 |
> home
> community >
discussion forums > basic training
> basebuilding, low heart rate training, via maffetone/mark allen/hadd/mittleman (Page 36)
|
    |
 |
| > rules | > faq | > e-mail to a friend | moderator: Liam
 |
 |
| Author |
Topic: Basebuilding, low heart rate training, via Maffetone/Mark Allen/Hadd/Mittleman |
Docster
Cool Runner |
 posted Sep-26-2007 08:10 AM
  
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
Yeah, but do people regress like I have? This is a big shock to me. I ran a 30 miler and a 26 miler and 4-5 18-20 milers in the last 10 weeks all at MAF or lower. I need to run MORE? I ran 460 miles since May. Do I need to go lower with my MAF and how are you going to convince me that's a good idea with the degredation shown above? I need to subject myself to MORE frustration and regression?
My plan was to build a base for the next 4 months through the winter but now I don't know. [This message has been edited by Gregolowe (edited Sep-25-2007).]
Greg, I went back and read your first posts. You were thrilled at being able to finish runs feeling strong and not beat up. You have no race times (that I recall) to provide, so the "usual" formulas don't apply. What were your normal paces before you started base building? (I can't remember if you mentioned this...sorry) Also, what is your resting HR and max HR measured with your HRM? If this is causing your running to not be enjoyable, then honestly I wouldn't continue doing what your doing. However, something doesn't seem to add up. Long distance running (effectively) requires people to be able to run at moderate (or even faster) paces below, even well below, anaerobic thresholds for hours on end. How do you think your 30 mile run would have gone if you had started out at 160 HR? Do you think it would have gone better? (I'm asking this seriously...not sarcasticly!)
IP: Logged |
Gregolowe
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 09:18 AM
Yeah, I was pleased with how enjoyable running was. I had a hamstring injury that has nagged me for the last year. It's a nuasence. It went away when I slowed down and changed my footwear. I haven't had any races save one, a 5K I did on the summer solstice whenever that is, beginning of June? I ran it in 24:10. First mile 7:00, second 8:00, third, 9:10. That was the first race since high school. Since January I had run all my runs with a run/walk ration of 15minutes/3 minutes. That would pan out, at all distances, to a 10:00/mile or 6 mph. So my running was actually at about 9:00/mile with the walking bringing the 10:00/mile pace. I was quite pleased with that and was planning on runnning my ultra that way. The walking allowed me to do long runs of 4 hours. The only problem was nagging injuries (the hamstring) and I was starting to get nauseous towards the end and after my long runs. My first MAF test was my best, so far as pace goes, though it showed more degredation of pace over the test. My second test was slower, but showed less of a degredation in pace. My third test was abysmal, which I'm chalking up to being sick I guess so I probably have to throw it out as a reference point. One week after doing the 30 miler I ran a 26 mile run. I completed that in 5:35 hours, a 12:00 pace roughly. I was quite pleased with that as it was much improved over the previous week but was probably due to the flatter terrain. I believe I could have run the 30 miler and beat 6 hours if I did my run walk strategy, but I knew I wouldn't be running at my MAF. Now however I wonder whether I could do that as I probably have eroded my anaerobic abilities by doing the aerobic training. I didn't RUN the race because it was a training run for me where I could put in my long run and practice for Sunday's 50 what with the aid stations and race atmosphere and all. I'm really glad I did it. As far as Sunday goes, I think I'm going to walk the ups, and run the flats and downs letting my hr go wherever and walk when I feel like I need to. I will then revisit whether I want to continue with the low hr training. I believe in it physiologically which is why I was willing to do it in the first place. The only nagging question in the back of my head has been whether I couldn't achieve the same thing by just running how I want and that my body would become more fit. Two example that stick in my craw are Mark Allen and Dean K. When Mark Allen STARTED MAF training he was doing 8:00/mile. That means he could run at MAF of probably 145-150 or something already. That means he had good aerobic fitness already. Yet, he was training balls to the wall all the time. How does one account for that in the low heart rate training paradigm?
So that's part of my frustration.
As I sit and try and figure out just what the problem is, I think I may have trained too much as much as I hate to admit that. Immediately after the 26 miler 10 days ago I got a cold and that has sapped my energy for the last 10 days. Sherpa John, a poster I correspond with, said it was due to the taper, cutting back my miles and that it's a commen phenomenon. I don't know. I was posting questions about overtraining about 4-5 weeks ago as my resting hr was rising and rose to 6-8 beats higher than where it normally was. I cut back my miles on the weeks I didn't have the big runs of 20,30 and 26. And I think those, especially the 26er, may have pushed me over the edge. That's really hard for me to admit because I'm trying to mentally prepare for VT50 on Sunday. It threatens to break my psyche and instill fear and doubt in my mind about my conditioning. After this discussion, I will have to psyche myself that I AM READY, FIT, and GOOD to GO for the race, that my body has recouped and ingrained all the training I have done, that it is an amazing biochemicalelectrical organism that is capable of amazing feats when pushed by the heart/spirit. I have heart damn it, and if nothing breaks, I will do this race and I will prevail and I will be ready.
Uh, so anyways, I ran 3 miles this morning at a 12:00/mile pace keeping under MAF. I did that for 26 miles 10 days ago with no degredation in pace for the first 20 miles or so. After that my pace slowed to 12:30. I'm counting on the fact that the test was an anamoly due to being sick and that I can and will recover in the next few days leading up to the race. After that, I need to reassess what to do. I'd love your feedback about any of the above, especially about my question about Dean K and Mark A, or on my numbers, or whatever actually.
IP: Logged |
Gregolowe
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 09:33 AM
I'm 38, my MAF is 142. My max heart rate I believe is 190, though I'm not certain.
You know, one complicating factor may be I chose the wrong MAF number, maybe not being honest about it? I started running last Christmas when my doctor was concerned about my blood pressure. She was talking about possibly putting me on meds. I thought I was fit, just flabby. I was a powerlifter at the time, having gone back to it after my strained calf and hamstring. The injury as well might be a factor, though I'm hesitant to call it an injury. I started running in January 06. I was real eager but was inconsistent. In April I got serious and ramped up my mileage quickly. I hurt something in my left calf/knee/hammie. I had to take four months off to let it heal and lifted weights during that time. I also started drinking whiskey again and eating alot along with the heavy weight lifting. I went up to 200 pounds of muscle and fat on my medium 5'10" frame. I was strong for sure but that's when I went to the doc for a physical for a new job and she told me my blood pressure was too high and was talking about putting me on meds. I said screw that, and started running again at Christmas 06. So, does that count as major illness or injury on the MAF computation? If so, then my MAF would be 132. What do y'all think?
Now I weigh about 175 and much leaner, muscle and fat wise. My blood pressure is and has been perfect since March or so. In fact, I started the MAF training at the end of the summer. My blood pressure wasn't an issue at that point for 4 months so I wouldn't say I was recovering from it anymore so I wouldn't use that to say I should be MAF -10 due to recovering from a major illness. I think the "injury" may be more valid, placing me at MAF-5, or 137. [This message has been edited by Gregolowe (edited Sep-26-2007).] [This message has been edited by Gregolowe (edited Sep-26-2007).]
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 12:22 PM
Yes, Mark Allen started MAF training at 8:30 pace (I recall from hearing him speak) but previous to that he was injured, and his training runs were 7 minute pace, and he was plateaued. Slowing to 8:30 was almost depressing for him, and he had to walk some of the uphills! Only during that period did he finally progress again, not be injured and in a few short years progressed to sub 5:30 pace (I read that it was 5:15 or something) at the same heart rate (actually lower because Maffetone lowered it along the way). But remember, Mark didn't have a job or a family (in the early years) or much stress at all to balance. That makes a big difference.
IP: Logged |
Gregolowe
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 01:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by DavidD:
Yes, Mark Allen started MAF training at 8:30 pace (I recall from hearing him speak) but previous to that he was injured, and his training runs were 7 minute pace, and he was plateaued. Slowing to 8:30 was almost depressing for him, and he had to walk some of the uphills! Only during that period did he finally progress again, not be injured and in a few short years progressed to sub 5:30 pace (I read that it was 5:15 or something) at the same heart rate (actually lower because Maffetone lowered it along the way). But remember, Mark didn't have a job or a family (in the early years) or much stress at all to balance. That makes a big difference.
Right, but it doesn't get to my point. How did he get such great aerobic ability, and 8:30/mile at MAF is great, doing anaerobic, hard training? Of course he made progress afterwards, as he built his aerobic engine, but how did he get to an 8:30/mile pace doing anaerobic work? No one really addressed this the first time I asked a month or so ago. I would be satisfied to run 8:30 minute miles at MAF without wanting to go faster. I am not getting there yet using MAF training. How was Mark Allen able to get there using anaerobic training? My suspicion is that his aerobic system developed to that point as a byproduct of the anaerobic training. PLEASE do not respond "genetics" cause that's garbage. And don't flame on about that statement. If you have an answer besides genetics I would love to hear it.
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 01:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
Right, but it doesn't get to my point. How did he get such great aerobic ability, and 8:30/mile at MAF is great, doing anaerobic, hard training? Of course he made progress afterwards, as he built his aerobic engine, but how did he get to an 8:30/mile pace doing anaerobic work? No one really addressed this the first time I asked a month or so ago. I would be satisfied to run 8:30 minute miles at MAF without wanting to go faster. I am not getting there yet using MAF training. How was Mark Allen able to get there using anaerobic training? My suspicion is that his aerobic system developed to that point as a byproduct of the anaerobic training. PLEASE do not respond "genetics" cause that's garbage. And don't flame on about that statement. If you have an answer besides genetics I would love to hear it.
Genetics play very little role. Genetic expression is dictated by training and diet.
Mark was a swimmer, originally, and I suspect that's how he built a lot of his aerobic engine. As I discussed way back in this thread, one can build some aerobic function by overtraining, including anaerobic work, but not long term. The problem is that it results in a broken down athlete (overtraining). So many coaches in all sports run their athletes into the ground in the beginning of the sports year. It's like, those who survive become the team. I don't recommend overtraining as a way of building aerobic function because it's not healthy.
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 02:17 PM
...also, Mark's 8:30 pace was at a heart rate of 155.
IP: Logged |
BrandonE
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 03:50 PM
Greg: Maybe a dumb question, but when you're running 26 and 30 mile long runs, what are your other days like? Are your long runs more than 30% of your weekly mileage? If so, could that be causing a stress response that could be inhibiting your progress? Just a thought, though I could be way off.
IP: Logged |
leitnerj
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 06:09 PM
I think it's almost time to restart this thread. I believe there's more
background missing at the beginning to highlight a few things:
(1) how extremely frustrating this can be for someone, even over
a period of 4, 5, or 6 months and (2) the type of records one should
keep if he/she really wants to decode and debug what might be going
wrong. It's unfortunate that we have to take something very simple
and imply that a lot of recordkeeping is required, but given the level
of anger and frustration it can cause for someone who is not
progressing the way he would like, I believe a warning is necessary.
So here's something I'll be adding at the beginning of the next thread:1. If you are interested in this approach, be aware that many people
have become extremely frustrated and angry when all of their
definitions of success have not been met, sometimes after 4 months.
For me, it was 6 months of dedicated running using a conservatively
low heart rate to achieve enormous (almost magical) benefits.
2. If you are starting just before or while it's hot and humid, you
are likely to see little or no progress over a good period of time.
That's not to imply that you won't see benefits - while those here
are posting how it was extremely difficult and frustrating to control
heart rate in a run, you'll see those following "traditional" approaches
elsewhere on coolrunning posting how they couldn't even finish
their runs.
3. If you want to be able to understand why this worked or didn't
work, not only will you have to strictly adhere to the guidelines,
but you will have to keep records. Keep in mind that many, many
people have been highly successful with almost no recordkeeping
and some cheating here and there, but when things don't work,
no one can answer your questions with out specific and credible
data. The posting of a few MAF tests does not constitute usable
data to understand what's going right and what's going wrong.
4. Some people will absolutely require some element of downhill
training to really see the pace improvement at low heart rates.
Just running a dead slow pace on flat ground may cause a decay
in running economy.
5. Think about what your goals are:
a. to run without injury?
b. to improve race times in so and so distances?
c. to have race times better projected from short to long distances?
d. to be able to run a good pace at low heart rates?
6. See how things are going every few weeks if your improvements
are not obvious. See if any adjustments need to be made.
...
If all you care about is running without injury, then you really don't
need to keep records. Run below MAF for a while and see if you're
not injured. That's an easy one. If improving race times is what you
want, then before you start MAF training, spend a couple of months
racing your distances of interest. Then after your stint of MAF training,
run similar races and see what happens. Don't use your pace at low
heart rates without any race times to say that you've failed if this
was your objective. I don't really believe in MAF tests. Or, more specifically, I believe
every run is a MAF test. Record your splits and avg HR per split
for every run. Make note if you went over MAF heart rate for more
than a few seconds. That's not to say you should compare every
day to the previous day, but when there's a problem, you need to
start looking at your detailed history. None of us can really answer
any questions without it, or with just a couple of anecdotal facts
(e.g., my runs this week have been crummy). When you ask the group why everything is going wrong, be prepared
to answer the following questions: 1. how many miles per week have you been running for how long?
2. how old are you?
3. what value are you using for MAF heart rate?
4. what were your race times before MAF training and after
MAF training?
5. what were your pace splits and avg HR per split for your runs
over the past couple of months? do you have HR/pace data on
a site such as motionbased that you can share? are you absolutely
strict, never going above MAF on any run? what was the
temperature and dewpoint during each run?
6. do you incorporate downhills into your runs? what is your
heart rate on the downhill segments? what does your heart rate
do on uphills?
7. do you take in any carbs within a couple of hours before your
runs?
8. do you deal with a lot of stress?
9. are you on any medications?
10. do you do any other activities, such as swimming, spin class,
aerobics, weightlifting, etc? are you below MAF on all?
11. what was your resting heart rate before your started MAF training?
what is it now? As a reminder, my first pace was 17 min/mile on a treadmill. About
8 months later, it was in the low 7s on the treadmill, mid-8s outside.
But, most importantly all of my race times improved. I have a lot
of downhills in all of my runs and I speed up a lot on them. I eat
nothing before or during any run. All of my activities are below MAF
in training (not in races). Anyone can "catch me" being wrong on
anything I say about myself. My log is public - anyone is welcome
to dig through and prove me wrong. I'm sure I'm wrong quite a bit,
especially as the facts age.
------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports
[This message has been edited by leitnerj (edited Sep-26-2007).]
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 10:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
MAF test #3 today.
Mile Time Pace
1 12: 34
2 26:00 12:34
3 39:50 13:50
4 53:30 13:40
5 ?
The last mile the treadmill cut out on me and erased my distance and time. I tried to keep my Hr below MAF of 142. I would back the pace down to slow down to bring hr down then back up to bring it up.
Some possible mitigating factors: I've got a head and chest cold, I haven't run in a week as I'm sick, my mielage has dropped way off due to tapering for VT 50 on Sunday, I drink alcohol every evening, maybe 4 oz of straight spirits, I may have gained a few pounds, I was wearing cotton instead of my polyester shirt possibly factoring into cooling issues, yada yada yada... Why should I even bother with this anymore? It's completey frustrating and my conditioning seems to be eroding, not improving. I did 10 weeks of low heart rate training, keeping my bpm below MAF the whole time, being patient, trusting, and I've steadily gotten less aerobically fit. [This message has been edited by Gregolowe (edited Sep-25-2007).]
You are obviously stressed if you are drinking every night (in my experience, never a good thing) , sick (shows a lowered immune system), gaining weight. Plus, tapering is a mental stress for some. 460 miles since May is not a whole helluva a lot of mileage for a marathon, let alone a 50-miler. What's that, 35 miles per week average? You probably weren't even ready to be doing such long runs on such low weekly mileage. My intuitive guess says the long runs without a good aerobic base , and weekly mileage base, are what made your MAF tests go completely downhill, and what lowered your immune system. You have to build up your weekly mileage evenly across the board, and long runs slowly, taking cut-back weeks every 3-4 weeks, getting to 18-20 milers when you are up over 55-60 miles per week.
10 weeks of MAF training at low mileage isn't much, especially when you start it in the summer. Summer heat can really stress the body. It took Mark Allen 6 months to see 1 minute of progress (12%) in his rebuilding phase, and 1 year to see 2 minutes (24%). He was a mess when he started, and when the year was over, he was healthy. Sounds to me like you need a long period of rebuilding in an aerobic phase. Build your mileage base, then your long runs. Get that immune system back up. But don't listen to me, listen to your own intuition and body. Your body is definitely telling you something. --Jimmy MAF log
profile
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-26-2007 11:16 PM
P.S. The Mark Allen example is a good one. He was an elite athlete who could run sub 5:00 miles, and trained in the 5:00's . 8:00 miles at 155 bpm (his MAF) for an elite is not very good aerobic conditioning.
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 12:30 AM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
P.S. The Mark Allen example is a good one. He was an elite athlete who could run sub 5:00 miles, and trained in the 5:00's . 8:00 miles at 155 bpm (his MAF) for an elite is not very good aerobic conditioning.
8:30 pace at 155 HR is where is started MAF training in 1983. He progressed to 5:15 pace in ~ 3 years at 153 HR.
IP: Logged |
Preto
Member |
posted Sep-27-2007 01:09 AM
What's the best way to warm up for a marathon? I'm assuming if you are truly racing, you aren't going to spend the first 15-20 minutes of the race gradually raising the HR.
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 06:44 AM
quote:
Originally posted by DavidD:
8:30 pace at 155 HR is where is started MAF training in 1983. He progressed to 5:15 pace in ~ 3 years at 153 HR.
Over 3 minutes progress relative to 8:30 pace is amazing. That would be like me improving to 7:30 (from 12:00) at MAF. 12% per year on average of progress does illustrate that it can take awhile for training paces to improve. Thanks for the added info and anecdotes you keep sharing, Dave. Did you ever hang out with any of The Beatles? :> ) --Jimmy MAF log
profile
IP: Logged |
d3finition
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 08:23 AM
Hey guys, I just wanted to post something here for those runners about 17-18 years old (my age) and trying out MAF training method. I used to follow the MAF training method when I was 17 but I found it hard to follow and hard to find my "ideal MAF HR pace" so I just decided to run slow and increase my milege and see how things work. Currently I am doing 32 MPW at my easy pace and I have realised something that might be pertinent to younger runners or maybe runners in general.I am 18 this year and based off the MAF function my MAF HR is 162 (give and take a few beats). After running @ easy paces for period of time, I find that I sort of reach my "aerobic threshold" when I feel this tightness in my chest next to my left arm joint and when my breathing clearly acelerates. This tightness isn't very comfortable, but its something more than bearable that I can run through for a few miles. On the other hand when I run "easy", I don't feel any form of difficulty and I just run as per normal. Out of curiousity when I started to realise this "tightness" that occurs occasionally, I checked my HR every 2 miles per run. (might be inaccurate since I stop and count my beats for 10 seconds and multiply by 6) I eventually found out that when I am at about 150 HR, I feel completely no difficulty. 156 HR, breathing a little harder but almost no difference and still no tightness in the chest. At 162 HR, I can feel as though that tightness is just above me and if I ran any quicker I would float and hit it. 168 HR is when I run through this tightness in my chest. I suppose that to a certain extent this tightness could indicate your aerobic threshold although I am not sure if the cause is due to my heart working faster, arteries under more pressure, lungs breathing in more etc, but when I run >6 miles or so with that tightness I get a slight feeling of overtraining the next day, a slightly elevated heart rate. So for younger runners my age who aren't sure about your MAF, you could use this as a gauge. For me at least the MAF function seems to be pretty right on spot assuming this tightness is the aerobic threshold.
IP: Logged |
Long Run Nick
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 10:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Preto:
What's the best way to warm up for a marathon? I'm assuming if you are truly racing, you aren't going to spend the first 15-20 minutes of the race gradually raising the HR.
Great question. The shorter the race the more time I need to warm up. Being 64 may have something to do with that. Over the years I found the fitter I became the longer it took to get warmed up. I may run 2-4 miles prior to a 5K and do some pick ups prior to the start of the race. My normal training runs I do the first mile between 12-13 minutes. The second probably around a 11:30 -12 and may get to MAF HR and a pace of around 10:45-11:00 after 3 miles. I have been trying to figure out what I will do with my December marathon. I will probably warm up with a mile or 2 prior to the start. I can't imgine standing around and when the gun goes off get to my marathon pace (9:00 min miles). I may try practicing going out a little quicker on my training runs--but I much enjoy my warm up. When I did ultras I would warm up as I ran/walk--was never in a hurry. That worked where I would end up averaging around 10 min miles where I would walk and run the whole way--that being 20 yrs ago or so. I ran my first marathon in 21 yrs in February and maybe jogged a 1/2 mile prior to the start. Got out at around 9:15 first mile--but it didn't feel comfortable. Then I foolishly ran the next couple miles around 8:30's. What was I thinking? I paid later and finished the last 10K at 11 min miles--4:07. I wanted a sub 4 hr. I will nail it this time--even if it means a 2 mile warm up. Whatever you decide, practice your warm up. Some people can stand around before a race and maintain 5:00 min miles--I haven't met many--but they probably exist. I would like to meet some folks in their 60's that can put the hammer down without warming up. I might even buy them a Gatorade. Nick PS Kinda sorry for the ramble. I could attribute it to age--but my wife reminds me I have always rambled. Got to love her!
IP: Logged |
jjwaverly42
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 12:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Preto:
What's the best way to warm up for a marathon? I'm assuming if you are truly racing, you aren't going to spend the first 15-20 minutes of the race gradually raising the HR.
I run slowly and easily for 20 minutes before the marathon (and every race I do). When the gun goes off I begin executing my pace plan--which I always have going into the marathon. I usually run the first few miles 10-20 seconds or so slower than my overall average pace goal. Then I hit my pace and attempt to stick to it. --Jimmy MAF log
profile
IP: Logged |
DavidD
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 12:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Over 3 minutes progress relative to 8:30 pace is amazing. That would be like me improving to 7:30 (from 12:00) at MAF. 12% per year on average of progress does illustrate that it can take awhile for training paces to improve. Thanks for the added info and anecdotes you keep sharing, Dave. Did you ever hang out with any of The Beatles? :> )--Jimmy MAF log
profile
The Beatles? Why, yes, we were good chums. 
IP: Logged |
Docster
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 12:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by leitnerj:
I think it's almost time to restart this thread. I believe there's more
background missing at the beginning to highlight a few things:
(1) how extremely frustrating this can be for someone, even over
a period of 4, 5, or 6 months and (2) the type of records one should
keep if he/she really wants to decode and debug what might be going
wrong. It's unfortunate that we have to take something very simple
and imply that a lot of recordkeeping is required, but given the level
of anger and frustration it can cause for someone who is not
progressing the way he would like, I believe a warning is necessary.
So here's something I'll be adding at the beginning of the next thread:1. If you are interested in this approach, be aware that many people
have become extremely frustrated and angry when all of their
definitions of success have not been met, sometimes after 4 months.
For me, it was 6 months of dedicated running using a conservatively
low heart rate to achieve enormous (almost magical) benefits.
2. If you are starting just before or while it's hot and humid, you
are likely to see little or no progress over a good period of time.
That's not to imply that you won't see benefits - while those here
are posting how it was extremely difficult and frustrating to control
heart rate in a run, you'll see those following "traditional" approaches
elsewhere on coolrunning posting how they couldn't even finish
their runs.
3. If you want to be able to understand why this worked or didn't
work, not only will you have to strictly adhere to the guidelines,
but you will have to keep records. Keep in mind that many, many
people have been highly successful with almost no recordkeeping
and some cheating here and there, but when things don't work,
no one can answer your questions with out specific and credible
data. The posting of a few MAF tests does not constitute usable
data to understand what's going right and what's going wrong.
4. Some people will absolutely require some element of downhill
training to really see the pace improvement at low heart rates.
Just running a dead slow pace on flat ground may cause a decay
in running economy.
5. Think about what your goals are:
a. to run without injury?
b. to improve race times in so and so distances?
c. to have race times better projected from short to long distances?
d. to be able to run a good pace at low heart rates?
6. See how things are going every few weeks if your improvements
are not obvious. See if any adjustments need to be made.
...
If all you care about is running without injury, then you really don't
need to keep records. Run below MAF for a while and see if you're
not injured. That's an easy one. If improving race times is what you
want, then before you start MAF training, spend a couple of months
racing your distances of interest. Then after your stint of MAF training,
run similar races and see what happens. Don't use your pace at low
heart rates without any race times to say that you've failed if this
was your objective. I don't really believe in MAF tests. Or, more specifically, I believe
every run is a MAF test. Record your splits and avg HR per split
for every run. Make note if you went over MAF heart rate for more
than a few seconds. That's not to say you should compare every
day to the previous day, but when there's a problem, you need to
start looking at your detailed history. None of us can really answer
any questions without it, or with just a couple of anecdotal facts
(e.g., my runs this week have been crummy). When you ask the group why everything is going wrong, be prepared
to answer the following questions: 1. how many miles per week have you been running for how long?
2. how old are you?
3. what value are you using for MAF heart rate?
4. what were your race times before MAF training and after
MAF training?
5. what were your pace splits and avg HR per split for your runs
over the past couple of months? do you have HR/pace data on
a site such as motionbased that you can share? are you absolutely
strict, never going above MAF on any run? what was the
temperature and dewpoint during each run?
6. do you incorporate downhills into your runs? what is your
heart rate on the downhill segments? what does your heart rate
do on uphills?
7. do you take in any carbs within a couple of hours before your
runs?
8. do you deal with a lot of stress?
9. are you on any medications?
10. do you do any other activities, such as swimming, spin class,
aerobics, weightlifting, etc? are you below MAF on all?
11. what was your resting heart rate before your started MAF training?
what is it now? As a reminder, my first pace was 17 min/mile on a treadmill. About
8 months later, it was in the low 7s on the treadmill, mid-8s outside.
But, most importantly all of my race times improved. I have a lot
of downhills in all of my runs and I speed up a lot on them. I eat
nothing before or during any run. All of my activities are below MAF
in training (not in races). Anyone can "catch me" being wrong on
anything I say about myself. My log is public - anyone is welcome
to dig through and prove me wrong. I'm sure I'm wrong quite a bit,
especially as the facts age.
Great advice, Jesse. Thanks for the refresher, too. Now that I think about it, I've never done an actual MAF test. I did compare a training run from about a year ago today though....almost the same temps and same route. My pace last year was ~10:05 at 143 Avg. HR. Today it was 8:27 at 141 Avg. HR. I don't consider my HR training to really be low HR training anymore. Now that it has cooled down a bit I have to actually push at times to keep from dropping to MAF -7 or -8. I've been fortunate enough to be able to race here and there, incorporate one day of speedwork, and still continue to improve. My wife is running around 10:15 now, whereas last year she was over 12:00. Granted we were both fairly new to running, so improvement is to be expected. However, all of this "easy" running does not inhibit improvement when it comes to developing the aerobic system. That much is for certain.
IP: Logged |
fredurie
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 01:10 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
How was Mark Allen able to get there using anaerobic training? My suspicion is that his aerobic system developed to that point as a byproduct of the anaerobic training. PLEASE do not respond "genetics" cause that's garbage. And don't flame on about that statement. If you have an answer besides genetics I would love to hear it.
Genetics. How many runners do you know that have gone from training at 8:30 pace
to 5:15 pace. Even the the 13:30 to 14:40 5k guys here are training at 6:30 pace.
IP: Logged |
fredurie
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 01:19 PM
Lagat was running 10 miles @ 5:20 a mile at altitude 3 months ago, but I
don't think that he was doing it every day.Don't tell me that Mark Allen wasn't genetically gifted.
IP: Logged |
fjordrunner
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 02:27 PM
hello again,
just wanted to report back on the half marathon i ran earlier this month - i followed the plan, and cut my time by 6 minutes from my first HM in may. i had music on the ipod that forced me to Go Slow during the beginning, and i think that was what did it. now remember that i'm a middle-aged mama, and about 18 months ago i couldn't run a mile. i improved my pace from 13.29 to 12.54, cut the time to 2.51.17, AHR 145, max 161. there were a few hills at the beginning, and i just kept to my pace and it went fine. somewhere around mile 7 or 8 i ran out of legs - i couldn't move them any faster and found that slowing down went better, so i couldn't really follow the plan of adding speed as i went along. i managed to recover enough to push the last half mile in. i'm planning a 10k in a couple of weeks and am mostly taking it easy now, trying to stay under 126 (i refused to admit i had a birthday last year), and then see what happens for the race. eta - i forgot to mention that i came in 3rd in my AG - and there were actually 4 of us in the 55-60 group! thanks for listening - i don't think i could have traveled these 1850 miles since i started in may 2006 without low heart rate training! ------------------
susan [This message has been edited by fjordrunner (edited Sep-27-2007).]
IP: Logged |
wstevena
Member |
posted Sep-27-2007 03:09 PM
>As a reminder, my first pace was 17 min/mile on a treadmill. >About 8 months later, it was in the low 7s on the treadmill, mid-8s outside.Just curious why is the differential between your MAF pace on the treadmill vs. outside so large? From my experience it has been around 30s/mile - 8:30 on the treadmill at 0 incline, ~9:00 outside. I'm wondering if an incline would be better, so that my indoor and outdoor paces are closer to each other?
IP: Logged |
slowgino
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 03:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Gregolowe:
I'm 38, my MAF is 142. My max heart rate I believe is 190, though I'm not certain.
You know, one complicating factor may be I chose the wrong MAF number, maybe not being honest about it?
...
so I wouldn't use that to say I should be MAF -10 due to recovering from a major illness. I think the "injury" may be more valid, placing me at MAF-5, or 137.
If you're thinking maybe you have the wrong MAF number, just remember that people's measured Aerobic Thresholds can be different from what the 180 formula gives. Here are the Aerobic Thresholds for folks aged 38-41 in the VO2 test data I got a look at: 106, 108, 163, 107, 162, 116, 153, 159, 110, 160. A 38 year old who computes MAF at 142 and has an actual Aerobic Threshold of 106 will not be well served by that MAF number. On the other hand, how about those people who are 39 but who have an Aerobic Threshold over 20 bpm higher than their 141 MAF? I have seen the results of one test (not included in the database mentioned above) which showed the guy had a low RQ (over 70% fat burning) all the way from an HR of 140 to 170. Anywhere in that range he would be doing great aerobic base training. The best thing, if you have the opportunity and can afford it, would be to get a good VO2 test.. (when you are healthy and not sick, etc.) You have done some serious long training runs, and that's a big plus... as long as you don't overtrain. It took me years before I got up to the point of doing routine (weekly/biweekly) 28-30 mile runs. At that point I found it was more important to "listen to the body" than to adhere to some schedule or other. Also, I never had a problem throwing in a small amount of faster-paced work, like a faster-paced 1/4 mile around the track after a 5-10 mile run. Nowadays, I'm doing the downhills at a faster pace, still keeping below the Aerobic Threshold. Don't worry too much about that last MAF test. If you over trained, rest is the cure.. taking it easy for a while. I've heard that if you do a MAF test once a month, it takes at least 6 months (or more) to get any reliable indication of a trend. I don't do a MAF test, as such, but I periodically do a sequence of mile repeats at a particular set of heartrates. I have a lot better long-distance endurance now than I did 2 years ago (before LHR training), but my pace for those mile repeats has gotten a bit slower (after LHR training) Go figure. Time for a VO2 test again, so I can see what my training range(s) should be. Take it easy, Gino
IP: Logged |
TommyL
Cool Runner |
posted Sep-27-2007 03:51 PM
quote:
Originally posted by wstevena:
>As a reminder, my first pace was 17 min/mile on a treadmill. >About 8 months later, it was in the low 7s on the treadmill, mid-8s outside.Just curious why is the differential between your MAF pace on the treadmill vs. outside so large? From my experience it has been around 30s/mile - 8:30 on the treadmill at 0 incline, ~9:00 outside. I'm wondering if an incline would be better, so that my indoor and outdoor paces are closer to each other?
My paces are very similar to Jesse's. My MAF-5 treadmill pace is around 7:00 min./mi and outside also mid 8's. Not sure why the difference.I guess the temperature, grade, wind, humidity all play a role.
IP: Logged |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Topic Closed