I followed HADD between Chicago (10/12/08) and Houston (1/18/09).....It produced great results.

It certainly did produce great results for you. Congratulations! These low heart rate training approaches (HADD, MAF) are really very good, especially as the distances of the races get longer. Since I am basically a lower mileage runner who only runs 5ks, the question that I have asked myself is how beneficial are these approaches for me? If you are running a 5k race, it is still considered a long distance race, but the shortest of the long distance races. It could even be considered middle distance. So, how important is fat burning versus carb burning for these races? Probably not as important. You are not going to run out of glycogen at this distance. But, it certainly has been beneficial for me, even at these shorter distances, but I think it's main benefit for me is the ability to recover. For someone my age (I just turned 50), I am seeing that recovery is about the most important issue and variable for me. So, I think I have really benefited most from that aspect. It is inspiring to see how well the HADD approach worked. Someday when I get my mileage up, and start doing longer distance races, I am looking forward to using this approach. If just turning 50 isn't bad enough? Two weeks before my 50th birthday, I received an AARP membership card in the mail. I thought someone was playing a joke on me!

But, it certainly has been beneficial for me, even at these shorter distances, but I think it's main benefit for me is the ability to recover. For someone my age (I just turned 50), I am seeing that recovery is about the most important issue and variable for me. So, I think I have really benefited most from that aspect.

EXACTLY!!! If you use the LHR approach to build a solid base for at least 12 weeks. Afterwords, when you start doing strength/speed and any faster training geared toward the 5k, the improvements during that time period are much greater, then if you had done a mixture of speed and endurance training all along. Also as you said keeping the intensity this low between the fast/harder workouts gives you better recovery while still providing aerobic benefit/maintenance.

I figured I would post on this thread because I kind of feel lost when trying to figure out my anaerobic phase of training. I have been basebuilding since November, all my runs have been below maff and I started running downhills this past month. I was going to do two days of anaerobic work rotating intervals, tempo runs and hills. I have a couple of shorter races scheduled for April and May and then a half marathon at the end of May. Any thoughts? I'm excited to start this new phase of running and see what my times look like since I haven't raced in a while and put in a lot of time basebuilding.

Maffetone has some good suggestions. You can read them in my post in the Boilerplate sticky Hadd also has some good suggestions on slowing building up to higher heart rates. It's been suggested that you separate the anaerobic runs by at least 2 days. Keeping track of your MAF tests. If all is well, you should see a nice improvement in your MAF test and MAF training times. If they don't improve, it might be too much too soon. Sometimes just racing is enough anaerobic work for some, keeping under MAF during the week. --Jimmy

Only advice i can give to most is enjoy the day. We are not going to run in the Olympics and we are not going to ever beat the likes of even the local top runners, so why beat ourselves up? Since switching back to MAF training I am waking before the alarm, not falling asleep in front of the TV at night and feel good all day long. All those things and more i was the opposite of just a few weeks ago and knew I needed ot change something. I always come back ot the MAF!

Great advice, Steve. Thanks for reminding us to keep it real and focus on the big picture. I think Pfitzinger's book is called "Advanced Marathoning" for a reason - those schedules are tough and, perhaps, unrealistic for recreational runners. Did your comment refer to his heart rate intensities for training or something else in the book? Also, if you don't mind my asking, in one of your more recent posts on the "RQ-land" thread you wrote of the differences between your HR and your wife's and how you required different training zones as a result. It looks like you were calculating the percentages off of heart rate reserve instead of straight off of HRMax. Is that what you did, and is there any particular reason why you used HRR over HRMax (other than it just feels right and you make progress doing what you're doing)?

Great advice, Steve. Thanks for reminding us to keep it real and focus on the big picture. I think Pfitzinger's book is called "Advanced Marathoning" for a reason - those schedules are tough and, perhaps, unrealistic for recreational runners. Did your comment refer to his heart rate intensities for training or something else in the book? Also, if you don't mind my asking, in one of your more recent posts on the "RQ-land" thread you wrote of the differences between your HR and your wife's and how you required different training zones as a result. It looks like you were calculating the percentages off of heart rate reserve instead of straight off of HRMax. Is that what you did, and is there any particular reason why you used HRR over HRMax (other than it just feels right and you make progress doing what you're doing)?

Hi Geoff.... Once upon a time I trained harder than the recommendations in Advanced Marathoning....I just now I'm just too old or maybe worn out from it all, but i just can't handle the intensity he suggests. AND i think you CAN get there with easier 9but longer) training. Use Stu Mittleman and Mark Allen as great examples. I also had very good luck training using Van Aaken's methods in the early 80's, getting both a sub 2:50 marathon and a 4:55 mile on the track, all on nothing more than 8-9 mpm for 100 miles or more. We used HRR because I was told (by a coach that I referred to in the "Finding your Max HR" sticky) that it is what really counts. You take your max which you cannot go above and subtract your resting, which you cannot get below to get that HRR. Take you percentages from that and add back the resting...or you can use one of the many calcs that are out there http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/hrzones.php One reason for actually finding your max rather than using the Karvonen formula to do that is the fact that formulas are really no good. These formulas have my max at anywhere between 163-169. My max is 187, which I test every year on the track.Here's a link that will show you your supposed max HR http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/hrmax.php?age=57&gender=M&Submit=Calculate So it's always best to find your "real" numbers and work from those. Right now, like i said in my prior post, Maffetone has me training at between 118-128, Mittleman between 123-133 and Hadd suggests to stay under 137, so I'm right now training at 130. After a month or so of that, I'll bump it up a bit, but not by much. Steve, who is really struggling with this 11-12 mpm, but will be "patient" PS: Read my new blog writeup on low HR training here http://perogoats.blogspot.com/ PSS: I spend a lot of time down in Virginia and know several runners from Charlottesville. In May my wife is running the Massanutten 100 and I will be marking the course all day Friday and Saturday.

About 3.4 miles, 35:05, AV HR 154. Felt good today and wanted to go a little faster. Spooked some ducks along the trail.

Nice links. Thanks much. FWIW my max HR is 206, and my RHR is around 50. That may be why I find MAF so inspiring sometimes. Maffetone has me training at 132-142 (52-58% of my HRR). Using the zones on your link bring them closer to the ranges I found trying the Mittleman tests. For me, it seems that Mittleman's MAP is the Maffetone recommended zone (and lower for walking), MEP is mid 140s to mid 150s, and SEP is mid 150s to mid 170s. I've always like the Mittleman ideas on personalizing the zones. A lot of "Slow Burn" seemed a little cooky to me, but that part on using personal experience to make the zones come to life really hit home. So, Wasatch Speedgoat, you're coming down to the Old Dominion? Looks like your wife's going to be racing Karl Meltzer. Like Karl (and you), I spent some significant time in New Hampshire. Love where I am now, though. I'd love to get over to view part of the MMT, but I'm running the Marine Corps Historic Half in Fredericksburg that weekend.

Deb's number's match your's exactly...you must really struggle with the MAF formula and I recommend you bump up your MAF a bit. Deb is happier up between 150 and 160... if you were to go strictly by Hadd, you should be running around 156. Using HRR takes age out of the mix, which I think it should. I am 57 and Deb is 54, no way are we even close to an average person of those ages. I've been running for 34 years (probably averaging 50 mpw) and Deb about 10. According to your HRR number (156), your 60% training pace should be 143.6...anything lower than that "should" be walking. I like to train more between 65- 70%. The coach I refer to on occasion suggests 75% for aerobic and 65% for recovery. Slow Burn is cooky for sure....just ignore that stuff The one visualization that I like is to imagine the earth rotating underneath your feet, all you do is lift your feet up and let it turn under you. It's still a better book than Maffetone's because he gives you some options. I ran OD100 in 2000 and loved it, but this year my goal is to run all fat ass races, no entry fees...and so far I have one every month. I even have a 100K on the Mason Dixon trail from MD to PA in June....that'll be a hot one! I was entered in MMT100, but withdrew....my head just isn't it to it after not getting into Hardrock. I've finished MMT twice anyway, which might be part of it, too. A couple of years ago I even came down and ran the Rivanna Ring trail in C'ville! Today I ran 7 miles at 7am and it was great....1:20 tot. Might be the slowest 7 miles I have ever run in my life , but i liked it. I listened to the birds and wind, felt like Stu Mittleman! There is something to this MAF experience...

Deb's number's match your's exactly...you must really struggle with the MAF formula

Ya think? Yeah, that was the genesis of the old "Making MAF Fun." I can handle a strict MAF session on the treadmill on deep recovery days, but for ordinary training I find it nearly unbearable. I did a quick run today at an average HR of 154 and BOY did it feel better. Sounds like Deb's experience and mine jibe nicely. Makes sense. I find mid 150s to be where Mittleman describes the MEP zone for me. Once I trip over 160 I start getting the tunnel vision and other sensations Mittleman says are the hallmarks of SAP.

Slow Burn is cooky for sure....It's still a better book than Maffetone's because he gives you some options.

It's exactly the options part of Mittleman that I enjoy. Maffetone is great, but it's too much of a "one size fits all" approach - all at MAF-10 to MAF, never a beat over, only age based adjustments.

A couple of years ago I even came down and ran the Rivanna Ring trail in C'ville!

Cool. If you're ever in town again let me know. My house is about 100 yards from the Rivanna Trail and most of my running is done there. It's a wonderful asset of this city.