Skip navigation
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community

87236 Views 1,198 Replies Latest reply: Jan 8, 2008 3:34 PM by formationflier Go to original post 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 ... 80 Previous Next
  • henrikker Rookie 20 posts since
    Sep 12, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by leitnerj:

    I didn't mean anything negative by it. I think you should do what you
    want to do, especially if you enjoy it. Maybe it will work better, maybe
    it won't. Over the past 6 or 7 versions of this thread, I can say that
    the most disgruntled of all are (1) those that expected short-term
    results and (2) those that made their own special adjustments that
    didn't seem to work out (and most lived in denial that they actually
    made adjustments). However, many have been successful with
    adjustments. The reason this thread stays alive is that many people
    post their own experiences and approaches, most of which follow
    similar concepts but differ in many ways from my own.
    But if you've found a pace/effort that works for you
    and that you enjoy, give it a shot.



     



    I didnt take it as negative.
    I appriciate the advice. I dont see myself as disgruntled though. I am just trying to see what works for me, and giving myself some numbers to play with (hobby of mine).
    After only 6 (recorded) runs this way, I dont claim to know anything about it (certainly not writing any books), but I like to talk about it, and get better at it. I am so new at this, that nothing is stable yet, and that probably wont change for a while.
    Trying 156 for me is just a phase. I think (again pure speculation), that if I can run the whole time here, I will be able to run all the time at below 151 at some point.
    hehe.. I am mumbling. Its late here, and I am off to get my sleep so I am rested for tomorrows run.
    Wont ask the same question again..

  • gregw070 Rookie 244 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by corland14:

    Hi chrisfield

    I've never read Daniels. I only threw that out there because it seemed to support my marathon goal given my recent 20 miler. I took the number from one of aharmer recent posts;

    FYI - These are the percentages of max HR people should be able to sustain for a marathon according to Daniels' Running Formula.
    5:00 80%
    4:40 81%
    4:20 82%
    4:00 83%
    3:40 84%
    3:20 85%
    3:00 86%
    2:50 87%
    2:20 88%
    2:05 89%

    I took a look at your numbers, very impressive. I've been thinking about using the Hadd method for my spring marathon. I love numbers so I think I'll buy the Daniels book as well.


     



    The table is in the second edition in a chapter about using "mileage training points." He's not really prescribing this as a method for pacing a marathon. The range of heart rates reflect the fact that elite marathoners are able to run at a higher percentage of their lactate threshold. An elite running 30 minutes at MP gets more training points than a 5-hour marathon running his MP for 30 minutes. The 5-hour marathon can only use a lower fraction of their lactate threshold because their marathon pace is limited by other factors.

    I wouldn't expect to fall right on the chart although it's probably a reasonable first approximation.  For me, I've run 5 marathon with an HRM and have average 172 or 173 for all of them, which is 86 or 87 percent.  Unfortunately, this doesn't mean I'm running a 3-hour marathon

  • jjwaverly_42 Pro 388 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by henrikker:

    Not saying that I need your blessing. Advice, yes.

    I just wanted to hear from you experienced guys, if the effect of the MAF training will decay if I add 5 bpm to 156.

    I REALLY enjoy during longer runs then I have been used to, and not feeling bad after. And I enjoy the runs using 151 with all the walking.
    I am just looking for the best way for me to get the most out of my runs.
    I can easily see the benifits I will get down the line from this, and I dont wanna miss out on them by adding a few bpm now. Just because I dont want to walk.
    Thats why I ask.


     


    What do you mean by "get the most out of my runs"?
    There is only one way to find out if 156 will be helpful.
    Though it wouldn't be MAF training anymore.
    But who says you you have to do that anyway?

    --Jimmy

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

  • Any advice here on my question of yesterday about the very low pulse rate (108) that the 180-age etc method comes up with?  Should I be sticking to that, and, if so, by walking or by a mixture of walk/running?  And for how long at a time?

    Thanks in advance.

  • Thanks, leitnerj.  I'm sorry to have misposted this in two places - new to this site.  Can we go on with the topic here, as it's Maffetone that I'm interested in?  I've found what he, and others of you here, are saying very persuasive, and would like to apply his ideas to my situation.  I don't understand why you say that at age 57 exact numbers become unimportant?  For the most part, if I understand you (and Maffetone), the idea seems to be that numbers are very important, and that his 180 minus xyz is a very good way to go, and that if that produces an improbably low MAF then that's still the figure to use.  It's that that I wanted just to check out here: if my 180 minus xyz produces 108, is that still a good figure to use?  I'm happy to use it, especially if it produces the sound aerobic base that I'm aiming for.  As I understand it, Maffetone etc (and I've read my way through the refs in your FAQ, by the way) only don't stand by the 180 minus xyz in the case of (roughly) ages below 20 or over 60/65.

  • jjwaverly_42 Pro 388 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by roster:

    Any advice here on my question of yesterday about the very low pulse rate (108) that the 180-age etc method comes up with? Should I be sticking to that, and, if so, by walking or by a mixture of walk/running? And for how long at a time?

    Thanks in advance.


     



    Are you 72? Have you been running and racing for a long time?
    If so, you can add 15 beats to bring the adjusted MAF to 123. If you haven't been training without injury bring it to 118:

    if you are a competitive runner who has been training and racing for more than two years without injury, add 5 beats<br /><br />-If you are over about 55 years old or younger than about 25 years old, add another 5 beats to whatever number you now have.<br /><br />-If you are about 60 years old or older OR if you are about 20 years old or younger, add an additional 5 beats to the corrected number you now have.<br /><br />Create a zone of 108 to 123 (or 103-118). That's your meaty zone you should get to after 15-30 minutes or 2-3 miles. You can play all sorts of games in that zone like:<br /><br />aerobic intervalsrun a speed that gets you to the top of your zone for .25 miles or 2-3 minutes, then run a speed that slows your HR to the bottom of your zone for 2-3 minutes or a .25 mile. Do 8 times.

    aerobic hill repeats and downhill aerobic "speed" workdo hills, but stay under or near MAF. Run the downhills fast enough to be near MAF.<br /><br />MAF Testafter a 2 mile warm-up, run 3-5 miles, keeping your HR at MAF. You can actually do all your runs this way if you want. It is usually an exercise in slowing down though.

    General runningto do runs in a way where you are keeping an even pace. Split the run and your zone into 1/3rs or 4ths 1/4's <br /><br />for example:<br />a 9-miler<br /><br />miles 1-3: MAF -20 beats to MAF -10 beats<br />miles 3-6: MAF -10 beats to MAF -5 beats<br />miles 6-9: MAF -5 beats to MAF<br /><br />You'll find as you develop your system, you will be able to get to MAF -10 and stay below MAF for increasing amounts of miles without having to slow down to keep under MAF. If you can eventually get to 10 miles straight and be able to stay in the zone  of MAF-10 to MAF, without significant slowing, you are getting somewhere for damn sure (a la Hadd).<br /><br />Walk if you have to in order to stay under MAF. If you need to walk, then you really need some work. It's temporary as you build mileage.<br /><br />I wish you the very best. Keep going!<br /><br />Jimmy

    "Keep It Simple Speedy"

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

    [http://This message has been edited by jjwaverly42 (edited Oct-12-2007).|http://This message has been edited by jjwaverly42 (edited Oct-12-2007).]

  • Thanks very much, jjwaverly42 for that very full and helpful answer.  I'm not 72, though - my situation is as follows - copied from my post on the previous page (and that's how I came up with the 108).  Would your advice be any different, knowing all this?

    I'm 57, haven't been exercising regularly, have had some gym-caused injury to a knee (over-enthusiastic trainer!) and am on some regular medication. That gives a read-out of max 108, which does seem amazingly slow. A moderate walk can send me over that. Do you still think that I should persist with such a low number of bpm? If so, should I just walk for the time being, or would you recommend a very slow walk/jog ('wog'?)? If a wog, would you do it in bursts or try to keep it up - and for what length of time and frequency? I'm trying to do some gym based exercise (pressups and cable machines and the like) to develop a bit of muscle (I'm tall and thin - ectomorph frame - 6'3 and 163 pounds). Maffetone doesn't seem to approve of that sort of training much - is it OK to be doing it at the same time as base building? My eventual aim is to be running, not fast, for enjoyment and cardio fitness, not to race.

    Thanks again for your help with this.

  • haley068 Rookie 134 posts since
    Mar 12, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by catwoman73:

    Hi haley-

    Welcome to the group.

    I'm 34, which makes MAF 146 for me. The early miles of almost all of my runs are at a HR of 140-141. It often climbs closer to MAF after about 7-8 miles. I have seen some good (but slow) progress running like this, so I don't think running at a HR in the 130s would be detrimental to your progress. Heck- look back over this entire thread- there are people here who run at HR<100! And I must say- good for you for not trying to push yourself too hard, and paying attention to the signals your body is sending you. There aren't many newbie runners who are capable of this.

    As for your MAF HR- I know you don't take daily medications for your asthma, but asthma is a chronic health condition, which, according to Maffetone, warrants running at MAF-10. I think your body is already telling you that 145 is too high, if you are having difficulty talking at a HR of 140. Its always better to err on the side of caution, and go with the lower HR. So, if I were you, I'd use a HR of 135.

    As for your bf telling you that you are running way too slow, well, I can't say I agree with that. Running most of your miles slowly, whether or not you are following Maffetone, is a great way to avoid injury, and become a life-long runner. Depending on your goals, and how you progress with low HR training, you may or may not eventually have to add some speedwork, but you are a very new runner, and don't really have the mileage base to benefit from speedwork. So for now- keep it slow and easy. Mileage increases should be slow- no more than 10% per week. I was only running approx. 15 miles per week when I started MAF training, and always had some nagging little aches and pains. 3 months later, I'm up over 30 miles per week, and completely injury-free!

    Good luck with your training, and keep us posted!

    Pam


     



    Thank you Catworman. It's funny how something seems so obvious when someone else says it. Of course the asthma should figure in and isn't it interesting that figuring it in brings me to the HR that I'm comfortable running!?!
    Ok, so I'll just keep on my slow steady journey. It's been working so far. !http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/biggrin.gif|src=http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/biggrin.gif|border=0!
    Thanks!

  • jjwaverly_42 Pro 388 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by roster:

    Thanks very much, jjwaverly42 for that very full and helpful answer. I'm not 72, though - my situation is as follows - copied from my post on the previous page (and that's how I came up with the 108). Would your advice be any different, knowing all this?

    I'm 57, haven't been exercising regularly, have had some gym-caused injury to a knee (over-enthusiastic trainer!) and am on some regular medication. That gives a read-out of max 108, which does seem amazingly slow. A moderate walk can send me over that. Do you still think that I should persist with such a low number of bpm? If so, should I just walk for the time being, or would you recommend a very slow walk/jog ('wog'?)? If a wog, would you do it in bursts or try to keep it up - and for what length of time and frequency? I'm trying to do some gym based exercise (pressups and cable machines and the like) to develop a bit of muscle (I'm tall and thin - ectomorph frame - 6'3 and 163 pounds). Maffetone doesn't seem to approve of that sort of training much - is it OK to be doing it at the same time as base building? My eventual aim is to be running, not fast, for enjoyment and cardio fitness, not to race.

    Thanks again for your help with this.


     


    You can still add 5 for being over 55.
    So that would be 113.

    If your goal is cardio fitness, and to be healthy, then I suggest you stick to the plan running wise and don't worry about doing gym workouts. Although if you are getting injured from doing so, you might want to keep those workouts as aerobic as possible. You have no desire to race or to be able to do long distances fast. MAF base training will work you aerobic system and help you stay healthy. Walk if you have to in order to keep in your zone. It is all good. Walking, runningkeep moving.<br /><br />Keep going!<br /><br />Jimmy

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

  • Thanks a lot, jjwaverly42 - I'm glad to get those extra 5 bpm.  I coudn't see a reference to adding beats for age in this way in the Maffetone book that I've been reading (_The Maffetone Method_, 2000).  Does he write about it somewhere else? 

    Do you/does he see this method as being something that you keep up indefinitely, or as a base from which to move on to higher bpm workouts?  And if so, how long would the base-building period last?  3 months, 6 months?  Or is there some more individual sign that would be an indicator of when to move on?

  • jjwaverly_42 Pro 388 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007

    quote:


    Originally posted by roster:

    Thanks a lot, jjwaverly42 - I'm glad to get those extra 5 bpm. I coudn't see a reference to adding beats for age in this way in the Maffetone book that I've been reading (_The Maffetone Method_, 2000). Does he write about it somewhere else?

    Do you/does he see this method as being something that you keep up indefinitely, or as a base from which to move on to higher bpm workouts? And if so, how long would the base-building period last? 3 months, 6 months? Or is there some more individual sign that would be an indicator of when to move on?


     



    I just gave the beats to you, you seem nice.

    Actually, I got those particular adjustments from the website of co-guru, Mark Allen here:

    http://www.markallenonline.com/heartrate.asp[/URL" target="_blank">

    The only quote I can find in Training For Endurance is:

    "The 180 Formula may need further individualization for people over 65. Uo to 10 beats may be added, depending on individual levels of health and fitness. This does not mean just add 10, but an honest self-assessment is important." (pg.41, Training For Endurance by Dr. Phillip Maffetone, Second Edition, ©2000 David Barmore Productions)

    You can make your own decision on what number you should use. The important phrase is "honest self-assessment." The overall theme that Maffetone pushes is "be healthy." His approach is all about maximizing training while minimizing stress on your body. The adjustments for injury and medication are all about reducing stress on the system. I'm sure the medication reduction can be played with as some drugs stress the body more than others. Again that would take an honest self-assessment. You could try not taking the reduction, and if your MAF tests and traininng paces improve (after that initial getting worse that I and others have), indicating that your aerobic system is improving, then you can honestly say you don't need the reduction. I'm sure he came up with the reduction because he noticed that when some runners went on medication, their MAF tests went downhill, and that when he subtracted beats from the ceiling they began to improve again.

    On a personal level, I used to have an MAF of 140-141 (135-36 + 5 for being so amazing). Then, after pretending to be Karno, I disobeyed my own rules of recovery after a race and injured my plantar fascia in my right foot. I tried training at some higher heart rates during the spring, but I felt like crap. Everything ached all the time, and the foot wasn't 100%. I made an honest self-assessment and decided to dedicate the rest of the year to rebuildingwith just a few races in the fall. I took the 5 point reduction  for injury (134-5) for a 129. I'm starting to see improvements in my overall health, paces, and the foot has been 100% for awhile now. Sure, I could say to myself "Mr. Amazing, you've been running for almost 5 years now, improving greatly for the last two, BQing and PRing, so  give yourself the extra five beats and run on the wind and be very, very attractive."  That wouldn't be an honest self-assessment.<br /><br />I think it is so important in this training to remember the basic theme of "be healthy." So, I accepted the walking I had to do this summer at the end of runs. I accepted the 14:00 per mile pace I had to run on occasion.<br />Having to walk and run these paces to keep under my MAF meant I NEEDED to walk and run these paces to get where I am going and remain healthy. With patience and perseverance, I know I'll eventually be training at faster paces, not walking, and most importantly probably maintaining health at the same time. So far so good as I am starting to see entire runs be below 11:00, and long runs below 12:00.<br /><br />I hope you enjoyed this blurt.<br /><br />Keep going!<br /><br />Jimmy

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

  • PB2 Rookie 87 posts since
    Apr 21, 2007

    the honest assessment part is so important. some of us have learned the hard way. i think the bottom line is, when in doubt, use the lower number.

1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 ... 80 Previous Next

Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...