| Author |
Topic: Basebuilding, low heart rate training, via Maffetone/Mark Allen/Hadd/Mittleman |
Docster
Cool Runner |
 posted Sep-20-2007 03:35 PM
  
quote:
Originally posted by sl8rbrian:
Hello All,I was hoping to get some constructive feedback on my LHR approach. I’m 31 years old and have been running 50K’s and will be running my first 50M in November. My MAF would be 149. My goal is to build a solid base and to get faster. Current schedule: Current Average 1 hour min/mi: 10 min/mi Monday: 1 hour 0-2% incline @ 117 (62% MHR)
Tuesday: 1 hour 0-2% incline @ 117 (62% MHR)
Wednesday: 1 hour 40 minutes -3% to 4% @ 117-123 @ 10:20 min/mi average
Thursday: 1 hour 0-2% incline @ 117 (62% MHR)
Friday: 1 hour 0-2% incline @ 117 (62% MHR)
Saturday: 1 hour 0-2% incline @ 117 (62% MHR)
Sunday: 3-6 hours @ > 149 My Sunday run is my long run where I use my MAF to full potential. My concern is that while I feel energetic during the week and never feel exhausted, am I doing any good at keeping my HR at 117?? Is that to low for my weekly runs and am I wasting time? I mean, I’m sure I can increase my speed by bringing it up to 149 on some of those runs, but am I doing any “good” by keeping it at 117? Any feedback would be appreciated! Brian Harvey
Hi Brian! I run anywhere from 25 to 50 mpw with my wife. She follows MAF and her pace generally puts me around 60% MHR. I've been running with her since last fall and have still had continual improvement. (as has she) When she started out, she was running an 11:45 + pace at MAF and is now down to a ~10:00 pace. Running such easy miles has helped me in several ways. MAF -20 miles with her keeps me in check, especially on high mileage weeks and weeks where I add a 2nd speed workout, etc. It also helps me learn how to maintain form and turnover anywhere from an 11:00 mile on down, which will hopefully come in handy when I start doing ultras.  Is there a specific reason why you want to keep all of your non Sunday runs at that low of a HR?
IP: Logged |
sl8rbrian
Member |
posted Sep-20-2007 03:46 PM
>Is there a specific reason why you want to keep all of your non Sunday runs at that low of a HR? No real reason other than it's not making running "hard" and I enjoy it whether outside or on the treadmill. It's party why I ask if it's even doing anything for me because as I tell my wife, it feels like I'm "cheating". I'm sure I can progress faster by moving it up to say 123 or 129 and still keep the running fun.
IP: Logged |
bluelake
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-20-2007 04:07 PM
Maybe a little off the topic. I've been slogging MAF since May. It gives me a lot of time to contemplate. Something interesting just hit me the other day. For a while in the 90s
I went to aerobics and step aerobics classes. I'm sure our HR exceeded MAF. Doesn't this mean they were really anaerobics classes? Hmmmm------------------
bluelake "It's not easy, but it's worth it"See My Profile! [URL]
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-20-2007 04:46 PM
Of course, this does not factor in diet and other potential stressors, which can impair aerobic progress despite proper training.
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
What would those dietary stressors be? Does alcohol inhibit aerobic development?
It depends on the person. Excess insulin inhibits aerobic function quite well, so any refined/simple sugar/carbohydrate food. Alcohol may actually help aerobic function in small ('moderate') amounts, but it's what people put in the alcohol -- so a sloe gin fiz (with lots of sugar) would not be good. Beer generally has higher amounts of carbs too. Food allergy (or any allergy) is a major stress on the body. Other stressors: work stress, family stress... Folks, if it's not fun move on. It's not difficult to assess stress, and cortisol (one of our big stress hormones) is easily measured via saliva. Well, I've said enough to get a bunch of people hyped up
IP: Logged |
burritos
Member |
posted Sep-20-2007 05:43 PM
Question. On one of the running podcasts, a physician touted that resistance training(for tone, not bulk) increases the endurance for one's running. But if you do resistance training, it can potentially nullify the aerobic base loading training. These two lines of thought seem to clash with each other. If trying to increase aerobic capacity can you still do lightweight resistance training or was that physician misspeaking?
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-20-2007 06:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by burritos:
Question. On one of the running podcasts, a physician touted that resistance training(for tone, not bulk) increases the endurance for one's running. But if you do resistance training, it can potentially nullify the aerobic base loading training. These two lines of thought seem to clash with each other. If trying to increase aerobic capacity can you still do lightweight resistance training or was that physician misspeaking?
I think this issue was discuss way back in some detail. Basically, weight lifting is anaerobic, and like all anaerobic workouts, it produces relatively high amounts of the stress hormone cortisol, which can impair aerobic progress.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-20-2007 06:28 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kommish77:
I just read the Hadd link from your signature and I was wondering if maybe I should go that route (I know I have seen 195 on my HRM before), which would allow me to bump up my HR a few beats. I have to mention, like everyone else seems to, that my runs/walks are very enjoyable (except for when I get frustrated with too many walks) and I feel very refreshed the next day with little to no soreness and no major injuries. I don't want to give up on LHR training but I want to make sure I am not wasting my time when I could try some tweaks that might really jump start my training. I will never go back to running each night to beat the previous night's pace, or trying to go farther each night at the same pace as a previous shorter run. Those days are over! Thanks again for your time.
Just keep in mind that I'm 37 and my max heart rate is over 210,
while I train at about 140. A high max heart rate is of little relevance.
A high anaerobic threshold can be of relevance, but if your anaerobic
threshold were high, you would be running faster paces at the lower
heart rates. It's all quite an oxymoron!
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
BrandonE
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-20-2007 09:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by burritos:
Question. On one of the running podcasts, a physician touted that resistance training(for tone, not bulk) increases the endurance for one's running. But if you do resistance training, it can potentially nullify the aerobic base loading training. These two lines of thought seem to clash with each other. If trying to increase aerobic capacity can you still do lightweight resistance training or was that physician misspeaking?
I'm not sure about the applicability to running, specifically, since the aerobic engine is the primary factor, but serious weightlifters often train maximum strength (high weight, low reps) for a cycle or several, followed by cycles of training muscular endurance (lower weight, high reps). The max strength training increases the capacity for muscular endurance, which is then optimized by training it. However, it should be noted that both types of training are still anaerobic and do not involve the aerobic system that running does. I imagine that there would still be serious benefits though. For instance, serious cyclists often train max strength (very heavy squats at low reps) in their off season, which helps them then maximize their leg endurance in riding. Cycling, however, does put greater demands on the strength output of the legs than running does. I don't know the answer (I'm just a beginner), but there's some more info, for what it's worth.
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-21-2007 08:08 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sl8rbrian:
>Is there a specific reason why you want to keep all of your non Sunday runs at that low of a HR? No real reason other than it's not making running "hard" and I enjoy it whether outside or on the treadmill. It's party why I ask if it's even doing anything for me because as I tell my wife, it feels like I'm "cheating". I'm sure I can progress faster by moving it up to say 123 or 129 and still keep the running fun.
Many people feel that way. You may not "need" to work on your aerobic system, though. I'm fairly confident I could run at MAF + 5 on my easy days and easily be within a safe range. This is based on a fair amount of HR data I've compiled from races, etc. However, now that the weather is cooling, even running a few beats below MAF I'm finding that I have to work at it. Unlike during the heat of summer where I kept having to "back off"...now at times I have to push a bit, which is refreshing. I say vary it up a bit. Pick a day or two a week to go a bit higher (like you stated) and just experiment. If you are already strong aerobically, then I would implement at least one day of speedwork.
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-21-2007 02:24 PM
The point of this type of training is to build the aerobic system as efficiently as possible (using the 180 formula). Randomly raising the heart rate during training can be counter productive to that as this thread has so often addressed.
IP: Logged |
sl8rbrian
Member |
posted Sep-21-2007 03:11 PM
thanks all for the feedback. I think I'm going to continue what I'm doing now, monitor my progress and revisit after my run in November.From there, I'll have enough data from daily runs and the race to better determine if I want to continue to run at 117 or push it further. At the same time, I'm going to focus on hill training while keeping it at 117. I think I'll at least be getting benefits from there. It's almost like LHR needs it's own chat room!
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-21-2007 03:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sl8rbrian:
thanks all for the feedback. I think I'm going to continue what I'm doing now, monitor my progress and revisit after my run in November.From there, I'll have enough data from daily runs and the race to better determine if I want to continue to run at 117 or push it further. At the same time, I'm going to focus on hill training while keeping it at 117. I think I'll at least be getting benefits from there. It's almost like LHR needs it's own chat room!
Hah. Yeah, that would be nice, but then the h8ters would just ruin everything.  Because you know....all we do is slog around day in and day out. All we do is "low HR training". We are slaves to our HR monitors, I tell ya! I'm wearing mine now making sure I don't go above 60 bpm when typing! It's called BASE BUILDING. Building...like the foundation of a building....building the aerobic system.....ah nevermind. /rant off
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-21-2007 03:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Docster:
Hah. Yeah, that would be nice, but then the h8ters would just ruin everything. Because you know....all we do is slog around day in and day out. All we do is "low HR training". We are slaves to our HR monitors, I tell ya! I'm wearing mine now making sure I don't go above 60 bpm when typing! It's called BASE BUILDING. Building...like the foundation of a builng the aerobic system.....ah nevermind. /rant off
You're right... (although, this is one of the most intelligent threads, some just can't handle that). People like Mark Allen slogging around at 5:30 pace so his monitor doesn't beep . . . Your TLHR (typing low heart rate) is 60..........WOW, you must be cool...
IP: Logged |
sl8rbrian
Member |
posted Sep-21-2007 05:29 PM
Docster,Thanks for your feedback and you're so right about my base building. I’m fairly certain that I have a solid enough base for my 50 miler coming up in November with multiple runs in the 5+ hour ranges and a goal finish time of under 9 hours. I’m fairly certain I can make it. My question originally started from wanting to know if I’m benefiting at all by running at 117 or if I’m just wasting time building a foundation that is already established. Oh, I just checked and my TLHR is 46. I must be coming down with a cold.. Thanks again for the feedback and for the others out there, if you have any additional thought or feedback, I'm all ears. -brian
IP: Logged |
martinjames
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-22-2007 10:34 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sl8rbrian:
Docster,Thanks again for the feedback and for the others out there, if you have any additional thought or feedback, I'm all ears. -brian
Hmm. That must make running especially hard. [This message has been edited by martinjames (edited Sep-22-2007).]
IP: Logged |
streeetch
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-22-2007 12:35 PM
Today marked the first anniversary of my first road race (local 5k). Even though my focus is on preparing for my first marathon (Nov. 11) I was anxious to run this race a second time to see what a difference a year has made. I've been running MAF (142) style since July 2006. The only higher intensity runs have been races (average 1 per month except during the summer). I also bike once a week keeping my HR in the low to mid 130's. 2006: 24:48 (7:54/mile)
2007: 21:46 (6:55/mile) They changed the course slightly but the elevation only went down 12 feet, 96 this year vs. 108 last year. A 3:00 minute PR and oh yeah, I won my age group! ------------------
stretch
IP: Logged |
PB2
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-22-2007 01:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by streeetch:
Today marked the first anniversary of my first road race (local 5k). Even though my focus is on preparing for my first marathon (Nov. 11) I was anxious to run this race a second time to see what a difference a year has made. I've been running MAF (142) style since July 2006. The only higher intensity runs have been races (average 1 per month except during the summer). I also bike once a week keeping my HR in the low to mid 130's. 2006: 24:48 (7:54/mile)
2007: 21:46 (6:55/mile) They changed the course slightly but the elevation only went down 12 feet, 96 this year vs. 108 last year. A 3:00 minute PR and oh yeah, I won my age group!
congratulations!...........just the way it should work. maffetone would be proud.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-22-2007 01:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by streeetch:
2006: 24:48 (7:54/mile)
2007: 21:46 (6:55/mile) They changed the course slightly but the elevation only went down 12 feet, 96 this year vs. 108 last year. A 3:00 minute PR and oh yeah, I won my age group!
Good stuff! Looks like you need to update your profile! ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
KSC
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 11:33 AM
Hadd's 200/200 workouts appealed to me. I'd like the idea of training at a faster pace to get the legs used to it but not hurting the effect of the LHR training. I'm considering using this to help prep for my HM in Nov and numerous PT tests I'll be having in the new year. The thing is, I wanted to base build all the way through next year and am already fast enough for my tests, I just want to squeeze that little bit extra out. Do the 200/200s sound good for maybe 10% of my mileage as long as I keep a close eye on my HR?
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 12:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by KSC:
Hadd's 200/200 workouts appealed to me. I'd like the idea of training at a faster pace to get the legs used to it but not hurting the effect of the LHR training. I'm considering using this to help prep for my HM in Nov and numerous PT tests I'll be having in the new year. The thing is, I wanted to base build all the way through next year and am already fast enough for my tests, I just want to squeeze that little bit extra out. Do the 200/200s sound good for maybe 10% of my mileage as long as I keep a close eye on my HR?
I like the downhill MAF workout, and what Maffetone calls "aerobic intervals" (I think that's his term) much better. Less stress on the body and a great tool to train the fast turnover mechanisms. The downhill MAF is just finding a nice long (not too steep) downhill so you have to run much faster at MAF. The key here is to keep your stride length the same (or similar) as flat running. Aerobic intervals is when you have to run fast to keep your HR at MAF. If you're not there yet, I think a track workout once a week where you run 10K race pace for 50 meters, then jog for 50 or 100 is great. Not sure if Maffetone would agree. Do this after a good warmup. Don't let your HR go above MAF. Most of all, it should be fun.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 12:11 PM
I really believe in the downhill intervals myself ( as many see me
harp about over and over again). It's sometimes a challenge to keep
the heart rate up at MAF on the long steep ones, but it's exactly that
challenge that gives you the muscle memory for race day. I'm convinced
that this is the segment of my MAF training that gives me the aerobic
speed. If I didn't have the hilly options around here, I would probably
spend more time on the treadmill in negative incline mode. Does anyone recall who it was that did 80% or more of his training
for the Olympic qualifiers on a propped up treadmill to get almost a
pure downhill running effect? I seem to recall he really tore it up in
the qualifier race. ------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 12:42 PM
14 miles today. Haven't seen that in many a fortnight.
--Jimmy MAF log
profile
IP: Logged |
streeetch
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 01:20 PM
Downhill training was partially responsible for my 5k PR yesterday. The course was an out and back with 2 hills; one that was short and steep and the other was gradual but at least .5 mile long. I'll be the first to admit that my uphill running needs work but when cresting both hills in yesterday’s race I had no problem picking up speed while everyone else appeared to be recovering. The same scenario has played out in other races I've run. When you say: "a nice long downhill", is long determined by ones current fitness level? I can only get my treadmill to -3% and I've done that for up to 5 miles. I also have a walk path close-by that drops 100 feet over the course of .5 mile. Now that the dew point is steadily lower (still mid-60s) my HR is back to being 5 - 10 below MAF and I have more control of it when running uphill. Do you think it would beneficial to push a little harder on the downhills? Thanks
------------------
stretch
IP: Logged |
KSC
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 02:02 PM
So the downhill is good, but intervals will work. All my running, for now, is limited to a 2/3 mile loop and once a week I get to a place where I have room to run a 15 mile loop. So I'm going to try pacing off 200 meter sections on my "track" and give the 200/200s a try and see if I can train a decent turnover and still stay under MAF.The propped up treadmill is a great idea, I'm sure you'd get all kinds of looks in the gym stacking plates under the machine.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-23-2007 02:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by streeetch:
Downhill training was partially responsible for my 5k PR yesterday. The course was an out and back with 2 hills; one that was short and steep and the other was gradual but at least .5 mile long. I'll be the first to admit that my uphill running needs work but when cresting both hills in yesterday’s race I had no problem picking up speed while everyone else appeared to be recovering. The same scenario has played out in other races I've run. When you say: "a nice long downhill", is long determined by ones current fitness level? I can only get my treadmill to -3% and I've done that for up to 5 miles. I also have a walk path close-by that drops 100 feet over the course of .5 mile. Now that the dew point is steadily lower (still mid-60s) my HR is back to being 5 - 10 below MAF and I have more control of it when running uphill. Do you think it would beneficial to push a little harder on the downhills?
Well, I don't know about pushing harder, but I think the downs are your
best opportunity to maximize leg turnover while still well into the
aerobic range, so you're best pushing to keep up at MAF on the
down segments. If you're just using the downs for recovery at
10-20 beats lower than the rest of your run, then you should definitely
push harder.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
