First off I apoligise for putting this in another thread. (Was not trying to thread jack!) Someone helpfully posted a link to that thread in a thread on the main board, and it was the only maff related thread that I saw. It was not until after I joined this group and replied to that thread that I saw a whole forum of Maff threads! (wahoo!)
I am new, but figured I would weigh in since I am doing Maff method and seeing results.
I am probably not a great test subject for the method because I had not been running for around 6-7 years (back injury). I do however have a pretty decent level of fitness from cycling (though over trained in the grey zone mostly.)
I did Maff method for around a month and a half before taking the test. I was mostly run/ walking, and probably clocked around 14:00 mile. Once I had been running the whole time for a bit I bought a Garmin GPS and took my first test.
I always suffered from shin splints before and could never run back to back days, or more than 4 miles without getting them. Now my short runs are 5.5 miles and long ones are 10-12 and going up 10% monthly. No shin splints, no sick days, no injuries.... I take days off when my RHR is up 10-12 beats. I also transitioned to minimalist shoes.
Maff rate 180-age = 130 +5 for 2 years working out with no injuries or sickness (cycling) = 135, so I keep it between 126-133 during workouts, and 130-135 during test.
Results below (tests are 5 mile runs on same course. Lap = 1 mile.
10/27/13 lap 1 10:51 avg. lap 11:32
11/26/13 lap 1 10:02 avg. lap 10:34 improvement: :58 per mile
12/25/13 lap 1 9:49 avg. lap 10:09 improvement :25 per mile (I ran this test in a 17 hour fasted state. Not sure if that makes a difference)
Anyway, pretty happy with the results so far.
Edit: I can put all of the lap times if needed, or any questions. I just figured that first (fastest) and avg lap times were enough.
Welcome to the unlurked experience of the forum, Trail! Nice progress. 9:49 is sweet. You're following some good, smart strategies. Good to see your injuries clearing up, and your endurance building. Next stop, 8:59 first mile!
Your experience with the Maffetone Method shared in this thread is a solid contribution to the forum. I hope you stick around and keep us posted.
--Jimmy
Thanks for the nice welcome and encouragement Jimmy!
I actually did lurk for a while on the main board. Got some good advice and some good laughs for free! But I didn't know about the usergroups and the forums tucked away in them.
MY goal was/is 8:00 mile, but not sure if that means 8:00 for the first mile or 8:00 avg. over all 5 miles. I guess I will find out as I get closer, if I get closer. Now I am starting to think 7:30 might be the ultimate goal. That would be faster than I was at my peak of fitness 15 years ago!!!! And at LHR!!!!
Welcome to the unlurked experience of the forum, Trail! Nice progress. 9:49 is sweet. You're following some good, smart strategies. Good to see your injuries clearing up, and your endurance building. Next stop, 8:59 first mile! Your experience with the Maffetone Method shared in this thread is a solid contribution to the forum. I hope you stick around and keep us posted. --Jimmy
nice stuff, congrats on progress, clearly biking isn't as specific to running as running is
Now my short runs are 5.5 miles and long ones are 10-12 and going up 10% monthly.
you're increasing the LR by 10% or weekly mileage by 10%? if it's the latter, you may not want to force that much increase after you get to a point where it would be more than optimal load. though maybe that's trivial
Nice work and nice post, Trailglover! Reading your post reminded me of where I was 12 months ago when I started low HR training. Prior to that, I was basically a 38 year old couch potato until I started cycling and running (mostly in the grey zone) for 9 months prior to starting the low HR stuff. FWIW, our trajectory looks to be similar as well, so I'll let you know how 2013 has played out for me. My 1st mile MAF pace was mid 10s in January '13, mid 9s after 2 months, then mid-upper 8s after 4 months. Those first 4 months I was building up weekly mileage to the high 20s for my first HM. Since then, I've probably averaged about 20 miles per week with a buildup to near 30 for another HM in November. So I'm not a high mileage guy, but that feels like all I can safely do right now without getting overtrained. I've also cycled over 2,000 miles this year, so that counts for something, too, right? I went to the track yesterday for a 4 mile MAF test and the 1st mile was just under 8:00 with about a 5 sec degradation per mile.
I'm getting ready to start a 15 week Pfitzinger plan for a spring HM, so we'll see how weekly speedwork affects MAF pace or if I can even handle it at all, LOL. Looking forward to seeing your progress continue. Keep it up!
Eric
PRs: 5k - (20:42) 3/9/2013 18:55 (9/28/13)
10k - (42:42) 3/23/2013 39:11 (10/26/13) course was short @ 6.0 mi :)
10 mi - (1:12:10) 4/6/2013
HM - (1:34:38) 4/27/2013
Nice work and nice post, Trailglover! Reading your post reminded me of where I was 12 months ago when I started low HR training. Prior to that, I was basically a 38 year old couch potato until I started cycling and running (mostly in the grey zone) for 9 months prior to starting the low HR stuff. FWIW, our trajectory looks to be similar as well, so I'll let you know how 2013 has played out for me. My 1st mile MAF pace was mid 10s in January '13, mid 9s after 2 months, then mid-upper 8s after 4 months. Those first 4 months I was building up weekly mileage to the high 20s for my first HM. Since then, I've probably averaged about 20 miles per week with a buildup to near 30 for another HM in November. So I'm not a high mileage guy, but that feels like all I can safely do right now without getting overtrained. I've also cycled over 2,000 miles this year, so that counts for something, too, right? I went to the track yesterday for a 4 mile MAF test and the 1st mile was just under 8:00 with about a 5 sec degradation per mile. I'm getting ready to start a 15 week Pfitzinger plan for a spring HM, so we'll see how weekly speedwork affects MAF pace or if I can even handle it at all, LOL. Looking forward to seeing your progress continue. Keep it up!
Eric, if you have built a solid base, you should see an improvement in aerobic speed from the speedwork. I've done the Pfitzinger program before (using his heart rate zones). I found it worked better if I kept the recovery days below MAF, and not at his recovery heart rate of 70% HRR. His LT run heart rate zone was pretty effective, I much preferred those runs over the v02max intervals for speedwork. I wish you the best of luck with it. May your aerobic speed get mucho closer to the speed of light.
Thanks cmon!
Yeah, it certainly is not, but I kind of knew that I would not be at the same level running as cycling after 7 years off.
I am increasing my long runs on Sundays by around 10% each month. My runs during the week are 5.5 miles, but I will start moving them up to 6, where they will stay. Maybe move one up, and then a couple weeks later move the 2nd one up, etc.
I was wondering what weekly mileage should I shoot for? What would my optimum load be? I also cycle 2-3 times a week - 1 to 1 1/2 hour rides, and row 3 times a week (concept2) - 30 to 40 minutes. All MAFF compliant. In fact my HR is slightly lower during rides, and I avg around 123 HR on rower (130-133 on runs).
nice stuff, congrats on progress, clearly biking isn't as specific to running as running is you're increasing the LR by 10% or weekly mileage by 10%? if it's the latter, you may not want to force that much increase after you get to a point where it would be more than optimal load. though maybe that's trivial
Thanks Eric!
Man that is great. Very inspiring! I am glad MAFF is working for you so well. You do your cycling MAFF as well?
I would love to follow a similar trajectory, but I am not going to force it.
Right now I am doing 20-24 miles per week. I am not sure where to top it off at (see above post for specifics). Any help/opinions would be welcome.
Thanks Eric! Man that is great. Very inspiring! I am glad MAFF is working for you so well. You do your cycling MAFF as well? I would love to follow a similar trajectory, but I am not going to force it. Right now I am doing 20-24 miles per week. I am not sure where to top it off at (see above post for specifics). Any help/opinions would be welcome.
You're progressing with the 24 miles per week; it seems you've been in a sweet spot with that progress you've made.
C's advice is solid. When I started out with base-building, I increased by about 5-6% per week, with cut back weeks every 4th week for recovery. Increase the hard days first, then the easy days. One approach is to cap the duration of your runs at some point, then let the body determine the distance. Let say you eventually, after a slow build, cap your long runs at 3 hours, as you your aerobic speed builds, you might be running 15 miles in 3 hours in January and 18-20 in the same 3 by the time September comes. Same might go for recovery runs capped at 50 minutes. You let the body determine the distance. Both Jack Daniels and Dr. Phil have written about running by duration and not distance. An elite can run 20 miles easy in a little over 2:30, and that same 20 might take an amateur age-grouper 4:00. They recommend not running much more duration than elites do. If you think about it, a marathon is one thing for an elite and quite another for someone who takes 5 hours to finish. In terms of duration, they're not running the same race at all. The 5 hour runner takes at least 2-3 times as many strides and footfalls. Imagine all races being like the 6-day and 24 hour races that take place. Go as far as you can in certain amount of time. The person who goes the furthest wins. Unworkable on most race courses. That's the thinking.
Remember that your "training load"=stress from exercise+stress from the heat and humidity+mental stress from life. Life always throws you curveballs at one point or another that increases mental stress way beyond normal (for you). This can sometimes affect your aerobic system, and volume needs to be cut. You might find your aerobic speed regresses early in the summer. If that happens, just retest in a month and see if it's still heading south. You should see progress from your new summer baseline aerobic speed.
Ultimately, let the MAF test and your body guide you. You'll know when you're overdoing it. The body has its ways of screaming at you with minor injuries, a resting heart rate that is way too low or high compared to normal, and reduced aerobic speed. Rest is your best friend (it likes to hear you say "you're my best friend", so tell rest that once in awhile, and it'll be super nice to you).
Jimmy
Thanks jimmy! Good to know that you had a good experience with Pfitzinger. And thanks for that link...I don't remember seeing that in the book that I read. I am similarly dreading the VO2 max stuff, but have experimented with his LT workouts already and I actually look forward to those. You are just reading my mind all over the place, because I was already thinking of reducing the recovery runs below MAF to sort of even out with the hard days. I'm also going to try to do this on 3 runs per week and keep my 2 cycling days and 2 days off. Any thoughts on that?
I do my solo rides at MAF. If I've only got an hour, I like to hold the cadence close to 100 and never let up or coast at all for the whole ride, staying below MAF, though. I def get more bang for the buck out of that workout and have seen MAF speed increase over 2 mph this year. My group rides are slower than my solo rides, but can involve some short intervals as my buddies and I like to hit some Strava segments now and then
As far as where to top off running miles at, that's elusive. But with you paying attention to pace at MAF, your RHR, and just generally how you feel, you will know it when you've gone too far. Plus everything jimmyb said
I must be superman (the worst movie song/poem ever--it was supposed to be sung, but she couldn't sing. Plus, the man can fly and stop bullets and all she's thinking about is that?).
Dr. Phil has mentioned in his chapters on anaerobic training that (in his experience) working in the AT range at 90% MHR and below works just as well as if you were doing bone crunching intervals at 95% or higher. Less stress for the same effect on the anaerobic system. Up near 90%, you're burning almost 100% sugar, which means you are using a full contingent of anaerobic fibers. Strategies will differ for different kinds of athletes. It's a different thing to be a 100meter sprinter as opposed to an endurance runner. The sprinter has different needs.
No thoughts on your schedule. Stock answer: follow your MAF tests and your body. Is your aerobic speed improving? Do you feel good?
If you're starting to get worn out and/or your aerobic speed is on an extended plateau or is plummeting, adjustments might be in order. If you feel good and healthy, and your aerobic speed isn't improving, then higher volume could be what is needed.
Good luck, Eric.
I must be superman (the worst movie song/poem ever--it was supposed to be sung, but she couldn't sing. Plus, the man can fly and stop bullets and all she's thinking about is that?)
LOL, she actually doesn't speak very well, either. Thanks for the other advice!
Thanks cmon! Yeah, it certainly is not, but I kind of knew that I would not be at the same level running as cycling after 7 years off. I am increasing my long runs on Sundays by around 10% each month. My runs during the week are 5.5 miles, but I will start moving them up to 6, where they will stay. Maybe move one up, and then a couple weeks later move the 2nd one up, etc. I was wondering what weekly mileage should I shoot for? What would my optimum load be?
I was wondering what weekly mileage should I shoot for? What would my optimum load be?
okay, that sounds good I guess. I mean, 10% increase for LR once a month.
as for the bolded: that's completely individual. jimmyb said the rest
oh dear, you're totally talented*, running such race times from such low mileage. if you ever feel like getting to your full potential with significantly more training - of course only after your body can take it -, I wish you lots of good luck, possibly a sub 2:40 marathon or better!
if you just want to stay a "hobbyist" runner, I still wish you good luck to that
PS: *: please do not take that comment the wrong way. I noticed some people don't like it when I say someone is talented even though I mean it as a very positive comment because to me it just means that these - talented - people can get really really far if they put in serious work. for some reason, certain people think I mean the person I call "talented" is some lazy ass who doesn't deserve their results. that's absolutely not what I wish to imply.