Low HR Training

12

Maffetone Base Plan to Armstrong Base Plan (Read 956 times)

Shondek


    Hi, wasnt sure what you meant by lower HR/pace == negative split at same effort - are you saying you are able to neg split keeping the same heartrate? Or are you running a higher HR on the way back, but the same percieved effort?

     

    Anyway, regarding AT, I think you are possibly mixing up AT with AeT (Aerobic Threshold) which is,  as far as I can tell,  much the same as MAF.

    AT is definitely well above MAF.

    http://www.runningforfitness.org/book/chapter-10-putting-it-together/threshold

     

    Your question on Allen's Marathon pace is interesting - given that he was close to 5:30 @Maf, it doesnt leave a lot of room to speed up - 

    though I suspect that 5:30 is likely for his first mile  - if he ran a Marathon at MAF I'm sure his pace would slow down as he goes.

    I reckon his best Marathon pace could have been about 5:10ish, not sure if he did run any/many Marathons standalone (comparing to an Ironman effort isn't really accurate given the huge effort already gone into the race).

     What I meant was if I try to keep my heart rate at maf I always do a positive split which means something is slowing me down..lactic acid?So I am saying  if you could bring your heart rate down to a figure that would give you an ever so slight negative split or neither you will get a better training effect and quicker improvement.Its what Lydiard used to determine training pace although before hr monitors keeping the effort the same was difficult unless you were walking.Eventually you would be able to a slight negative split at maf... I doubt it though especially on a long run..something to aim for I guess

       What I meant was if I try to keep my heart rate at maf I always do a positive split which means something is slowing me down..lactic acid?So I am saying  if you could bring your heart rate down to a figure that would give you an ever so slight negative split or neither you will get a better training effect and quicker improvement.Its what Lydiard used to determine training pace although before hr monitors keeping the effort the same was difficult unless you were walking.Eventually you would be able to a slight negative split at maf... I doubt it though especially on a long run..something to aim for I guess

       

      I think there are a couple of things happening that slow us down over the course of a run at the same HR - increasing dehydration, and increased need for the body to cool itself being a couple. At MAF or near MAF efforts, lactic acid would not be one of them - however, if you do hit high HRs then yes, lactic acid would come into play. For me, if I want to negatively split a MAF run then I just run at something lower than MAF (say MAF-10 or -15) for first half and allow the HR to get up to MAF by the end. 

      Shondek


        I think there are a couple of things happening that slow us down over the course of a run at the same HR - increasing dehydration, and increased need for the body to cool itself being a couple. At MAF or near MAF efforts, lactic acid would not be one of them - however, if you do hit high HRs then yes, lactic acid would come into play. For me, if I want to negatively split a MAF run then I just run at something lower than MAF (say MAF-10 or -15) for first half and allow the HR to get up to MAF by the end. 

         I hear you Sean.   I think the goal is to run as fast as possible for the distance without slowing down with equal effort.I could walk at maf-20 then run up to maf for the last 5 minutes...not ideal.Unless you have a base from heaven after one maf mile you are slowing down,are you saying heat or dehydration is slowing you down in the space of 10 minutes or so.Try a winters run in Scotland Sean

          I think you can run with "equal effort" over a distance without slowing down - if you are talking about pervieved effort, not HR.

          Being more aerobically fit should help reduce the HR increase - but I don't think you will find a magical HR level where it just disappears. Yes, running in cooler weather usually results in lower HR at same effort, and should, I think, reduce the cardiac drift also (though you are still susceptible to dehydration - even small amounts matter, and muscular fatigue, as you run) 

           

          There is a lot of info on cardiac drift/heart rate creep/whatever you want to call it - e.g.

          http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/review%20arts/29%20PR)%20CV%20Drift%20New%20Perspectives.pdf

          though a lot of different opinions on exactly the causes.

          And yes, it does happen over short periods (and its more like 25 mins, not 10 for the first MAF mile as you will have done 15 mins w/u)

           

          I do some of my runs now by running at MAF for the first mile after w/u, then holding that pace (allowing HR to go over MAF) for the rest to the run. It's not a MAF run,  but I find it works well for me personally - my long runs I usually start at low MAF and finish on MAF.

           

          p.s.

          I lived in Glasgow for 2 years and did plenty of running in the cold!

          Shondek


            I think you can run with "equal effort" over a distance without slowing down - if you are talking about pervieved effort, not HR.

            Being more aerobically fit should help reduce the HR increase - but I don't think you will find a magical HR level where it just disappears. Yes, running in cooler weather usually results in lower HR at same effort, and should, I think, reduce the cardiac drift also (though you are still susceptible to dehydration - even small amounts matter, and muscular fatigue, as you run) 

             

            There is a lot of info on cardiac drift/heart rate creep/whatever you want to call it - e.g.

            http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/review%20arts/29%20PR)%20CV%20Drift%20New%20Perspectives.pdf

            though a lot of different opinions on exactly the causes.

            And yes, it does happen over short periods (and its more like 25 mins, not 10 for the first MAF mile as you will have done 15 mins w/u)

             

            I do some of my runs now by running at MAF for the first mile after w/u, then holding that pace (allowing HR to go over MAF) for the rest to the run. It's not a MAF run,  but I find it works well for me personally - my long runs I usually start at low MAF and finish on MAF.

             

            p.s.

            I lived in Glasgow for 2 years and did plenty of running in the cold!

             Thanks for that link something I hadnt thought much about ..My run this morning still had a positive split with a really low average hr so you are right impossible with hr ..especially with a headwind on the way back ..that's Glasgow for you...But I'll start slower tomorrow Where did you do your runs in Glasgow ..west end or the dark side?

             

            <tfoot> </tfoot>

            Split

            Time

            Moving Time

            Distance

            Elevation Gain

            Elevation Loss

            Avg Pace

            Avg Moving Pace

            Best Pace

            Avg HR

            Max HR

            Calories

            Summary 1:30:56.8 1:30:42.0 7.25 68 68 12:32 12:30 8:23 113 129 749
            1 13:02.9 12:58 1.00 7 23 13:03 12:58 8:35 100 128 99
            2 12:13.1 12:12 1.00 10 7 12:13 12:12 9:30 115 129 106
            3 12:10.0 12:09 1.00 3 5 12:10 12:09 9:15 116 124 105
            4 12:07.0 12:04 1.00 5 4 12:07 12:04 9:32 117 124 106
            5 12:10.4 12:09 1.00 4 6 12:10 12:09 9:27 117 123 110
            6 12:04.8 12:04 1.00 8 7 12:05 12:04 9:14 117 124 106
            7 13:20.6 13:19 1.00 26 16 13:21 13:19 8:23 112 123 96
            8 3:48.1 3:47 0.25 4 0 15:06 15:02 10:42 99 107 21

              Shondek,

               

              Was thinking about your posts about staying away from MAF, and keeping below it. I think one of the reasons this works well for people is that,  not only is there less stress, but for many of us coming to this program, 180-age is too aggressive, and those -5 or -10 adjustments that Dr. Phil lists should be taken. 

               

              In his adjustment list "b." reads (quotes are from "Training For Endurance"  2nd Edition pages 40-41 by Dr. Phil Maffetone ©2000):

               

              "if you have been inconsistent with exercise, have been exercising with injury, have regressed in training or competition, get more than two colds or bouts of flu per year, or have allergies  or have not exercised before, subtract an addition 5 (beats)"

               

               "c." reads:

               

              "if you have been exercising regularly (at least 4 times weekly) for up to two years without any of the problems just mentioned keep the number (180-age) the same"

               

              and finally:

               

              "once the MAF is found, a range from that number to 10 beats below should be used. For example if an athlete's MAF is determined to be 155, that person's aerobic training zone is 145-155 bpm"

               

              On occasion, at least, I'm sure it happens that someone comes to this program and goes with the 180-age without adjustments, thinking they fit "c." They either ignore, don't remember, or don't know that they had a period of aerobic regression in the preceding two years. They might have had lingering sore spots or minor injuries that they didn't consider injuries, because they were able to keep running. But they did have injuries, even if they were minor.  So, they actually start the program 5 beats over their true MAF, maybe more.

               

              Looking back at my own past, there were times when I should have taken the -5, but didn't. I think what helped me get away with it was doing something like what you prescribe. I would do most of my run way below MAF, only reaching it near the end.

               

              Taking the -5 and using a ten beat zone below as Dr. Phil suggests, can give a 50 year old runner a range of 115-125. If that runner thinks they don't need  adjustments in their MAF calculation, but really should be taking one, then a practice of starting well below MAF and only reaching it near the end of a run is a good one. Always running at MAF might be too stressful for some (even though it doesn't feel that way), and they won't see any progress. 

               

               Your advice is well taken by me, and another "sign" (if I may be  paranoid in a positive way for a moment) that I should return to the practice of  using a training zone of  something in the neighborhood of MAF -20 to MAF (I'll be taking the -5 adjustment for awhile).

               

              Thanks, Shondek.

               

              --Jimmy

              Cool

              log   prs      Crusted Salt comic #141

               

              Shondek


                Very much so Jimmy and thanks. I think its just a case of finding the heart rate where can repeat the pace mile after mile.Whether it is maf or not is irrelevant  .As your base improves your negative split will increase and you might need to increase your heart rate/speed closer to maf  to maintain the initial slight negative split.

                Maffetones formula takes you close but fine tweaking is still required.Its better than a 50 year old saying let me try 160 and take it down from there.

                When your base is tops running at maf should be doable and you're probably close to speed time.

                I am now running at the same pace as 1 month ago averaging 8-10 beats less.

                Lets remember all this maf thing is about  endurance building which by definition is all about not slowing down.

                Use a flat out and back route to find a more accurate heart rate.Your body doesnt lie to you..its too risky hoping your self diagnosis and formula is accurate or not,luckily it only took me 7 months to figure this out.

                Looking at the splits of my run I think I've found it.The route starts flat then it goes downhill obviously on my return its uphill at the end combined with a warm down .It'll be a while before I manage a slight -ve split on this route and when I do you'll be the first to know.

                Are you back out yet it would be intersting to know what your -ve split heart rate is 117 perhaps?

                 

                CheersSmile

                  Very much so Jimmy and thanks. I think its just a case of finding the heart rate where can repeat the pace mile after mile.Whether it is maf or not is irrelevant  .As your base improves your negative split will increase and you might need to increase your heart rate/speed closer to maf  to maintain the initial slight negative split.

                  Maffetones formula takes you close but fine tweaking is still required.Its better than a 50 year old saying let me try 160 and take it down from there.

                  When your base is tops running at maf should be doable and you're probably close to speed time.

                  I am now running at the same pace as 1 month ago averaging 8-10 beats less.

                  Lets remember all this maf thing is about  endurance building which by definition is all about not slowing down.

                  Use a flat out and back route to find a more accurate heart rate.Your body doesnt lie to you..its too risky hoping your self diagnosis and formula is accurate or not,luckily it only took me 7 months to figure this out.

                  Looking at the splits of my run I think I've found it.The route starts flat then it goes downhill obviously on my return its uphill at the end combined with a warm down .It'll be a while before I manage a slight -ve split on this route and when I do you'll be the first to know.

                  Are you back out yet it would be intersting to know what your -ve split heart rate is 117 perhaps?

                   

                  CheersSmile

                   

                  I'll give your idea a try. Won't be starting running until mid-May (that'll give me time to put on 10 more pounds!); until then it will be walking. Then it will be an ease back into it. RHR has been normal. I just don't want to start up until I can fully commit to training. I dream of the day when I can run long again---short will do as well. Cool

                   

                  --jimmy

                  log   prs      Crusted Salt comic #141

                   

                  Shondek


                    Hi Jimmy I was thinking about what you said about ' not making the correct adjustments' so I decided to make  180-age-10 my new maf(119).So I've decided to use this as my upper limit instead of 124,the things you'll do to get a negative split.Another change I can recommend is switching off hear rate alarms.It was getting to the point I couldn't tell if the beeps meant too high or too low.So I now get a feel when my heart rate is rising as opposed to waiting until  it's too high

                    This is this mornings 60 min out run, trying to keep heart rate at 115.I ended getting back in 55 mins so obviously too slow,and that was 1 minute into my 6 min walking warm down:mirror imaging my 6 min walking warm up.

                    Tomorrow I'll split the 45 min out run for easy comparison .Doesn't look like much of a drift tho,or am I just giving myself a proper warm up

                     

                     

                    Laps

                    <form>


                    <colgroup span="12"></colgroup> <tfoot> </tfoot>

                    Split

                    Time

                    Moving Time

                    Distance

                    Elevation Gain

                    Elevation Loss

                    Avg Pace

                    Avg Moving Pace

                    Best Pace

                    Avg HR

                    Max HR

                    Calories

                    Summary 2:00:02.4 1:59:19.0 8.96 111 113 13:24 13:19 5:04 115 131 877
                    1 14:38.4 14:35 1.00 16 13 14:38 14:35 7:10 111 126 84
                    2 14:44.7 14:31 1.00 16 12 14:45 14:31 5:04 115 125 92
                    3 13:06.2 12:58 1.00 7 6 13:06 12:58 7:10 116 124 100
                    4 13:36.0 13:31 1.00 23 18 13:36 13:31 9:57 116 124 100
                    5 12:54.2 12:53 1.00 11 10 12:54 12:53 9:59 116 131 98
                    6 12:55.5 12:56 1.00 16 21 12:56 12:56 8:19 116 127 102
                    7 12:31.5 12:29 1.00 1 7 12:31 12:29 8:02 116 126 105
                    8 12:19.3 12:18 1.00 12 20 12:19 12:18 7:43 116 124 107
                    9 13:16.8 13:08 0.96 9 6 13:50 13:41 9:52 110
                    </form>

                      I'm intrigued to see how you go. My gut was saying it's not doable (neg splits at same HR) but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.

                       

                      RE:Glasgow my runs were mostly in the west end (I lived near Kelvinbridge), ran along the river a lot.

                      Shondek


                        This morning I finally managed to get a negative split on my 45min out and back route that starts with a downhill and finishes obviously uphill..anything is possible.

                         

                        I try and keep my pulse at 115

                         

                        Laps

                        <form>

                        <colgroup span="12"></colgroup> <tfoot> </tfoot>

                        Split

                        Time

                        Moving Time

                        Distance

                        Elevation Gain

                        Elevation Loss

                        Avg Pace

                        Avg Moving Pace

                        Best Pace

                        Avg HR

                        Max HR

                        Calories

                        Summary 1:29:52.8 1:29:38.0 7.47 66 67 12:02 12:00 7:52 115 139 805
                        1 12:04.6 11:58 1.00 14 23 12:05 11:58 7:52 110 128 106
                        2 12:09.7 12:08 1.00 8 9 12:10 12:08 9:42 115 139 108
                        3 12:09.0 12:08 1.00 4 2 12:09 12:08 9:16 115 136 107
                        4 11:48.5 11:47 1.00 7 5 11:48 11:47 9:08 118 125 109
                        5 11:58.6 11:58 1.00 3 4 11:59 11:58 9:36 116 125 110
                        6 11:57.6 11:57 1.00 2 3 11:58 11:57 8:55 116 124 109
                        7 11:41.4 11:39 1.00 10 13 11:41 11:39 8:37 116 123 109
                        8 6:03.4 6:03 0.47 18 8 12:56 12:55 9:35 115 125
                        </form>

                         

                         

                        Hey Sean my business Hair Lynks previous location of 25 year was at kelvinbridge .My 1hour out and back route I refer to is along that very river,as you know it's reasonably flat apart from  a couple of steep short hills..

                         

                        This is the same route done 5 weeks ago.This was helped by an outward tailwind and I failed to match this speed until I started reducing heart rate by 10 beats

                         

                        I try and keep my pulse at 125

                         

                        Laps

                        <form>

                        <colgroup span="12"></colgroup> <tfoot> </tfoot>

                        Split

                        Time

                        Moving Time

                        Distance

                        Elevation Gain

                        Elevation Loss

                        Avg Pace

                        Avg Moving Pace

                        Best Pace

                        Avg HR

                        Max HR

                        Calories

                        Summary 1:31:26.7 1:31:09.0 7.61 63 64 12:01 11:59 7:33 120 143 817
                        1 13:10.5 13:04 1.00 5 23 13:10 13:04 9:02 99 122 94
                        2 11:03.0 11:01 1.00 10 6 11:03 11:01 9:06 124 135 115
                        3 11:18.1 11:19 1.00 3 6 11:18 11:19 8:47 125 135 113
                        4 11:50.7 11:47 1.00 5 2 11:51 11:47 9:29 125 135 109
                        5 12:14.0 12:14 1.00 4 5 12:14 12:14 9:31 124 134 107
                        6 12:15.7 12:14 1.00 3 8 12:16 12:14 9:50 122 130 106
                        7 11:52.6 11:52 1.00 12 14 11:53 11:52 8:52 122 142 108
                        8 7:42.2 7:38 0.61 19 1 12:40 12:33 7:33 124 1
                        </form>

                         

                         A negative split is the way forward..Run too short to convey any drift 

                          Looks promising. Once i finish my ironman i might spend some time at lower than maf to see if i can get similar results. One thing i notice is your max hrs are pretty high. I generally stop calling a run a maf run if i see maf +5 at any stage. I usually try to keep it to two or three over max. Yeah the river run is a great one, it was my regular run for most of my time there.
                          Shondek


                            Looks promising. Once i finish my ironman i might spend some time at lower than maf to see if i can get similar results. One thing i notice is your max hrs are pretty high. I generally stop calling a run a maf run if i see maf +5 at any stage. I usually try to keep it to two or three over max. Yeah the river run is a great one, it was my regular run for most of my time there.

                             Point taken about the max but if it doesn't impede on my speed then I dont think it's really an issue,tho' I'm  not sure what the main goal of a maf run is, that cant be achieved at a lower level.Good luck with the IronSmileMan

                            12