# Treadmill test to determine MAF (KPH) (19 tests) (Read 2754 times)

Daggone it, I'm gonna have to break down and do this soon    I'm dying to know.  I think I can complete the test procedure easy enough, but can someone help me with how to get the data into these pretty graphs?

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

Just enter the data into columns in a spreadsheet software like Excel or Numbers, then choose Graph, and make a line graph. I then take a screenshot, then upload as a JPg. You can use Google to store your graphs and link to them in the threads here, or just send me a screen shot in a message in the message box here at RA.

Latest test from Mo 9/19/13

Cool, I can handle that.  I think I will do this in early Oct after I race a 5K on 9/28.

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

MarkO1969

Latest test from Mo 9/19/13

Jimmy, thanks for posting my test and for all the info/advice you gave me.  Would you say that little plateau at 148 is likely my 50/50 point?

Mark (MO)

Mark O.

Rocklin, CA

Jimmy, thanks for posting my test and for all the info/advice you gave me.  Would you say that little plateau at 148 is likely my 50/50 point?

Mark (MO)

You're welcome, Mark,  All I can say about that second deflection is that it coincided with my 50/50 fat/sugar point.  I had taken an RQ test and had the 50/50 numbers. In the RQ test I didn't see any plateau at 50/50. Nothing personal against the 50/50 point (if it indeed has consciousness), but I'm not sure if it's really of any use in training.

I don't know what causes any of the plateaus we see, even at MAF.  I can only speculate. They might mean nothing at all, or they could represent a recruitment of different fibers.

According to Wikipedia, there are 4 types of muscle fibers:

Type 1 (red)  aerobic

Type 2a (red) long term anaerobic  (these are the ones that can be trained to be "more aerobic" )

Type 2x short-term anaerobic

Type 2b (white)  short-term anaerobic

It's most likely the Type 2a that ever so slightly kick in at MAF, which causes the faster, steeper rise in HR, and sugar-burning that you see. Is the next plateau a slight engagement of Type 2x? Or is it the point when the Type 2a are fully engaged? Plateaus seen near anaerobic threshold could be the recruitment of the theType 2b. Even if that is true, I don't understand why the heart rate levels out  even though the intensity is increasing. Is it a helping effect from the next level of fibers?

I just looked at the one RQ test I did back in 2009. There is also a plateau in the fat/sugar ratio at MAF (134). The %fat is the last column. You see that MAF that that my body is burning 64% fat and 36% sugar. Then you see a steep rise in sugar burning. There is no other plateau in HR, but two plateaus in Fat/sugar% at 154-158 bpm and 169-172 bpm. My anaerobic threshold was measured at 176 bpm by the software. Not sure how it zeroes in on 176, but at 174 bpm  and beyond the sugar-burning increases very rapidly until no fat is being used at all:

Why there are more plateaus in HR in this TM test, I don't know.   There's not much science here, and data is very heavy on the anecdotal. Ultimately, I just wanted this test to help Maffers confirm their MAF's. You should see a deflection point in HR in the neighborhood of 180-age, give or take 5-10 beats. And perhaps a change in your breathing (and even your gait, according to Dr. Phil). Then it's up to the Maffer to either stick with the formula, or go with the deflection in this test.

--Jimmy

Petco Run/Walk/Wag 5k

Well Jimmyb, as i said I would try and do a repeat MAF Determination test (last done in Jan 2012)to see if it had changed from 95. Since then I've lost weight (30lbs), reduced medications, but still taking beta blockers, and have finished races at higher than previous max HR (determined during 2011 stress echo, age 64, I was ready to puke when I hit 137 so if not my max, very close). I repeated the test this morning.

Am disappointed to find that my latest Garmin, a refurbished 405CX, didn't record with 10 second intervals set, where as my older 301 did! Dang it! I did monitor as Jimmyb suggested and did start noticing breathing changes in hr=113 are, maybe a little lower in the area of calculated MAF (180-67=113). My right knee started to talk to me as the pace increased. I find it harder running on treadmills than on pavement. The only graph I can generated is the RA one. I'm 30 days from being 67 so jumped the gun on age! Should be going the other way shouldn't I! LOL.

So in spite of being on beta blockers, other BP, cholesterol, heart, and stomach drugs,it looks like my current conditioning offsets the med reduction. I'll try and place with the 405CX to see how to get it to lap properly but it could a design 'feature'. Might redo the test in a week or so.

So, if I continue to do initial marathon training with the r/w 3/1 group I should keep max hr close to 113, a little slower than I have been doing, especially near the end of long runs.

bob e v
2014 goals: keep on running! Is there anything more than that?

Complete the last 3 races in the Austin Distance Challenge, Rogue 30k, 3M Half, Austin Full

Break the 1000 mi barrier!

History: blessed heart attack 3/15/2008; c25k july 2008 first 5k 10/26/2008 on 62nd birthday.

MarkO1969

Jimmy, incredible amount of info in that last post!  Will need to read it a few times to comprehend, haha!

bobev, I couldn't get my Garmin 310xt to "auto lap" at 10 second intervals either.  But, I was able to set up a "custom workout" in the Garmin Training Center (the free software that comes with Garmins) and it worked perfectly.  If you've never done this before, all you have to do is set up the "custom workout" as I have pictured below and then transfer it to your Garmin. Here's what it looked like after I set it up:

edit/add:  I picked 45 minutes as the duration of the workout because I knew the test would not take that long.  When I couldn't take it any more, I just hit the Stop button!

Mark O.

Rocklin, CA

Petco Run/Walk/Wag 5k

Mark - thanks for the idea/info. Will give it a try in a week or so. Maybe next week if I don't get on a jury...

bob e v
2014 goals: keep on running! Is there anything more than that?

Complete the last 3 races in the Austin Distance Challenge, Rogue 30k, 3M Half, Austin Full

Break the 1000 mi barrier!

History: blessed heart attack 3/15/2008; c25k july 2008 first 5k 10/26/2008 on 62nd birthday.

I completed the MAF determination test this morning.  I'm 38, 174 lbs, been running for 15 months, biking for 18 months.  I've been using a calculated MAF of 142 for nearly all of my running and biking.  Well, here's the results:

So it appears that MAF is either 144 or 148 as there are plateaus at both HRs.  I wasn't expecting them so close together, but did expect something higher than the calculated 142 as that aerobic pace would indicate a predicted 5k time that is a bit slower than my actual 5k time.  Interesting that the plateaus at 157, 170 and 174 are more pronounced.  Again, surprised at that the plateaus at 170 and 174 are so close together.  I was breathing 3:2 without any noticeable change until 174 when I felt the urge to go to 2:2.  That's about where I thought my lactate threshold was, too, btw.  Anyway, I'm interested in thoughts from the gallery.  I love data Edit: forgot to mention that I did a proper 30 minute warmup at MAF-20 and stopped the test at 183, or about 12 beats shy of MHR.

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

I completed the MAF determination test this morning.  I'm 38, 174 lbs, been running for 15 months, biking for 18 months.  I've been using a calculated MAF of 142 for nearly all of my running and biking.  Well, here's the results:

So it appears that MAF is either 144 or 148 as there are plateaus at both HRs.  I wasn't expecting them so close together, but did expect something higher than the calculated 142 as that aerobic pace would indicate a predicted 5k time that is a bit slower than my actual 5k time.  Interesting that the plateaus at 157, 170 and 174 are more pronounced.  Again, surprised at that the plateaus at 170 and 174 are so close together.  I was breathing 3:2 without any noticeable change until 174 when I felt the urge to go to 2:2.  That's about where I thought my lactate threshold was, too, btw.  Anyway, I'm interested in thoughts from the gallery.  I love data Edit: forgot to mention that I did a proper 30 minute warmup at MAF-20 and stopped the test at 183, or about 12 beats shy of MHR.

Good test. Thanks for posting. DId you notice any change in your breathing or gait  near 147-148?

What's important is that steep rise after the end of the curve, that shows the deflection where the anaerobic is kicking in, which in the neighborhood of 147-48. You get that plateau after the steep rise that many of see.

I also see plateaus about 6-8 beats below LT then a change in breathing at LT (which I've been tested for). I think each these plateaus (but I'm not sure, just speculation) is a new set of fibers kicking in. When that happens, a plateau in HR comes about, before it proceeds to climb again.

Without retesting, you can tell if 148 is you MAF. Usually when I get to my MAF, there's  a sensation in breathing I get. I just need a hair more, not much enough to change a pattern. There's a different feeling of stress or something.

Thanks, Eric!

Thanks for the quick input, jimmy!  The subsequent steep rise as the indicator does make sense to me.  I didn't notice any breathing or gait change at 147/148, but I was flying blind as the lap display on my watch lasted 10 seconds each and covered my HR display, so I didn't know my HR the entire time, lol.  I'll do some training now at 147/148 and see if I notice any breathing or gait changes.  On the other hand, I hate to mess with what is working as I've seen good progress all year at what I now know to be MAF-5.

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

I'll read the other new posts in the thread after my marathon... I'll only check these last two for now

I completed the MAF determination test this morning.  I'm 38, 174 lbs, been running for 15 months, biking for 18 months.  I've been using a calculated MAF of 142 for nearly all of my running and biking.  Well, here's the results:

So it appears that MAF is either 144 or 148 as there are plateaus at both HRs.  I wasn't expecting them so close together, but did expect something higher than the calculated 142 as that aerobic pace would indicate a predicted 5k time that is a bit slower than my actual 5k time.  Interesting that the plateaus at 157, 170 and 174 are more pronounced.  Again, surprised at that the plateaus at 170 and 174 are so close together.  I was breathing 3:2 without any noticeable change until 174 when I felt the urge to go to 2:2.  That's about where I thought my lactate threshold was, too, btw.  Anyway, I'm interested in thoughts from the gallery.  I love data Edit: forgot to mention that I did a proper 30 minute warmup at MAF-20 and stopped the test at 183, or about 12 beats shy of MHR.

cool stuff! your graph from 170 looks just like mine would from 188-190. strikingly similar really. I mean I haven't done this test yet but I can visualize it from all the runs over the years.  your breathing changing at 174 also lines up with that, heh.

I wouldn't worry about having two close plateaus at 170 and 174, as I just said mine's exactly like that, two little plateaus almost blending into each other. and basically everything after that is a series of plateaus just like in your graph. not everyone's HR is like this around/past LT, though.

another note on LT, I have hard data (lactate blood test) that shows it to start from ~189. so I guess for you that's starting around 170, yes.

I can't comment on the MAF, I'm less sure about that stuff than LT stuff.

Without retesting, you can tell if 148 is you MAF. Usually when I get to my MAF, there's  a sensation in breathing I get. I just need a hair more, not much enough to change a pattern. There's a different feeling of stress or something.

that's a nice tip there mmm. (btw I've just replied to your PM finally )

whatever this is worth, for me the first time I ever notice a change in breathing and stress load and whatnot and yes it's a very fine small change, it's at low 160-ish HR-wise. I'm actually pretty sure my MAF is at least 160 so this makes sense. (somewhere between 160 and 175 is where I've definitely narrowed it down without the chance to do your treadmill test properly yet.)

cool stuff! your graph from 170 looks just like mine would from 188-190. strikingly similar really. I mean I haven't done this test yet but I can visualize it from all the runs over the years.  your breathing changing at 174 also lines up with that, heh.

I wouldn't worry about having two close plateaus at 170 and 174, as I just said mine's exactly like that, two little plateaus almost blending into each other. and basically everything after that is a series of plateaus just like in your graph. not everyone's HR is like this around/past LT, though.

another note on LT, I have hard data (lactate blood test) that shows it to start from ~189. so I guess for you that's starting around 170, yes.

I can't comment on the MAF, I'm less sure about that stuff than LT stuff.

Thanks, I hadn't really noticed the other plateaus above 174.  Don't know what they mean, but interesting nonetheless .  I'm under informed on the LT stuff, but I'll come back to this data as I learn more.  I expect to see your test results here soon, haha!

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

Thanks, I hadn't really noticed the other plateaus above 174.  Don't know what they mean, but interesting nonetheless .  I'm under informed on the LT stuff, but I'll come back to this data as I learn more.  I expect to see your test results here soon, haha!

I also don't really know but I assume it means that more anaerobic fibers get engaged. Though I don't know how long the anaerobic fibers are supposed to last so I'm not sure if that's the full explanation. Another possible explanation is about how the heart increases cardiac output, I recall reading it can also increase volume of each stroke so maybe past LT it just does more of that stroke volume increase for some reason Yea maybe ask an exercise physiologist

Now I've just run my first marathon but when I'm recovered I would like to test yea.

Btw throwing out a theory here... in the marathon I was able to last forever at a 8:35 pace even after running down my legs and with very high HR and there was *no* HR drift anymore either. I'm sure that lack of HR drift at that pace has several reasons but what I'm getting at, at my current bad-ish shape 8:35 pace is low 160-ish HR in training (without adding HR drift on long runs). So maybe my MAF is kind of mid-160's? I'm not sure if that's a good way to guess at it... Kind of coincides with that very little bit of breathing change too.. The problem is I could also argue that MAF is something that involves just a bit more fibers to be just that much more effective while still keeping a good balance of stress load right? Because then it's more like 165-170 HR for MAF. That also coincides with some training experience. Eh I dunno :/