|
Jun 2020
2:55pm, 29 Jun 2020
20,057 posts
|
Dvorak
That's certainly getting the climb over with early, Big_G. Btw, are you on the Anne or the Josh side of the family  ?
Gobi, whilst training for a hilly race at the start of the year, I did run repeats all the way up HBH (post -parkrun!). No hr readings unfortunately, though I'm sure they were pretty high.
(The race, fortunately, was early enough in the year to go ahead. Unfortunately, it also coincided with Storm Desmond. Still, I made it round, even if I was blown clean off the road at one point.)
|
|
Jun 2020
3:13pm, 29 Jun 2020
70,501 posts
|
Gobi
Ouch
I remember racing up the Glen Brae
|
|
Jun 2020
12:36pm, 30 Jun 2020
35,433 posts
|
DocM
Tried my last 3 runs now paying particular attention to heart rate. Two trying to keep in z2 or below and one in z4 or above. What is the wisdom of how much of each. ? I'm currently running higher mileage than ever.
|
|
Jun 2020
1:27pm, 30 Jun 2020
70,524 posts
|
Gobi
80 to 90 % of training in Z1/2 - the other 20% or so the rest
|
|
Jun 2020
1:32pm, 30 Jun 2020
1,315 posts
|
Paul N
How are you finding it Doc?
For my part it’s hard work running slow!
|
|
Jun 2020
1:37pm, 30 Jun 2020
70,528 posts
|
Gobi
I run with my other half at 11 to 13 min mile pace, it is just about time and patience.
For perspective my 100km pace was about 7.45 a mile and I am still a 17.x 5km runner
|
|
Jun 2020
1:38pm, 30 Jun 2020
11,378 posts
|
larkim
A penny dropped with me last night ref MAF when I was out running with my son. I know not everyone loves it etc, but nonetheless...
MAF heart rate is 180-age with some tweaks for experience / injury etc. So for me, I'd go for something around 132-137 (depending if I was generous about adding the extra 5 or not). That's clearly Z1/2 for me (max HR probably 180-184, RHR 48).
But for fit and healthy son, that would be 160-165. He doesn't run often with a HRM, but here's an easy run for him with HR data (he's quick, recently ran a sub 74 min half as a virtual challenge on a fair course). As evident there, mid 140s is where his easy pace comes out. He averaged 171 on a flat out 5k effort back in April with what looks like reliable HR data.
Perhaps he's unusual in having a maxHR well below the standard 220-age profile, so maybe that's where MAF's broadbrush approach would fall down for him anyway?
Split Summary
===
1) 1m - 7:04(7:04/m) 138/163bpm 111cal 8.5/9.25mph
2) 1m - 6:50(6:50/m) 138/155bpm 81cal 8.77/9.48mph
3) 1m - 6:51(6:51/m) 140/154bpm 81cal 8.75/9.1mph
4) 1m - 6:56(6:56/m) 133/146bpm 63cal 8.66/9.1mph
5) 1m - 7:05(7:05/m) 143/158bpm 81cal 8.48/8.97mph
6) 1m - 7:09(7:09/m) 139/150bpm 66cal 8.39/9.43mph
7) 1m - 6:57(6:57/m) 143/151bpm 70cal 8.63/9.37mph
8) 1m - 6:58(6:58/m) 141/151bpm 66cal 8.62/9.27mph
9) 1m - 7:06(7:06/m) 148/156bpm 79cal 8.45/9.1mph
10) 1m - 6:50(6:50/m) 144/150bpm 64cal 8.77/9.52mph
11) 1m - 6:58(6:58/m) 144/152bpm 61cal 8.61/9.33mph
12) 1m - 6:54(6:54/m) 143/155bpm 60cal 8.69/10.04mph
13) 1m - 7:00(7:00/m) 145/151bpm 64cal 8.57/9.08mph
14) 1m - 6:51(6:51/m) 140/148bpm 51cal 8.75/9.2mph
15) 0.21m - 1:30(7:02/m) 136/138bpm 9cal 8.53/8.7mph
|
|
Jun 2020
1:53pm, 30 Jun 2020
70,532 posts
|
Gobi
Larks - maybe I'm thick, definately not as smart as many of you but I never get how you can calc on assumption.
My max is 180, my rest is 40 - Z1(60% is 124 max) z2(70% is 138)
My max HR was below 220 - age until I was 36 and now it is some way above it
Having run a 73 min half, I didn't do easy running at 7mm and even now 7mm is not 148 HR for me
I still run a 5km at close to 170 when I get it right and redline 175(unless really racing where I find that other 5
I guess what I am saying is I don't understand the point you are making as to me it loooks like your maf zones are WRONG and your son is obviously very talented but runs too hard on easy days.
|
|
Jun 2020
1:57pm, 30 Jun 2020
16,298 posts
|
Chrisull
Maff himself is notorious for advising people not to eat in restaurants in one article (because restaurant food is unhealthy according to him), and also on my CIRF course (the coach level course), the elite coach taking it devoted 5 minutes on taking down the training programs that have NO speedwork component ever in (ie MAFF), explaining the whole principles of stimulus, recovery and adaptation and the effects on the cardiac system. She didn't mention Maffe by name, but it was pretty clear that's who she was getting at.
And yes for an untrained athlete with no or little base, MAFF does provide stimulus, so may well be useful to an extent (but ANY training would). My experience of 9 weeks with Maff was I steadily got more unfit and my HR got worse not better. As soon as I introduced a little bit of speedwork, it all started changing. 80/20 or 90/10 or even 95/5 ratios can all work well. (also his principle of cardiac drift on an 8 to 10 mile run is also BS - yes you get it at marathon level, but any fairly well trained athlete will not see on that length of run. His predictive times as well are rubbish, I'd only ever manage 8.30 at the time for his zone, and that predicted times WAY slower than I was achieving, but ok this is anecdotal, but I'd ask where is the evidence that an athlete who can run 8.30 for the Maffe zones will not be able to run a sub 40 10k, a sub 3.20 mara?? We are all different, one person will be able to another won't)
And as for making up HR boundaries based on age alone (which as discussed here many times in other contexts we know is poor) and then doing nothing but. I've even read accounts of elites who used Maff for a bit but they all ended up ditching eventually.
HR Training DOES NOT EQUAL Maff. Rant Over
|
|
Jun 2020
2:01pm, 30 Jun 2020
70,534 posts
|
Gobi
Chris - you are safe in here - MAF is discussed but not used by everyone.
I always thought I was the ANTI - MAFF
I'm a level 2 speed and endurance coach, old qualification from before LIRF and other jog on courses were introduced
|
