10-29-20 07:30 PM - Post#904086    

After seeing the topic thrown around here I looked into the maffetone 180 aerobic training method.

I read this: https://philmaffetone.com/want-speed-slow-down/

I'm really intrigued and want to give this a go. My 2x2x2 program has one aerobic day on the airdyne and one rec hockey day (essentially totally anaerobic).

I would like to increase my aerobic base and want make the aerobic day entirely aerobic and avoid pushing myself excessively - which always ends up burning me out in the long run as I get better and push harder each time to keep improving.

So I need to get a HR monitor to do this effectively. Any recommendations? I don't care between chest strap/wrist watch; I just want something that actually works well and has good feedback so I don't go way out of my zone accidentally. How many of you use your MAF number for your aerobic training?

MAF Aerobic Training
10-29-20 07:55 PM - Post#904087    

Most of my training is at MAF but struggle with the "at or just below" my MAF number as I tend to go slightly over, slightly. I'm 64 and find it difficult to settle for 116 bpm when 120 or a bit more seems to do the trick. My test improvements continue although I have not made a commitment to 116 since my birthday in September (or for the last four birthdays for that matter). I ask myself whether I'm impeding progress by being over my target bpm. When I do other zone/anaerobic work my aerobic fitness seems to be more than adequate unless I let 'er drink, so to speak. I used a chest strap for quite a while until I felt confident that I could rely on RPE which seldom fails now.



Edited by Upside on 10-29-20 07:57 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

10-29-20 08:07 PM - Post#904088    

I remember reading in Maffetone's writings that the 180-age formula is just a rule of thumb and that he doesn't consider it accurate past age 60. I'm 69 and still use 120 as my approximate MAF number.

"Coyote is always waiting, and Coyote is always hungry."

10-29-20 08:39 PM - Post#904090    

I’ve used MAF training extensively with great benefits. For most people, most of the time, it’s ideal. The 180 formula is reverse engineering from data Maffetone collected over the years to create a formula anyone could use. As Steve pointed out, over age 60 it breaks down a bit, as well as under age 20. As for HRMs, a chest strap is far better and you can’t go wrong with major brands like Polar, Garmin etc. Just get the most basic model since the bells and whistles are of little value.

10-29-20 08:57 PM - Post#904092    

This is Jordan's thread so I don't want to hijack it, but...

Yes to both Steve and vegpedlr with regard to seeing references the formula breaking down post-60. Have you seen what is recommended? I have not found it.

10-29-20 09:02 PM - Post#904093    

• Steve Rogers Said:

Yes, I have read the same thing. If I limited myself to the MAF formula max, I would be going at no more than 67-69% of conservative estimates of my true max (based on several recent field tests). This is actually a fair amount lower percentage than the MAF formula prescribes for people in the 30, 40, or 50 year-old cohort, assuming heart rate maxes derived either from the old-fashioned 220-age max heart rate formula or the somewhat more accurate 211-0.64 x age formula. (The latter formula yields a max that is reasonably close to my field-tested numbers.) Let's just assume that 211-0.64 x age yields a reasonable estimate of one's true heart rate max. For someone who is 30, the MAF formula would have them exercising at 78% of max. That's a nice comfortable pace. Not necessarily very slow at all. But the MAF formula would have me--a 62-year-old--avoiding anything over 69% of max. That's a pretty low limit and definitely would require that hills be walked up, not run up. There's no reason for the difference--something that Maffetone seems to recognize. But the problem goes beyond the inappropriateness of the formula for the 60+ crowd. Since maximum heart rates differ a good deal among people, formulas like the MAF formula can just be back-of-the-envelope estimates. They can result in exercise maxes that are too high for some and too low for others (if what you are trying to do is maximize aerobic capacity). I think there probably are benefits to slowing down (even slowing down a lot) to boost aerobic capacity, especially if even a slow jog puts you at 85% of max heart rate. But for me, trying to run at MAF was torture and just not worth it. Life is too short (and stressful nowadays) to add extra stress by puritanically driving yourself to adhere to a formula.

Why are you squatting in the curl rack?

10-29-20 09:41 PM - Post#904094    

The 180 formula has nothing to do with max HR. At all.

Maffetone himself never used it with the athletes he coached. Instead he watched them run at gradually increasing HR until he saw a change in their gait. That was their MAF. After collecting data from a zillion or so, he derived the 180 formula as an estimate anyone could use.

MAF, aerobic, and anaerobic as Maffetone uses the terms refer to whether the energy being produced is primarily from fat or carbohydrate oxidation. So the truly correct way to determine MAF is to go to a lab and have RQ measures to find that inflection point.

10-29-20 09:46 PM - Post#904095    

Furthermore, I encourage anyone interested in MAF training to read and listen to Maffetone himself. He approaches things a little differently than others do, and the terminology can cause a little confusion. The first time I heard about it was an article with Mark Allen, and the HR formula seemed ridiculously low and made no sense. Years later I heard him interviewed and then it made sense enough to try.

While The Big Book of Endurance Training and Racing is the main text, I think is older OP book The Maffetone Method is the best explanation for casual folk.

10-29-20 11:32 PM - Post#904097    

• vegpedlr Said:

And that's a good thing? I just find it a bit odd to say that one's "maximum aerobic heart rate"--a phrase that Maffetone uses in discussing what the 180-age formula (with adjustments) yields--is completely independent of one's true maximum heart rate. But okay, whatever. If it works for you, enjoy!

Why are you squatting in the curl rack?

10-30-20 12:28 AM - Post#904099    

https://philmaffetone.com/180-formula/

For the full explanation.

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 06:29 AM - Post#904103    

• Jordan Derksen Said:

If you don’t have a heart rate monitor, use nasal breathing exclusively. It won’t be Maffetone pace, but quite close to it.

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

10-30-20 06:35 AM - Post#904104    

• Adam S Said:

Same principle behind Easy Strength.

Doing ES you never get close to your 1RM. You just keep lifting almost effortlessly until your baseline increases. Which, in turn, will improve your maxes.

Niko Niko running uses a slower pace than Maffetone’s and works wonderfully.

His creator, Hiroaki Tanaka formalised his system after using it to improve from 4:11 for the marathon in his thirties to 2:40 when his was fifty-years old and eventually 2:38:50 – his personal best after that.

Not bad, huh?

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 08:59 AM - Post#904105    

• iPood Said:

I've actually been doing this, but for unrelated reasons. After hearing Rogan interview that... guy whose name I forget about how bad mouth breathing is I'm trying to use exclusively nasal breathing for all my workouts. It's definitely hard, my nose just feels 'too small'. Theoretically though nose breathing exclusively is supposed to eventually 'open up' the nose. I can say that on average my nose has never felt more clear than in the last week or two.

• Adam S Said:

While I agree with this the whole point of this experiment for me is to avoid the stress of turning aerobic workouts into a speed event that ends up burning me out in the long run.

I have developed a strong belief that having a good aerobic base is the foundation that indirectly and directly improves all other markers - including strength.

Since my CF days my base level of aerobic fitness has slowly dropped away to almost nothing. Every once in a while I get on my airdyne or a rower and decide to get in shape again. I always see a strong improvement in my strength workouts and my times get better, but then I fall back into my old CF ways and what was once meant as an easy effort becomes a competition. The realization for me, especially since joining the forum here and assimilating the 'reasonableness' that everyone approaches fitness goals with, has been that I keep going too hard and defeat the goal of building that aerobic base.

The HR monitor/MAF number is an experiment I want to do to help keep my aerobic workouts aerobic and have something to shoot for instead of 'more, faster, better' in a distance or timed sense. Ultimately, this should decrease the stress from these workouts.

10-30-20 10:10 AM - Post#904110    

Nose breathing, "Chatting Pace" and HR monitors all work about the same for me with the MAF stuff.

I bought his ear bud HR monitor and I really like it EXCEPT:

You lose your hearing! With a Covid mask, ear buds, hand weights, weight vest and ankle weights I actually had a touch of an emotional meltdown...

Truth.

I got some sweat in my eyes, turned a corner and I felt like people feel when their fears take over (stuck in a closet, alone in the middle of a lake)

It was weird!

So, when any of my friends with like former cancer issues or other things that make me wear a mask, I go back to the chest HR monitor...if I need it.

I love the MAF HR monitor...I love it.

I'm not sure why I shared this.

The wrist ones won't work with KBs...as we discover at EVERY KB cert.

Daniel John Just handing down what I was handed down... Make a Difference. Live. Love. Laugh. Balance work, rest, play and pray (enjoy beauty and solitude) Sleep soundly. Drink Water. Eat veggies and protein. Walk. Wear your seat belt. Don’t smoke. Floss your teeth. Put weights overhead. Pick weights off the floor. Carry weights. Reread great books. Say thank you

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 10:13 AM - Post#904111    

• Jordan Derksen Said:

This one is somewhat tricker than just breathing through your nose.

It’s breathing through your nose while being able to comfortably maintain a conversation. Which forces you to slow your pace down very, very, very much during those first months.

If you are running and your nose suddenly becomes too small, you are doing it wrong.

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

10-30-20 10:16 AM - Post#904112    

• Dan John Said:

I came quite close to smashing my Apple Watch the first time I tried to clean a pair of kettlebells wearing it.

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

10-30-20 10:24 AM - Post#904113    

I managed to do cleans and snatches with a wrist monitor for a while by turning the face to the inside of my wrist. However, the straps only take a limited amount of abuse before failing and after going through three straps I went back to a chest strap.

"Coyote is always waiting, and Coyote is always hungry."

10-30-20 10:27 AM - Post#904115    

It isnt mentioned much and there are no clear guidelines on it that I’ve ever seen, but using MAF to build your aerobic base takes a LOT of volume. Like, 8-10 hours a week, in sessions of no more than 2 hours. It took me a lot of reading obscure running forums in dark corners of the internet to realise this.

You will very likely have to run or cycle etc so slowly to keep below MAF that one session a week will not even be noticeable.

Hence why on the recent 2x2x2 thread I suggested something more like 4-6 days of easy cardio plus 2-3 brief strength sessions.

If I was only doing one focused cardio session a week I’d be aiming for more intensity than MAF ...but not necessarily hard. Probably easiest to say at a pace you could maintain for an hour but no more.

Log

10-30-20 11:42 AM - Post#904116    

8-10 hrs a week of MAF is base building for an endurance athlete. General health and fitness folk can do less. But it is true that the only way to progress MAF is by adding volume, first by adding frequency and then increasing duration. Of course, much depends on where you’re starting from.

The necessity of the HRM is to keep yourself honest and under the speed limit. Like Easy Strength, the point is that each session should leave you feeling better than when you started and ready to go again.

Nasal breathing can be a guide, when I started breathing exclusively through my nose while running it correlated closely to MAF. But it too is trainable, and soon I could nasal breathe well over MAF.

DJ has mentioned it before, but John Douillard’s book, Body, Mind, and Sport takes nasal breathing as its core. He uses Ayurveda to explain it all, so that might turn some people off.

10-30-20 12:42 PM - Post#904120    

How about doing the vast majority of your running using both Zone 2 and Zone 3 according to the Heart Rate Zone chart?

It would be, basically, Maffetonesque running, wouldn’t it?

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 01:03 PM - Post#904121    

• iPood Said:

That's amazing.

I'm having trouble believing Maf's method would work for me, but I felt the same about EES...and I was wrong.

According to what I've read, if I train for two hours a week (four 30 minute sessions, including warmup/cooldown) at 101-111 HR (180 - 74 + 10 [age adjustment] - 5 [beginner] = 111 MAF) -- which would be a brisk walk pace for me, I'd be ready to RUN a 5K race in ten weeks. I have VERY short legs, so we're talking maybe 1.5 miles a training session. That's only six miles of "fast" walking a week. Does that look right?

Be strong. Be in shape. Be a man among men, regardless of your age or circumstances.

Edited by AAnnunz on 10-30-20 01:06 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 01:31 PM - Post#904123    

• AAnnunz Said:

Keep in mind that these low fatigue methods of developing endurance usually take quite a long time to bear fruit. You end up walking A LOT before you can sustain a mere ten minute run at a Maffetone pace.

Having said that... since you are truly a savage, I have little doubt you that you will be able to crush it.

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

Edited by iPood on 10-30-20 01:31 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

10-30-20 01:57 PM - Post#904124    

But not Maffetone

• iPood Said:

That’s not Maffetone, that’s something else. Maffetone is not the only game on the endurance playground, there are other methods that also work. But it works best to pick one and stick with it. The Maffetone Method is about building a deep aerobic base, defined by fat burning by disciplined training below MAF. On the common 5 zone models, that’s usually a low zone 2. Once the base is built, shorter cycles incorporating higher intensities can be used, but may not really be needed.

Zone 3 is the gray area or no man’s land that trap a lot of people, leading to the common mistake of making easy days too hard, thereby ensuring the hard days aren’t hard enough.

10-30-20 02:41 PM - Post#904125    

• vegpedlr Said:

Several important points here. First, if you are going to do MAF (or Easy Strength, or 80/20, or whatever), do them as written--at least at first. Don't do something else and call it "MAF," if only because that gives you no way to evaluate MAF. Second, the point about Zone 3 is really important. As several have noted in this thread, it's the middle intensity stuff that screws everything up. That zone is usually too hard for aerobic base building (however you define the goals of that phase), too easy for high intensity work, and too exhausting to give good efforts on the subsequent hard intensity days.

Why are you squatting in the curl rack?

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 03:46 PM - Post#904127    

• AAnnunz Said:

This type of running should be easy, basically a recovery session and you may not need much warm up/down. At the speed you're likely to be starting running is less efficient than walking and will be slower than your brisk walk. This would load the musculoskeletal system in a new way which it will have to adapt to which will take some time. Alternating walking/jogging at first helps with this even if you don't need to walk to keep your heart rate in the target zone.

"Coyote is always waiting, and Coyote is always hungry."

MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 04:54 PM - Post#904130    

If you're actually in good aerobic shape and not fat, running a 5K is not hard.

I did three miles in 24 minutes on the back on hill sprints and five days a week of a half mile jog (and youthful hormones) - this weighing 265 - 270, so I was also fat.

Running a fast 5K is hard, but if you actually have a good base and are not heavy (or are heavy and strong)a slow one is mostly mental.

Edited by Justin Jordan on 10-30-20 04:57 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 05:02 PM - Post#904131    

When I was a young, serious runner, we had never heard of Maffetone. But we defined an easy run as one where you could chat easily to your friends, and everyone 'knew' you should do lots of easy running in base period (although, being idiot youngsters, we ignored this). I think there is merit in this test - it just defines 'effort' nicely. And there's definitely merit in training with friends, as you will do it more consistently and for longer.

HR depends a LOT on what you are used to. Maffetone thinks my easy pace running should be 126 (I'm 54), but my really easy runs are at 135-140, and it takes conscious effort to go slower than this, feels wrong and artificial and out of rhythm. And if I do a progression run (e.g. kilometres at increasing paces, which I did yesterday), spending several minutes at 160 or even 170 is not particularly unpleasant. Max is 180ish, I think.

But if you get me doing circuits or complexes, I will be in buckets of sweat, tears, and screaming for mercy before I can get my HR up to 130. And the maximum I can get it up to with steady-state rowing or cycling is about 150-160, and that's again a brutal effort.

So, don't take the numbers too seriously. Aim for the nose-breathing (if your nose works) or the talk test.

10-30-20 07:16 PM - Post#904136    

• vegpedlr Said:

Like MAF, the whole “grey area / black hole” thing is also aimed at huge volume trainers; triathletes, rowers etc

Hours and hours of training too hard each week will of course be too much and destroy you, but 2-4 medium-paced runs a week would not.

Log

Re: MAF Aerobic Training
10-30-20 08:37 PM - Post#904141    

• Old Miler Said:

Simple. No nonsense. Effective. I like it.