 |
> home
> community >
discussion forums > basic training
> basebuilding, low heart rate training, a la maffetone and mark allen (Page 31)
|
    |
 |
| > rules | > faq | > e-mail to a friend | moderator: Liam
 |
 |
| Author |
Topic: Basebuilding, low heart rate training, a la Maffetone and Mark Allen |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
 posted May-08-2007 06:59 PM
   
Nick is 63 with over 60k miles under his belt and he can
still run a 46 minute 10k and he's asking for my input.
Something's just a tad crazy here, but I'll bite!
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
willamona
Cool Runner |
posted May-08-2007 08:35 PM
NICK!!!!!! I am so glad you are here!!! We will do the best we can to get you to break that 4 hour mark again. Even if it takes cheerleaders!  ------------------
***********
My myspace
No Complaining
My User Profile
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ Because many have asked...
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-08-2007 11:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Long Run Nick:
Great info. I sheepishly add that over the last few days I read the whole damn thing. I appreciate the initiation of the thread by Jesse--even the threads from a couple of years ago.I have posted for the last several years mostly on the Newbie Forum. My simple message has been to slow down--it is ok to walk, to have fun, and not get too serious and make running a life long pursuit. Having just begun my 32nd year of very consistent running (over 63,600 miles--and counting) I was very fortunate to stumble across a guy by the name of Tom Osler. He wrote a small pamphlet titled "Conditioning of the Long Distance Runner" back in the late 60's. I read it in early 1976 and it made sense. He followed that with a book on Ultra Marathoning--in the late 70's. Mix in Joe Henderson who used the phrase LSD--Long Slow Distance and I was lucky to follow their lead. Pre-Maffetone--I think. I attibute my longevity to basically running 2-3 minutes slower than race pace after warming up at 4-5 minutes slower than race pace. I have competed in over 400 races (15 marathons) and numerous Ultras. Osler recommended a run/walk approach for long runs. He ran 10 walked 5. I got to a point of running 27 min/walk 3. It worked. In my mid 40's(after 10 yrs of running) I ran in the low 18's 5K(PR 17:46)/low 37's 10K(PR36:41)/ 3:16 marathon and 8-9 hour 50 milers (PR 8:12). Most of this with little if any speed work. My main speed work was racing. I rarely ran more than 50 miles per week nor less than 40 miles per week. 1 injury--Plantar F--back in'97. Brought me to my knees. No running for several months. I biked. Now, as I close in on turning 64 I run 5K's around 22:30 and 10K's in the mid 46's. I ran my first marathon in 21 years back in February. I wanted a sub 4hr(BQ)--ended up with a 4:07.
Never thought much about HR. When Polar came out with theirs--I got one. I was amazed that once I figured out my HR Max I found I had been doing most of my running at 65-70% of my Max. For years my max was 207--even into my mid 50's. At 63+ my max is 200. I have communicated with Jesse recently and he is going to assist me as I give the MAF approach a shot. That 180-63 leaves me at 117+5 = 122 Yikes!! I will listen to what Jesse recommends and fiddle with it. Oh, rambling is authorized once you are eligible for Social Security. A final point. Most posts on this thread are about the here and now. Once in awhile look down the road a decade or 2. Don't get too wired about this Fall's race--think about Boston in 2027 or so. I hope most of you will be still running. Take it easy or you will join the biggest running club in the world: "I Use To Run But......Club". Remember start off EZ---then back off. Nick PS Thanks again to Jesse/Jimmy and all the knowledgeable folks that have added to this thread.
Hey Nick, Thanks for the blurb on your sweet journey. 4:07 is awesome for your first 26.2 in 21 years. I believe you can get the sacred BQ next time out. A focus on the aerobic system will not hurt you in your vision quest. Good luck with your new coach. I believe he'll have you burning more fat than a McDonald's grill in no time at all! Now back to my over==the==top movie on Lifetime starring Ann Margret in her meanest role ever (Seduced by Madness: The Diane Borchardt Story). She makes Faye Dunaway as Joan Crawford look like Judy Garland as Dorothy. ==Jimmy @@@@
jog log
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 09:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
Nick is 63 with over 60k miles under his belt and he can
still run a 46 minute 10k and he's asking for my input.
Something's just a tad crazy here, but I'll bite!
Impressive 10K time! However, with that time, a 4 hour marathon should be relatively easy. (going strictly by projections, mind you) Of course, not having run a marathon for 21 years, and coming that close to the 4 hour mark is still awesome. Nick, do you have your splits from the marathon by chance?
IP: Logged |
monikam
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 10:13 AM
It's my first week of MAFing.. Today was warmer and humid and I had to slow down to 20 min miles to stay within my target zone which is 145-150. Before MAF I was running 10:30 mm average.. Somebody please tell me this is normal.. because I heard of 16 or 17 mm but never of 20mm.. I can walk faster but I don't want to walk.. I want to run and that means I have to go super slow..Advice?? ------------------
"It's never too early, it's never too cold and it's never too far... I AM A RUNNER" Monika
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
Who Dey
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 11:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Long Run Nick:
A final point. Most posts on this thread are about the here and now. Once in awhile look down the road a decade or 2. Don't get too wired about this Fall's race--think about Boston in 2027 or so. I hope most of you will be still running. Take it easy or you will join the biggest running club in the world: "I Use To Run But......Club". Remember start off EZ---then back off.
I think this is marvelous advice. In business, etc. people are routinely advised to step back from the day-to-day demands and take a long range view ... imagining where you want to be in 20 years ... and then make mid-course corrections as necessary. Yes, it's all to easy to focus on today's immediate, urgent priorities, but it is wise to every once in a while raise one's head and look a little farther down the road.Excellent advice, Nick. Thank you.
IP: Logged |
monikam
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 11:15 AM
Nick - Seeing you here is great!!! It's my 3rd day of MAF and one thing I can say right now is that MAF is NOT easy running...at least not in the beginning... It's far from easy.. So far it's the toughest thing I had to do as a runner..------------------
First few weeks of MAF: miserable, unbearable, pride depleting, exercise in patience and will power - I. CAN. DO. IT. I AM A RUNNER Monika
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
Long Run Nick
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 11:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Docster:
Impressive 10K time! However, with that time, a 4 hour marathon should be relatively easy. (going strictly by projections, mind you)Of course, not having run a marathon for 21 years, and coming that close to the 4 hour mark is still awesome. Nick, do you have your splits from the marathon by chance?
Docster
What self respecting distance runner wouldn't have his splits? I had mine tatooed on my back--but don't have a mirror. Actually they are on a different watch. I can tell several mistakes I made. Got out at 9:15--perfect weather day 40'-50's. Flat course. Ran several 8:40's not sure why. Got through 10 miles just under 90 minutes. Got to 20 miles--3:02. Last 10K went downhill--65 minutes. Last several miles at 11:00. No walking. Actually felt "good" the whole way. Well miles 23 on were slow. I think I realized at mile 7or 8 that the sub 4 was not doable. Another foolish mistake: I drank Amino Vital--not many carbs in it. I had some GU with me--didn't use it. Why? Because I felt ok. I don't train with the stuff. I have used it a few x. I have gotten---or some yrs ago--gotten my body to fat burn. Had I GU back in the early 80's I would have run under 3 hrs--I think. My 10K times back then charted I should have run under 2:50. Now the charts show I "should" run in the 3:30's. Has not worked for me.I am excited to have Jesse as a coach. I have coached hundreds of runners--including the All Army Marathon Team back in the early 80's. For a guy who has always preached slowing down it is fun to have Coach Jesse tell me to slow down. Yikes!! I really think if I follow the MAF concept I will be able to add more miles per week and add a 6th day of running--see after 30+ yrs--the sickness continues. My plan is to get around 60 mile weeks. 3-4months of MAF. Use GU in training runs after 1-2 hrs and then get some quality runs/races and go knock the hell out of a sub 4 marathon. The Hunstville--then the Rocket City Marathon was my first back in December of 1977. I finished in 3:58. My vision and plan is to run the marathon quicker than I did 30 yrs ago. A confession: I ran the '78 Boston as a bandit. Ran a 3:51 and finished ahead of a lot of "official qualifiers". I had a race number made up that simply said "TOO SLOW Ft McClellan, AL." To qualify back then in my early 30's was under 3 hrs. I promised myself I wouldn't go back till I could qualify. Well, it's time. Thanks for the warm welcome. You know I will pontificate from time to time and share my training with you. Please have fun. Enjoy the journey--the destination is not always as great as it is cracked up to be. Nick
IP: Logged |
breger1
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 12:43 PM
Nick made an interesting comment in the post where he joined this thread: quote:
"I was amazed that once I figured out my HR Max I found I had been doing most of my running at 65-70% of my Max."
Personally, I'm not surprised at all. I'd be surprised if you were running harder than that.Clearly after all those years and miles your aerobic base is awesome. Just my opinion, but I think MAFing won't help you aerobically as it would almost anyone else, because you have that down. It will allow you to run more miles and safely sprinkle in speed workouts though, and that's never a bad thing. You are so aerobically in shape that I'd be surprised if you went out today and, with just a few minor adjustments, didn't BQ. You know what to do, you know what you likely did wrong in the last marathon, and you won't make those mistakes again. We're looking forward to listening to you and to hear what Jesse does for you. He is the best. Boston deserves you and you deserve Boston. Bill ------------------
Bill's Profile
IP: Logged |
dfcameron
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 01:57 PM
Nick,Great story. My PRs are similar to yours. In 1982, I ran a 17:47 5K and a 36:44 10K. Fast forward 25 years and I can run about 21:00 for a 5K and a hair under 44 for a 10K. I actually got a heart rate monitor early on in 1992. It was a basic Polar; great for that time. I tested my max HR by running 10 min all out a couple of times and found it to be 192. (I was 29 years old). Since then, I've owned 2 other HR monitors. Currently, my max HR is about 180 (age 44). So in 15 years, I've lost 12 beats. What's interesting is that in 1992, when in great shape, I could run 10 miles at a HR of 120 and it would take 100 min. Today, I can still run 10 miles at a HR of 120 and it takes 100 minutes. The difference is that in 1992, 120 was 63% of my max HR. Now its 67% of my max HR. In reality, I gravitate toward a little slower pace than my MAF (about 145 today). I do much of my running at a HR of 140. 15 years ago, I did much of my running at a HR of around 147. Looking back, my MAF was probably about 152 or 153 at that time (although I didn't know it). So, yeah, I think you're on the right track... I just wouldn't assume your max HR has dropped 1 beat per year. You'd want to test it. I suppose I'm close; I've lost 12 beats in 15 years. But... what if it were only 5 beats in 15 years. Or 12 beats in 22 years? That's a difference of 10 beats in MAF and training pace!
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 02:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by monikam:
It's my first week of MAFing.. Today was warmer and humid and I had to slow down to 20 min miles to stay within my target zone which is 145-150. Before MAF I was running 10:30 mm average.. Somebody please tell me this is normal.. because I heard of 16 or 17 mm but never of 20mm.. I can walk faster but I don't want to walk.. I want to run and that means I have to go super slow..Advice??
The warm weather is a tough time to be starting a MAF period for the first time. With 20 minute miles, you are better off doing a run/walking combination, or adding 10 bpm to your zone, or maybe try a peak of 75-80% MHR on warm days. Something that gets you back to a close to normal running stride, yet keeps you aerobic. These modifications won't hurt your development. If you do allow extra, do it on hard days and make sure you keep under MAF on the low mileage recovery days.
Good luck! --Jimmy @@@@
jog log
IP: Logged |
Who Dey
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 02:35 PM
I was wondering what might happen as the warm weather approaches. I'm struggling to run slow enough to stay under MAF right now and the thought of being able to do that when the temperature rises by 20 degrees is depressing. I bet my HR is above MAF just sitting in a lawn chair on a hot and humid day. Adding up to 10 bpm to my MAF (133) wouldn't trash my low heart rate training?
IP: Logged |
monikam
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 02:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
The warm weather is a tough time to be starting a MAF period for the first time. With 20 minute miles, you are better off doing a run/walking combination, or adding 10 bpm to your zone, or maybe try a peak of 75-80% MHR on warm days. Something that gets you back to a close to normal running stride, yet keeps you aerobic. These modifications won't hurt your development. If you do allow extra, do it on hard days and make sure you keep under MAF on the low mileage recovery days.Good luck! --Jimmy @@@@
jog log
Thanks Jimmy... I was so frustrated with my run this morning that I went and did a 2K on my treadmill downstairs to compare.. I compared the first 2K during my outdoor runs this week to the first 2K on the treadmill.. On the TM I can run 16mm totally within my range 140-145 whereas outdoors I was spiking up over 150 even within the first 2K. I stopped at 2K because I didn't want to do too much today, but my HR was still very constant.. I didnt see as much drift as I've seen outdoors within the first 2K... I forgot to mention that I live in hilly neighbourhood and I'm constantly either going up or down.. I think I should probably do more of my runs on the TM for a while until I can control my HR a little better and until my pace improves.. ------------------
MAF - I. CAN. DO. IT. I AM A RUNNER Monika
My User Profile [This message has been edited by monikam (edited May-09-2007).]
IP: Logged |
chase3543
Member |
posted May-09-2007 08:31 PM
Hi-I posted on this thread a few weeks ago, and just thought I'd update a little. BTW, I'm a 26 yr. old female, running 4-5 years, 20ish mpw. I used to train with my HR almost always 170-185. Staying under 170 was really difficult. I have been experimenting with lower HRs for about 10 weeks now. At first, I was trying to stay under 150, but wasn't seeing any improvement, so following LeitnerJ's advice, for the last few weeks I have been mostly under 155, and occasionally up to 160. I still haven't seen any improvement- my pace is around 17:00mm on a good day- 19:00mm on a bad day, 16:00 going down hill. I can sometimes get into lower numbers (12's going down a steep hill, sometimes 14's or 15's on flat), but my mile splits don't reflect this because I can't hold it for long. 20 mpw might not be enough to notice any change, but it's difficult to increase mileage when it took me 6.5 hours of running (wogging?) to get to 20 mpw....... It took me 1:45 just to run 6 miles! I asked my doctor about my high training HR, and he wants to test my iron, thyroid, and give me an EKG... He suspects hyperthyroidism is causing the elevated HR, not poor fitness. However, two interesting things HAVE happened- I used to suffer horribly from allergies- literally could not be away from my tissue box more than a few minutes, and my allergies have gotten MUCH better since I started "running" at lower HRs. The other thing is that I have lost a noticeable amount of weight- I went from 121-122 to 116-118 (I'm 5'3''). I think it's definitely fat loss bc my breasts are smaller (TMI? sorry guys!) and I have more definition in my abs.
I guess I'm looking for any feedback from you experts. I've got a doc's appt. for tomorrow, so he might have some insight as well.
I'm also wondering whether there are some people who just are meant to run at higher HR's?
Thanks for any help!
Christine
IP: Logged |
willamona
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 09:00 PM
If you have only tried it for 10 weeks, and the heat just kicked in in most of the country, I would not give up yet. I also would wonder why you do not add mileage, as 20 mpw would take forever to see improvement when you consider most see improvements every 300 miles. If I were you, I would talk to the doctor about diet and nutrition. You should not be losing that amount of weight on only 20 mpw. Those expert people recommend 30+ mph for weight lose. The fact that you are losing that much at low mileage would seem to be disturbing. I am not a doctor though. ------------------
***********
My myspace
No Complaining
My User Profile
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ Because many have asked...
IP: Logged |
chase3543
Member |
posted May-09-2007 09:07 PM
Willamona- Thanks for your reply. The reason I haven't increased is because I have at most 80 minutes to run before work- and I can only fit in about 4.5 miles in that 80 minutes or so. After work I have the normal chores and such to do. I suppose I could run 2x/day.....I doubt the problem is my diet- I consistently out- eat my 6 foot boyfriend. People are shocked my how much food I can put away........
Guess I'll know more after seeing my doctor tomorrow.
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted May-09-2007 10:51 PM
Christine,If the doctor clears you for any problems that may affect heart rate, then it is probably your aerobic fitness. If you choose to keep with MAF, then it may take a long time. If your heart rate is that high going that slow, then there is lots of work to do. Patience and slowly building miles and/ or time is key. You might think about combining running and fast walking, you might be able to cover more ground in less time. My guess is that you can walk 15:00 miles, maybe faster. Find a running/walking ratio that keeps your HR under the MAF. In time, you'll be running all of it. Think of it as giving your body the time it needs to catch up with your dreams. Keeping under MAF will allow it to build in its own time. Once you are down to 10-12:00 miles, you will have built a sweet foundation. I iwsh you well with the DOc. May the news be that you are just terribly unfit! :> ) --Jimmy Jog Log
zzzzzzz
IP: Logged |
monikam
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 07:38 AM
I have confirmed this morning that my HR is higher in the morning by about 10 beats than in the afternoon.. My MAF is 150.. In the afternoon I'm able to run at below MAF and maintain sort of a running speed of 16mm... In the morning I'm able to do that at 155.. Even if I walk as soon as I start running it goes back to 154-156 and stays there through most of the run.Again it's only the first week of MAF, but how should I approach this problem?? Should I just stay below 160 for a while and see what happens?? ------------------
MAF - I. CAN. DO. IT. I AM A RUNNER Monika
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
Who Dey
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 08:05 AM
I would like to get an ultrarunner's perspective on how to use this type of training. I know Jesse "qualifies" and there are probably others of you out there.Over the winter, I built my mileage up to just under 50 mpw before getting injured. I recently returned to running and intend to use low heart rate training while building my miles back up. I would like to run one or two 50Ks this fall and, if nothing breaks, run a 50M (probably JFK). Can I just low heart rate train myself through this without switching over to different types of workouts (speed, hills, etc.)? I've never run an ultra and feel that the increase in distance will be stressful enough without adding speed work which has gotten me into trouble in the past. My understanding is that low heart rate training is used to build an aerobic bank account which is later drawn upon via anaerobic workouts/races. If I never transition to the anaerobic work, will I eventually peak out aerobically and start to slow down?
IP: Logged |
dfcameron
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 08:52 AM
I've run about 15-20 ultras; the longest has been 50 miles. For one of my ultras, I wore my heart rate monitor and made sure I stayed under MAF pace until the last mile where I picked it up to break 6 hours (50K).I tend to agree, though, when first building up for my first 50 miler - it was enough to just get the distance in and the long runs. Trying to build in some speed could have been detrimental. I'm running the Ice Age 50 on Saturday (2 days, eek!). For this one, 90% or so of my runs have been at a HR in the 130s or so (my max is 180). I've done some runs around 120. I've also done some fast - getting up around 170. But, now I'm more experienced and want a faster time at Ice Age. Even there, I've been careful not to overdo it.
IP: Logged |
Who Dey
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 09:12 AM
Thank you! That was exactly the type of experience I wanted to tap into!Sounds like my intuition was correct. Get comfortable with the distance and then, with experience, play with adding speedwork. I have to say though, as someone new to this type of training the thought of running an ultra below my MAF is hard to imagine. I used to run 9:15-9:30 pace on long runs, but this MAF stuff has me waddling along at 11-12 minute pace on my short runs!
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 09:43 AM
quote:
Originally posted by monikam:
I have confirmed this morning that my HR is higher in the morning by about 10 beats than in the afternoon.. My MAF is 150.. In the afternoon I'm able to run at below MAF and maintain sort of a running speed of 16mm... In the morning I'm able to do that at 155.. Even if I walk as soon as I start running it goes back to 154-156 and stays there through most of the run.Again it's only the first week of MAF, but how should I approach this problem?? Should I just stay below 160 for a while and see what happens??
How soon after you wake up are you running Monika? (in the morning) Are you drinking a good 12 to 16 ounces before you run in the morning? My HR's are generally a few beats (not usually 10 unless I'm slightly dehyrated) in the morning compared to afternoon/evening runs. I usually drink 20 to 28 ounces of water (I'm 196 pounds though!) before heading out in the morning, which definitely helps. My wife recently went out for a run with me, and she was struggling to keep her heart rate below her target and was running a good 30 to 45 seconds slower than normal. The next day (when it was 15 degrees warmer) she was back to normal. I'm not sure if this is what might explain some of your differences, but I figured I'd toss it out there. 
IP: Logged |
monikam
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 09:55 AM
Thanks Docster!! I'm run approximately 1 hour after I wake up... I don't drink that much before the run. I will try that and see if that makes a difference. ------------------
MAF - I. CAN. DO. IT. I AM A RUNNER Monika
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 11:17 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Who Dey:
Can I just low heart rate train myself through this without switching over to different types of workouts (speed, hills, etc.)? I've never run an ultra and feel that the increase in distance will be stressful enough without adding speed work which has gotten me into trouble in the past. My understanding is that low heart rate training is used to build an aerobic bank account which is later drawn upon via anaerobic workouts/races. If I never transition to the anaerobic work, will I eventually peak out aerobically and start to slow down?
I'm the extreme case, of course. The only speed work I do is when
I run road marathons. I really don't do anything anaerobic except
perhaps the last mile or so of a marathon. You really don't need a
lick of speed work to do an ultra (well, even) and you can do quite
well in a marathon without it. Ultimately, your
best performance will have some solid speed work behind it, but
when you're building up your mileage and endurance, speed work
is likely to interfere in a few ways and possibly increase likelihood
of an injury. I'd suggest you get your mileage up, get comfortable
with the distance, develop yourself aerobically until you can
sustain what you consider a reasonable pace for that distance, and
then decide whether you need speed work. In fact, I would even
say the same thing for a marathon. Somewhat extremist (or at
least extreme) advice, I know, but it's worked quite well for me.
I think we have learned however, that your pace should be slowly
but surely improving (all other conditions being equal) and that it
may be necessary to get enough downhill miles in where you pick
up the pace to maintain a good running economy. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted May-10-2007 11:21 AM
By the way, are others having as much trouble as I am accessing
the FAQ? Do you get some sort of windows live space error?
Is it time to move it to another site? I also have it crosslisted under
"running articles" at www.myjjk.com, but I don't maintain it there so
there's some out of date stuff. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
