posted Mar-31-2006 08:05 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Mar-31-2006 08:32 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by gregw:
If your resting heart rate is say 50 then (193-50)*.7 + 50 = 150.

As Jesse will surely point out :-) one problem with heart rate reserve is that the target heart rate goes higher the worse shape you are in, since that corresponds to a higher resting heart rate.

---

I'm becoming too predictable. Kind of a broken record. Anyone
remember what those are?

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Mar-31-2006 08:38 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Miamirunner:
I guess now after reading this forum I'm trying to decide which is the more accurate approach to HR training....Parker's or Maffetone's?

---

There are 2,963.7 "right" answers. The simple answer is to pick one
that you believe in and stick with it for a while. I like Maffetone's
approach because I think it is simple - I strain my brain enough at work -
I'd rather not use it much when I'm running. I do correlate it with the
results of my vo2max tests I've had, my own running data, and data
that others are kind enough to share with me and henceforth, I believe
in it. You can come up with logical justifications for any approach and
you might want to look at people's real-life experiences to determine what
may be up your alley. Do you feel that any of the things I mention in
my FAQ #1 apply to you, particularly in terms of short-long distance
race time correlation?

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 12:31 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Miamirunner:
I'm trying to decide which is the more accurate approach to HR training....Parker's or Maffetone's?

---

Sounds like you can't go wrong either way. Parker has you at 135, which would be MAF-10. It won't hurt at all working down there. You could always combine them. Maffetone has you at 146. Sounds like you have a zone right there, 135-146.

Ultimately, it comes down to commiting to one or the other for at least 12 weeks--see how it goes.

It wouldn't hurt to figure out your true max heart rate with a running test of some kind. That would get rid of part of the mystery.

Maffetone has me at 141 (180-age 44 + 5 for experience), or 71% MHR or 65% HRR.

Good luck. I wish you the best in your training.

--Jimmy

My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 12:34 AM               

--Jimmy

My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 10:46 AM               

Mile 1: 9:39/124
Mile 2: 8:52/132
Mile 3: 8:53/134
Mile 4: 8:48/134
Mile 5: 8:26/138
Mile 6: 8:41/138
Mile 7: 8:55/137
Mile 8: 8:53/135

Needless to say I am pleased. I'm 40 yrs. old so my Maff is 140 and I'm at about 40 mpw. I'm trying to get to an 8 minute pace at these heartrates but don't know if it will take 2 more of these training cycles or not. My thinking right now is why ever leave this type of training in the first place? Right now I've just started adding back my Tues. night Tempo run. It doesn't seem to be eroding at my aerobic base so far. Man this is exciting! If I can someday do a 20 mile training run at an 8 minute pace all at a fairly low HR then I should have a decent shot at Boston! So to sum up I have no intentions at this point of abandoning this type of training unless I absolutely see myself stagnating. By the way, I run at least 2 of my 5 runs per week in the Maff-10 range where I never let my heartrate go over 130. This may be a key for those who are seeing no progress over the long haul. Good luck to all!

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 10:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Behnke:
Just wanted to again post my Maffetone progress. I'm 18 weeks in to this training and still dropping my times but not sure how much lower I will go, but I'm going to find out. I started in the high 10 minute range for a 3 mile run in mid Nov. My run from yesterday was as follows:

Mile 1: 9:39/124
Mile 2: 8:52/132
Mile 3: 8:53/134
Mile 4: 8:48/134
Mile 5: 8:26/138
Mile 6: 8:41/138
Mile 7: 8:55/137
Mile 8: 8:53/135

Needless to say I am pleased. I'm 40 yrs. old so my Maff is 140 and I'm at about 40 mpw. I'm trying to get to an 8 minute pace at these heartrates but don't know if it will take 2 more of these training cycles or not. My thinking right now is why ever leave this type of training in the first place? Right now I've just started adding back my Tues. night Tempo run. It doesn't seem to be eroding at my aerobic base so far. Man this is exciting! If I can someday do a 20 mile training run at an 8 minute pace all at a fairly low HR then I should have a decent shot at Boston! So to sum up I have no intentions at this point of abandoning this type of training unless I absolutely see myself stagnating. By the way, I run at least 2 of my 5 runs per week in the Maff-10 range where I never let my heartrate go over 130. This may be a key for those who are seeing no progress over the long haul. Good luck to all!

---

Congrats on the progress! At 40, I'll be amazed if you don't qualify
for Boston in your next marathon. My crude little pace calculator
would have you in the 3:20s or better and I don't think 3:20 would
be out of the question. And you've hit on to the same
thing I have - why would I add anything else given how well things
are working now?

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 11:54 AM               

Keep at it. Congrats on all your hard work and progress--and positive attitude!

--Jimmy

My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment
My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 12:02 PM               

--Jimmy

Coolrunning profiles:
My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 12:29 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Now, as reported, i just ran 71 miles in the past 7 days. Today I went out and ran 7, and I couldn't believe how good I felt (knock on wood, I bow to your supreme power, running gods and goddesses). And it was hot (for my body at this point) and humid. My 7 mile run times are progressing rather quickly in the past few weeks. This might be a one day anomaly, but I have never felt this good after running 78 miles in 8 days. So far so good with this form of training.

--Jimmy

Coolrunning profiles:
My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment

---

sounds like it's really kicking in! you're getting the bug.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 12:40 PM               

IP: Logged

posted Apr-01-2006 01:12 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by vashondan:
Just discovered this thread and interested so ordered the Maffetone book. While I wait for it, is there, somewhere in this thread, the formula that you use for calculating MHR under this plan? Thanks.

---

This approach does not depend on max heart rate. If you look at
item #1 in my FAQ, you'll see some links from Maffetone and
Mark Allen that talk about the approach. In either case, if you choose
an approach that uses % of max heart rate, you shouldn't use a formula
to get it, but that's a different story.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

[This message has been edited by leitnerj (edited Apr-01-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 10:08 AM            

Quick question. I had calculated my MHR as 191 based on the 220-age formula. However, yesterday when I was really pushing it in a time trial I hit 198. I know that this doesn't change my MAF targets HR, but I'm wondering what it means for my general fitness level? Don't the really fit have lower MHRs than the formula predicts??

Here I was, thinking I was in really good shape until I bought the damn HR monitor...

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 12:14 PM            

The thing is that while my HR is kept under MAF, I find that I'm usually running at a perceived effort that is not necessarily an "easy pace". The only time that my heart rate threatens to climb over 130 is on a long hill....

My pace averages to about 9mm at medium to longer distances and it has been there for at least a year or so. Feels like a plateau where I'm not getting faster and maintaining that pace at MAF isn't much easier either.

My question is, does the fact that running at or below MAF feels like a reasonable effort, imply that my aerobic fitness is fairly decent and that I should do some pushing of the envelope to get myself to a new level?

I'd like to pick up my speed for HM and marathon in the Fall and am looking for guidance as to where to go at this point.

Thanks.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 12:25 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by kellyalittlebit:
Hello again. My training is going pretty well. I've been upping my mileage but still cannot 'run' under my MAF HR. However, my time trials show that I'm getting faster on both the bike and treadmill, so that's ok.

Quick question. I had calculated my MHR as 191 based on the 220-age formula. However, yesterday when I was really pushing it in a time trial I hit 198. I know that this doesn't change my MAF targets HR, but I'm wondering what it means for my general fitness level? Don't the really fit have lower MHRs than the formula predicts??

Here I was, thinking I was in really good shape until I bought the damn HR monitor...

---

No, there's no connection between fitness and max heart rate.
Fitness is closely connected with resting heart rate.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 12:28 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mrwizard:
I almost always run at or below my MAF (131), averaging usually in the mid to upper 120s over most runs.

The thing is that while my HR is kept under MAF, I find that I'm usually running at a perceived effort that is not necessarily an "easy pace". The only time that my heart rate threatens to climb over 130 is on a long hill....

My pace averages to about 9mm at medium to longer distances and it has been there for at least a year or so. Feels like a plateau where I'm not getting faster and maintaining that pace at MAF isn't much easier either.

My question is, does the fact that running at or below MAF feels like a reasonable effort, imply that my aerobic fitness is fairly decent and that I should do some pushing of the envelope to get myself to a new level?

I'd like to pick up my speed for HM and marathon in the Fall and am looking for guidance as to where to go at this point.

Thanks.

---

It could mean one of two things: (1) as you said, if you have a very
high level of aerobic fitness, it can start to become challenging to
keep up the pace at MAF HR - the test here is to see if any of
the "criteria" I've defined at the beginning of the FAQ link apply to
you today, or (2) you have a very low max heart rate - if you do, you
should follow Hadd's advice (article is linked in the FAQ) on finding
your target low HR. In that case, you'll have to do a realistic test
to the highest level of achievable exertion (after proper warmup) to
find your max.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 12:31 PM               

After my 71 minute performance in the RRCA 10 mile course
a few weeks ago, I decided that I wanted to push a bit to
break 70, since this is a much easier course. Weather was
great. We didn't got to packet pick-up yesterday, so we had
a sense of urgency to get to the race area before 7:15 to
get our packets. After a brisk walk for a bit, it became
clear that we weren't going to make it, so I grabbed my wife's
and my confirmation mailings and ran very quickly to the start,
getting there at 7:10 (it turned out that they seemed to go
well beyond that, but oh well). I got our packets, numbers,
and chips in time to put everything on, drop my bag off and
get another mile or so of warm-up jogging in. With no pace
markers at all and feeling not too aggressive, I eased into
the starting pack, clearly way too far back. When I crossed
the starting line a bit over 2 minutes after the race started,
I spent the entire first couple of miles running back and forth,
on the sidewalks, curbs, sometimes backwards, just to get around
everyone. A needless waste of much extra effort and distance
traveled. This reminded me of my experience in Marine Corps
Marathon as well. Next time, I'm shoving my way as far to the
front as possible. The only positive thing about it is that
you are passing people continuously all the way through to the
end. After about 3 miles into the race, the pack finally
started to break apart a bit and I was able to get into a rhythm.
By 4 miles, I knew how much extra I had traveled to get around
everyone - over 1/4 mile off. Oh well. I hit the 10k point
at 42:30, which is a new PR for me for the 10k. I progressively
kicked it up a few notches as time went on and I decided to
bring my heart rate over my lactate threshold (at least my
last measure determination of it) with about 3.5 miles to go.
I hit the 10 mile point of actual distance traveled at 67:29,
and shortly thereafter finished at chip time of 69:12. Splits
and average heart rate over each split were:
6:52/163, 6:46/172, 6:57/172, 6:44/173, 6:53/173,
6:36/175, 6:50/176, 6:37/176, 6:41/180, 6:27/182,
1:42(5:49/mi)/188. Though I kicked it in a bit at the end,
I wasn't overly stressed and I didn't max out my HR, so clearly
I saved a little bit of something. That's fine, I need to have
as much in the bank as possible for my 50 miler next week. Today
was my second tempo run of the year - I still haven't gotten
into speedwork just yet. I may be able to hold out until next
year, depending on my level of patience!

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 07:07 PM            

Again we ran the same race. I had a 5:24 PR today (although my old PR was soft since I ran it on 20mpw after only running for four months).

Now to make this somewhat relevant to the thread... My 1:19:25 time today was almost exactly equivalent to my 47:21 10K in February according to mcmillan's running calculator, but during the 10K my heart rate averaged 178 and I averaged 182 for this race. I ran 40:50/175 for the first half while paying attention my heart rate (and dodging some traffic) and 38:35/188 for the second half while ignoring it and trying to hit my goal of 1:20. (Note: the times don't add up to the chip time because somehow my watch said 1:19:23 even though I believe I hit it early and not late at the start.)

I would have expected my average heart rate to be considerably lower for the 10-miler than the 10K. The only thing I can think that accounts for the discrepancy is that the temps were lower (30's versus 50's) and I was much more tired entering the 10K. (I was near the peak of Pfitz marathon training and ran 43 miles in the 6 days before, including an interval session.)

So here's what I learned: your heart rate can vary a lot based on circumstances and sometimes it's good to ignore that thing on your wrist. I also learned that negative splits can be quite fun! I ran the second half faster than my 5-mile PR (from my one and only 5-miler last fall) and my last 3 miles were at or below my 10K PR pace. (OK, so they were downhill...)

Greg

[This message has been edited by gregw (edited Apr-02-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 07:44 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by gregw:

So here's what I learned: your heart rate can vary a lot based on circumstances and sometimes it's good to ignore that thing on your wrist. I also learned that negative splits can be quite fun! I ran the second half faster than my 5-mile PR (from my one and only 5-miler last fall) and my last 3 miles were at or below my 10K PR pace. (OK, so they were downhill...)

---

This is a very true statement and it's the reason why I don't
generally recommend to people a specific a priori heart rate
at which to run. However, I do think it can be helpful if you
find a pace that feels right, keep in mind some of your
"hard" cutoffs, such as lactate threshold and max heart rate,
if you know them, and just kinda use that HR as a reference for the race.
I'm still learning what's best, still conservative, but I feel that
I'm getting a little bit less conservative each successive race.
Congrats on your PR as well! Even if the last one was soft, 5+ mins
is a lot over 10 miles.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-02-2006 11:15 PM               

3/25/06......15.14
3/26/06......13.20 (7 mile plus 6.2mi race)
3/27/06......rest
3/28/06......7.16
3/29/06......15.10
3/30/06......7.25
3/31/06......13.36
4/1/06.........7.16
4/2/06......22.08

Today, I let my HR drift up to my 70%hrr (151) by the last mile. As I move closer to my goal marathon, I feel it's better to keep an even pace in the home stretch of my long runs, as that is the plan for the race. I really don't feel I'm switching over to anaerobic fibers by doing this, as a HR drift of 10 bpm is expected over 22 miles (my MAF is 141).

--Jimmy

My Running World
My Maffetone Low-HR Training Experiment

IP: Logged

posted Apr-03-2006 05:23 AM               

I have unlimited access to VO2 max tests and treadmills. I have ordered the Maffetone book and am going to pick up a hrm today. I really think that this is the training method I need to use. I got bit by the running bug yesterday when the cramps kicked in and I pushed thru them.

Any advice or suggestions on how to document progress are welcome. and Jesse great job on your progress, a long time ago you told me just to keep goin and I did. Lets see how you can help me out now....

MATT

IP: Logged

posted Apr-03-2006 05:26 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by runningsouthernstyle:
I am officially volunteering to be a "test" subject for this method of training. A little background, around August I started running with the c25K program on this website. I finished it and joined a marathon group with the goal of running a 1/2 marathon. I did that yesterday using the galloway method. The race report is in the galloway thread.

I have unlimited access to VO2 max tests and treadmills. I have ordered the Maffetone book and am going to pick up a hrm today. I really think that this is the training method I need to use. I got bit by the running bug yesterday when the cramps kicked in and I pushed thru them.

Any advice or suggestions on how to document progress are welcome. and Jesse great job on your progress, a long time ago you told me just to keep goin and I did. Lets see how you can help me out now....

MATT

---

Hey Matt! Thanks for being willing to join in and be a guinea pig!
It's really great that you have unlimited access to vo2max tests -
perhaps you can have one done before you start, we can look
at the data at that time, and then try a few months later. As a
relatively new runner, there seem to be many ambiguities on
progress, so it would be very interesting to take a look at a
detailed data point.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-03-2006 05:29 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:

Today, I let my HR drift up to my 70%hrr (151) by the last mile. As I move closer to my goal marathon, I feel it's better to keep an even pace in the home stretch of my long runs, as that is the plan for the race. I really don't feel I'm switching over to anaerobic fibers by doing this, as a HR drift of 10 bpm is expected over 22 miles (my MAF is 141).

---

sounds good - indeed out of a 20-something mile run, the last mile
done at a higher aerobic pace should have no "anti-aerobic" effect
whatsoever, especially if you've been doing this for a while, pushing
that RQ down at higher heart rates.

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

MyStuff

Low Heart Rate Training FAQ

IP: Logged

posted Apr-03-2006 09:14 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by gregw:
If your resting heart rate is say 50 then (193-50)*.7 + 50 = 150.

As Jesse will surely point out :-) one problem with heart rate reserve is that the target heart rate goes higher the worse shape you are in, since that corresponds to a higher resting heart rate.

---

However, it doesn't you'll be running any faster. The fact that you're out of shape means that your heart rate will go up faster with any sort of exertion compared to when you are in shape.

Under an ideal situation, you'll lower your resting HR and run your easy days at a lower HR. However, your speed will probably pick up as you get into shape.

It's similar to MAF. As you get into better shape, your pace will pick up at the MAF HR.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-03-2006 10:59 AM            

IP: Logged