quote:<HR>Originally posted by tigger:

I am not sure fast twitch fibres are stimulated by threshold work. I understood they are stimulated at the end of long runs lasting 90 min or more.

Runs faster than 90% MHR should be part of the final few weeks of training. They help improve turnover and increase VO2 max.<HR>

I'm just going by Coach Maffetone's experience and advice, as well as my own experience. Remember that he is coming from a different place than most. It is health first in his program. He's not a big believer in anaerobic training. He found that too much of it caused aerobic suppression, and that most injuries came during anaerobic training sessions. He found that his endurance athlete's stayed healthier and got the same results as if doing traditional speed intervals, when doing their anaerobic work at 90% and below. He found that his athletes, did just as well keeping 90%MHR as a ceiling, as if they were doing 90%+ interval work, with less stress on the body. As far as 90%MHR being someone's threshold, it might actually be over for some. Mine falls at about 87-89%MHR. I find that when I start working the zone of 85-90% for 20-40 minutes every 2-3 weeks, AFTER a base period below MAF, my speed increases across the board. Just after one of these runs. Something is being stimulated. And I like it. Oh so much.

As far as fast twitch fibers being stimulated at the end of long runs, I've read that in a few places as well. Some of the fibers actually develop aerobic qualities, and behave as such. Whether or not that is true, I'll leave that to the intellectuals and debaters, I'll just keep doing my long runs, my MAF base periods, and add those 85-90% runs when race season gets closer.

--Jimmy

@@@@[/URL" target="_blank">
MAF log[/URL" target="_blank">

quote:<HR>Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
I'm just going by Coach Maffetone's experience and advice, as well as my own experience. Remember that he is coming from a different place than most. It is health first in his program. He's not a big believer in anaerobic training. He found that too much of it caused aerobic suppression, and that most injuries came during anaerobic training sessions. He found that his endurance athlete's stayed healthier and got the same results as if doing traditional speed intervals, when doing their anaerobic work at 90% and below. He found that his athletes, did just as well keeping 90%MHR as a ceiling, as if they were doing 90%+ interval work, with less stress on the body. As far as 90%MHR being someone's threshold, it might actually be over for some. Mine falls at about 87-89%MHR. I find that when I start working the zone of 85-90% for 20-40 minutes every 2-3 weeks, AFTER a base period below MAF, my speed increases across the board. Just after one of these runs. Something is being stimulated. And I like it. Oh so much.

As far as fast twitch fibers being stimulated at the end of long runs, I've read that in a few places as well. Some of the fibers actually develop aerobic qualities, and behave as such. Whether or not that is true, I'll leave that to the intellectuals and debaters, I'll just keep doing my long runs, my MAF base periods, and add those 85-90% runs when race season gets closer.

--Jimmy

@@@@[/URL" target="_blank">
MAF log[/URL" target="_blank">

<HR>

There is no doubt that too much anaerobic training will interfere with running ability, however there is a huge difference between "none" and "too much." If you are training for a goal race and want to do your best you must work all of your athletic ability, not just one or two aspects. Lydiard called it sharpening. Others call it speedwork, but several sessions of higher intensity running at the right time in a training program are beneficial for any runner.

When you speak of "his athletes" I am curious...what athletes of note have used or are using his training methods, particularly the lack of high intensity training? I should point out that even Mark Allen had a "Push" phase for 4 weeks prior to a goal race where he did short and fast track work.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by tigger:
There is no doubt that too much anaerobic training will interfere with running ability, however there is a huge difference between "none" and "too much." If you are training for a goal race and want to do your best you must work all of your athletic ability, not just one or two aspects. Lydiard called it sharpening. Others call it speedwork, but several sessions of higher intensity running at the right time in a training program are beneficial for any runner.

When you speak of "his athletes" I am curious...what athletes of note have used or are using his training methods, particularly the lack of high intensity training? I should point out that even Mark Allen had a "Push" phase for 4 weeks prior to a goal race where he did short and fast track work.<HR>

Just quoting his books, Tigger. Besides Mark Allen, the only other one I've heard him mention is Mike Pigg. His writing on Pigg is that Pigg would do quite well with very little anaerobic training, with absolutely none through a successful race season. I'm sure if you worked with Maffetone, he'd call you one of his athletes (who cares if someone is world famous elite or an age-group runner?). For many, the term "patient" might have been more in line, as he was known as one who could help broken down athletes back into a state of health (Allen included). Maffetone includes an anaerobic phase in his training, and he probably has had athletes that go the traditional route, but in his experience he saw the same fast twitch stimulation keeping 90% as a ceiling, as doing intervals over 90% at let's say a 5k speed. Maybe the guy is bullpoopy, maybe he has no clue. But I don't see why he would lie about such a thing. He says it is his experience with hundreds of athletes--okay, I'll believe him. I truly believe the guy wants to athletes to get the most out of their potential, and more importantly, he wants them to be healthy and well (it's the primary focus and spine of his whole program). So, if he has found that you can get the same effect with less stress, he is going to push the less stressful way.

Now, I already know all the traditional points of view about intervals, speed training, sharpening, and over 90% work, and don't want to get into it more than this simple regurgitation of Maffetone's books (the subject of this thread) and a telling of my own experience. There are no points to prove, no stance I can take that will make any difference to you or anyone who is using a system that is already working for them, or who have not really given MAF training a full go, and therefore really don't know anything about it. This isn't the thread for it. I find such arguments to be meaningless pursuits anyway, as I feel the only true way to really know if things work or not for me is to try them (am I getting better race times AND staying healthy?). If they work for me, I'll share what I'm doing, but always in a take it or leave it spirit. (ALTERED CLICHE ALERT) I am an awesome, mysterious experiment of one.

Keep going, Tig!

--Jimmy

MAF log[/URL" target="_blank">
profile[/URL" target="_blank">