1234

Who has tried Phillip Maffetone's method of training slower to go faster? (Read 461 times)

    How do you take heat, humidity and dehydration into account ? All three of those factors will cause excessive drift.

     

     

    The detail is in the Hadd document which drifts off of the OP's original question about Maffetone. But:

    No I'm not saying you should not run fast. if someone were to train this way properly they do eventually get to run fast, but only when they are ready for it.

     

    the idea is that you start at a guaranteed aerobic pace for everyone.

    you train at that pace (lets say it's 140) until you can run 10 miles without your hr drifting up.

    then you raise the hr to 145 till you can run 10 miles without the hr drifting up

    you keep doing this(raising the hr 5bpm) until you can run 10 mi at MP without your hr rising significantly at which point, erm, you'll be running pretty fast. not only fast but comfortably. Don't forget, your basic easy running pace will improve all the time you are doing this.

    it's no surprise they call it the patience phase and lots of people can't stomach it. But it does work. Read the HADD document - if it doesn't make sense to you - don't do it.

     

    The pain that hurts the worse is the imagined pain. One of the most difficult arts of racing is learning to ignore the imagined pain and just live with the present pain (which is always bearable.) - Jeff

     

    2014 Goals:

     

    Stay healthy

    Enjoy life

     

    Runslowalksalot


      I just did 10 miles at an average HR of 142 that did not drift at all  in 1 hr 38 min, just below 10 minute mile average) and felt fantastic! Smile   I really wanted to keep going, actually I wante to run faster, but resisted.    As this is 1/2 my usual weekly mileage, it tells me that I have been running too fast for too many miles to allow proper recovery to get in more miles.

           I did fail to mention that it is my norm to stand up paddle at a heart rate of 135-145 for 90-120 minutes several times a week, and if conditions are good, get in a 3-4 hr paddle on the weekend.

            After inadequate mileage going into the richmond 1/2 and paying for it after about 11 miles, I want to really put in the miles for the Battleship 1/2 in November.    I'm going to try this MAF method for a few months leading up to a standard 12 week HM training program so I can have a good training foundation.

       

            BTW, thanks for all of the input, valuable insight from both camps!     As an old training adage goes, "it's easy to go hard, but can be hard to go easy"

       

      if you want to check to see if your aerobic system is up to scratch, strap on a hrm and go for a 10 mile run at your MAF pace (180 - age) if it doesn't drift up after the 1st mile (miles 2 - 10) much more than about 5bpm then your aerobic system is pretty good. if not, then maybe you have some questions to ask yourself. Prove it to yourself.

       

      Anyway, whichever method you choose, it definitely works.

      J-L-C



        The Point of it all is that 180 - your age will pretty much get EVERYONE running at a point that is guaranteed to be Aerobic only it's a ball park figure that works. It guarantees that you will be only be training your aerobic systems.

         

         

        Aerobic only? That doesn't make sense. Marathon pace (and half marathon for the majority) is entirely aerobic.

         

        If you ran half marathon pace every day, you would be training "only" your aerobic system but I don't think anyone would ever advocate training that way.

         

        Why? Because there's a helluva lot more to running fast than just metabolism.

        J-L-C


           

          it's no surprise they call it the patience phase and lots of people can't stomach it. But it does work. Read the HADD document - if it doesn't make sense to you - don't do it.

           

          You could take the most hair-brained training method you could think of and if someone consistently followed it for a few months than some manner of improvement wouldn't be that surprising (on the contrary, it'd have to be downright awful for there to be no improvement). Consistent training, especially training in which you're not killing yourself (which would mess with the consistency) can be very useful for many people.

           

          But that doesn't mean that said method is as efficient or effective as other methods. I think that's sort of the point to what a few people are saying. Why be "patient" and go through months of low hr stuff for  "x" performance gains when you can do training that you can actually "stomach" and very likely improve even more?

          Runslowalksalot


            I read the HAAD document and it makes al ot of sense, equating trainig to a toothpaste tube, with anerobic being at the top, and aerobic at the bottom.    Squeeze anywhere and you'll get results (toothpaste)   but you'll never see your potential (all of the toothpaste) without squeezing from the bottom.

            Aside from builing a solid foundation for distance specific training, it was a nice change of pace; though I can see how it can get really old for those who are used to  training  fast.     It's funny how a "no pain, no gain" motto applies to a fit person trying to rebuild thier base, only its a mental pain, vs physial!Surprised

             

            I'll use my wife as an example, She does triathalons and recently had a 6 hour 1/2 Iron distance.    When the distance gets longer tham 8-10 miles, I can't keep up with her, but can take her in a 5k.

             

            Just like running itself, it's for anybody, but not for everbody.


            Consistently Slow

               

               Why be "patient" and go through months of low hr stuff for  "x" performance gains when you can do training that you can actually "stomach" and very likely improve even more?

               

               

               

               To prevent  reoccurring  injuries. Injured  runs general do not run. Fewer injures. More consistence.  More miles. Faster times. For ten years I averaged 700 miles a year. The last 3 years the average is 1600 miles. 75% of my miles are ~7  HB of MAFF.

              Run until the trail runs out.

              2013***1500 miles

              50 miler

              Race Less Train More

               

              Ana Trason  "Living Her Life"

              "The Marble in The Groove"

               

              unsolicited chatter

              http://bkclay.blogspot.com/

              J-L-C


                 

                 

                 To prevent  reoccurring  injuries. Injured  runs general do not run. Fewer injures. More consistence.  More miles. Faster times. For ten years I averaged 700 miles a year. The last 3 years the average is 1600 miles. 75% of my miles are ~7  HB of MAFF.

                 

                All of that can be done without giving a second's thought to hr... Cool

                 

                But yes, I agree consistency is by far the best method of improvement. After all, that's what the whole first paragraph of that post addressed. And if faster running seems to leave you injured, then finding something that works for you instead is a great alternative.


                Bad Ass

                  I used Maffetone while preparing for this season's multiple marathons and I liked it.  I have asthma and this has been the only method that has stopped any asthma attacks during runs and races and which let me run without major issues (most likely because I slowed down).  I have had 4 PRs since September (two of those marathons) and I contribute it in part to Maffetone.

                   

                  I also realized that my easy runs were being run too fast, as you did.  I used to run my easy runs at 10:15-10:30mm.  Now I run them at 11-11:30mm.  yet, I'm faster at races now than I ever was, asthma and all.

                   

                  Overall, I think it's a good guide to help you in building a good base and in keeping your runs not too fast.  I don't think a lot of us can really run by effort without running a tad faster than we should.

                  Damaris, Marathon Maniac, Ultra Runner

                  Blog

                  "The most powerful weapon on earth is the human soul on fire."


                  In it for the long run..

                    J-L-C    Maybe you don't realize how difficult it can be to run truly "easy".  Your post reminds me of someone advising on a weight loss plan- "Just eat less!"     The low-heartrate or MAFF training is a way to discipline one's self to really adhere to slow runs.  I have done varies stints of MAFF training and did find it excellent for coming back from injury, rejuvenating after over-training, and, especially, as I am getting older.  My MAFF number (giving myself some points as allowed) is the very bottom range of my aerobic training zone.   I do find it more difficult on rolling or hilly terrain, since walking is pretty much required if you stick to a strict MAFF.  Flat terrain I can run the whole thing.

                    "It's not who wins the workout..."

                      To the OP, I'm 37 but my MHR, RHR and mpw are almost identical to yours and I have been using Maffetone's methods since January, so I thought this might be relevant to you.  I started running last summer and am so competitive that I turned nearly every run into a race.  Ran myself to injury.  Now I could have fixed that without Maffetone, but he taught me some of the physiological reasons why I needed to slow down to build aerobic speed.  I'm one of those people that has to know "why" before I am bought in.  Took a month off to heal, then came back in January with Maffetone.  Started out at 10 m/m plus at 143 HR (180-age).  Do I believe 143 is the perfect number for me?  No, but I'm not willing to find someone and pay for a test to determine where the inflection point of fat/sugar burning occurs for me.  I'm seeing results keeping it under the 143 range, so no need for a fancy test at this point.

                       

                      Not quite 3 months later, my pace is about 8:45 at around 140 HR and I do almost all of my runs in this HR range.  Not boring to me because I understand what is happening on a physiological level, although admittedly my understanding is elementary.  Proof is in the results.  I am already racing faster now than I thought I would achieve by the end of the year AND I feel great, nowhere close to injury.  Granted, I am just now getting up to 20 mpw, so things should only get better as I move to 25, 30, whatever.

                       

                      My advice to anyone is to learn as much as you can about aerobic base building, fat burning, slow-twitch muscle fibers, whatever you want to call it, because I required that knowledge to stay committed when things were extremely slow.  An analogy that keeps coming to my mind is that a rising tide lifts all boats.  Aerobic capacity is the rising tide...when it goes up, it increases your speed in the anaerobic zone, too.  Now will there be a point where the aerobic improvement will plateau?  Yes, but I'm committed to building out the aerobic base pretty fully before adding much traditional speedwork.  I believe that doing it this way will make the difference in whether I am still running strong and healthy in 10 or 20 years or burned out in couple years.

                      Eric

                       

                      PRs:  5k - (20:42) 3/9/2013 18:55 (9/28/13)

                                 10k - (42:42) 3/23/2013 39:11 (10/26/13) course was short @ 6.0 mi :)

                                 10 mi - (1:12:10) 4/6/2013

                                 HM - (1:34:38) 4/27/2013

                        The dieting analogy is a good one.

                         

                        Counting calories is useful if you don't have the self-control to just eat less and exercise more.  When I finally got serious about losing weight, I started counting calories (using The Hacker's Diet) and eventually logging my exercise.  I lost ~70 lbs, but I had to keep logging or I'd start gaining weight.  The habit took time to stick.  It's finally internal, almost 2 years later, but I still rely somewhat on the mental calculations.

                         

                        Likewise, when I started running, I had trouble telling how hard I was running.  I did the low-HR thing for easy/recovery runs for a long time.  As a new runner, I had major trouble wrapping my head around +/- 45 seconds being "the same" depending on the day (and was hung up on easy being a pace, not a feeling).  Just like calorie input helped me calibrate my relationship with food, HR data helped me calibrate my relationship with pace and effort.

                         

                        I still wear the monitor, but I just have my watch show time while running now.  I still weigh in once a week on my scale, too.

                         

                        Like others have said, there's no magic to it.  Marathon pace is completely aerobic, for God's sake, but most people will break down if they run there or faster all the time.  However, if you're struggling with base-building properly, it *can be* a useful calibration tool.

                        "When a person trains once, nothing happens. When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, then he certainly has developed in more ways than physical. Is it raining? That doesn't matter. Am I tired? That doesn't matter, either. Then willpower will be no problem." 
                        Emil Zatopek


                        just a simple cat

                          J-L-C    Maybe you don't realize how difficult it can be to run truly "easy".  Your post reminds me of someone advising on a weight loss plan- "Just eat less!"     The low-heartrate or MAFF training is a way to discipline one's self to really adhere to slow runs.  I have done varies stints of MAFF training and did find it excellent for coming back from injury, rejuvenating after over-training, and, especially, as I am getting older.  My MAFF number (giving myself some points as allowed) is the very bottom range of my aerobic training zone.   I do find it more difficult on rolling or hilly terrain, since walking is pretty much required if you stick to a strict MAFF.  Flat terrain I can run the whole thing.

                           

                          Do you follow the 180 minus age formula?  Confused

                           

                          I  guess as you get more bodacious, you begin to lose more brain cells, because there is a limit to how much magnificence your body can house

                            Like others have said, there's no magic to it.  Marathon pace is completely aerobic, for God's sake, but most people will break down if they run there or faster all the time.  However, if you're struggling with base-building properly, it *can be* a useful calibration tool.

                             

                            Exactly. The benefits of building a strong aerobic base by spending lots of time running at low intensity are not really in debate.

                             

                            I think the thing that riles (some) non-MAFers is the physiobable. There's no magical point when you switch from carbs to fat, you won't somehow "waste" the aerobic benefits of a 10-mile run if you throw in some up-tempo pickups in the middle, you don't have separate and distinct aerobic and anaerobic systems and running marathon pace, (or half marathon pace, or even 5k pace in small doses) is still an aerobic activity.

                             

                            But if MAF is what gets you to slow down and build a strong base, then have at it.

                            Runners run.

                              Agreed.  We don't really have a "fat burning system," "lactate threshold system," "sugar burning system," or whatever that is capable of switching on and off.  It's a mix, all the time.

                               

                              My urge to run like hell up a hill doesn't mean that I suddenly didn't run an easy run.

                               

                              "Anaerobic work" doesn't spoil and damage the aerobic system, either.  That idea almost turned me off to the whole thing initially.

                               

                               

                              Exactly. The benefits of building a strong aerobic base by spending lots of time running at low intensity are not really in debate.

                               

                              I think the thing that riles (some) non-MAFers is the physiobable. There's no magical point when you switch from carbs to fat, you won't somehow "waste" the aerobic benefits of a 10-mile run if you throw in some up-tempo pickups in the middle, you don't have separate and distinct aerobic and anaerobic systems and running marathon pace, (or half marathon pace, or even 5k pace in small doses) is still an aerobic activity.

                               

                              But if MAF is what gets you to slow down and build a strong base, then have at it.

                              "When a person trains once, nothing happens. When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, then he certainly has developed in more ways than physical. Is it raining? That doesn't matter. Am I tired? That doesn't matter, either. Then willpower will be no problem." 
                              Emil Zatopek


                              In it for the long run..

                                 

                                Do you follow the 180 minus age formula?  Confused

                                 

                                That would be 120, so NO!  I do 135.  That gives me 5 for running every day, 5 for being old and I forget what the othe 5 was for!  Smile

                                "It's not who wins the workout..."

                                1234