quote:<HR>Originally posted by runawayjesse:
FWIW- Maffetone isn't all that valid as people make it sound. I tried it and lost fitness as a result. The 180-age formula put me wayy to low for their to be any knd of training stimulas..<HR>

I've done thousands of treadmill tests on athletes, measuring among other things RQ (fat/sugar burning) at specific heart rates. This is the best way to determine what you want. Unfortunately, it's expensive, and not readily available.

I like Maffetone's 180 formula because it comes out almost the same as the treadmill tests. The problem is many people are not honest in the initial evaluation of determining a training heart rate from that formula. Hadd and other approaches get close to what the treadmill test show, but only some of the time. Not good enough for me. The problem with Maffetone's formula is he does not emphasize strongly enough other lifestyle items that directly influence fat burning, so you may be spinning your wheels if you don't pay attention to food, stress and other issues, even if you come up with the correct training heart rate.

No one said it was simple.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by JackieLeigh:
Ok, so say I pick a range and work to stay there...I run a lot of hills, there is no way around it. It is why I had to walk a lot of my route today.

If I pick a range I am comfortable at I might as well not use the HR monitor. I have run 2 marathons, I can sustain a pace for a long distance. My HR was really high though. Heck, at 7 miles I could run at 180bpm. I dont think that is a good thing

I want to become a more efficient runner. I want to burn fat. I want to be faster at a more comfortable pace.

I know there is no right way, I just dont want to be wasting time here.
http://This message has been edited by JackieLeigh (edited Sep-04-2007).<HR>

Burning fat, running faster...these are expected results from an effective training program. When that does not happen it's usually some combination of training with too high a heart rate, dietary factors, and the possibility of excess cortisol (from stress). Metabolic problems can also prevent these goals, but they are more often secondary to the three I mentioned. Since we basically don't know anything about you, you have to take it from here. I'd also recommend Maffetone's material as it's scientific and practical (not to mention successful). I'd didn't mean to say it was not simple (it is, overall), just that when you're in one world and you're trying to get to another, it's seems like a long road.

Can someone explain the science behind 180-age? I never did understand what makes that any better than 220-age.

Thanks

quote:<HR>Originally posted by runawayjesse:
Can someone explain the science behind 180-age? I never did understand what makes that any better than 220-age.

Thanks<HR>

Apparently a lot of folks (sorry...don't mean to give you a hard time)...but this has been discussed in great detail in other threads (basebuilding, for one). I could explain it scientifically (which I've done elsewhere), but best to get it from Maffetone, it's his formula (www.philmaffetone.com). I believe there's a chapter from his textbook online there, which gives a detailed explanation of the 180 formula better than I can here.

I will say, that one could not argue the validity of a treadmill test (VO2 max, RQ, etc.). Maffetone's 180 formula (which is based on those same tests) comes within a beat or two, which is quite amazing.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by JackieLeigh:
Will weight lifting really counteract and LHR work? I lift 2x a week <HR>

It depends on the person, and the workout. Certainly if your metabolism is unbalanced and fat burning is reduced, lifting weights (which raises the stress hormone cortisol) can make things worse.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by JackieLeigh:
Ok, so I am going to back off on the weights for a few weeks then, or get in once a week and do higher rep work, keep it more aerobic than anerobic<HR>

you might also check out Maffetone's two week test thread in the canteen section. This was a big step for me (the diet) in getting my running back to 'normal'.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by JackieLeigh:
Well I attempted my first LHR run today and it was HARD. I live in a hilly area and found I had to walk all the hills to keep my HR down. I averaged 148bpm and finished at a 12:15 mm, which is 3 minutes slower than my norm. Yowza<HR>

Hee, hee.... welcome to the wonderful world of LHR training! A world where you have to swallow your pride, suck it up and let little old men with walkers pass you by!

Seriously, though- there's lots of people out there who don't get the whole LHR training thing, or who have tried it and it hasn't worked for them. Really, it is all a big experiment for all of us. I started LHR training a couple of months ago, and have seen some good results so far. In addition to seeing more speed at lower HRs, I have eliminated the little aches and pains I had before, I have more energy, and I'm much healthier. That being said, the little setbacks with this strategy are really frustrating. I'm suffering from horrible allergies right now, and have had to really slow down to keep my HR under control. You will definitely become more self-aware training like this. You will come to understand how much even tiny little stressors in your life have a huge impact on performance. If nothing else, you'll be able to take that lesson away from this.

The only way to know if this is going to work for you is to commit to it, and stick with it faithfully for a few months. Read the WHOLE LHR training thread, including the links and FAQ. Ask lots of questions- there's lots of people who have been doing this for a long time on that thread- they've been a great source on info for me. Do your MAF tests every month to monitor your progress. Most of all- be patient. This is not a strategy that works quickly, but based on your history, it sounds like you could really benefit from giving it a try.

Good luck with your training!


------------------
ME![/URL" target="_blank">