posted Jul-11-2007 03:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
How did you determine AeT? RQ=.83? I assume you're using AT
at the point where RQ=1, right? If you've got 6 heart beats between
.83 and 1, that's quite a steep increase! I wonder if that's common
for those over 60 or so.

---

Huh??? <Deer in the headlights glazed over stare>. I guess I need to do more reading.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-11-2007 03:19 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DanMoriarity:
I found when I initially tried LHR training ( I'm not a full time LHR trainer, I do 1 or two faster workouts most weeks, but my other days are all at MAF pace or slower ) that my knees bothered me quite a bit as I got used to it. After a month or 6 weeks it gradually went away. I think there are subtle changes in your running form and certain muscles may need a little time to get used to it.

As for the interval/speed work, my opinion is probably different than most on this thread, but I think some faster running will help a lot. You don't need to do a lot of it, once a week is fine, but I do think it helps, provided the bulk of your running is at a comfortable pace. It all depends on your goals and experience.

As for the last question, I wouldn't worry about setting a low end of the range. For example, my MAF is 147 ( I'm 38 which gives me 142 and I add 5 beats for running 7+ times a week as per Mark Allen's article ). I start my runs around 120-130 and allow it to drift up while maintaining a steady pace. As long as you're using your normal running action, I believe you're getting aerobic benefits even if you're running well below your MAF value.

---

Thanks, Dan. I've got about 18 weeks until the marathon. I think I'll stick strictly to MAF until my improvements level off and then start the speed work. However, I'm just not sure I'll reach that plateau before the the big day.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-11-2007 06:35 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DanMoriarity:
I found when I initially tried LHR training ( I'm not a full time LHR trainer, I do 1 or two faster workouts most weeks, but my other days are all at MAF pace or slower ) that my knees bothered me quite a bit as I got used to it. After a month or 6 weeks it gradually went away. I think there are subtle changes in your running form and certain muscles may need a little time to get used to it.

As for the interval/speed work, my opinion is probably different than most on this thread, but I think some faster running will help a lot. You don't need to do a lot of it, once a week is fine, but I do think it helps, provided the bulk of your running is at a comfortable pace. It all depends on your goals and experience.

As for the last question, I wouldn't worry about setting a low end of the range. For example, my MAF is 147 ( I'm 38 which gives me 142 and I add 5 beats for running 7+ times a week as per Mark Allen's article ). I start my runs around 120-130 and allow it to drift up while maintaining a steady pace. As long as you're using your normal running action, I believe you're getting aerobic benefits even if you're running well below your MAF value.

---

I wouldn't say at all that your opinion is different from most here on
speedwork. I think most everyone expects/hopes to graduate to the speed
work phase at some point. I think your post is what many people
here want to hear, i.e., the combination of MAF with speedwork.
You've got a strong running history and
a solid base, so I would guess that you could get away with doing
a significant % of your overall volume quite a bit above MAF. I only
discourage speedwork from those who still really haven't "caught up"
in long distances relative to their short distance capabilities. While
I do promote the fact that I don't do any speedwork, it's quite likely that
if I didn't run the number of marathons I did per year, my performance
improvements would probably not be that significant! Since most
people don't want to pile up so many long races, speedwork is probably
the best option. My guess is that for you, the MAF runs are a good
way to truly keep your easy runs easy to balance your workload and to
sustain a strong aerobic capacity. I definitely agree that some time
far under MAF can be very beneficial (I hope it is - I spend a lot of
time running with friends that have me at about MAF-20).

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-11-2007 06:39 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DavidD:

We can't really say AeT is an RQ of .83 (did you mean .85 as the point of 50:50 fat and sugar burning?).

---

Yes, indeed I did. I lost my little RQ table!

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-11-2007 11:35 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
I wouldn't say at all that your opinion is different from most here on
speedwork. I think most everyone expects/hopes to graduate to the speed
work phase at some point. I think your post is what many people
here want to hear, i.e., the combination of MAF with speedwork.

---

Sorry if I misinterpreted things.

I've gone back and forth a few times with using the HRM and LRH principles for running on my easy days, and have started using the monitor again for the last two months or so.

My coach tells me to go by feel, but isn't strongly against using a HRM and looking back over the last couple of years I can see where my periods of greatest improvement have come after several months of using the monitor to slow me down on easy days. Also, I've been quite frustrated with my marathon times as compared to my shorter distance races ( according to Mcmillan I'm pretty consistent at everything from 200m up to 30km, but my marathon time is about 15 minutes slower than it should be ) and thought that maybe going back to running at lower heart rates on my easy days might help my fat burning capabilities and help avoid a dramatic slowdown in the last 6 miles which has been the hallmark of all but one of my lifetime marathons.

I lurk occasionally on this thread but decided to jump in and actually post something. I like the comraderie and attitude of the people on this thread. No one claims to have all the answers, but everyone is prepared to jump in and share their personal experiences and try to help anyone who has questions. Just the way it should be.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 12:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
I would walk fast, and when my HR got down to 119, I started to run until it rose to 130, then I began to walk.

---

Exactly. I've got about 5-6 weeks of training like that now after a layoff of about 6 months. After a walking warmup, I start out cycling between 105 and 115, work up to 115(low)-125(high), and settle in going between 119 and 127. I find that the run-walk has great advantages when coming back from a layoff or injury. There is also another advantage. I'm working on some form improvements and efficiencies, but just can't run slowly enough to keep the HR levels from rising after a few minutes. With the run/walk I get the advantage of working on the form and keeping the body used to that mechanical pace without sacrificing the LHR training. I suppose a run/walk like this could be likened to a form of interval training, where the intervals are controlled by the HRM and the training zone you want.

Speaking of walking, has anyone here read Bill Bowerman's 1967 book "Jogging"? After a 3 month program of walking (2-3 hr/day) to recover from a hamstring pull 3 years ago, I started doing a little bit of what we might call "Bowerman Jogging." For folks of better than average physical condition, the 12th week of his program could have you "jogging" repeats of 100m in 20-25 seconds, repeats of ladders like 300m,200m,100m etc (I've converted his yds to meters.) Those jogging paces at his "Pace 5" work out to between 5:20 and 6:40 minutes/mile. Hmmm... I guess if people ask me if I've been out jogging I can just say "No, I did jogging 3 years ago, but I don't go that fast anymore."

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 04:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DanMoriarity:
Sorry if I misinterpreted things.

I've gone back and forth a few times with using the HRM and LRH principles for running on my easy days, and have started using the monitor again for the last two months or so.

My coach tells me to go by feel, but isn't strongly against using a HRM and looking back over the last couple of years I can see where my periods of greatest improvement have come after several months of using the monitor to slow me down on easy days. Also, I've been quite frustrated with my marathon times as compared to my shorter distance races ( according to Mcmillan I'm pretty consistent at everything from 200m up to 30km, but my marathon time is about 15 minutes slower than it should be ) and thought that maybe going back to running at lower heart rates on my easy days might help my fat burning capabilities and help avoid a dramatic slowdown in the last 6 miles which has been the hallmark of all but one of my lifetime marathons.

I lurk occasionally on this thread but decided to jump in and actually post something. I like the comraderie and attitude of the people on this thread. No one claims to have all the answers, but everyone is prepared to jump in and share their personal experiences and try to help anyone who has questions. Just the way it should be.

---

No, I don't think you really misinterpreted - my point is that your
post fits in quite well, and most would be in agreement and would
like to hear your contributions! The only thing you may have
misinterpreted is the thought that you're thinking differently from
most. I don't think that's the case.

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 08:40 AM            

I decided to start MAF again. I want to build up my aerobic fitness. I want to run a a marathon someday. Along the way I want to run half marathons and not die during them. I want to run for life and not have injuries. I want to try to run an ultra someday. But, baby steps. So I ran at a MAF of 144 this morning (180-26-10 for health problems). I would run to 144 and then walk to 135 and repeat. It was good, around 18 min/mi.

My question, and I'm sure you knew I'd get here eventually. Do newbies ever feel like their MAF runs are completely cheat runs? My 'schedule' only called for a 2.5 mile run this morning, but it was so easy going that I did 3 with about a quarter mile warm up and quarter mile cool down. I feel like I could have done 4-5 and I haven't yet hit a 5 miler doing a regular run! Should I increase my mileage to make MAF work 'faster' or just keep on with my schedule as is. (It's HH Spring Training, if anyone wants to check it out). Should I just go out and every morning decide how far I think I want to run that day? Should I set a time limit on the runs? (I don't really want to do that as I really do like running for distance more than running for time...)

Any advice?

(oh and i just wanted to add, i really appreciate jesse for this thread and everything, but i think people miss how valuable JIMMY has been for lhr training as well! so, maybe jesse for pres, but jimmy at least for vice...)

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 08:52 AM            

It sounds like when you ran non-LHR you struggled with your runs. Now, when you follow LHR training, those same runs seem too easy.

A great aspect of LHR training for me has been that I am able to run injury-free. At the same time, running at a slower pace has allowed me to increase the number of days I run in a week and my total weekly mileage. The first order of business is to stay injury-free IMO ... the icing on the cake is the ability to run more miles.

If you are injury-free and feeling strong, I see no reason why you shouldn't increase your mileage. Take it slow. The frequent advice is to increase no more than 10% a week, but 10% is too aggressive for me. I do better with 5% or less ... with recovery weeks after every 2-3 weeks of increase.

A lot of people yo-yo in their training (I did). They train well for a time, become injured ... cutback ... get well ... get back to training ... get injured ... yo-yo. I believe LHR training will allow you to be consistent and that consistency over time will allow you to reach your racing goals. You'll become faster the longer you train.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 09:13 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aetheana:
I am a complete newbie. I read the ENTIRE old thread and posted there once or twice, but here I am again. I finished C25K in May and ran my first 5K on May 20 in 42:xx. I was pleased, but really wanted to break 40 minutes. I did MAF for 2 runs, decided it wasn't for me, then went back to running. I had some problems health wise in June (not running related) but still managed to get 35 miles in in June and ran my second 5K on June 23 and finished in 41:xx, about a minute and a half faster. But, I was really struggling to get my runs in. It would be the day to get up and go and I just wouldn't want to! I think I started pushing on every single run and would come home dripping and sweating and gasping, even though I thought I was going slowly.

I decided to start MAF again. I want to build up my aerobic fitness. I want to run a a marathon someday. Along the way I want to run half marathons and not die during them. I want to run for life and not have injuries. I want to try to run an ultra someday. But, baby steps. So I ran at a MAF of 144 this morning (180-26-10 for health problems). I would run to 144 and then walk to 135 and repeat. It was good, around 18 min/mi.

My question, and I'm sure you knew I'd get here eventually. Do newbies ever feel like their MAF runs are completely cheat runs? My 'schedule' only called for a 2.5 mile run this morning, but it was so easy going that I did 3 with about a quarter mile warm up and quarter mile cool down. I feel like I could have done 4-5 and I haven't yet hit a 5 miler doing a regular run! Should I increase my mileage to make MAF work 'faster' or just keep on with my schedule as is. (It's HH Spring Training, if anyone wants to check it out). Should I just go out and every morning decide how far I think I want to run that day? Should I set a time limit on the runs? (I don't really want to do that as I really do like running for distance more than running for time...)

Any advice?

(oh and i just wanted to add, i really appreciate jesse for this thread and everything, but i think people miss how valuable JIMMY has been for lhr training as well! so, maybe jesse for pres, but jimmy at least for vice...)

---

Like Cheney, I'm really in control here.

Congrats on graduating "the throne with cookie crumbs on your shirt to 5k" plan and doing your first 5k.

I'd like to suggest at this point in your development that you skip any running that makes you gasp. Keep between 134 or below to 144, even if you have to walk. Walking is good, and helps. and is very good for your health as well. You will find that you can go farther and feel like you didn't do much with this program.

Make it your goal to be an endurance deity, and a HEALTHY one to boot.

Build your mileage about 5-10% per week. 5% is best. Although, you can augment your workouts with long walks.

Remember to warm-up and cooldown. Warm-up can be a really slow run walk, getting to the bottom of your zone by mile 1-5, depending on the total distance of the run. Cooldown at least 15-30 minutes with walking.

If you haven't read the book Training For Endurance, or any of the Maffetone books, you might consider reading them. There is also a good interview with Maffetone on his website (the Kevin Gianni one).

Keep going!

--Jimmy

MAF log

the exciting land of ME

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 10:48 AM            

Thanks! I'll do a MAF test in the next few weeks to get a baseline so I can see improvement.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 11:18 AM            

This LHR stuff makes sense to me just from an empirical standpoint.

Twenty odd years ago I was a cross country runner finishing my 5k's in 18 minutes or so with a PR at 17:52, if I remember correctly. Like that matters.

I was "mostly" running 5k training runs in the 25 minute range with best pace of 7:56 m/m. I knew I was pushing hard because I wanted to run a marathon in October so I ran hard, fast, and frequently. (Ignore the false logic of that for now.) Well, the shin splints kept getting worse until I couldn't run for about 10 days (mostly by choice because I wanted to heal and fix the stupidity part of the running equation.) So I went back to the beginning of Hal's 18 week plan and turned it into a 19 or 20 week plan so I could fit in a half marathon and a 10 miler along the way before I run the Marine Corps Marathon in late October.

But here's the deal. Most of my training runs were in the 8:10-8:40 range for distances less than 5 miles. Distances greater than 5 miles I tried to stick with the LHR method and keep my HR at or under 141 (I'm 39). The distances were quite easy to cover at that heart rate and even though I might have passed 141 at times going uphill, I simply slowed down a bit and got back under.

I've only been truly running since January/February and that was starting the C25K program. My longest run so far on HH's program was 7 miles at 1 hr, 5 minutes focusing on the LHR training (all my long runs will do this.) Occasionally I'll break a 10 m/m if I'm running uphill. Usually it's in the 9:20-9:45 range.

But what I'm reading here are stories about 10, 12, or even 14 and 15 minute miles (at varying ages). I'm not a Kenyan by any means but after reading all of this I feel like I have a "leg up" (pun not intended) on many other newbie runners or I'm doing something very wrong.

I will say that my general level of fitness wasn't bad but my aerobic fitness was probably not great. My max HR during one early run was 207 and another around 214. Again, I'm 39. After running a while the highest I've pushed the HR is 179 during a quarter mile sprint and the end of a 5k training run.

I've got a 9 mile run this weekend and I'll focus on the LHR training and MAF of 141.

So in 16 weeks or so, I have a marathon to run. If I can keep a LHR pace of 9:20 or less, is it likely that I can push 8:40 (or even 8:30) during the race following this LHR strategy?

I have a progressive ordering of goals for my training.

1. Finish the marathon.
2. Finish the marathon in under 4 hours.
3. Finish the marathon in under 3:40
4. Finish the marathon and qualify for Boston (3:20 based on my age during my first marathon).

The first two appear to be relatively realistic. The 3rd would be a dream goal. and the 4th, well... probably not my first time out but if you don't set your goals high, you'll always be a bottom feeder.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 04:15 PM               

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 05:08 PM            

Oh boy, I can chime in here. I ran high school track and XC (although I'm a little older than you) in similar times. My 5K PR was 17:47. My max HR was certainly over 200 then.

Fast forward to today. I'm now 44. My max HR is probably 183. My MAF is about 145. Most of my training is between 9:00-9:30 pace with occasional tempo runs at 7:00 min/mi pace.

I have no doubt that right now (if it were a little cooler) I could break a 3:40 marathon. I've always been able to race a marathon at least 1 min/mi faster than MAF pace for long runs.

5 years ago, just before I turned 40, I ran with friends who often left me behind in training runs. We'd start at 9:00 min/mi pace; and they'd often pick it up to around 8:40. I'd stay at 9:00, because at 8:40 - my HR would edge over what "felt right". Yet... on marathon day, I ran a 3:27, and they ran 3:30-3:35 (depending on person).

Now, with age 45 looming between now and the next Boston, the qualifying time eases to 3:30. I now have a new goal - get under 3:30. I've upped my mileage - ran 257 in April, 264 in May, 260 in June and will build a little more. I need a really strong aerobic base before I get back into speed work.

Sounds like we're similar in ability... So everyone's different; but you can set your sights high if you get the base in using LHR.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 05:13 PM            

My two cents? Listen to your body. As your body gets adjusted to running below MAF, you can extend the mileage more quickly than you think if the connective tissue holds out. The heart adapts more quickly than the muscles which adapt more quickly than the connective tissue.

I'm averaging upwards of 60 MPW right now, with an October marathon goal - but I don't even have a set distance I want to run each day except the long run. I play it by ear and listen to my body. If it feels like going farther, its not cheating, just do it. Just watch for signs from the tendons/ligaments.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 05:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Runner1967:
OK, maybe I'm just naturally gifted or I'm going to be injury prone for the rest of my running career... but here goes.

This LHR stuff makes sense to me just from an empirical standpoint.

Twenty odd years ago I was a cross country runner finishing my 5k's in 18 minutes or so with a PR at 17:52, if I remember correctly. Like that matters.

I was "mostly" running 5k training runs in the 25 minute range with best pace of 7:56 m/m. I knew I was pushing hard because I wanted to run a marathon in October so I ran hard, fast, and frequently. (Ignore the false logic of that for now.) Well, the shin splints kept getting worse until I couldn't run for about 10 days (mostly by choice because I wanted to heal and fix the stupidity part of the running equation.) So I went back to the beginning of Hal's 18 week plan and turned it into a 19 or 20 week plan so I could fit in a half marathon and a 10 miler along the way before I run the Marine Corps Marathon in late October.

But here's the deal. Most of my training runs were in the 8:10-8:40 range for distances less than 5 miles. Distances greater than 5 miles I tried to stick with the LHR method and keep my HR at or under 141 (I'm 39). The distances were quite easy to cover at that heart rate and even though I might have passed 141 at times going uphill, I simply slowed down a bit and got back under.

I've only been truly running since January/February and that was starting the C25K program. My longest run so far on HH's program was 7 miles at 1 hr, 5 minutes focusing on the LHR training (all my long runs will do this.) Occasionally I'll break a 10 m/m if I'm running uphill. Usually it's in the 9:20-9:45 range.

But what I'm reading here are stories about 10, 12, or even 14 and 15 minute miles (at varying ages). I'm not a Kenyan by any means but after reading all of this I feel like I have a "leg up" (pun not intended) on many other newbie runners or I'm doing something very wrong.

I will say that my general level of fitness wasn't bad but my aerobic fitness was probably not great. My max HR during one early run was 207 and another around 214. Again, I'm 39. After running a while the highest I've pushed the HR is 179 during a quarter mile sprint and the end of a 5k training run.

I've got a 9 mile run this weekend and I'll focus on the LHR training and MAF of 141.

So in 16 weeks or so, I have a marathon to run. If I can keep a LHR pace of 9:20 or less, is it likely that I can push 8:40 (or even 8:30) during the race following this LHR strategy?

I have a progressive ordering of goals for my training.

1. Finish the marathon.
2. Finish the marathon in under 4 hours.
3. Finish the marathon in under 3:40
4. Finish the marathon and qualify for Boston (3:20 based on my age during my first marathon).

The first two appear to be relatively realistic. The 3rd would be a dream goal. and the 4th, well... probably not my first time out but if you don't set your goals high, you'll always be a bottom feeder.

---

With regards to this quote:

"So in 16 weeks or so, I have a marathon to run. If I can keep a LHR pace of 9:20 or less, is it likely that I can push 8:40 (or even 8:30) during the race following this LHR strategy? "

Easily. I've been able to run more than a minute faster than my MAF pace for both of my marathons this year. I logged a lot of MAF miles, but I did some marathon paced finishes (last 5 miles or so) of 20 mile runs as well.

Currently I *think* my MAF is around 8:25/8:30, but with the heat and hills, I'm usually in the low 9:00's. I intend to run a 7:30 pace in October with any luck.

Right now I can't remember if I've asked this before (and I will check Jesse's numbers later tonight or this weekend for sure)...but for the other MAF'ers here...your MAF heart rate pace versus marathon pace...how much of a difference has everyone seen?

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 05:22 PM            

Anyway... I haven't raced a marathon in 5 years. But... in the days I had my most marathon success; most of my runs were at MAF pace. I could always race a marathon about 1 min/mi faster than estimated MAF. At the time, my MAF was about 150, my max HR was about 190. I could race a 10 miler or half-marathon at about 170 - but no farther. I think my marathon HR at race pace was about halfway or a little more between the MAF pace and the 10 mile race pace. So 160ish? 162? This worked out to nearly 1 min/mi faster.

I still think today I could get about 10-12 beats higher in a marathon race than strict MAF pace. But I don't know what it'll translate to in pace since I rarely if ever run at that pace.

[This message has been edited by dfcameron (edited Jul-12-2007).]

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 05:46 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Docster:
With regards to this quote:

"So in 16 weeks or so, I have a marathon to run. If I can keep a LHR pace of 9:20 or less, is it likely that I can push 8:40 (or even 8:30) during the race following this LHR strategy? "

Easily. I've been able to run more than a minute faster than my MAF pace for both of my marathons this year. I logged a lot of MAF miles, but I did some marathon paced finishes (last 5 miles or so) of 20 mile runs as well.

Currently I *think* my MAF is around 8:25/8:30, but with the heat and hills, I'm usually in the low 9:00's. I intend to run a 7:30 pace in October with any luck.

Right now I can't remember if I've asked this before (and I will check Jesse's numbers later tonight or this weekend for sure)...but for the other MAF'ers here...your MAF heart rate pace versus marathon pace...how much of a difference has everyone seen?

---

Hey docster,

My max HR is 176, training HR is 125, and recently completed a marathon with an average HR of 153.

I'm not doing exclusively Maff-style training right now, but still doing 80-85% of mileage at the same 125HR I used for a year of pure basebuilding.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 07:00 PM            

Actually, what I've found is running at my MAF of 141 is quite easy. Almost like making really good time but kind of a leisurely stroll... at 6.5 MPH or so. Also, I think I'm less likely to deal with injury following the "slow and steady" route rather than the hard and fast route.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 07:58 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Like Cheney, I'm really in control here.

---

Now, Jimmy. You weren't supposed to tell. Let's
recall that you were certainly the secdef well before
I came governor.

------------------
MyRunningLog
MyStuff
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ
My marathons and ultras
My races and reports

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 08:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aharmer:
Hey docster,

My max HR is 176, training HR is 125, and recently completed a marathon with an average HR of 153.

I'm not doing exclusively Maff-style training right now, but still doing 80-85% of mileage at the same 125HR I used for a year of pure basebuilding.

---

Thanks Aharmer. I was hoping you would chime in since you tend to run "lower" than most of us.

I know you recently ran 3:04 at Grandma's in the heat, which equates to 7:02. How was your normal pace for your non -speed work in relation to your marathon?

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 08:31 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Docster:
Thanks Aharmer. I was hoping you would chime in since you tend to run "lower" than most of us.

I know you recently ran 3:04 at Grandma's in the heat, which equates to 7:02. How was your normal pace for your non -speed work in relation to your marathon?

---

Doc,

My long runs were right around 8:00 pace. My marathon pace was 7:02 but I really think that with perfect weather that would have been 6:50. The 8:00 pace I mention was more along the lines of "perfect" weather conditions. Probably 1:10 slower per mile if you compare apples to apples. Interestingly, I had not read Daniels' book at the time but my 125HR training pace correlates pretty well with his long run recommendation of 8:01 per mile for 2:59 marathoners.

------------------
My Profile

"Pain is temporary. Regret hurts forever."
[URL=http://www.analytical-training.blogspot.com]

IP: Logged

posted Jul-12-2007 09:48 PM            

In February I ran Myrtle Beach in 3:34:45. (8:11 pace) Average HR was 168. However, that was my first marathon, and I could (should?) have run it faster. I had a 3+ minute negative half split. Anyway, my HR was probably several beats below as a result. My MAF training pace around that time was around 9:00 to 9:05.

I ran the Country Music Marathon at Nashville in April in 3:27:50, which is a 7:55 pace. (AHR of 171) I pushed much harder this race, and the temps were around 70 when I finished. My MAF runs at that time were right at 8:55 give or take a few seconds.

My MAF pace right now is probably 8:30 or so. Who knows with the heat and such.

IP: Logged

posted Jul-13-2007 12:05 AM               

Also, when you first started running strictly at MAF pace in training, how long did it take you to peak and hence require adding speed work to continue making progress? Thanks.
Joel

[This message has been edited by litefoot (edited Jul-13-2007).]

IP: Logged

posted Jul-13-2007 07:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Now, Jimmy. You weren't supposed to tell. Let's
recall that you were certainly the secdef well before
I came governor.

---

"secdef"
spoken like a true government guy.
Actually, way back, I was only appearing to be "secdef",
I was actually running abroad, hitting walls,
and my job title was "ambassfatass."

--Jimmy

MAF log
profeelia

IP: Logged