerobic limit. This is generally estimated by the following formula: 180-age (-10/-5/0/+5 depending on activity and injury level) [I'd describe fully what's in the parentheses but you know what I mean] Q) WHAT?!?! Why so low?
A) The MAF equation is based on a statistical sampling of people. Most people who use this formula will find that they are working out at a level that does not trigger the anaerobic system. [then you can point to your already existing question #
18. Is this the same as running at x% of heart rate reserve or of max heart rate?] The third one is more of an addition to your question #4: Q) Scientifically, what is happening with this approach?
A) You are training your aerobic system, which includes using more fat (vs carbohydrate) for fuel and using slow-twitch muscle fibers as well as building mitochondria. I THINK that low heart rate running also builds capillaries in the muscles that are being used. Is that correct? If so, it might be good to put in. If not, well, I'm wrong! Anyhoo, just some thoughts. Cheers, -Jason
IP: Logged |
purfledspruce
Member |
posted Nov-01-2006 01:22 PM
Greg,[quote]Running this way wins you no races or admirers. You impress no one by running gently and running long, because you go against the grains of both the serious runners and the confirmed non-movers.[\quote] I'm not sure that the first part of this is true--running this way might win you races--and some admirers, too. (Just look at Jesse if you want someone who runs this way and has admirers!) But that's beside the point. The quote is a beautiful encapsulation of why we run--we run for ourselves, not for others. Sometimes, when that grandmother with the walker is passing me by while I feel like I'm running backwards because I'm running so slowly, I forget that. Thanks. -Jason
IP: Logged |
PerfesserR
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-01-2006 05:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Boston124:
Hey ~~
I think I have narrowed it down to either the Garmin 305, or Polar r200sd or s625x ( I hope I have those model #'s right!!)
I just bought the new Polar RS800, the new watch that records HR, altitude, pace, distance (it's an update to the 625x). It's got a smaller/lighter shoe pod than the 625. I haven't had time to check it out thoroughly, but on today's run it seemed to be very accurate in distance. It's expensive, but you might want to look at it.
IP: Logged |
PerfesserR
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-01-2006 05:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Boston124:
Hey ~~
I think I have narrowed it down to either the Garmin 305, or Polar r200sd or s625x ( I hope I have those model #'s right!!)
I just bought the new Polar RS800, the new watch that records HR, altitude, pace, distance (it's an update to the 625x). It's got a smaller/lighter shoe pod than the 625. I haven't had time to check it out thoroughly, but on today's run it seemed to be very accurate in distance. It's expensive, but you might want to look at it.
One other thing--the Polar software is not Mac-compatible, even with emualtion software running Windoze.
IP: Logged |
Southern Man
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-01-2006 05:54 PM
Okay, as a newbie to running w/ a HRM, I have two questions:1. What do you do about hills? I run in an area of rolling hills. I'm trying to keep my heart rate less than ~133. Downhill or flats this is slow but fine. Up even a modest hill I can't keep it less than 140 (and that's if I'm really careful). If I'm not careful, it quickly shoots to 150. 2. After about an hour running slow I have to speed up a little to keep my heart rate near my target. If I don't I quickly sink to the low 120s. I'm not really worried about this, but curious about what is happening. Does this mean I am exhausting the slowest of my slow twitch fibers and have to switch to use those which are somewhat more conditioned? Also, thanks for posting that Joe Henderson link. Good stuff there. Southern Man ------------------
We're on a road to nowhere. Come on along.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-01-2006 06:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Southern Man:
Okay, as a newbie to running w/ a HRM, I have two questions:1. What do you do about hills? I run in an area of rolling hills. I'm trying to keep my heart rate less than ~133. Downhill or flats this is slow but fine. Up even a modest hill I can't keep it less than 140 (and that's if I'm really careful). If I'm not careful, it quickly shoots to 150. 2. After about an hour running slow I have to speed up a little to keep my heart rate near my target. If I don't I quickly sink to the low 120s. I'm not really worried about this, but curious about what is happening. Does this mean I am exhausting the slowest of my slow twitch fibers and have to switch to use those which are somewhat more conditioned? Also, thanks for posting that Joe Henderson link. Good stuff there. Southern Man
1. Slow down. A lot! I live in an area with all massive hills, no
flats, except on the treadmill or track. For a while, I had to walk
up the hills. I've learned to run what I call "the wog" which is a
nice shuffle up the steep hills. It gets better, I promise! It is
definitely painful for a while. And when you're going down,
speed up! You shouldn't need to recover on the downs if you're
controlling the ups. The downs are your speed work. The good
news is that while the ups will be very painful for a while, this
will really help your racing efficiency for hilly marathons (and
ultras) and steep downs will provide great aerobic speed work. 2. If your heart rate is going down and your pace is staying the
same then that means you have just gotten warmed up! If
after 20 miles of running, your heart rate is lower than when
you started and you are at the same pace, then the best
name for you is LUCKY!
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
ZimGrlRun
Member |
posted Nov-01-2006 09:50 PM
New MAFF Kid:Alright, I officially started my MAFF training yesterday. I did 8.51 miles, mixture of hills and flats. My MAFF is 155. I slowed way down to keep my heart rate under 155, and I succeded 99% of the time. My heart rate was abnormally high at the beginning, hit 208 which is my Max HR, but stabilized after about 1 min into running. Ocassionally when I was going up the hills, it would go to 156 and I will just slow down or walk a little bit. Here is what I accomplished: Distance: 8.51 miles
Avg HR: 149
Max HR: 208 (for like 1 min)
Time: 1:40
Pace: 11:45
I usually train around 9:30. I will post reasonable results after a few weeks that show progress. Just wanted you guys to know that count me in in MAFF training. [This message has been edited by ZimGrlRun (edited Nov-01-2006).]
IP: Logged |
gregw
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-02-2006 07:33 AM
quote:
Originally posted by ZimGrlRun:
[BMy heart rate was abnormally high at the beginning, hit 208 which is my Max HR, but stabilized after about 1 min into running.][/B]
This is probably not real. HRMs often give goofy results in the first few minutes before you break a sweat and the electrodes make good contact. Welcome to maff where the living is slow... Greg
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-03-2006 08:17 AM
quote:
Originally posted by ZimGrlRun:
New MAFF Kid:Alright, I officially started my MAFF training yesterday. I did 8.51 miles, mixture of hills and flats. My MAFF is 155. I slowed way down to keep my heart rate under 155, and I succeded 99% of the time. My heart rate was abnormally high at the beginning, hit 208 which is my Max HR, but stabilized after about 1 min into running. Ocassionally when I was going up the hills, it would go to 156 and I will just slow down or walk a little bit. Here is what I accomplished: Distance: 8.51 miles
Avg HR: 149
Max HR: 208 (for like 1 min)
Time: 1:40
Pace: 11:45
I usually train around 9:30. I will post reasonable results after a few weeks that show progress. Just wanted you guys to know that count me in in MAFF training. [This message has been edited by ZimGrlRun (edited Nov-01-2006).]
I believe you'll be back to 9:30-10:00ish before you know it, but with a bit of a difference--you'll be more of an aerobic machine!
Keep going!
--Jimmy Current Marathon Training
My Running World MAF training source:
Training for Endurance by Phil Maffetone
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-03-2006 08:32 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Cashmason:
I have lost 20 pounds since Jan 1 when I started using Maf. But I have also run 469 miles in that time, and I try to keep to a sensible diet and reasonable portions. I do cheat once a month and have a pizza or something else thats not so great.I have also gone from a 16 minute mile pace at Maf to a 12:30 pace at Maf, in that time frame.
Awesome. Isn't it weird how 12:30 can feel like you're flying? Wait until you get to 10:00!
Good work. Enjoy that pizza. -Jimmy Current Marathon Training
My Running World MAF training source:
Training for Endurance by Phil Maffetone
IP: Logged |
Boston124
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-03-2006 09:27 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by breger1:
[B]The Garmin 305 does all you are looking for and more. I love mine and can't imagine running without it!Bill -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those interested....I purchase the Garmin 305!!!
I am excited, alittle leary, and pray I can figure it out and make the most of it!!!! Many thanks to all who helped.
NOW, I can (hopefully) post my MAFF tests and let you all figure out what it means!!!! Have a nice relaxing weekend and stay warm!!! Here in Chicago, (the suburbs, that is) it was 21 this a.m.!!! Not fun! Kris
IP: Logged |
landofvanilla
Cool Runner |
posted Nov-03-2006 10:22 AM
Hi all, a little progress report after 2 weeks on MAF. I went straight into MAF after 30 mile/weeks of relatively hard running (8:50's for 4-6 miles, 9:30's for 10 miles). My first run at MAF was 5 miles at 12:54/mile. Two weeks later, it has deteriorated to around 15-16:00/mile, for some odd reason. But last night, I think I found my stride. I'd been keeping a conservative MAF number, with my runs averaging 137-140bpm (I'm just 22 years old and have run for over a year with no injuries or meds). When I saw my pace get worse than ever after 2 miles, I just got frustrated and picked up the pace. Surprisingly, my HR stayed around 142, hitting 145 occasionally and dipping as low as 137. Even on hills I did not have to walk and it still did not top 145. The stride felt natural and I felt like I was running for the first time in weeks, even though it was probably a 14:00/mile. Given my age, 142 is probably still well into my aerobic zone. I finished the run with a 140 average but I feel like the next 3-6 months will be much easier mentally now that I'm in a groove. This is coming from someone who started the program probably more skeptical than anyone else. I hope posting these encouraging resutls does not jinx me... On an endnote, before MAF, the longest time I've ever run in one outing was ~1:35, and ~4:30 in a week. I ran for 2:15 last sunday and 7:30 for the week. I had to bump up the time to maintain comparable mileage now that I'm running more slowly. My legs are pretty sore from having to use different muscles at this new pace, but cardiovascularly, I feel like I haven't done anything in the last 2 weeks. If nothing else, I found I can devote more than 4 hrs/week to running, so when I return to my 9:00/miles, I can ramp up to 60+mpw without feeling bound by time. Also, running at MAF encourages me to take my long runs SLOW. Just a few weeks ago, I couldn't bear it if they went over 10:00/mile. I know two weeks isn't concrete enough evidence but hopefully this encourages those who are otherwise too pessimistic to try a new program. ------------------
My Profile
IP: Logged |
 |
