Low HR Training

1

Basic Question (Read 387 times)

C-R


    A quick question. I've convinced a co-worker to give LHR a try. His MAF is 128 but he has to walk to maintain it. Any running and he goes over the mark. 1) Is this something you've encountered before? How did you handle? 2) In the general FAQ, Jesse talks about running some at a higher rate if you can't keep MAF. Can you expand on this? 3) if he only walks, how soon shouldhe see some changes. He sees the results for me with my new PR's and continued injury free running and thinks this is the way to go, but the slowness is frustrating him. Any help or advice is appreciated. Thanks.


    "He conquers who endures" - Persius
    "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

    http://ncstake.blogspot.com/

    BeeRunB


      If someone can't run and stay under MAF, then he or she should probably be walking for awhile at a pace that keeps them between MAF-10 and MAF. Eventually they won't be able to walk fast enough to get up there in HR, then it's time to run. This person is seriously out-of-shape aerobically. If you're going to suggest this method, tell the hard truth--it could take years to build--but it will be the safest way, and he will more than likely be running everything in a year or two and be injury free. So many people start and they go out running and they're huffing and puffing through every run, and they don't last ten weeks before they quit with an injury, and a belief that running is bad for you, when all that was bad for them was running before they were ready. --Jimmy
        The MAF concept reminds me of a bible verse I once read: "For those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away" I always thought it sounded unfair to give more to those that already have. But, it seems to work this way with MAF. If you already have an aerobic base to start from, it is easier to see progress and to add to it, running at or below MAF. But, if your aerobic system is in bad shape, then it can be frustrating. This is the stage that requires real patience. It seems like the people who most need it, have the most frustration with it intially, because they have to start out so slow. But, these are the very people who will most benefit from it. In reading one of Dr. Maffetones articles recently, I got a new appreciation for slowing down even more and even walking. He is a real advocate of starting and ending a run with long walks. I have a much better appreciation for improving the aerobic system, not just for better race times, but for general health. It sounds like the aerobic system takes a long time to improve, but the improvement is contuous and can continue for years. I like that.
        C-R


          Thanks guys. This is exactly what I thought and yes it is some bitter medicine. He's a former athlete from college but that was 30 years past. Lets see how the facts play out. The only reason he even contemplates this is having seen my results over this brief six or seven months. If interested, I will continue the thread with updates from time to time.


          "He conquers who endures" - Persius
          "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

          http://ncstake.blogspot.com/

            You may want to recommend Van Aaken's method as a possible alternative. He advocates running between 130-150. I've been following this recently with good results. I'm now dropping down to running below my MAF of 140. It's certainly easier. Or, you could let him strap on a hr monitor and have him run easy, comfortably, till his breathing becomes too labored, then have him walk for a minute, then resume running, repeat to desired duration. Eventually he could eliminate the walking. This is what Van Aaken recommends, recognizing that most people can't run with a low hr and need walking breaks. This is fine, as it allows the body to recover, and then to go farther. This is how children play, and anybody can run 3-5 miles daily using this method. Van Aaken is one approach to low hr training. MAF isn't the only one, as you all know. Maybe your friend would take more to that approach. It's a little more stress, but the walking breaks and taking rest days as he sees fit may make running more enjoyable and allow him to adapt. It could be an entrance into this way of training that he can enjoy and make progress in, from which he could then try MAF later if he would like. Van Aaken recommends averaging a 130 hr, but the 130-150 window allows me to run low hr but gives me a little more wiggle room than a strict MAF number, yet it allows me to tune into my body and discover what comfortable running feels like. Using this over the last month, I've discovered that 130-135 is very comfortable, while 140-150 is strained, though I can keep that up for 25+ miles. My MAF is 140, but I'm going to go for 135 over the winter as my limit. My point though is I bit on MAF after trying Van Aaken and discovered empirically that it's better to run at 135 than 145. I'm not committed to MAF because of the ideas (though I agree with them) but because of my experience. If running can't be fun, one won't stick with it. Usually. Van Aaken may allow your friend to move towards comfortable running while still making progress. You can get his book for $1 off Amazon. Best dollar I ever spent.

            "Run slowly, run daily, drink in moderation, and don't eat like a pig" Dr. Ernst Van Aaken. Sorry ultrasteve.

              Hi Buddo, I like your point about how children play. As we get older, and more sedantary due to our jobs, responsibilites, etc. it is very easy to lose that aerobic fitness that came to us so naturally as children. Many of us, end up in that state, and do not even realize what happened and how it happened. Just as slowly as we lost it over all those years, it just takes time to gain it back. It feels like a river that has gone dry. To get things really flowing again, it seems like you have to start with a trickle. It seems to me that anything you can do, to awaken those slow twitch fibers, and get something going is what you have to do. When I started, it was very frustrating because I felt like my high end aerobic (fast twitch aerobic) and anerobic systems were in good shape because I had relied on them so much for the sports I did, and my lower aerobic system (the slow twitch) was shot. So, at the very low HRs, it felt like they would get bypassed and I would already be tapping into those other systems. It takes time and experimentation to get those lower aerobic systems to kick in, if they are dormant. That is my experience.
              RER


                A quick question. I've convinced a co-worker to give LHR a try. His MAF is 128 but he has to walk to maintain it. Any running and he goes over the mark. 1) Is this something you've encountered before? How did you handle? 2) In the general FAQ, Jesse talks about running some at a higher rate if you can't keep MAF. Can you expand on this? 3) if he only walks, how soon shouldhe see some changes. He sees the results for me with my new PR's and continued injury free running and thinks this is the way to go, but the slowness is frustrating him. Any help or advice is appreciated. Thanks.
                I agree with most of the posts -- if his MAF is really 128, that's the starting point. At his age and poor condition, no need to risk anything. I'm guessing his diet is not helping his aerobic state either, and that's another consideration. I've seen plenty of out-of-shape people who can only walk but within a couple of weeks of eating right, their aerobic systems kick in a bit and they're able to start jogging. DavidD
                  It's interesting you mentioned diet. This is a bit off topic, but might be relevant. Smile I have been doing some thinking about the last race I ran. (The Army 10 miler a few weeks back) My HR was definitely higher than I expected given the pace, and I was trying to figure out why. In looking back at it, I realized that my food intake in the days leading up to the race was way out of line with what I would normally eat. I did get plenty of sleep. For breakfast (after runs) I usually have Kashi cereal and homemade banana bread. (very healthy banana bread, thanks to my wife!) However, while on vacation before the race I was eating at the breakfast buffet in the hotel, which included me indulging in bacon, sausage, lots of eggs, pancakes, and "some* fruit. To sum it up, I definitely increased my fat intake (especially saturated fat) for a few days before the race, and probably ate half as much fruit and vegetables. Food for thought.


                  running yogi

                    When I started MAF I started at 17 m/m. That's mostly walking. I was frustrated, but I convinced myself with the anology that if you were teaching a person to read for the first time, where would you start ? with Shakespeare or A B Cs ? How fast he/she will start reading Shakespeare depends on many parameters including how often does he/she practice/train and how much. I can get in very low milage per week. I am right now at 15 m/m and that's mostly running(albeit very slow) for me. It took me about 4 months to get here. I have noticed consistency in milage is very important. I took jesse's advice of trying to find routes with downhills and running fast on them. That helps with MAF training and morale.
                    GMoney


                      Definitely good advice so far. So, not to play the contrarian, but... MAF and Van Aaken have a lot to recommend them, but it could be an error to get too locked into a specific number or range for HR. Think of weightlifting: except for competition, the weight you lift isn't an end in itself, it's a means to an end. Many would say that in running, the analog to weight is speed - the speed at which you workout isn't an end in itself and matters only in competition. Perhaps, though, the proper analogy to weight is training HRs rather than absolute speed. What's important is an end result - improved fitness and increased health. The training HR is just a way to get there. If you're not getting the result you seek then you may have selected the wrong training HR, just the same as if you aren't seeing any size or strength increases it may be because you're working out with weights that are too light. A weight that's too heavy (or an HR that's too high) will cause injury. A weight that's too light (or an HR that's too low) can be uninspiring and unchallening, and no work out or method is any good if it doesn't inspire you to actually do it. This is why I like Mittleman's approach to training zones (though his dietary recommendations seem really kooky to me). To him, the 180-minus formula (with adjustments) is just the starting point for setting training zones, not the end. As many here know, Mittleman would have you take your 180-minus number and see how the experience of moving in that zone feels based on sensory, emotional, and kinesthetic anchors. (As an aside in an already long post, I would acknowledge that I'm probably oversimplifying the Maffetone system. I don't believe that Dr. Phil thinks the 180-minus formula is a perfect fit for everyone, but I do think that he finds it to be the best formula to make sure no one who uses it gets injured. From what I've read Van Aaken seems to be pretty strict about the 130-150 range for everyone.) So, what I would suggest is that your friend read "Slow Burn," paying particular attention to the sub-section in chapter 16 entitled (in my edition) "Bringing the Zones to Life." Then, using his 128 HR benchmark, have your friend go out and test his zones as Mittleman suggests. It would be helpful if you went along with him and wore the HR receiver so that he can't see the training HRs and has to focus only on his experience. As a warning it can take some time perhaps even multiple sessions to figure them out. Since many people new to LHR training have done virtually all of their running in the state that Mittleman calls "SAP" or higher, anything else may seem so strange at first that they miss the subtle changes they're looking for. It takes some trial and error, but, once you lock into your own zones, you know instinctively that they're right. Then it's just a matter of making sure that your daily subjective experience matches the level of experience that you're seeking and gradually adjusting your HR up or down as needed to maintain that desired level of expereince.
                      RER


                        I think Mittleman was a great athlete. But his training stuff, well, he's taken Maffetone's material and made it oddly complex for the average person (I suspect to be able to call it his own). On the other hand, the more we read of other approaches, the better we'll understand our own.
                        Rudolf


                          A quick question. I've convinced a co-worker to give LHR a try. His MAF is 128 but he has to walk to maintain it.
                          I am interested, how did You get the 128. Is he 52 ? 180 - 52 = 128. or is he 42, 180-42 = 138 and because aerobicaly completely unfit, factor minus 10 is applyed to get the final 128 figure. Becasue if he is 52, than his real MAF should be 180-52-10 = 118. Big grin So instead of allowing him to run higher than 128, actually what he really needs is to go even lower. at least thats how I understand the whole issue. By the way, thanks to everybody for this wonderfull and most educational and usefull forum. Smile
                          C-R


                            He's 52 but I would not say unfit in a complete sense. He just finished walking a HM last weekend and was once a national water polo player (many years past). My gauge is that he in aerobically unfit and strength fit but decreasing by 10 was not something I considered. My read implied it would be for fully unfit person coming from a sedentary lifestyle. I read some Van Aaken and the 130-150 seems best for him just to keep interest. My fear is that he would quit the low heart rate program all together due to not being able to run. Once he gets some fitness, we will return to MAF. Good ideas and advice everyone. Thank you.


                            "He conquers who endures" - Persius
                            "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

                            http://ncstake.blogspot.com/