88 replies to this topic

[grunner]

Hi all runners,

I am wondering if anyone has used or use the Maffetone approach. ( See Link)
http://philmaffetone...eninterview.cfm

Over the last few years I have been following traditional approach's to running, with improvement of around 30s over 10kms every 12 months. Last year after another injury I buried my head into Lore of Running and stumbled across Mark Allens method of using the Maffetone approach.

So I decided to try something different. After being overseas for 4 months, I arrived back home in April and started training. Two runs a week, 2hours and 16ks for 6 weeks. Almost gave up after the first run as I was running 6:30pace. By the SMH Half I was up to 5:30pace. I ran the half in 1hr:24m which was 2mins slower then last year. Then 3 weeks later I ran the Sydney 10 in 36:10. A PB of 1min 20. From July I have included one extra session which ranges from tempo - fartlek. Depending how I feel.

The last month has resulted in the following -

- Sri Chinmoy 1/2 Marathon 1hr:20m (PB of 2min:30)
- Sri Chinmoy 25kms - 1hr:31:39

My training each week is similar to below

Monday 12km - 15km using Maffetone Method
Tuesday - kayak 1 hour -  Outdoor strength session of Chin ups/ push ups/ squats lunges ( around 600 reps)
Wednesday - Fartlek, Tempo
Thursday - Bootcamp session 1hr
Friday - Rest
Saturday - Long Run ( using Maffetone method)
Sunday - Rest

Now I have read so much on Maffetone and I do understand it is not for everyone, however I would appreciate some thoughts on it and my training approach. I am aiming for my first sub 2hr:48m marathon in September. I am also using it with some of my running friends as well.

Thanks

[grunner]

Ha,

The first reply and it's by me. Love chatting with myself.

Ok, so a few months ago I posted the above. I thought I would share my results.

So how did I go? I ended up running 3hrs 6mins. 18 minutes off my desired time. Is it because of the training? No. I don't believe so.
I didn't take in any gels or electrolytes until 25kms. To late on a day when the temperature was above 30 at 10am. (rookie)
I ran thru 21kms in 1:25 and was feeling solid. Then from 28kms slowed and first cramp was at 34kms. Had a double hamstring cramp at the 38km mark, and did the shuffle until the finish. So bad day at the office, however loved the challenge and learning from it.

The thing is, all my training and races leading up had me at around 2:48 time. I think it was because of my poor fluid intake that I struggled.

In regards to the Maffetone approach, I still believe it works. I am uninjured for the first time in 2 years. I also feel fresh, 4 days after the Marathon.(except left calf, which is still a little tight).

I have a running group as well. 7 first time female runners ran the marathon.

They all trained Maffetone, (we did do 5 weeks of tempo runs at 1/2 marathon to 10km pace).

Interesting results.

They all ran exactly to the race plan.
Due to the predicated hot weather we adjusted the times from 3:50 - 4hrs for two girls, 4:10 - 4:30 for one girl, and 4:30 - 5 hours for the other four girls.

Results
3:58
4:06
4:29
4:56
4:58
5:01
5:06

No injuries. all spot on time except two who where 6 minutes out. I was so proud.
In the race, whilst their 10km splits slowed, they improved their overall placing each 10kms. So they actually ran through the field. From the first 10kms - 42kms they improved from between 200 positions - 900 positions. The general comment was, yes they had some mental struggles at times, however, they felt strong, and all except 2 powered home the last 5kms.  

So I do believe it works. For everyone, maybe not, as when you start you need to fight the ego. I will stick with it for Canberra Marathon or Great Ocean Road 2012. And for first timers? A big yes. My group will also do another marathon next year.

I believe in the theory side of it (being a PT it makes sense)and the practical does work. After all, don't we all just want to run, injury free and enjoy it.

Would love to hear some thoughts from experienced runners on this topic.

Grunner

[TheRuns]

Great posts. I was interested in the Maffetone method after reading about it in Noakes' book too. I'm still recovering from a nasty bout of ITB-itis and I will start walk/run intervals next week. I may yet start using this method. You can't help crappy weather. I am sure Canberra will go well for you. It is far more likely that you'll freeze there than be too hot!
Thanks!

[B+]

Grunner, based on your orginal post i thought you may have your Maffetone methodology wrong, but seeing as I hadn't had a chance to refresh my memory on this I had not posted a reply.
However on reading this again, my understanding is that you should do a 10 week block where all running is at a max heart rate of 180-your age, irrespective of pace.
The theory being that as your condition improves your pace at the same H/R will increase. Once this improvement stops it's time to add higher intensity/speed work to increase pace again. Once this stops its time to race or go back to 180-age phase.

Given you were mixing a fair few other training phases into your weekly block you may have not got the full effect of the conditioning phase.

Train safe

[SurfStrider]

Good work Grunner - 3:06 is a great result and even better given you did it in this years Sydney Marathon which seems to have knocked everyone about with the heat based on all the race reports.  Also it does sound like you didn't get your energy/hydration levels right - 25kms in is very late in the day to start, but you can fix that next time.

I started dabbling with this method in the lead up to the Glasshouse 100 mile I did recently

I had been off injured for most of the early part of the year (was surfing and riding though to maintain some fitness) and then off for a couple of months completely due to a new job. 12 weeks prior to the event I started my running (not knowing I would enter the GH100 though). I thought I would be sensible and do most of it slowly to allow myself to get used to the kms to minimise the chance of injury but wasn't following a Maffetone schedule.

Over time as I read more of Maffetone, Mark Allen and some more Lydiard, I started to see more sense in training at lower heart rates to build up my aerobic base for ultras.  Given the lack of books on ultra training I thought the success Maffetone had with Ironman competitors was about the most thorough and tested training method for events which last for more than a few hours.

So I started to use MAF heart rate to determine my max running pace.  I did a lot of reading on the MAF heart rate and so had read the objections people had to it, but as I read other heart rate zone information I started to see the wide variability in where people felt different heart rate zones begin and end - i.e. one coach would say heart rate zone x ends at 64% of HR max and another would say it was 72% of HR max - so I thought the Maffetone method of adjusting based on a set of criteria based on your training and injuries etc made as much or more sense than these, so I stuck with it (even though mentally I fought a battle saying it doesn't fit me as I have a very high heart rate max - 205)

How did it go

- well it was very hard at first to force myself to run that slowly, especially seeing people that I know I would normally outrun overtake me, but I soon learned to accept the fact that training is not racing and that I had bigger plans than just this one training run

- I was able to build up my kms in a very short time frame and did not receive any injuries (I also mixed up the shoes I ran in - including some kms barefoot or in minimal shoes - to help increase the strength in different parts of my legs and feet, but that is for another post). nb given i have done a few ultras in the past I am sure that must count for something about why I was able to handle the longer kms, so i would not advise that ramp up for people just starting out.

- my pace did start increasing at those heart rates (plus you can keep the legs going faster through downhills and other drills)

- I felt healthy and didn't get tired or fatigued - if I started feeling a bit tired I backed off the training a bit

- I ended up finishing the 100 mile run (my first) feeling great the whole day and with what I consider a great time for a first time effort of 21hrs 11mins.  I paced it by keeping my heart rate always below a level (just above my MAF rate), so I walked as fast as I could on any hill and then ran as fast as that HR would allow me on everything else.  For some reason my pace was slow for my HR for the first few hours - about a minute/km slower than usual on the flats - I'm not sure if it was a lack of sleep, the cold, a lack of training at that time of day (I trained at very gentlemanly hours/end of day/later weekend starts); not eating before the event, something else, but I stuck with the heart rate and as the day warmed up I started feeling better and my pace increased. Increasing my fitness, not getting lost (over 30mins there) and increasing my pace over the day would allow me to better that result next time - so a new target for next year

- I came out of the event feeling great and looking forward to the next one

So I will keep it up and hopefully see my fitness and pace increase over time. If I was running a shorter event (say city to surf, a half or maybe a marathon) I would do some higher heart rate stuff in the last 6 weeks or so (as suggested by Maffetone and Lydiard), but if it is for another ultra i would only do that if i felt like a change (doesn't seem vital to have a great anaerobic speed for an ultra.

ps. On injuries, I had ITB issues in previous ultra events and so had got into a routine of always stretching them rigorously as they were always tight (like a piece of reo running down my leg), but hesitantly following some of the advice from Maffetone and doing some other research into stretching I stopped really stretching as well, at most a light stretch of everything after a run, and for the first time my ITBs actually seem normal -  was it the body having the ability to adjust as I wasn't pushing as hard, was it the variation of shoes, was it a magical bilby who decided to fix them, I don't know.

[grunner]

B+, on 23 September 2011 - 10:21 AM, said:

Grunner, based on your orginal post i thought you may have your Maffetone methodology wrong, but seeing as I hadn't had a chance to refresh my memory on this I had not posted a reply.
However on reading this again, my understanding is that you should do a 10 week block where all running is at a max heart rate of 180-your age, irrespective of pace.
The theory being that as your condition improves your pace at the same H/R will increase. Once this improvement stops it's time to add higher intensity/speed work to increase pace again. Once this stops its time to race or go back to 180-age phase.

Given you were mixing a fair few other training phases into your weekly block you may have not got the full effect of the conditioning phase.

Train safe

Hey B+

I have to admit the ego is hard to control.

Below is a sample of my training blocks.

April - June 30
2 runs a week @ 135 heart rate. Flat runs from 16km - 25km
Strength and kayak other sessions.

July - august 15
2 runs a week @ 142hr. 1 tempo run @ 155hr.
Strength and kayak other sessions.
Aug - sept 1
2 runs a week @ 145hr 20ks - 35ks lots of hills.
Strength and kayak other sessions.

Taper sept. No running last 10 days.

I also do PT sessions, so once a week we may do some fast 2:4kms.

Not exact maffetone, and also max of three runs a week and only two in the last 3 weeks before taper.

My tempo runs where also only at 1/2 marathon pace / 10pm pace.

I like the variety of training i do as I believe a strong body = less injuries. Which complements the maffetone. Weighing in at 80kgs as well. So not to sure if that is
Heavy weight for marathon.

Thanks for your advice. I like testing new methods. I think I will follow more closely the method for next year.

G

[B+]

grunner, on 23 September 2011 - 11:01 AM, said:

Hey B+

I have to admit the ego is hard to control.

Below is a sample of my training blocks.

April - June 30
2 runs a week @ 135 heart rate. Flat runs from 16km - 25km
Strength and kayak other sessions.

July - august 15
2 runs a week @ 142hr. 1 tempo run @ 155hr.
Strength and kayak other sessions.
Aug - sept 1
2 runs a week @ 145hr 20ks - 35ks lots of hills.
Strength and kayak other sessions.

Taper sept. No running last 10 days.

I also do PT sessions, so once a week we may do some fast 2:4kms.

Not exact maffetone, and also max of three runs a week and only two in the last 3 weeks before taper.

My tempo runs where also only at 1/2 marathon pace / 10pm pace.

I like the variety of training i do as I believe a strong body = less injuries. Which complements the maffetone. Weighing in at 80kgs as well. So not to sure if that is
Heavy weight for marathon.

Thanks for your advice. I like testing new methods. I think I will follow more closely the method for next year.

G

Mate, thats a good effort in the marathon on pretty limited running and may have more to do with the drop off later in the race than nutrition. Hyrdation would have been more critical but not a massive factor. What was your pace in training runs compared to on race day? I ask this because unless you have exposed yourself to race paced efforts your body will "freak out" a bit on race day no matter how fit you are.
If I was in your position I would try to get 4 runs per week in a an average during your low heart rate mileage phase. They don't all have to be long runs but the cumulative mileage will help you down the track.
Don't know what you body composition is like but any kg off is better when running long. So if you can drop a few kg's during your prep it will help on race day too.
One thing I found really good to do was to run a regular time trial at the prescribed heart rate on the same course as you get a pretty good idea of your true pace change over time.
I would have also run a few times in the last 10 days just short sharpening stuff to keep the legs in tune.

Train safe

[lactatehead]

I understand the 180 minus your age HR approach from Maffetone, but did he also advise such little volume? The lowest weekly mileage I have ever heard about from an elite runner was about 100kms a week and that was Tim Hutchings coached by Frank Horwill. I am just wondering why you could not use the HR approach but with a decent volume of running?

Edited by lactatehead, 23 September 2011 - 07:21 PM.

[grunner]

Hey B+ & LactateHead

Some good points, and something I have thought about.

I had two races in July. 1/2 marathon I ran 1h:20, 24km 1hr:31, The 24kms was a day after I ran 28km easy.
In August I ran 51m for the C2S.
In some of my long runs, I ran the 2nd half at marathon pace. No faster. Always felt strong except on one run where I experimented with salt tablets.
One area I will change is more runs 30 - 35kms. I only did two. I feel that maybe I was short here and need a few more under the belt. I don't know if I will add much speed work. I will see how my pace goes, and also races I do.

Because of my trade I am lucky at the moment to be fit. Ideally I would like to be at 78kgs for canberra. Lets hope.

Hopefully I will be able to get more runs in. At least four. Again my trade dictates this, as some days are 12 hours of PT'ing.

I will research Tim Hutchings as well. I am looking at Jack Daniels program and seeing how I can incorporate some of that into my training. Also looking at maybe the Marathonguru, and just taking on a traditional program.

Thanks for your thoughts guys. Appreciate it.

G

[Colin]

You are not the ideal guinea pig to convince me of the Maffetone/Allen method. You are naturally talented given the times you run off low mileage and you do a lot of cross training, and in any case the method is supposed to involve lots of running, certainly more than 100km.wk.
Add to that the fact that Allen et al were doing triathlons involving 30hrs/wk of training then of course you can pull any running training fad out and it will work.

Moral of the story is that there are different ways to skin a cat but if you want optimum performance there are less ways. If you run low HR training of course you will be getting faster at the same HR-- that's called getting fitter isn't it, and for it to work you need more mileage.
If like you, one runs low mileage then more of that ought to be at MP (and you did some of that) otherwise you fade because of the lack of mileage.

Even so, an 80min HM, 36min 10km, 51min C2S should do sub 3 even on 45km/wk in that weather we had, so the jury is still out, but heavily swayed towards it not being the best way of skinning this cat..imo of course.

[grunner]

Thanks Colin, some valid points.

I did train more around 80km - 100km per week last year. My times where slower. 90s for 10km, 2mins for 1/2. I was overseas for 4 months, with no training, and started the Maffetone in April. Ran SMH in 1:24 with 4 weeks training, then the results started coming.

I have lots to think about. Wonder if my wife would fund me for 4 months.

[lactatehead]

Colin, on 23 September 2011 - 07:33 PM, said:

You are not the ideal guinea pig to convince me of the Maffetone/Allen method. You are naturally talented given the times you run off low mileage and you do a lot of cross training,

I was thinking the same thing. Maybe you were overtraining/not recovering properly when you were running 80-100kms a week.

[Shredder1]

If Dr Phil says you should train at 180-age then what heart rate should we be targeting during a marathon? Any advice?

[Bellthorpe]

I don't see that you target a given heart rate during a race.

[Shredder1]

Bellthorpe, on 25 September 2011 - 09:41 PM, said:

I don't see that you target a given heart rate during a race.

I've only just got myself a HR monitor and am wondering what target I should be setting during a race.

[B+]

Shredder1, on 25 September 2011 - 09:27 PM, said:

If Dr Phil says you should train at 180-age then what heart rate should we be targeting during a marathon? Any advice?

You need to read all of Dr Phil's advice.....

You only run at 180-age for a specific phase of the training and note your run time/pace at this hear rate. Once your pace isn't increasing at this set up you add in speed work once pace stalls here you race. Then you start to the process over again. Once you are doing harder speed work and some specific race pace stuff you will figure out what H/R to have as your guide in the race.

This is like Lydiard's 10 weeks of 160km per week at best aerobic pace, then add hills then add anaerobic condition then co-orditation training, then peaking then race.....But everybody only looks at the 160km/week and think that thats the program.

Train safe

[lactatehead]

B+, on 26 September 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

This is like Lydiard's 10 weeks of 160km per week at best aerobic pace, then add hills then add anaerobic condition then co-orditation training, then peaking then race.....But everybody only looks at the 160km/week and think that thats the program.

Yes, most of the training is not aerobic running when you think 10 weeks of aerobic work followed by hills, speed and race practice which lasts for a total of 14 weeks.

[Bellthorpe]

Shredder1, on 26 September 2011 - 07:09 AM, said:

I've only just got myself a HR monitor and am wondering what target I should be setting during a race.

Again, I don't see that you target a given heart rate during a race. Heart rate training is just that, training. During a race, you're trying to run the set distance as fast as it's possible for you to do it.

[Shredder1]

Thanks for the comments guys. I better get a copy of Dr Phil's book.

[Freesoul]

Yep, the Big Book of Endurance Training and Racing made a lot of sense to me.

I'd always thought I'd been doing my long slow runs too fast, and my racing times have not been progressing over the past few years. Now I realize that building an aerobic base is extremely important, and to be able to objectively measure this via HRM training and MAF tests simplifies things a lot. I've been running at MAF pace for only 3 weeks. It's a bit of a pain to be 'slowed down' by my HRM beeping at me, but I guess the long-term gains are what I'm after. I do feel really refreshed after runs now, whereas when I ran more anaerobically I would feel drained afterward. Dr Phil's book made me think more holistically, so I'm paying more attention to my diet now too. Ha! I love the fact that Maffetone doesn't believe in stretching!

Thanks for encouraging me to look more into this method, grunner. I'd been mildly interested when it was discussed on another forum that I follow, but you stirred me into action. Ta!

[Curreo]

Bellthorpe, on 26 September 2011 - 09:05 AM, said:

Again, I don't see that you target a given heart rate during a race. Heart rate training is just that, training. During a race, you're trying to run the set distance as fast as it's possible for you to do it.

Would it not make sense to stick to a heart rate during a marathon as a way of not going too hard early and using up too much glycogen to avoid hitting the wall? I have not run one yet so don't really know but it sort of makes sense to me.

[Caterpillar]

Curreo, on 29 October 2011 - 07:12 PM, said:

Would it not make sense to stick to a heart rate during a marathon as a way of not going too hard early and using up too much glycogen to avoid hitting the wall? I have not run one yet so don't really know but it sort of makes sense to me.

I don't know what the 'ideal' heart rate during a marathon is. I've heard that an ideal marathon strategy is to maintain the same pace throughout, which means you start off at a very easy effort, which gets progressively harder during the race. You can search for garmin + Heart Rate Monitor wearers for your choice of recent marathon at the garmin connect site, which, in the most part, shows an increase in heart rate for the final 10-15km of the race. I guess this coincides with the increasing effort as the legs get tired. I notice my breathing becoming more laboured during the final quarter, but I don't wear a HRM during races.

The heart rate also tends to be very high for the first few kilometres....probably race 'nerves/anticipation'.

You're supposed to feel relaxed for the first 3 quarters of a marathon, and if believe you're going too slow during the first half, you're probably running at the correct pace.

[B+]

Caterpillar, on 30 October 2011 - 04:32 AM, said:

I don't know what the 'ideal' heart rate during a marathon is. I've heard that an ideal marathon strategy is to maintain the same pace throughout, which means you start off at a very easy effort, which gets progressively harder during the race. You can search for garmin + Heart Rate Monitor wearers for your choice of recent marathon at the garmin connect site, which, in the most part, shows an increase in heart rate for the final 10-15km of the race. I guess this coincides with the increasing effort as the legs get tired. I notice my breathing becoming more laboured during the final quarter, but I don't wear a HRM during races.

The heart rate also tends to be very high for the first few kilometres....probably race 'nerves/anticipation'.

You're supposed to feel relaxed for the first 3 quarters of a marathon, and if believe you're going too slow during the first half, you're probably running at the correct pace.

If you want to race and use heart rate as your guide then you should have figured out your "ideal" range during training. Its not something you dial in on the day based on how you feel when you get out of bed.
If your running your first marathon and just want the experience then star easy and build into it. However if your are running to acheive a time in the race then you need to start on a predetermined schedule/pace/heart rate and get moving at this from the start.
Anything that predicts your heart rate is a crock. You need to work it out via either a heart rate step test or during some time trial efforts. This will give you a much more accuart number to train and race too.

As an example in a quest to break 3hrs I sarted doing test sets in training that were built around my tested heart rate range. The goal was to progressively build my ability to stay on pace at this heart rate. 6 weeks out I ran 42km in training all within a 5 bpm range and ran 3hr04min. On race day I knew this range was where I needed to be so all numbers were geared around this goal and sub 3 was the result.
The lesson learned is do your homework in training and you will have a much better chance of acheiving your goal.

Train safe

[HillsAths1]

B+, on 30 October 2011 - 07:43 PM, said:

If you want to race and use heart rate as your guide then you should have figured out your "ideal" range during training. Its not something you dial in on the day based on how you feel when you get out of bed.
If your running your first marathon and just want the experience then star easy and build into it. However if your are running to acheive a time in the race then you need to start on a predetermined schedule/pace/heart rate and get moving at this from the start.
Anything that predicts your heart rate is a crock. You need to work it out via either a heart rate step test or during some time trial efforts. This will give you a much more accuart number to train and race too.

As an example in a quest to break 3hrs I sarted doing test sets in training that were built around my tested heart rate range. The goal was to progressively build my ability to stay on pace at this heart rate. 6 weeks out I ran 42km in training all within a 5 bpm range and ran 3hr04min. On race day I knew this range was where I needed to be so all numbers were geared around this goal and sub 3 was the result.
The lesson learned is do your homework in training and you will have a much better chance of acheiving your goal.

Train safe

B+ was the time a result of keeping within the allotted HR  or was it because you were training? I suspect that it was more likely the latter.

[B+]

HillsAths1, on 31 October 2011 - 11:51 AM, said:

B+ was the time a result of keeping within the allotted HR  or was it because you were training? I suspect that it was more likely the latter.

Not quite sure of your question, however I suspect a combination of both as I had run some k's in the past and not performed as expected on race day.
My primary goal was to get my pacing right and then work on my ability to hold this pace/intensity level. In the past I have always gone out to hard and it's got ugly with about 15k to go.
This was also run on a hillish course as a 2 lap run and I hadto adjust pace on hills to keep my heart rate in that 5 beat range. On the flats the pace was picked up to hold this number. Things were challanging in the last 40 minutes as fatigue was setting in and my sole focus was on holding in the heart rate zone. I was dropping towards the low end as was expected, so concentration on staying relaxed and smooth were keys to keeping my intensity where it needed to be.
The same heart rate range on race day gave me a faster time although I did not race as strcitly to heart rate as after all a race is a race.
My point was just to show that no matter what you want to acheive in competitive environment you need to have figured a fair bit out in training.

Train safe

[Arn]

Shredder1, on 25 September 2011 - 09:27 PM, said:

If Dr Phil says you should train at 180-age then what heart rate should we be targeting during a marathon? Any advice?

My Garmin measured my average HR at my last marathon to be 172. Can you match that?

B+, on 31 October 2011 - 12:30 PM, said:

My point was just to show that no matter what you want to acheive in competitive environment you need to have figured a fair bit out in training.

Train safe

Thats the key, isnt it?!

[HillsAths1]

B+, on 31 October 2011 - 12:30 PM, said:

Not quite sure of your question, however I suspect a combination of both as I had run some k's in the past and not performed as expected on race day.
My primary goal was to get my pacing right and then work on my ability to hold this pace/intensity level. In the past I have always gone out to hard and it's got ugly with about 15k to go.
This was also run on a hillish course as a 2 lap run and I hadto adjust pace on hills to keep my heart rate in that 5 beat range. On the flats the pace was picked up to hold this number. Things were challanging in the last 40 minutes as fatigue was setting in and my sole focus was on holding in the heart rate zone. I was dropping towards the low end as was expected, so concentration on staying relaxed and smooth were keys to keeping my intensity where it needed to be.
The same heart rate range on race day gave me a faster time although I did not race as strcitly to heart rate as after all a race is a race.
My point was just to show that no matter what you want to acheive in competitive environment you need to have figured a fair bit out in training.

Train safe

Thanks B+, most people dont race with their HR's in races for the same reason as you pointed out, that a race is a race.

I think you are also right in your assessment that training is a vastly under used method of achieving a goal. Too often it is a case of just going out for a run with little or no thought given to the task at hand or the end goals.

[ruskie]

grunner, on 03 August 2011 - 04:18 PM, said:

Hi all runners,

I am wondering if anyone has used or use the Maffetone approach. ( See Link)
http://philmaffetone...eninterview.cfm

Hey grunner

Interesting post, I have had a read of the site and think I might give it a try. By the sounds of it, it might just be the thing I need to shed my extra Kg's and make my journey to running a marathon a closer goal. But as it and others have said it will seem strange training at a slow pace, currently my HRM (wahoo via runkeeper) is telling me I am at 80%-90% of my Max rate and I am assuming it is being based on the 220 method. So dropping it back will feel counter productive. Anyone always up in trying something new.

[SNOTRAG]

Hi Gunner

Really interested in the 'Maffetone' approach to training.

I am looking to run a couple of Marathons next year and just feel like I can actually walk the next day. Just curious how did our group feel after the marathon and immediate few days after?  

Cheers

[slowmo]

I need to do a lot of work on my aerobic fitness, which I think is very ordinary at the moment, so I recently bought a copy of Maffetone's 'Big Book of Endurance Training and Racing'. The book seems to contain a lot of useful and interesting information, but it's a pity that the writing is so dreadful. You need quite a bit of endurance just to trudge through it.  Poor expression, frequent repetition, and too many irrelevant anecdotes (sorry, but I don't give a tinkers about Phil's songwriting ambitions or his musings about general relativity). I'm only a third of the way through the book, but so far I think the 'Big Book' could have been edited down to the 'Small Leaflet' with no loss of useful information.

For my age the max training HR is 129 (I don't qualify for the extra 5 bpm you add if you've had consistent fitness and health for the preceding couple of years). Despite routinely running like a slow snail, I find it very hard to keep my HR below 130. An easy, "conversational" pace generally has me closer to 140. Maffetone acknowledges in the book that both resting HR and max HR are, to some extent, inherited and suggests that, for instance, about one third of the population will have a max HR that is higher than predicted by the old [220 - age] relationship. So I'm puzzled why he then advocates that his [180 - age] MAF rule should apply to everyone.

Anyway, I've just bought a cheap HRM and plan to train according to Maffetone's method over the next two to three months in the hope that it will help with my TNF100 preparation. It will be interesting to see how it goes.

slowmo

[Andolate]

Glad to see someone else giving it a go.

My MAF rate is 149 bPM
I started MAF training in early December and have reduced my long run avg pace times down from 5.20k pace to 4.50-4.52pace.
I have also dropped my MAF test time (9k heart rate time trial) from 5.16 pace to 4.48 pace.

I am feeling fit and healthy and ready to bring in some tempos and intervals in 3-4 weeks time.

I did a group interval session today and was pleased to see I had not lost any speed.

I am enjoying the MAF training but also look forward to the next phase coming up to see how it helps.

[slowmo]

Andolate, on 14 January 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

I started MAF training in early December and have reduced my long run avg pace times down from 5.20k pace to 4.50-4.52pace.
I have also dropped my MAF test time (9k heart rate time trial) from 5.16 pace to 4.48 pace.

That seems like an incredible improvement since early December Andolate - congratulations.  Do you credit the MAF training alone for such results ?

I'm starting this week - my timex HRM / honesty gadget arrived today. But I don't expect such dramatic improvements, partly because I'm twenty years older than you but also because I suspect I'm also nowhere near as athletically gifted. However, my main interest in the Maffetone training is to run long rather than fast. I had big problems with nausea in my longer events last year and I'm hoping that a stronger aerobic base, including better fat metabolism on the trot, will help remedy that.

slowmo

[Andolate]

slowmo, on 16 January 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

That seems like an incredible improvement since early December Andolate - congratulations.  Do you credit the MAF training alone for such results ?

I'm starting this week - my timex HRM / honesty gadget arrived today. But I don't expect such dramatic improvements, partly because I'm twenty years older than you but also because I suspect I'm also nowhere near as athletically gifted. However, my main interest in the Maffetone training is to run long rather than fast. I had big problems with nausea in my longer events last year and I'm hoping that a stronger aerobic base, including better fat metabolism on the trot, will help remedy that.

slowmo

Thanks slowmo,

I am somewhat analytical when coming to a conclusion.

I do credit the MAF. I have not changd my diet. The only minor change is that I have eliminated intervals from my program which I was doing twice per week. I also slowed my longer run avg pace which was a comfortable 4.35-4.45 pace. I also went from 45-55klms per week to 60-70 as I felt that I needed to spend more time on my feet in the MAF range. I now do 2 x 16K runs, 2x6-10 runs and 1x 18-25k run.  It is all now at the MAF pace as stated.

As suggessted by the book I do feel healthy and also very fresh when finishing. I think that due to the low HR that I focus on form more to keep things right and maximise efficiency. I think assists slightly in improving pace.

Please keep a track of your improvements and keep posting them.

I reallly think Maffetone is onto something!!

Andolate

[slowmo]

Andolate, on 16 January 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

Please keep a track of your improvements and keep posting them.

A short progress report and some more thoughts...

I've spent the last couple of weeks familiarising myself with the HRM (first time user) and learning how my heart rate is affected by my general state, conditions on the day, and the specifics of each run. I've also been trying to relate it to my perceived effort.

My MAF target heart rate of 180 - 51 = 129 seemed unattainably low at first. I was also unsure how much wiggle room to allow, but started with 5 bpm either side. The first few days were very frustrating, and generally ended with me giving up on the HRM alarm after a few minutes of painfully slow shuffling. Actually, I suspect I was also making things harder by stressing about it.

I found this discussion on Maffetone's web site very interesting. Firstly I noted that Maffetone uses personal testing, rather than the 180 formula, with his coaching clients. This suggested that individual variation was significant. Secondly I saw the reply by Grant Molyneux in that thread where he refers to other ways of defining a personal MAF heart rate. This reminded me that I actually had a copy of Molyneux's e-book Effortless Exercise (link) which I'd never read !

Molyneux suggest you try calibrating your heart rate against two types of perceived effort. The first is the threshold between a sensation of sustainable pace / flow vs a feeling of pushing harder. The second is the threshold between comfortable nasal breathing vs needing to suck air in through the mouth. He advises taking some time to over this, and then to use whichever results in a lower heart rate as your MAF target, working with a range from 10 bpm below to 5 bpm above. I found that each of these thresholds can be very fuzzy, and shift between runs or over the course of a long run so I've taken average values from the HRM rather than trying to pin down threshold HRs on the fly.

After playing with this for the last couple of weeks I was quite surprised by how things turned out:

- My target heart rate following Molyneux's suggestions is around 135. This is actually very close to what I would get by using Maffetone's recommendation of adding 5 bpm to the MAF target from the 180 formula if you've had a couple of years uninterrupted by illness etc (which I haven't but never mind).

- Once I got more relaxed about running with the HRM I found that it is quite possible to run at these low heart rates for a time. I do have to walk anything more than a gentle hill. I also find my heart rate is always a little higher on trail than on hard surfaces. But it seems I was wrong to doubt that Maffetone's method is feasible for me.

- I was doing long run/walk sessions during December to prepare for the Narrabeen 12 hour race. I now realize that these were more or less MAF sessions, so I guess I can claim about 6 weeks of MAF training to date.

- Last week I ran my fastest 5km race ever !  My fastest is probably most people's slowest but still, this came as a complete surprise. It does at least suggest that the low heart rate sessions are bringing benefits.

- I'm enjoying my running more and feel much fresher through the week.

One thing I'm not clear on, and haven't seen mentioned in Maffetone's book, is how to deal with heart rate drift over the course of a long run. Currently my weekly long runs (done as run/walk intervals) are 3-4 hours. On the last one I found that my heart rate was quite stable at around 130 during most of the first hour, but was up around 150 by the end of the fourth hour even though my pace and my perception of effort didn't seem much different. Perhaps Maffetone would say I shouldn't do anything that long until I have a better base and the drift is not as high ?  On the other hand, Molyneux seems more relaxed about such variation.

slowmo

[walker1st]

Slowmo,
there is also possible easing into MAF, by gradually going down with training HR
first it might be a problem to run at the HR so you do training at MAF + 20 after few weeks you are able to run at MAF + 10, later at MAF

this seems to be easy to grasp.

however it can continue, I found in the MAF forum that when runners hits the plateau in improvement, solution is lower the training HR further

MAF - 10, MAF - 20.

The way I do understand the method, that the calculated MAF HR is the testing HR, test is run every 3-6 weeks exactly at the MAF HR, when the conditions are right = weather, temperature no wind etc so comparing the test results has any logic.

apart from testing, the training HR is lower that the MAF HR, lower by 10-20.

so to me typical session would be running in the range 20-10 bellow MAF HR , and allowing on hills to come it up to MAF HR or maybe to +5, although on the hills it is possible to run slower easier, it is often mental block which is trying to keep the uphill pace

disclaimer : I have never done the MAF test the way he is prescribing it, for various reason I do prefer different type of testing

1 of the side ideas of this method, in my view is, that it should allow gradual increase of the running volume, in km or in hours per week, till the volume needed for
desired performance target, so it is in direct contrast to methods of how to run something with no training or training 3 x per week
from the MAF discussions forums, runners are comming to conclusion, that running every day at MAF HR is too demanding it means running the test every day
but running at MAF-10 or MAF-20 allows for recovery and running every day and getting the volume needed

[slowmo]

Thanks for that Walker1st. Gradually approaching the desired training heart rate makes a lot of sense to me, much more so than trying to run at a slow shuffle from day one which I think actually risks injury because of poor form.

I also take your point about needing to do the MAF tests under consistent conditions. I've noticed how much wind and temperature can affect my heart rate even at a very gentle pace.

I didn't realize that some people aim to train at sub-MAF heart rates. I think I need to read the relevant parts of Maffetone's book again and maybe look up the forums that you mention.

slowmo

[slowmo]

I've been continuing with the Maffetone / Molyneux training this month and I'm noticing further changes and improvements:

- Resting heart rate has fallen to around 45 bpm which is a lot lower than I'm used to.

- My longer week-day runs (14-16km) now feel more like my shorter (8-10km) runs used to in terms of expended effort.

- Weekly long runs, presently around 4 hours, are much more enjoyable and I no longer experience the "oh god, when will it be over" feeling that used to characterise the last part.

- Just had another best time at a race (Sri Chinmoy 16km at Mirambeena, Sydney) which surprised me because it included some testing hills which I usually struggle with.

It's hard to say how much the Maffetone training contributed to the above improvements and how much was due to other factors. For instance, I did a session on running form with Fossil last September (which I highly recommend) and I know that it's taken some months for the changes in form to really take root in my running. Also, the low HR running has made it easier for me to up my weekly mileage so there is likely to be a training volume effect at work too. Despite this, I am confident that the focus on low HR is helping me to get substantially more training benefits from my everyday running than I used to while enjoying it more.

Lastish pointed me to the discussion form about Maffetone and low HR training at http://www.runningah...s/LOWHRTR/forum and I'm very slowly working my way through it.

slowmo

[walker1st]

Slowmo
1 of the basic ideas of MAF in my view, is the ability to significantly increase the volume of running training.

probably it is not spelled out clearly enough, but I see it as a basic rule of Lydiard for beginners :

run very slowly but build up the volume in time eventually running the same number of hours per week, as the elite runner would covering 100 training miles

so slow down and increase the volume of running time

MAF has the same basic idea, just made it into formula, system, numbers, tests etc

and not trusting the human Ego in own evaluation what is slow enough, cleverly introduced the HR control mechanism

Lydiard in age before HRM had same control mechanism expressed as : the pace is so slow, so when you return from training session and I tell you to run it all again at the same pace, you can do it with no prob, and often he did it to make sure it is taken seriously

It is the same principle, instead of the coach controlling it it is the HRM

[mutk]

walker1st, on 22 February 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

Slowmo
1 of the basic ideas of MAF in my view, is the ability to significantly increase the volume of running training.

probably it is not spelled out clearly enough, but I see it as a basic rule of Lydiard for beginners :

run very slowly but build up the volume in time eventually running the same number of hours per week, as the elite runner would covering 100 training miles

so slow down and increase the volume of running time

MAF has the same basic idea, just made it into formula, system, numbers, tests etc

and not trusting the human Ego in own evaluation what is slow enough, cleverly introduced the HR control mechanism

Lydiard in age before HRM had same control mechanism expressed as : the pace is so slow, so when you return from training session and I tell you to run it all again at the same pace, you can do it with no prob, and often he did it to make sure it is taken seriously

It is the same principle, instead of the coach controlling it it is the HRM

Fascinating..   So an alternative approach _could_ be...   if I have a goal to run a sub 3hr marathon, I could find a consistent sub 3hr runner, get an idea of the volume in hours they do on a daily basis, and steadily work my way up to be able to do that volume  at the appropriate MAF  pace/HR.  And the theory is that doing that volume in hours   at the appropriate MAF pace will allow superior adaptation and fitness gain..

I am in fact planning on walking a marathon training program for a while, slowly build up to running it again. MAF- 70  I suspect..

Cheers

[walker1st]

actualy Lydiard worked with 2.20-2.30 marathoners, so conservative 2.30 M is 3:33 /km pace

in the basic buildup, the pace could be 60-75 slower per km, than the targeted MP, considering some faster shorter runs lets take aboput 60 secs slower
so we have average training pace about 4:30/km

to run 100 miles as per Lydiard per week at 4:30 takes : 160km x 4:30/km = 720 minutes per week = 12H

and on top of that there was easy morning jogging up to an hour weekdays, so additional 3-5 hours

so if you include recovery runs, really you are targeting 12-15 hours per week

and only after adapting to this and managing it for some length of time,
you can start thinking about increasing the pace of some of the runs

[slowmo]

walker1st, on 22 February 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

Slowmo
1 of the basic ideas of MAF in my view, is the ability to significantly increase the volume of running training.

probably it is not spelled out clearly enough, but I see it as a basic rule of Lydiard for beginners :

Ah yes - it makes a lot of sense when put that way. Plus I guess the slower running also reduces the risk of injury and fatigue despite the increased volume.

But at some point I imagine the law of specificity has to apply ? I gather that Lydiard required a sharpening phase to get speed in his athletes' legs.  My own recent race results suggest that even the base-building slow running can lead to surprising improvements in speed, but the big caveat there is that I am at the slowest end of the running spectrum (my CR name isn't ironic) so this might not be what most people could expect (?)

slowmo

[walker1st]

slowmo, on 22 February 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

walker1st, on 22 February 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

Slowmo
1 of the basic ideas of MAF in my view, is the ability to significantly increase the volume of running training.

probably it is not spelled out clearly enough, but I see it as a basic rule of Lydiard for beginners :

Ah yes - it makes a lot of sense when put that way. Plus I guess the slower running also reduces the risk of injury and fatigue despite the increased volume.

But at some point I imagine the law of specificity has to apply ? I gather that Lydiard required a sharpening phase to get speed in his athletes' legs.  My own recent race results suggest that even the base-building slow running can lead to surprising improvements in speed, but the big caveat there is that I am at the slowest end of the running spectrum (my CR name isn't ironic) so this might not be what most people could expect (?)

slowmo

yes it is correct re the different phase system in Lydiard, we are now talking the first big volume general fitness aerobic and strength endurance base building.

In MAF similar approach could be seen in Mark Allen ironmen preparation, 6 months of low HR MAF traing and than few months of high intensity including short races leading to Hawai.

Generally in MAF You can do low HR as long as You can afford or as long as you need to, minimum 3 months, typically 6-9 months, but also 18 months period,
really it is about how important you think is the race coming soon on a calendar, can you run it just from the slow base, or is it that important that you interrupt the process and include intensity ?

I have some friends following low HR system longer term back in czech-slovak and they are consistently improving their racing performance across all racing distances
without doing any intensity phase and most of them decided to stay with the process till they find the plateau, experience is that as they find the body coping well with load they simply increase the volume and despite the real freezing and snowy winter they are putting in a huge base relatively comparing what they used to run before.


edit : as usual I use my fav example in Viren, who was putting in a base for 3 and 1/2 years between olympics, this statement always bringing in a controversy and opposition,...
I remember from some article his coach asking him : make a choice, chasing world record or olympic gold, he picked olympics, so there was no high intensity sharpening phase in between the games.

pick a goal and focus on it

Edited by walker1st, 22 February 2012 - 04:52 PM.

[slowmo]

Many thanks Walker1st - this discussion is really helpful.

slowmo

[grunner]

Just curious how did our group feel after the marathon and immediate few days after?  

Group felt like every other runner after a marathon, elated and buggered. On a 32deg day it was hard. However....

Prior to the start we adjusted everyone's pace according to the heat factor. It was around 30s slower per km.

Now whilst all runners fell short of our original times set 6 week earlier,they all ran to the new pace and finished within the time. The one thing that really stood out was all the girls improved their overall position every 10kms. And not just by a few. I am talking an average of 987 positions from 10kms - 42kms.

Everyone was happy and no one got injured.

We are now in training for the Great Ocean Road 1/2 & 42. We will see how they go this time.

G

[grunner]

8 months on.

After Sydney, I took 8 weeks off running and increased strength work. At the end of November I started training for Narrabeen 12 hour. ( 7 weeks). I based my training on MAF H/R and two runs a week over distance. This was reduced to 5 weeks as I rolled my ankle xmas day in Lane Cove. I did however cover around 20kms per week in walking with a client. This may have helped!!

Ran 114kms on race night, but cannot put that down to MAF on just 5 weeks training. Maybe Luck.

Have been back running 3 weeks now and all at MAF. I did a 10km time trail run 2 weeks ago in 41m. This is about equal to 37:10 pace for a 10km road race. Only about 20s of my pace 6 months ago.

Plan is to run x 2 a week at MAF, swim, strength and maybe a bike ride every 3 weeks. Every 2 - 3 weeks I will run a 10km- 21km to see how I am tracking.

No tempo sessions until May.

Goal is sub 8hrs at Tan 100 in August.

We will see. I will post up a monthly track on this blog.

G

Edited by grunner, 22 February 2012 - 09:57 PM.

[Tony123]

grunner, on 22 February 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

8 months on.

After Sydney, I took 8 weeks off running and increased strength work. At the end of November I started training for Narrabeen 12 hour. ( 7 weeks). I based my training on MAF H/R and two runs a week over distance. This was reduced to 5 weeks as I rolled my ankle xmas day in Lane Cove. I did however cover around 20kms per week in walking with a client. This may have helped!!

Ran 114kms on race night, but cannot put that down to MAF on just 5 weeks training. Maybe Luck.

Have been back running 3 weeks now and all at MAF. I did a 10km time trail run 2 weeks ago in 41m. This is about equal to 37:10 pace for a 10km road race. Only about 20s of my pace 6 months ago.

Plan is to run x 2 a week at MAF, swim, strength and maybe a bike ride every 3 weeks. Every 2 - 3 weeks I will run a 10km- 21km to see how I am tracking.

No tempo sessions until May.

Goal is sub 8hrs at Tan 100 in August.

We will see. I will post up a monthly track on this blog.

G

Very interesting topic.  Out of interest what is your MAF pace?  And how far are your MAF runs?  I think its amazing that you can target a sub 8hr 100km off just 2 runs per week.

[grunner]

MAF -
HR sits at the moment at MAF pace is 145.

Pace per KM is around 4:50 per km.

My runs are only two a week. Usually one 1 hour and a 90 minute at he moment. Leading up to Narrabeen allnighter I only had 5 weeks prep and ran a 90m per week and runs from 3hrs - 5hrs.  I was aiming for 7 weeks training, however rolled my ankle two weeks out.

Being a Personal Trainer I also have running groups, kayak and outdoor sessions. So legs, cardio and strength do get a workout.

At the moment I am only doing two runs. I am doing the TAN 100 in August so will have 8 - 10 weeks of 3 runs per week. I was thinking today of doing the Great Ocean Road Marathon in May or a 6 hour in June to see if I can hold 4:30 pace over that distance. Marathon will be ok, not sure over 6 hours.

Time will tell.

Thanks for the question

G

[Tony123]

Ok, so your MAF HR is higher than I thought - so your pace is a bit quicker than I thought too.

Good luck with the training

[KiaKaha]

Hey guys i switched to maf end last year because i had had so much trouble building any kind of kms with my MS

I tried low volume higher intensity trianing last year and just kept crashing

Best thing i ever did. Im a very slow runner at best of time and it took me a while to get used to seeing even slower pace at first i was frustrated. although i havent seen an improvement in pace yet i have just completed 100kms this week feel great and am loving my runningagain

I no longer care about the speed because now i can go out and enjoy my running. I wa planning to stick to this method for this year and see what happens. Im not sure if pace will improve but then as i dont enter races often and im not chasing a pb every time it downt really matter Im excited abot the vents i have chosen i fel like a runner again

I did some reading on the central nervous system it takes 3-7 days to recover from a medium intense sesson so im guessing this is my problem and with the easier pace and less stress on the body it must be recovering quickly allowing me to trian . whereas if i do anything of higher intesnity i fatigue and need to spend 2 days in bed

[Freesoul]

Cool, Stella C! It definately looks like you're onto something there. Keep it up, and be encouraged! You've inspired me.

slowmo, on 01 February 2012 - 09:32 PM, said:

One thing I'm not clear on, and haven't seen mentioned in Maffetone's book, is how to deal with heart rate drift over the course of a long run. Currently my weekly long runs (done as run/walk intervals) are 3-4 hours. On the last one I found that my heart rate was quite stable at around 130 during most of the first hour, but was up around 150 by the end of the fourth hour even though my pace and my perception of effort didn't seem much different. Perhaps Maffetone would say I shouldn't do anything that long until I have a better base and the drift is not as high ?  On the other hand, Molyneux seems more relaxed about such variation.

slowmo

Yep Slowmo, I've noticed the same thing. It may have something to do with heat dissipation. (as mentioned by Hadd on this forum you  kindly gave us. I'm slowly making my way through it too).

slowmo, on 22 February 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

Lastish pointed me to the discussion form about Maffetone and low HR training at http://www.runningah...s/LOWHRTR/forum and I'm very slowly working my way through it.

slowmo