Low HR Training

1

Stuck newbie feedback, with data (Read 34 times)

lexx


    Hi All,

     

    I am new to the group, and pretty new to the low HR method approach to running. I am putting up a post because I have been making an investment in MAF training, but it does not seem to be paying off. I am not frustrated, but rather just observing that it is not working for me, and I want to make some adjustments (either trying a different approach, or changing external circumstances).

     

    My brief athletic history is: I have been a rower for 4 years, which led to a lot of speedwork (2 minute sprints) and short "base" training (25 minutes was the longest race). Since then, I have been running, but thinking about miles and fast/hard performance. I also weightlift 2-3 times a week. Prior to starting MAF, my best races were 5K at 20:25 (6:49), 10K at 45:12 (7:18), half marathon at  1:41 (7:47). I have never put in a lot of miles, but would do a day of two 5Ks and a longer run (6-12 miles) per week.

     

    Earlier in the summer, I did the Death Race and decided to take it easy / recover while building a foundation for better future performance. I track my workouts in a spreadsheet and below's a summary. I ran and biked at MAF (180 - 29 - 5 = 146 hr), first biking and then running more. Whenever I ran 45 minutes and my running split dipped towards the aggravating, I'd jump on the bike to finish another 45 mins. For the bike, I tracked pace per hours (e.g., 17.17 miles per hours), and for running, I tracked mile pace (e.g., 11:00 min per mile).

     

    <colgroup><col width="56" /> <col span="3" width="100" /> <col span="3" width="96" /> <col span="3" width="56" /> </colgroup>
    Week Bike Bike Bike Run Run Run Bike Min Run Min Total Min
    1 60 min, @17.17           60 0 60
    2 60 min, @17.63 60 min, @17.70   64 min @10:20     120 64 184
    3 60 min, @16.93           60 0 60
    4 20 min 60 min, @18.10   64 min @11:30     80 64 144
    5 60 min, @18.39           60 0 60
    6 60 min, @19.21     75 min @10:34     60 75 135
    7 45 min, @18.50     45 min @11:28 50 min @10:25   45 95 140
    8 travel     travel          
    9 60 min, @16.77           60 0 60
    10 45 min, @17.65 60 min, @17.40   45 min @10:35 70 min @11:36   105 115 220
    11 45 min, @18.13 45 min, @17.70   45 min @11:03 35 min @11:06   90 80 170
    12 60 min, @17.73 60 min, @17.70 40 min, @18.50 60 min @11:17 60 min @11:06 70 min @11:20 160 190 350
    13 45 min, @18.55 45 min, @18.08   45 min @10:53 60 min @10:40   90 105 195
    14 45 min, @18.17     45 min @11:05     45 45 90

     

    After doing some math, here are the average stats per week:

     

    <colgroup><col width="56" /> <col width="62" /> <col width="62" /> <col width="67" /> <col width="71" /> <col width="68" /> </colgroup>
    Week Bike Min Run Min Total Min Bike Pace Run Pace
    1 60 0 60 17.2  
    2 120 64 184 17.7 10:20
    3 60 0 60 16.9  
    4 80 64 144 18.1 11:30
    5 60 0 60 18.4  
    6 60 75 135 19.2 10:34
    7 45 95 140 18.5 10:54
    8          
    9 60 0 60 16.8  
    10 105 115 220 17.5 11:12
    11 90 80 170 17.9 11:04
    12 160 190 350 17.9 11:14
    13 90 105 195 18.3 10:45
    14 45 45 90 18.2

    11:05

     

    I am not sure what to conclude, either that (1) I am not putting in enough mileage, (2) my weightlifting is getting in the way, or (3) I need to have a more consistent schedule. (3) is not really possible with work, (2) is highly undesireable, so if it is really about mileage, then I will probably have to go back to my previous routine of 1 fast day and 1 long day instead of trying to stick with MAF, where I was at least seeing consistent progress in mile splits and was training fine for the 5K - half marathon distances.

     

    But maybe it is something else?

     

    Thanks for the advice! I would love to improve my aerobic health.

      oh darling, you have a 20:25 5K, 1:41 HM and you're trying to run at 11min pace exclusively?

       

      I doubt you have such an extremely bad aerobic condition, after all, 1:41 HM is good even if it's a bit slow for your 5K time. So, clearly the MAF 180-age formula isn't working for you. What is your racing HR and maxHR if you have such data? I see you're 29 years old...

       

      The other and bigger issue is that, yes, it's way too little running. You should be putting in at least 4-5 hours of running a week at your level or even more if possible. And I don't think you need to be training at 11min pace.

       

      Try 9-9:30 pace or something like that. That's assuming normal weather conditions and terrain both for your race times and your training days. My recommendation is check what HR you end up at that kind of pace under good training conditions and then just use that HR.

       

      But that's just a quick guess, you need to be experimenting for yourself. The only thing I'm sure about is, too little mileage and too low intensity.

       

      If you don't have the 4-5 hours per week then this LHR thing isn't really for you :/

       

      Though you could still try modified Hadd method, that apparently has you running 3 times a week and still allow you to kind of improve.

      BeeRunB


        Hi Lexx,

         

        Welcome to the LHR forum.

         

        The heart of this method is keeping healthy and increasing speed at MAF (aerobic speed). Maffetone suggests periodization with an aerobic base phase, followed by added anaerobic work and racing, always keeping track of speed at MAF. That doesn't mean you have to periodize. You don't have serious regression, and I would agree with C that you probably need more volume at MAF. There's a sweet spot you have to find. E.g.  2 hours a week might not be enough and 4 might be just right.  BUT you have time constraints, and if you only have so much time, and it's not enough to get to your aerobic training sweet spot, then you have to find what works with the time you have. If you think in terms of training load, then perhaps a combination of the fast day and long run with bike as you stated might be proper for you. Take the heart of this program with you and keep in touch with your aerobic speed. Do a 1-mile MAF test every few weeks (after a warm-up) and keep track. Remember that with any combination of aerobic and anaerobic work that makes up your training load, you will eventually plateau and perhaps start to regress at some point, unless you find a healthy way to increase it. Often, adding more and more anaerobic work just hits a wall at some point, where not so much if you add more and more aerobic work. Let your MAF test guide you. If you choose to go back to how you were training before this experiment, see it through until you don't see progress at MAF anymore. Then cross that bridge when it comes in terms of a training strategy.

         

        Things to keep in mind:

         

        --periods of high and unusual mental stress can cause regression

         

        --keep in touch with your body and how it feels. If you're feeling great and see an extended plateau or some regression, it might just be a hiccup, or it might indicate you need to add anaerobic work (if you're in an aerobic period). Conversely, if you've been training anaerobically for awhile and have been racing, and you seem to be slowing in your race times, it might be time to cut the anaerobic work either out or way down, and go back to aerobic base training (working in your sweet spot).

         

        Looking forward to your reply.

         

        --JimmyCool

          hey jimmyb, as you know I do like the idea of testing aerobic fitness. And you're totally right about mentioning it to OP.

           

          I'm still wondering though if the MAF test is an extensive enough test for that. The test of running one single mile only every few weeks is something that can be influenced by too many factors. I believe more in tracking the training runs and see pattern in those over time.

           

          An interesting thing here I've experienced recently. After my first marathon that I ran a few weeks ago, I found it took me about 2 weeks to get a run in that had close to normal HR/pace relationship. Next day I was again "out of it". One more week later and apparently I stabilized HR/pace relationship at low HR, 180-age HR actually. Smile But my paces tanked at higher zones. I mean I tried running something faster and that's crap. So if I was to do a race right now, even though my base aerobic fitness at low HR seems to be back to normal, I would have a crappy race result. So I guess if I was to only watch MAF test result (assuming I'm even supposed to do it at 180-age HR in my case and not higher), I wouldn't realise that something was still actually off.

           

          Funnily enough also, I have a little niggling injury as well, it's allowed me to run but I have to be careful. And the LHR pace is still fine. Surprised Not complaining though, this is better than nothing. Big grin (This year for me has been basically completely injury-free but seems the marathon made things unstable...)

          lexx


            Thank you for replying so quickly.

             

            I do think that the aerobic part of my curve is pretty lacking, which is why the half marathon is slower relative to where it should be based on the 5K.

             

            Sounds like the solution is (1) if doing MAF, then bump up to at least 4 hours of work per week and (2) it is okay to go faster as part of a program or to find the best HR that generates progress without hurting MAF results.

             

            I've settled on a March 16th marathon date, and will try to introduce some pace work while keeping the Saturday long runs at a 10 minute pace or so.

              Thank you for replying so quickly.

               

              I do think that the aerobic part of my curve is pretty lacking, which is why the half marathon is slower relative to where it should be based on the 5K.

               

              Sounds like the solution is (1) if doing MAF, then bump up to at least 4 hours of work per week and (2) it is okay to go faster as part of a program or to find the best HR that generates progress without hurting MAF results.

               

              I've settled on a March 16th marathon date, and will try to introduce some pace work while keeping the Saturday long runs at a 10 minute pace or so.

               

              I didn't think your curve was so bad going from 45:12 10K to 1:41 half marathon. That's pretty much fine. The 5K time is an outlier but maybe you ran that under different (better) conditions than the 10K and HM PR's??

               

              10min/mile seems a tiny bit slow for the 10K/HM times but it's okay for long run if the volume is high enough otherwise

               

              anyway good luck to the training and the marathon! Smile

                Still curious about your heart rates at races but maybe you don't have data on that then?

                Trailglover63


                  Just thought I would add to the already helpful replies. Dr Mafetone says weightlifting is stressful and anaerobic (no matter what your HR monitor reads) and is a no-no during base building. Once your body engages anaerobically it stops aerobic improvement.

                    Just thought I would add to the already helpful replies. Dr Mafetone says weightlifting is stressful and anaerobic (no matter what your HR monitor reads) and is a no-no during base building. Once your body engages anaerobically it stops aerobic improvement.

                     

                    AFAIK, Maffetone has changed his opinion on this since then... just like he changed opinion on the idea of stretching being a big no-no Smile

                     

                    This is not quite as black and white about anaerobic vs aerobic stuff.