Gray Guys/Girls Master's Focus Triathlon Mentor Group--Now Open (Page 6)

I think I'm going to give this a try, now that me and running are back on speaking terms.  With the recurring problems I've had with my ankle/knee/hip (the whole left leg really!), I'm thinking this might be the way for me to go.  I've tried using HR before but never stuck with it because it always seemed to be a little complicated - too many zones to think about.  If I'm reading this right, there are really only 2 zones with this method.  And I'm OK with going slow - seems to be my default setting anyway.

Janet

Hi Janet,

Here is a link to the Maffetone article on how to determine your Maximum Aerobic Function Heart Rate (MAF HR) - http://philmaffetone.com/180-formula/.  This method doesn't utilize zones at all.  According to Dr. Maffetone, each individual heart rate is a zone unto itself so he is not a real advocate of "training zones."  This method determines a maximum hr and you simply keep your hr below that number while training.  THAT WILL INITIALLY BE A CHALLENGE TO DO AND WILL OFTEN INCLUDE WALKING!

This method is different from using traditional training zones - Joe Friel's running zones for example.  The Maffetone method has you working out below your aerobic threshold - the level of effort at which anaerobic energy pathways start to be a significant part of energy production.  The aerobic threshold is around 80% of lactate threshold, although it may occur before that (at a lower HR).  Using Friel's running zones, zone 1 is less than 85% of lactate threshold so the MAF HR would be near the upper end of Friel's zone 1.  This is SLOW running initially!  The 180-age formula (with a couple of modifiers) that Maffetone developed is based on decades of empirical evidence developed in a lab to support the formula's efficacy.  Maffetone's formula takes into account various stressors that alter blood chemistry, lowering your aerobic threshold, that a fitness test, such as a lactate threshold test, does not account for.

Another key component of this method is volume.  If you are only running minimal miles once or twice a week, you will likely not see results.  You will need to be running a few times per week and build mileage as fitness progresses.

Good luck.  If you have questions, while I am certainly not Dr. Maffetone, I will do my best to answer them or at least point you to the answers.

Scott - thanks for the link.  According to the formula my HR should be between 113-123, staying closer to the 123. 180-52 (I'll be 52 next month - figured it was close enough) -5 (because of the recent leg problems) = 123.  I'm doing a run/walk right now anyway since it's easier on my knee and hip so I don't think it should be a problem for me to stay within that range, but we'll find out on my next run.  

Also, you mentioned volume.  Right now I'm doing 3-4 miles at a time, trying to get in 3 runs a week, although most recent weeks it only ended up being 2.  Hopefully I can get back to 3 times a week now that the leg is doing better.  

Janet 

So I tried my first run yesterday morning using the Maffetone HR method.  A few observations:

1. I figured at my normally slow running pace, I wouldn't have too much trouble keeping under 128 bpm.  I was wrong (really wrong!).
2. Even at my new, even slower running pace my HR still jumps to the low 130's after about 30 seconds or so, but... 
3. My HR drops back down to the high 110's pretty quickly, so I'm still basically doing the run/walk that I had been, it's just that the intervals are shorter than the 2/2 I was using before.
4. Was it a little frustrating/annoying to be constantly stopping and starting?  Yes.  Will I stick with this?  Yes, and here's why.  My "A" race isn't until August 22 and I am determined to get there injury-free and well-trained.  And if that means that for now I have to run/walk at a very slow pace, then that's what I'm going to do.  I'm trying to focus on the longer term.

Interesting tidbit - I did a run last Sunday with the exact same miles (4.24) using a 2/2 run/walk and my overall pace for that run was only 6 seconds per mile faster than the run yesterday.  Granted, conditions were a little different between the 2 runs (different locations and I wasn't paying attention to my HR last week), but I was surprised that the overall paces were so similar. 

Hope everyone is having a good weekend!
Janet

Hey Dave!

Welcome to the group.  We have a good group of people that are more than willing to answer questions and as a "first timer" I imagine you have a couple so fire away!

Hey Chris.

There isn't really a set answer as to how long it takes to begin to see results while using ANY training method, let alone an aerobic focused plan or Maffetone.  My personal experience and observations from working with other athletes over the years is that it typically takes a few weeks to perhaps months to begin to see repeatable quantifiable results from a targeted aerobic base plan.  Once the aerobic base is built (actually even before it is fully in place) speed can be increased relatively quickly - in just a few weeks.

I doubt that just a couple runs at the reduced Z2 pace has made a significant, noticeable difference.  More likely it was just a good day.  One thing to remember is that running at a lower Z2 pace is a bit different for most people and it may take a few runs for the "awkwardness" to go away.  As you complete more and more runs at the reduced pace it will feel more natural.

Hey Janet,

It wasn't completely clear to me if your HR is jumping before you are warmed-up or after you are warmed-up and you begin to run, so a couple comments addressing both situations -

It isn't uncommon for HR to rapidly rise if you aren't fully warmed up.  It will come back down as your body gets warmed up or obviously if you reduce the effort.  People that experience this often don't notice the phenomenon because they simply aren't paying particularly close attention to their HR until they begin to use a method that requires they keep their HR strictly below a certain number.  My suggestion would be to easy walk 5', the brisk walk 5', then easy jog 5'.  THEN begin your workout.  I suspect you will not see the dramatic spike in your HR.

On the other hand, if you are fully warm-up and your HR quickly spikes with effort, that would imply your aerobic engine is not very well developed and you are quickly going anaerobic which is a good indicator you need to work on the aerobic base with low HR efforts (as you are doing!).

As your body becomes more proficient at utilizing fat for fuel, in 4-8 weeks your should begin to see your pace begin to get faster at the same HR.  In the meantime, as you complete more runs, you will get a sense of the "rhythm" of the run to maintain the lower HR, i.e.run at 'x' pace for 'x' minutes, then walk for 'x' minutes or seconds, then repeat.

If/when it gets frustrating, just remember that 6-time Ironman World Champion used this very method to build his fat burning aerobic engine, and he continues to use this method to this day to further build his aerobic base.  Mark runs at a sub 6:00/mile pace during his Ironman marathon.