Author Topic: MAF Method  (Read 1949 times)

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #25 on: January 31, 2019, 05:28:57 pm »
I have a low VO2 max and small lungs. My lungs and heart have to work hard to feed my muscles.

130bpm is ticking over for me.

No cycling fitness atm, but kayaking arms are coming back. I'm doing intervals and 800m sprints with people 20-odd years younger than me; and doing better than keeping up. Last night I sat with the div5/6 paddlers, gave the div7/8 paddlers a 100m head start and still caught them.

Steady speed paddling wasn't creating that improvement.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

ElyDave

  • Royal and Ancient Polar Bear Society member 263583
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #26 on: January 31, 2019, 05:41:01 pm »
So youve already built your base, well done.
“Procrastination is the thief of time, collar him.” –Charles Dickens

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2019, 06:32:53 pm »
So youve already built your base, well done.

And once you have a large aerobic base the next step is what kind of Cu long you do and for most of us I suspect that is more than good enough

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #28 on: January 31, 2019, 07:42:35 pm »
Again - it’s not about plodding, steady state exercise at a low heart rate.

MAF is about constant improvement wiithout hurting yourself.   If you follow it to the extreme (as some have) you will end up with a maf mile per minute pace that is very uncomfortable to hold.   You do still break out of maf heart rate when racing or when you are further on in the plan.  I still do strides or down hill running to get the leg speed work in.   Down hill my maf pace is 7.30 min/mile so it’s a good workout

While running I still have to think about staying under maf and slow down a bit but that’s allowing me to up the volume way beyond what I’ve managed before.   On the bike I have to go pretty quick to stay up near my MAF ... the idea is to stay as close to it as possible, not 20-40bpm under it.

If you are just doing steady state, low intensity then you are not doing MAF- you should be testing, improving and then testing again and as soon as the MAF pace starts to plateau you bring in intervals.   

It’s a high volume plan .... if you only have two - four hours a week to train then don’t do MAF, intervals or sweetspot stuff would clearly make more sense


zigzag

  • unfuckwithable
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #29 on: February 04, 2019, 08:24:16 pm »
i thought i'd give a go and see how it feels running at this pace.

just did 10k at 4:56/k which seemed alright, a normal fairly relaxed run and i felt i could keep going for another few hours at this pace.

perhaps a good way to build a high volume base and adapt to fat burning as the pace increases at the same hr?

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2019, 08:58:55 pm »
I don't think I can even "run" at 138bpm, it would be so slow as to be horribly dull.

The slowest I can find (part of school running club with a bunch of 10/11 year olds) is ~7:00/km and that's still 10bpm too high. Walking at ~10:00/km is about 100bpm.

(I am ~15kg heavier than I should be for running, which may have something to do with it.)
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #31 on: February 04, 2019, 09:29:16 pm »
i thought i'd give a go and see how it feels running at this pace.

just did 10k at 4:56/k which seemed alright, a normal fairly relaxed run and i felt i could keep going for another few hours at this pace.

perhaps a good way to build a high volume base and adapt to fat burning as the pace increases at the same hr?

That is exactly what I am attempting

Ran a Pb half marathon Sunday ... 2 hours 2 secs which was 7 minutes quicker than previous attempts.   Was slightly over MAF averaging 156 bpm but my long run is my weekly quality session so I’m good with that.   Was also fasted as I’m trying to improve fat burning.

More pleasing is that every mile of Sunday’s run was at a lower heart rate than the first half of my 2017 marathon - more pace at less effort ....nice!

Just need to lose the two stone I have spare and I might have cracked this! (Plus stay injury free until May)

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2019, 09:51:07 pm »
i thought i'd give a go and see how it feels running at this pace.

just did 10k at 4:56/k which seemed alright, a normal fairly relaxed run and i felt i could keep going for another few hours at this pace.

perhaps a good way to build a high volume base and adapt to fat burning as the pace increases at the same hr?

That is exactly what I am attempting

Ran a Pb half marathon Sunday ... 2 hours 2 secs which was 7 minutes quicker than previous attempts.   Was slightly over MAF averaging 156 bpm but my long run is my weekly quality session so I’m good with that.   Was also fasted as I’m trying to improve fat burning.

More pleasing is that every mile of Sunday’s run was at a lower heart rate than the first half of my 2017 marathon - more pace at less effort ....nice!

Just need to lose the two stone I have spare and I might have cracked this! (Plus stay injury free until May)

For an event do not run/cycle at MAF as that is about building up to the target event.

The quicker you are at NAF you burn more fat and then when you go higher you use far less glycogen ... since being fat adapted and MAF I have not bonked or been anywhere near it even on 200 rides which I start fasted but may have a sausage roll after 6 hours or so 

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2019, 10:10:16 pm »
I have given this a try for the last two weeks. First thing is to read the book!

180 is just a number and unrelated to max HR or anything else. In an equation it is just a const, experimentally derived.  Now it is “time after time” research and therefor not an RCT.

For me, aged 60, the equation gives me 120 and I gave myself the 5bpm boost for training without injury.

So all my training has to be in a range of 115-125. The first couple of rides seemed very easy but very slow. Outside it was a very enjoyable audax pace on flattish terrain.

I do an hour this morning and could feel the work really building at that HR. Yesterday I did 3 hours on the bike with 90% in the range and maximum of 135 for a few minutes. Average of 122bpm for the whole ride.

What I would like to find is something to relate beats per watt per duration.  This would give a true measure of aerobic ability. You could do it easily enough for an hour as average watts/average HR. But I can’t work out how I would model the effects of long duration fade.

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #34 on: February 12, 2019, 06:31:15 am »
Personally I’m not sure I would follow strict MAF at 60  unless you are very new to exercise.   There is a huge amount of research that shows lifting heavy weights combined with intensity and more rest would be more effective as we age.   I think you might have more to lose than to gain from MAF.  I am of course no expert.

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #35 on: February 12, 2019, 07:21:25 am »
Personally I’m not sure I would follow strict MAF at 60  unless you are very new to exercise.   There is a huge amount of research that shows lifting heavy weights combined with intensity and more rest would be more effective as we age.   I think you might have more to lose than to gain from MAF.  I am of course no expert.

Hi, Thank you for your response and I do appreciate it. I am a somewhat counter cultural person and read a lot of "research" with both an experienced and a jaundiced eye.  I do agree that muscle loss is a reality in the elderly but the evidence on which it is based tends not to be physically active people.  I quite like the difference between aerobic and anaerobic pathways and training them separately as a concept which is really what MAF is saying in my view.  I have not given up my weight lifting although I have parked it for a few weeks whilst I focus on this.

Thank you again and please do not take this as a rude dismissal of your views.

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #36 on: February 12, 2019, 07:37:44 am »

What I would like to find is something to relate beats per watt per duration.  This would give a true measure of aerobic ability. You could do it easily enough for an hour as average watts/average HR. But I can’t work out how I would model the effects of long duration fade.

That is a very interesting idea, I think I'll analyse my recent Seiler zone 1 rides (similar to MAF) and see what I can come up with. I don't think it could be called a "true" measure though but a useful personal indication.

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #37 on: February 12, 2019, 09:07:36 am »
What I would like to find is something to relate beats per watt per duration.  This would give a true measure of aerobic ability. You could do it easily enough for an hour as average watts/average HR. But I can’t work out how I would model the effects of long duration fade.

I do not know whether you have read Joe Friel's Fast after Fifty - he covers the above.

The watts / HR he calls efficiency factor and it is one of things he suggests you measure for a repeatable steady state effort. He suggests the intensity should be at 30+/-2bpm below your lactate threshold heart rate.   He calls it Aerobic Threshold (not to be confused with Aerobic Capacity) So lower than what MAF would predict for me, but sure that 180 - age thing is is based on some sort of bell curve analysis so is only making a good guess. As you get aerobically fitter you should see your efficiency factor improving. If you do not have access to power then you can take your average speed and HR to calculate an efficiency factor.  Just keep it consistent, whatever you are measuring / calculating.

The latter he calls decoupling - where you get heart rate drift for a long steady state effort.   He suggests you monitor this during your base phases and when heart rate decoupling becomes low, your aerobic base is built,  you are ready to move onto your next stage of training.

Interestingly my resting heart rate is dropping, and my maximum heart rate (for the bike) is increasing as I get fitter through my training.  This is only my second year of structured training and these are not things I was really monitoring on a regular basis last year. 

It is all fascinating stuff.

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #38 on: February 12, 2019, 09:45:25 am »
Personally I’m not sure I would follow strict MAF at 60  unless you are very new to exercise.   There is a huge amount of research that shows lifting heavy weights combined with intensity and more rest would be more effective as we age.   I think you might have more to lose than to gain from MAF.  I am of course no expert.

Indeed Vo2Max shows the biggest decline (about 1.5% a year from your 30's) as we age, most other markers of fitness do not see so much of a decline.  But since most of us have never reached the V02max our genetics would enable us to reach, it can be slowed, halted, or even reversed (not the genetic decline but how close our realised Vo2max is to its ceiling) for a period.   Of course if you were an Olympics athlete when younger then your best years are probably past. 

Most of the research is of course with sedentary adults with not much study of life long athletes / active people.  So how much of the the decline is inevitable, at what ages, and to what extent, is now being questioned.

But the research is pointing to including regular intense exercise throughout your life.  As you say you just need more recovery, which again will vary by person.  But as it is during recovery that your body makes the improvements, that is not such a bad thing.  Younger folk just get away with bad habits when it comes to lack of recovery.

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #39 on: February 12, 2019, 09:46:02 am »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #40 on: February 12, 2019, 09:49:10 am »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

Well, it sounded like it to me, but we will need to see what he meant when he replies.   Maybe he is not sure himself. If he means audax durations then that is a whole different ball park with about zero research ;D

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #41 on: February 12, 2019, 11:03:53 am »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

Not that I take any notice of it any more as it's a pointless metric and possibly just cardiac drift repackaged. Certainly I get less decoupling with a fan on than not for otherwise identical sessions.

LMT

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #42 on: February 12, 2019, 12:18:41 pm »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

He was, HTH.

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #43 on: February 12, 2019, 12:39:44 pm »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

He was, HTH.
;D
You don't actually know what aerobic decoupling is do you?

This might help you https://sporttracks.mobi/blog/what-is-aerobic-decoupling
GC calculate it as a %

He may be thinking that but it's not beats/watt per duration.

LMT

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #44 on: February 12, 2019, 12:51:03 pm »
Chris isn't taking about aerobic decoupling I don't think, my analysis software does that automatically for the whole session and each individual interval.

He was, HTH.
;D
You don't actually know what aerobic decoupling is do you?

This might help you https://sporttracks.mobi/blog/what-is-aerobic-decoupling
GC calculate it as a %

He may be thinking that but it's not beats/watt per duration.

Chris is after a way to measure his aerobic endurance - this can be done via a decoupling test.

Trevor

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #45 on: February 12, 2019, 03:31:10 pm »

What I would like to find is something to relate beats per watt per duration.  This would give a true measure of aerobic ability. You could do it easily enough for an hour as average watts/average HR. But I can’t work out how I would model the effects of long duration fade.

That is a very interesting idea, I think I'll analyse my recent Seiler zone 1 rides (similar to MAF) and see what I can come up with. I don't think it could be called a "true" measure though but a useful personal indication.

First analysis based on my Seiler Zone 1 rides (similar to MAF in that they are targeted to be below 80%HRmax) during January (before it got cold) show no correlation between average W/bpm and duration.

Data here:


Three rides were completely in Z1, of durations 90, 184 and 206 minutes, from these it would seem that the efficiency is increasing with time, i.e. more power/HR, but another 3 rides were only 11% or less above Z1 and if you consider these as well then the P/bpm is not showing a trend.

I have including the Aerobic coupling value as calculated by the Golden Cheetah algorithm for Trevor if he finds it useful.

Everyone is different so if someone else were to do this intervention (n=1) then the results could of course be different.

PS it was a rough and ready exercise so I missed off units from the table, I'd have marked my students down for that obviously!  O:-)

PPS If you spot anything I didn't please let me know, as well as any other things worth looking at and/or evaluating.


Re: MAF Method
« Reply #46 on: February 14, 2019, 11:41:50 am »
Is it necessary to get some sort of hrm to do this type of training?

Been wondering about getting a smart watch device thingy for kayaking.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: MAF Method
« Reply #47 on: February 14, 2019, 01:00:50 pm »
I think you could do this training without a heart rate monitor if you really knew your body.  However a HRM with audible alerts for too high and too low is probably essential for all but the most elite sports people.

offcumden

  • Oh, no!
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #48 on: February 14, 2019, 08:14:32 pm »
Is it necessary to get some sort of hrm to do this type of training?
As MAF training is at the 'bottom end' of effort level, it wouldn't be difficult just to work on perceived effort. Thus, the old maxim of 'if you can talk in long sentences, you are just about right'. Where a HRM with audible alerts would be more useful is to target intermediate zones (say, sweetspot).
Once you've used a HRM you do get to know what the levels feel like. I was out today for a MAF type ride, with a HRM watch on my 'bars. I found that I could predict my HR within a couple of beats, even as the road went up and down.  Mind you, I have had a bit of practice at pace judgement - Something like 60 years  ::-)

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: MAF Method
« Reply #49 on: February 14, 2019, 08:30:06 pm »
Is it necessary to get some sort of hrm to do this type of training?
As MAF training is at the 'bottom end' of effort level, it wouldn't be difficult just to work on perceived effort. Thus, the old maxim of 'if you can talk in long sentences, you are just about right'. Where a HRM with audible alerts would be more useful is to target intermediate zones (say, sweetspot).
Once you've used a HRM you do get to know what the levels feel like. I was out today for a MAF type ride, with a HRM watch on my 'bars. I found that I could predict my HR within a couple of beats, even as the road went up and down.  Mind you, I have had a bit of practice at pace judgement - Something like 60 years  ::-)

There was a 4 level system I used for coaching in the '80s;
L1: can speak in complete sentences without pausing for breath.
L2: can speak in complete sentences but need pause after each one.
L3: can speak only ~3 words at a time.
L4: had to catch your breath after every word.

Not sure where I got it from  but I think it was fairly standard as HRMs only just became common.