Probably covered or discussed already but I could not locate. Mafetone ascribes to the 180 - age for HR where Van Aaken says to stay between 130 and 150. Seems like Van Aaken offers more opportunity for variety given a long view of training and health. Anyone switch between the two and notice any differences? Am I splitting hairs. Ive been MAF since last summer and just finished Van Aakens book and am thinking of working in his range. Thoughts comments or ideas?

I just know from looking at people's results that those who really had aerobic problems really got nowhere by using MAF estimates much above 180-age so anything that pushed it higher did not bear the fruit that Maffetone's estimates gave. For those that were already in very good aerobic shape, 5 or 10 extra beats didn't seem to make much difference but in some cases was enough to bring about the typical overuse injuries.

Like Greg said....Dr. Van Aaken's method comes from back before we had any HR monitoring technology and my thought was he is just basically telling you to keep it slow! He had world class athletes running 10 mpm pace in training, but some workouts were an hour run on and off for 24 hours! He basically pushed the aerobic method with very minor speed tune-ups. I have been following Van Aaken since i first read his book back in the late 70's and of course would also fall right into Maffetone's plan. Think of it this way, if he has an Olympic athlete running at 130 bpm, what should "we" be running at? Follow Maffetone for a year, then and only then should you begin anything fast. I usually train at around 140 and I'm 57, but I also have been running competitively for over 30 years. Now that the racing season is over, I am focusing on 130 which has me doing a lot of walking, but man do it feel great! In a few months I'll start some hills, then a tempo run a week, but all else will be at 140 (which feels real easy to me). Good luck, Steve

Maffetone is a much better guitarist/singer/composer. That should say it all.

ah. I love playing Mozart piano pieces because of the modal tones, which the Beatles brought back to pop music. A lot of Maffetone's songs have that modal tone, which is great. van Aaken's work is outdated. It was great at the time, but we're coming up on 2009. I'm not sure why van Aaken's name is even on this forum (and for that matter, Mittleman's too). Certainly Lydiard's work is much more relevant (although he was ahead of his time, his work is now outdated too). Just my opinion.

Since this thread seems to have moved into the direction of music, I'll ask: Does anyone knows when Dr. Phil first began working with The Red Hot Chili Peppers?

Since this thread seems to have moved into the direction of music, I'll ask: Does anyone knows when Dr. Phil first began working with The Red Hot Chili Peppers?

Not sure, but Maffetone's first album had the Red Hot Chili Peppers guitar guy play on several songs (I guess a couple of songs on the second album too, which I just received ), and it's a nice touch. To stay on topic, it's good to read all about everything, all the time. So, van Aaken's material is important in that regard. Subjects like this one (HRM training/aerobic training/aerobic base/etc.) evolve into better, more practical and well defined subjects as more generations of researchers, clinicians, coaches, etc. pick up on previous research.