Low HR Training

Lydiard, Hadd, Maffetone (Read 2439 times)

    Hadd would have me run at 2 low HR's, 1 would be somewhat below MAF, one would be somewhat over it, but both below LT (using his LT notion 

     

    I recall that the lowest HR was just for low aerobic benefit (optimal fat burning) and the LT HR was to improve the LT (raise it).

     

    His first phase was to do a base with only low HR.  Once you maximized that, you move on to a mix of low HR to maintain optimal fat burning, but also mix in LT HR to improve the LT.  He believed in training below the LT and that would cause the LT to improve.  Once it improved, he would then have you move the HR up to continue pushing up the LT, but still train below the LT.

     

    That is what I recall from the Hadd article.  I recall the phrase "squeezing the toothpaste tube from the bottom".  He really emphasized building a strong base first to squeeze out all of the areobic benefit before moving onto higher HR stuff.

       

      I recall that the lowest HR was just for low aerobic benefit (optimal fat burning) and the LT HR was to improve the LT (raise it).

       

      His first phase was to do a base with only low HR.  Once you maximized that, you move on to a mix of low HR to maintain optimal fat burning, but also mix in LT HR to improve the LT.  He believed in training below the LT and that would cause the LT to improve.  Once it improved, he would then have you move the HR up to continue pushing up the LT, but still train below the LT.

       

      That is what I recall from the Hadd article.  I recall the phrase "squeezing the toothpaste tube from the bottom".  He really emphasized building a strong base first to squeeze out all of the areobic benefit before moving onto higher HR stuff.

       

       

      thanks! Smile

       

      I think this quote below also answers my previous question, I should have just remembered it better Surprised

       

      To improve your LT (which will have a direct impact on your race performances), you must increase the motochondria in your running muscles (in a neat move, the optimal training to improve mitochondria is also the optimal training to improve capillary density).

      The more mitochondria, the less lactate at every running pace. But mitochondrial adaptation in each fibre type is training-intensity dependent. If you want to maximise the number of mitochondria in each fibre type, you must train at the correct pace for that type. (remember; the more mitochondria, the less lactate; the less lactate, the faster the racing pace and the more economical you are at any pace, meaning you can keep that pace up for longer.)


      that goddam doc is just too long to remember all details at once :P (I do like such lengthy writings, though - I bet you can tell that!).

       

       

       

      so anyway I suppose running at LT (base HR + 10 bpm initially, not a high HR at all), will get the type IIA fibers to develop more mitochondria and running at base HR will get the type I fibers to do the same...

       

      I already know about myself that I probably have more type IIA than I fibers... so this could also explain why it was so beneficial to train all the time at around this LT before I started doing too much of it! (or just because I was a beginner.)

       

       

       

      well, one problem I have here is, before moving to next HR, he assumes you can run 10miles without any HR drift.

       

      now, how can that be done if I get a 2-3bpm drift at MAF after 90minutes? I assume that's due to some dehydration (I never drink during my runs, I do drink before going out for the runs). I know, 2-3 is not much, but his requirement is even stricter than that. Smile

       

      I have a feeling that you can cover 10 miles without any drift at all only if you can cover these 10 miles before this 90min drift i.e. he assumes a pretty good pace, but that means a very long base building at HR = 145 for someone whose MHR is 208... :P

      (yea I can run at 145, that's MAF-8 for me, it's around a 15m/m pace)

       

      I guess the other possibility is move the point of this 2-3bpm drift further in time. Hadd in a forum thread shows a HR diagram of a woman running a sub-2:40 marathon PR, and her HR basically didn't change a lick from 5 miles into the 26.1-mile run. I suspect that you have to get really fit to be able to move the drift point that far in time, though. (and I bet she got some drinks in during that run.)

       

      I know this woman was not an imaginary person, I talked to a guy in our local forum who ran a 2:25 marathon and he posted the HR graph of that and it looked the same as the 2:40 woman's.

       

       

       

      the other important point that also slightly confuses me:

       

      To move the lactate curve to the right, we need to go wayyy back to just before the curve begins to turn, and train both at the point, and below (slower).  Not faster.  If we do this right, in six weeks the curve will move and we will be able to run faster, more easily (ie: aerobically and not by calling up some anaerobic energy).

      also:

       

      Here we needed to find 2 training paces for Joe. One, we knew had to be low aerobic conditioning pace for every day, the second could be up closer to his current LT.

      these two quotes sound like you start with 2 paces right away.

      however! Joe first had to go to 50mpw on easy running, right? he was not told what HR to use for that 50mpw though...

      guess, this Hadd doc is just not too well organized, you have to get the different parts to see how to build your training from the start from several places in the document...

      so, did I get this right? 50mpw at low HR, then low HR + LT HR (initially a relatively low HR for LT HR too!!!). buuut, I don't know if the 50mpw assumes any specific (fast) pace or it can be done using a loooooot of time every week.

       

      one more thing that confuses me about Hadd training:

       

      As noted in an earlier addendum (to Part IV), Joe found this initial test effort at 170 HR to be okay for 8-10mins, but not something he wanted to keep up for too long, maybe 30-40 mins. Indeed 180 was something he did not believe he could maintain at this early stage for even 18 mins.

       

      note here, Hadd says that for 193+ MHR, the base HR will be 145 and the initial LT HR will be 155-160. he clearly states that any MHR beyond 193 should be calculated with the same values as MHR 193.

      Joe's MHR was just about 193. and he found 180 very hard to run at. so I guess it is pretty likely that his LT was really around 155-160.

       

      but in my case, my MHR is 208 and I find running at 180 very easy to do for a loooong time. at the same time, my Hadd-type LT is around 160-165. I determined that by looking at HR drift in long enough runs at different HR's after warm-up as this is how Hadd defines it; also by looking at subjective feelings. above the LT my muscles feel differently than below LT, during and after the run and my running style subtly changes too.

      but running at 180bpm is still quite easy to do, the maintaining-HR-for-18mins problem thing would come up for me at around 200bpm. 200bpm is what I find hard to hold for 18mins (why 18mins though? why not 15 or 20??). I can hold 195bpm for 30mins. so I dunno why I should apply the same rules as in Joe's case.

       

      anyway, it's not that I'm trying to follow a strict Hadd training now, as I haven't decided on that yet, I'm just wondering because these details confuse me somewhat.

       

      oh, one more neat thing. the ceiling of Mittleman's MEP zone would be about Hadd's LT for me. also by the subjective feelings that he describes. this fact I find funny :P maybe Mittleman managed to nail down the same thing...? though, he doesn't mention the MEP can move after a few months of training... he does still mention that the MEP can be different from the calculations and that it should be tested out.

      and then, if I assume I got the 160-165 LT assumption right, then it is just about MAF+10 for me