Low HR Training

12

A Case Study (Read 2544 times)

jimmyb


port-a-bella-potty

    I was just rereading The Maffetone Method--includes all the good stuff from Training For Endurance, so if you can't find Training For Endurance, The Maffetone Method is just as good. The following is a breakdown from a blurb on page 67 of The Maffetone Method by Dr. Philip Maffetone ©2000, Ragged Mountain Press. He wrote about a woman who started with a walking program.

     

    ---Her MAF test time (walking) at the beginning was 18.5 minutes per mile.

    --After 10 months, her time was down to 13.5 minutes per mile. Since she was getting uncomfortable with that walking pace, she began to jog.

    ---It took a year more to get her MAF test time down to 11 minutes per mile.

    ---Six months later it was down to 9:15. It was then she started to race. She increased her training.

    ---Her MAF test time dropped to 8:45 and stayed there for 3 months.

    ---The next month test was 9:15 (regression)

    ---after a year more of not consulting with Dr. Maffetone, she showed up at his office with knee pain, fatigue and depression. Plus a number of other overtraining signs and symptoms.

    ---after 3 visits and a modification to her diet and training, she began to feel better.

    --During the time of her first office visits, her MAF time remained at 9:15.

    --Two weeks after her 1st visit, it improved to 9:00

    --After a month, she was symptom-free

    --Her MAF test time improved to 8:20 and continued to make slow, steady improvements

     

    This might be encouraging, or discouraging, depending on your viewpoint. Currently, I am Run/walking 14:17 and find the story encouraging.

     

    From the very beginning: It took her about two and a half years to drop from 18:30 to 8:45 per mile @ her MAF.

    It took her a little less than two years to get down to 11:00

    It took her 2 years, four months to get to 9:15

     

    That's amazing improvement for someone who began with walking.

    It shows the kind of commitment it takes, but also shows the results in better health and speed. Although, like most of us do at one point or another, she overdid it. Her MAF tests told the story.

     

    Enjoy! --Jimmy

    Log    PRs

    Rudolf


      yes interesting and encouraging and inspiring. however it is all very individualized and say it depends on the weekly volume of traing in hours how fast is the progress. we can speculate that with carefull management of the volume increase and teh nutrition issues she could have been progressing faster or much faster. I am doing mostly walking training and racing mostly in walking races - ultrawalks or racewalks. I did my version of test 2 days, still in very hot weather, previous test of the same kind was done in august last year - end of aussie winter in cold weather. despite doing second test in hot weathere I have significant improvement in walking speed for all the measured HR range - I do test for all HR's starting wth slowest and going to around MAF HR or slightly above. I was quite fast walker already at the time of teh first test, so this is not just he usual beginners fast improvement HR = 80, pace improved from 11:08 per km to 10:18 per km HR = 105, pcae improved from 9:27 per km to 8:39 per km this is for ordinary fitness waqlk style and for racing walk style : HR = 125 (my age MAF is 126) pace improved from 7:18 per km to 6:54 per km and the speed in kms per hour at around my anaerobic treshold at HR = 144 increased from 9.08 km/h to 9.68 km/h I am aiming first to get the speed at HR=144 to above 10k/h= under 6:00 per km and later to get the same speed for my MAF HR around 125.
      lowgear1


      Max McMaffelow Esq.

        I was just rereading The Maffetone Method--includes all the good stuff from Training For Endurance, so if you can't find Training For Endurance, The Maffetone Method is just as good. The following is a breakdown from a blurb on page 67 of The Maffetone Method by Dr. Philip Maffetone ©2000, Ragged Mountain Press. He wrote about a woman who started with a walking program. ---Her MAF test time (walking) at the beginning was 18.5 minutes per mile. --After 10 months, her time was down to 13.5 minutes per mile. Since she was getting uncomfortable with that walking pace, she began to jog. ---It took a year more to get her MAF test time down to 11 minutes per mile. ---Six months later it was down to 9:15. It was then she started to race. She increased her training. ---Her MAF test time dropped to 8:45 and stayed there for 3 months. ---The next month test was 9:15 (regression) ---after a year more of not consulting with Dr. Maffetone, she showed up at his office with knee pain, fatigue and depression. Plus a number of other overtraining signs and symptoms. ---after 3 visits and a modification to her diet and training, she began to feel better. --During the time of her first office visits, her MAF time remained at 9:15. --Two weeks after her 1st visit, it improved to 9:15 --After a month, she was symptom-free --Her MAF test time improved to 8:20 and continued to make slow, steady improvements This might be encouraging, or discouraging, depending on your viewpoint. Currently, I am Run/walking 14:17 and find the story encouraging. From the very beginning: It took her almost two years to drop from 18.5 to 13.5 per mile. It took her three years to get down to 11:00 It took her 3.5 years to get to 9:15 That's amazing improvement for someone who began with walking. It shows the kind of commitment it takes, but also shows the results in better health and speed. Although, like most of us do at one point or another, she overdid it. Her MAF tests told the story. Enjoy! --Jimmy
        Hey Jimmy, Thanks for the link, as well as all the contributions you make to RunningAHEAD. It really helps to keep me focused, and most importantly, cognizant of how fickle training can be. That is very timely information. It's nice to know that "ordinary" people can have such potential, and with proper training and strict attention to detail, evolve into competent runners. Personally, I've reached a slightly troublesome stage, but I'm very confident that it's just temporary. I've learned what an absolute must it is to keep frequent and detailed data in order to optimize training. Maf tests are an obvious example. Admittedly, I've been too cavalier in this regard, but have seen the light! With a little more attention to detail, I just might get the hang of this. Interesting training, you're currently doing!! lg
        ♪ ♫ Hey, hey, we're Maf Monkees And people say we monkey around. ♪ ♫ (The Monkees)
        Give me 12:59 in '09, please. I deserve it! (Maf of course)..No more teens! No more teens! (ME! ME! ME!)
        ♪ ♫ I Thank The Lord For The Night Time...And I Thank The Lord For You ♪ ♫ (Neil Diamond)
        jimmyb


        port-a-bella-potty

          You're welcome. The biggest thing I take from that case study is to remember who you are, stay patient, and keep tabs. It's not a 12-week program. If you think long-term, great progress can be made. --Jimmy

          Log    PRs

          GMoney


            It's an inspiring story to be sure, though specific time frames are an area where I find Dr. Maffetone to be particularly dodgy. Note, on page 111, where he writes: "Developing your aerobic base will take three or four months, sometimes more." Even people who are "chronically overtrained" can recover in a year, according to Maffetone (p. 92). Which presents the more realistic picture? Perhaps Rudolf's right and that if other factors had been addressed in "Jane's" case she'd have improved faster. Or maybe not. One big point I take from "The Maffetone Method" (and all of his materials that I've read) is that there are no easy answers. Simple answers, maybe, but easy answers, no. Wanna get fit and run fast real quick? There are far better ways to achieve that goal quickly than Maffetone's method, but at what cost? Maybe if you want to get comfortable with Dr. Maffetone, you should stop trying to mobilize your inner Mark Allen, Stu Mittleman, or Priscilla Welch and try channeling your inner "Jane" instead. Allen, Mittleman, and Welch achieved remarkable results with Dr. Maffetone, but so did people like "Jane," and, let's be honest, most of us are closer to "Jane" than we'll ever be to Mark, Stu, or Priscilla. Bear in mind, though, that "Jane's" story unfolded over three years, not three months. Who among us is really ready to devote 3-1/2 years just to get to running 9:15 m/m? So I think you've hit the nail on the head, Jimmy, when you write: "It shows the kind of commitment it takes, but also shows the results in better health and speed." To me, "The Method" is about making a commitment and having faith. Not "faith" in the sense of believing in God, a higher power, or some other force larger than any of us, but faith in a smaller sense. The kind of faith that helps you stick with something that, deep down, you know is right even when it's not giving you the outcomes you seek. Something that guides you when the chips are down. Too often, I think, we see people - like me - who want to try "the Method" for 3 or 4 months then get back to the fast stuff at a higher level, but that's Mark Allen talking, not Maffetone.
            jimmyb


            port-a-bella-potty

              There are people starting running that are like this case. They can't run and stay under MAF. This case is an example of how long one might expect to improve their MAF tests starting from scratch. Also shows that walking is not a benign way to train. It can help develop your aerobic system; prepare your body for running. She obviously worked at a level that her body could handle. % improvements: From the very beginning: 2 years...walking....18.5 to 13.5 per mile (27% improvement) 1 year to get from 13.5 to 11:00 (23% improvement) 6 months to get from 11:00 to 9:15 (16% improvement) Total improvement from 18.5 to 9:15 in 3.5 years (50%) I think that most of us that come to this after already racing, seeing some progress, but perhaps cranky, injured, tired, hitting the wall, expect to see see results in 12 weeks, then get back to the anaerobic and racing, and expect it to stick. Racing and competing is so much fun, it's hard to imagine not doing it for a period of time longer than 12 weeks. In Mark Allen's case, he came to the conclusion that he wasn't getting any better, and he was frying himself. I'm not sure exactly how long he gave the first base period he tried, but I think it was at least 6 months based on what I've read. He saw a 13% improvement. After a year, he saw about twice that. The case study did no racing or hard stuff until she reached 9:15. Not intentionally, as racing became part of her growth of interest. This study, along with Mark Allen's experiment, brings up the question: what are you willing to do to achieve the level of running you want, without sacrificing your health? In my case, my experiments have shown that a 12-16 base period of MAF training at high volume can bring my marathon times down. But they also show that I arrived at each of those marathons, except for one (where I kept the volume low) a little more tired, feeling "off", or injured (I ran my PR marathon on a bum foot). I most likely could have done much better in each of those marathons. I became like the case study (how she started to get burned out and injured). My experiments also showed that my aerobic base eroded quickly when I wasn't MAF training and either resting, racing and doing anaerobic work, or spending very little time on my feet. It didn't stick very well. My current experiment is an attempt "to see it through." I want to see what happens if I train an amount of time that makes my MAF tests improve without causing overtraining until I see the plateau Maffetone talks about. I really want to be a better endurance runner, and I'm willing to give up a few racing seasons to get myself there. I'll keep you posted. --Jimmy

              Log    PRs

              lowgear1


              Max McMaffelow Esq.

                Money Jimmy, Beautifully expressed, gentlemen. You guys offer some cogent analysis.I'm finding your comments very insightful and motivating. I like your "faith" analogy, Money, and the prospect that staying conservative long term, can pay dividends! Thanks guys. lg
                ♪ ♫ Hey, hey, we're Maf Monkees And people say we monkey around. ♪ ♫ (The Monkees)
                Give me 12:59 in '09, please. I deserve it! (Maf of course)..No more teens! No more teens! (ME! ME! ME!)
                ♪ ♫ I Thank The Lord For The Night Time...And I Thank The Lord For You ♪ ♫ (Neil Diamond)
                jimmyb


                port-a-bella-potty

                  Money Jimmy,
                  Sure. You can send it to my company address.

                  Log    PRs

                  lowgear1


                  Max McMaffelow Esq.

                    Sure. You can send it to my company address.
                    GM Jimmy, Ironically, I nearly addressed as above. Billion dollar bail out checks in the mail! Cool lg
                    ♪ ♫ Hey, hey, we're Maf Monkees And people say we monkey around. ♪ ♫ (The Monkees)
                    Give me 12:59 in '09, please. I deserve it! (Maf of course)..No more teens! No more teens! (ME! ME! ME!)
                    ♪ ♫ I Thank The Lord For The Night Time...And I Thank The Lord For You ♪ ♫ (Neil Diamond)


                    Beginner all over again

                      Thanks for posting the Case Study a while back. It's nice to read about a person who started with MAF from the start. Smile

                       


                      Beginner all over again

                        Bump

                         

                        I went looking for this one to re-read it

                         

                         

                         

                          This is great.  I need to read it.  I had a few shots of espresso this afternoon and started planning my first ultra (a 50-miler), then I crashed and kept planning it, but made it a year away instead of 4 or 5 months away...sanity took over.  Has anyone ever done that American River one near Sacramento?  I like running along the river there and have done that before, but only a few miles.


                          I'm like that woman in Maffetone's book in a lot of ways, but I can shuffle-run a fair amount at about 16.5 minutes per mile and then walk a bit too.  I am excited to see where I'll be in a year and impatient too, but it's a day at a time, a run at a time.  Even though I want to get better faster.  Ugh.


                          Jimmy when you talk about high mileage what does that mean for you?  I'm doing about 22-26 miles per week but REALLY trying not to worry about the numbers.  On the other hand, if I don't pay attention to numbers I won't get off my ass and get to it.  But I need to watch that Type A crap, and the espresso.


                          Thanks Money for the faith idea.  Needed that too.



                          Runner and writer with a pesky day job. http://memoirsandhalftruths.wordpress.com/ "Don't ask yourself what the world needs - ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." -- H. T.Whitman
                          jimmyb


                          port-a-bella-potty



                            Jimmy when you talk about high mileage what does that mean for you?  I'm doing about 22-26 miles per week but REALLY trying not to worry about the numbers.  On the other hand, if I don't pay attention to numbers I won't get off my ass and get to it.  But I need to watch that Type A crap, and the espresso.

                             

                             

                            I used to train by miles, regardless of time. My highs in terms of distance was six 100 mile weeks (aprox. 20 hours in a 6-day week), a tom 60+ (aprox. 12 hours in 6 days) and many more over 70+ (aprox 14 hours).  The time spent on my feet was a lot. the question I'm exploring is where the optimum training load (duration x intensity) really is for someone my age, my limited talent. Those 20 hour weeks (100 miles) brought my marathon time down 8 minutes, but could I have achieved that same improvement or even better with just 10 hours, regardless of the distance. At what point does it become overkill. Seems a few things will indicate when it is. The MAF tests plateau and regress. The LT runs plateau. The body feels a little off. Etc.

                             

                            I've become a total believer that it is duration and intensity that has  to be monitored. Miles are secondary. One person's 20 miler is another person's 14 miler at equal  intensities and duration. Same training effect.

                             

                            I like that case study. Interesting how she walked until it became uncomfortable to so so, because it was so fast, then started to run. Eventually her MAF test were incredibly fast relative to when she began. Walking is a rock solid thing to do.

                             

                            --Jimmy

                            Log    PRs

                              I meant to also say I know my miles are low.  What I am working on is consistency and a slow buildup, because I was the queen of missing a week and then leap-frogging over that week's missed training to the next part of my all-important schedule.  No more. 

                               

                              I'm walking during the week with a run or so thrown in, and then a long run on the weekend.  I tend to rest on Fridays since I usually do the long run on Saturdays.  Tomorrow I'm running (and walking since the first 6.5 miles is uphill) in a very cool place, one of my favorites but I don't go much since dogs aren't allowed.  It's full of bighorn sheep and mountain goats, and a river runs through it.  Magical and peaceful, although once I had to make a crazy, cliffed out detour due to 2 sheep fighting on the trail! 

                               

                              Happy weekend everyone.

                              Runner and writer with a pesky day job. http://memoirsandhalftruths.wordpress.com/ "Don't ask yourself what the world needs - ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." -- H. T.Whitman
                              gregw


                                Those 20 hour weeks (100 miles) brought my marathon time down 8 minutes, but could I have achieved that same improvement or even better with just 10 hours, regardless of the distance. At what point does it become overkill. Seems a few things will indicate when it is. The MAF tests plateau and regress. The LT runs plateau. The body feels a little off. Etc.

                                 

                                I've become a total believer that it is duration and intensity that has  to be monitored. Miles are secondary. One person's 20 miler is another person's 14 miler at equal  intensities and duration. Same training effect.

                                 

                                I like that case study. Interesting how she walked until it became uncomfortable to so so, because it was so fast, then started to run. Eventually her MAF test were incredibly fast relative to when she began. Walking is a rock solid thing to do.

                                 

                                --Jimmy

                                 

                                Jimmy, your comment resonated with me.  I've kind of decided 10 hours is what I'll give and then optimize as best I can.  I was injured in November (and still carry it to a degree) and worked my way back to 10 easy and then have added some "more than easy" running.  That opens pandora's box of course in terms of all the variables of intensity, duration, etc.

                                Someone posted (on RA I think) a link to this tomehttp://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/methods-of-endurance-training-part-1.html (this is the first of 5 parts).  It's geared to triathlon training (and kind of long-winded!) but I think it's relevant.  It also struck me as somewhat Hadd-like in its emphasis on below threshold training.

                                I'm not advocating anything he says, but your approach with 20hrs per week struck me as what he calls the "miles build champions" approach (although it doesn't align with Lydiard who coined the phrase).  He basically says you'll be more effective with more intensity if you have a limited time to spend, but you won't do as well as with the high volume approach.  It's a fairly interesting article.  Note that you have to translate from triathlonese where "tempo" doesn't mean threshold.  If you read the whole thing, it's really pretty Hadd-like.

                                12