I'm well overdue speaking about it to be honest. Wheels have well and truly fallen off as I'm operating on 2-3 hours sleep most nights thanks to a little monkey who didn't get the memo about babies sleeping ~13 hours per day 🙈 Training just ain't happening because of it. Survival mode!! Feeling a bit rubbish about it (the lack of running) to be honest, which is why I'm not addressing the issue in a video. I know it's just a phase. Will address it more openly in due course.
As an older runner I am totally delighted from the progress I am making through LHRT. My pace for an average heart rate of 120 dropped from 7min to 6:25 within 8 weeks. With an HR of 130 I came down to a 5:43 pace. I run 50-55 kms a week with one single intervall or treshold session.
I’ve been doing this for months. Starting at 47, now 48. I felt it wasn’t working, but eventually realised that I could run at a very slow pace and keep the heart rate in zone 2. More months of no discernible improvement but read somewhere to up my runs to an hour. This seems to have done the trick as all of a sudden I can run much fast for longer and my heart rate stays in zone 2. The proof of the pudding was today in a park run where I smashed my post knee surgery 5K PB by over 30 seconds and I perhaps could have gone faster!
Each zone 2 session should be at least an hour, it is even better if you can make them longer. Van de Pol would do 7 hours zone two sessions, which of course is extreme for normal people.
@@christopherhaak9824 That's interesring, I'll have a look into that. I would be worried about running more than 30k or so regularly, even if really slow. I hope you're doing well. 🙂
@@christopherhaak9824 Great, thank you! I'm not sure I could survive z2 on a bike for that long. The longest session for me was 4h and I definitely dipped below quite a lot.
I implement low HR training almost unconsciously. Been running for a year aged 29-30. Last March, ran 2:03 and 1:58 half marathons with average HR in low 170s. Today I ran 1:29 with a 158 average and never even touched zone 4! It breeds consistency, helps avoid injury and develops an appreciation for the process. @James, wishing you happiness and cant wait to see you back at it when you can be!
Looks like consistency is key. Thanks for that comment - it makes me think I can still drop my HR. I used to weigh a bit more (4-5kg) than now at 32 and I have never been able to get my HR out of threshold zones. I usually do multi sports and 10 years ago I was doing MTBing, running, swimming and some martial arts consistently but still couldn't really drop my HR under 170bpm even on multi-hour efforts. First(and only) half marathon I did was 1:58 probably around 170 (no HR monitoring). This year I will try concentrating on running only but my last try of low intensity - higher mileage was still an average of 170 HR for 10k and easily under 1h (usually I run a 5k (22-25ish) with some 1-2k warmup). Let's see how that goes.
I started MAF 4 years ago, back in 2019. My max heart rate for my easy/normal runs was 143, and my runs was around 7 min per km. Now when I run at 143 bpm, I am at 5 min 14 sec per km.
Great progress.. How much do you run per week? Are you on any low carb or keto diet? How old were you when you started? I am guessin 37 if it is MAF formula u used.. ?
@Daniel Valenzuela I haven't done a full marathon yet. I did a half marathon two weeks ago, and I did it in 1 hour 38 min 49 secs. I could have done it faster, but I haven't ran that sort of speed before, so I wanted to pace it. My previous was 1 hour 50 min which was a year after starting MAF.
I tried strictly low heart rate training for 3 months and did a 5k. It was my worst 5k since my first CC race 25 years ago in 9th grade. Just adding 10x3 lunges, 10x3 air squats, and 6x200m strides/sprints (current 800m race pace) at the end of each low heart rate run has made a world of difference. LHT is still 95% of my total training, but adding a small amount of spice can go a long way to improving your times if you feel stuck.
Guys and girls, zone 2 isn't too hard to figure out, it's supposed to be "Fully Conversational" not "Semi Conversational", you don't need to check your resting heartrate or any other rate for that matter. Some experts will say a Vo2Max is accurate but I can almost guarantee you that you will not be able to replicate the Vo2Max test conditions even on a flat track because lab tests are in a controlled environment and on a treadmill isn't "real world conditions" so you may be able to push yourself during the Vo2Max session further than real world conditions. Just keep it Conversational, the end, save your money on the heartrate monitor.
I've been trying that, but I feel I have to go very slow, almost walking, to lower my heart rate to the apple watch recommended "zone 2" and to be "Full conversational" as you say. I've been running for 8 month and I ran my first marathon past December (4:38hrs) I want to run sub 4 this year. Do you think that I should keep trying the low HR like this even if I feel I'm going too slow?
@@David.Lopezz yes because Marathon runners aren't built in a year or two, I'm not going to feed you rubbish like social media coaches, it has taken the best "decades" to build their Base Aerobic Fitness, there's no shortcut. Intervals can help but what's the use of that pace if you haven't built up the base to sustain it, Marathons aren't 10ks you must sustain over 42kms. Don't worry too much about what your watch says, as long as you can sing "Cotton Eye Joe" while running= you're in "your own" zone 2.
@@MultiThunder1234 HAHA! awesome, thanks for the straight answer. I now this game is about consistency for the long term, but sometimes is hard to measure the progress and stay motivated/disciplined. I have a half marathon this sunday and I'm aiming for a sub 2hr, lets see what happens.
With the propensity to run just a little harder than easy, and it still feel easy, I like to have 2 methods of internal stress-HR and feel. If the strap says it’s easy and it feels easy then it probably is. But speaking the occasional few sentences to check how easy you can converse is good
After 4 months of MAF training, my aerobic function is improved, but the change in my gait / form / cadence to run at or below the required HR has left me with chronic tendonitis in both feet/ ankles. I’m no expert, but my guess is my calves started doing much of the work that my glutes, quads, hip flexors etc did before. I tried really hard to run with correct form, but the pace I had to go at to stay below target HR made it impossible. Would love to hear from others who found this challenging and managed to overcome it!
I’ve been experiencing the same thing. I realized I was sitting back too much and sacrificing form - starting to reach out and heel strike. The cue “kiss the ground with your heels” really helped me. Now I can stay comfortably low hr with no pain even at 12-13min per mile pace. Focusing on that plus forward hips/standing tall has helped my slow jog form a ton
Me too. When I slowed down, I started to really plod, my cadence got very low, and I started to get lower back pain. I think I was sitting back in my hips too. A cue that's really helping me is to imagine a bungee cord attached to my hips, pulling them up and forward. This helps me to lift my hips and increase my cadence a bit, whilst keeping my HR low. I'm also playing around with taking regular walk breaks. This allows me to run a little faster, with better form, but helps keep my HR from getting too high.
The shorter stride and slower pace as a result of MAF training does increase the foots time contacting the ground and as a result the impact/contractions of the muscles/soft tissues. I run in a minimalist shoe, so these effects were drastically increased with my shoe. I’ve been wearing zero drop for awhile so I knew it was from the MAF training. One technique to help decrease foot contact (impulse) time was to perform more of a cycling motion with my feet & legs. The size of the cycles circling was relative to how fast I was running. This technique made me strike through the ground quickly while still maintaining my slower pace to keep my HR low. It takes a lot of core, HS, and Glute control but did help me keep good form, shorten contact times, and maintain my sub 135 HR.
Low heart rate training works, it just takes a long time and eventually needs to be associated with som tempo runs. Started 3 years ago at 12'/km and now can run 6-6'30 at 75%. I did my first 5k last year 35'00 and went down to 24'27 after only 3-4 races. This year, efter 2,5 years of slow running, I have introduced tempo workouts. This had me from 24'27 to 22'45 in 4 months.
James is one of the few people who talks about caffeine negatively. Caffeine is such a double-edged sword, especially coffee. Helps to keep most of us regular and allegedly enhances athletic performance by a few percent (although being a diuretic I'm not sure the pros outweigh the cons for longer-duration activities), but everyone metabolises caffeine differently. For me, even one cup of coffee in the morning per day will lower the quality of my sleep, raise my anxiety and stress levels, and make me feel exhausted the next morning. Since cutting it out, I feel much better after the nights in which I get a genuinely good sleep. Even David Goggins gave it up - from what I've read it seems he saw it as a dependency, and like with any dependency, they can't be trusted to always be available.
Last year I got into long distance off road mtbing , upto 8hrs a day once a week.as part of a training routine to get my fitness up for bikepacking multidays. . It got me focusing on not maxing out over 170hr and thus burning out quickly . It helped calm my routine down , and I noticed when I went back to my original 2hr to 3hr cycles I found them so much easier and my heart recovery seemed much faster after exertion. So I'm a believer now in not over doing the heart, and implementing slow pace long duration sessions . I'm also in my 50s now and not going in the red when I have a choice makes sense to me at this time .
One thing I noted from military training is if you can sing a song or talk normally like how David Goggins dose in his videos you are still in or around zone 2 cardio. The more you do this. The longer and faster you can go while still keeping everything relaxed.
i started maffetone april 2022. this march 2023 i feel like my improvement is too slow at maf hr from 7:40/km to 6:30/km. today i said forget about maf and run easy by feel and disregarded hear rate and the pace was around 5:30-5:45. expectedly, my hr went up but after 2km it went back to my maf hr at same 5:30-5:45 /km pace
I am a trauma surgeon, who has to disrupt my sleep cycle often to take night call, and on other work weeks will put in 80+ hours. I'm wondering if low heart rate training would even work for me.
Have just started low HR running , have been running most my adult life at varying quantities but have always totally neglected base running (common mistake from what ive been reading!) Still incorporate some tempo/interval into plan but 80% now done in zones 1 & 2. Using a karvonen calculator for HR Zones have finally got some results that match up with how I feel. Achieved Max HR doing running test and min HR taken from garmin watch. Have been using HR zones set from garmin watch previously , to max HR, Lactate threshold and HRR and for some unknown reason are totally different from Karvonen results. Personally, I will be using the new found zones to guide all my runs from now on.
I started off with the MAF formula, and quickly abandoned it for zone 2 training. I'm 36, which means 144 is my number. But, my resting average is around 53 bpm and my max is, no kidding, about 186. I was getting frustrated trying to keep my HR at like 140. I've been running a while, but my body just won't do it. But by using my garmin watch to help me out and going with zone 2 (so up to 149 ish?), I'm running at a pace that isn't QUITE killing me with frustration. But I'm also able to stay there, and even after an hour of 11:59/mi, I'm feeling like I could go another hour.
As an older runner, I found low heart rate training extremely frustrating. I made progress when I incorporated hard, internal runs to my training on a regular basis.
This is where the 80/20 trianing comes into play. 80% of your runs should be easy (low heart rate) and 20% should be harder intensity, like the intervals you're doing.
@@jeffh4505 Exactly. I run 3 slow runs a week and add in 1 interval session or tempo run (alternating weekly) to spice things up and get my anaerobic system working as well. Slow running alone, necessary as it is, is too dull for me.
@@jeffh4505 I heard it might be more like 80% of your runs would be easy but 20% would have some hard element, so it may be like 97/3 for long distance runners
I'm an older runner and I find the more speed training I do, the better. I think my proportion might be 60/40 or 50/50. I think you have to find what balance works for you. If you do too much slow running, then you typically become a slower runner. It is really important, and I think it is even more true as you age, to engage those fast twitch fibers or else you lose it. When I was in my 20's, I could easily do 90/10 or even 100% slow running and still maintain quick paces during races. However, now I cannot do that at all.
So my relatively recent experience is that I am using MAF, combined with a low carb diet. I went for proper testing in a sports lab which revealed an over reliance on carbs for my energy system and that doing the above + running before brekky will yield results. One thing I've noticed, is I no longer hit a wall on my runs as I'm not depleting glycogen but also the time is starting to decrease per km (3 weeks in).. it's not an overnight solution, but it works. I typically cover 30-60km per week, my pace is around 6:35/km (was around 7 when I started)
I'm learning about low heart rate training on my treadmill right now by setting the speed lower than I would normally run outside. I can keep my average heart rate between 135 and 140. Any efforts to do this outside has been a total failure. So far so good!
Just be sure to do lunges and incorporate a pair of outdoor runs every week, even if they're short. I did strictly treadmill training for months without ever running outdoors and when you go to race you'll find yourself utterly exhausted since you're now using muscles to propel yourself that you don't need to engage on the treadmill since the belt does it for you.
@@JoeMac1983 I've taken to running with my dog now that's it's getting warmer outside, this way we stop occasionally for mini breaks which brings my heart rate down.
Okay, another formula to try. This Karvonen Formula, without age or gender inputs, puts my “easy” pace in the same range as Garmin Zone 3 which, I’m happy to say, is the most comfortable and pleasurable pace for me on long training runs, not its zone 2 shufflethon (ugh!). The issue with other formulae is my age; the older we get, age is a less accurate measure of an individual’s fitness. Incidentally, this also ties in with the easy pace I was required to work at in the Garmin set training plan, based on a benchmark run time, I did 18 months ago. It’s all making a bit more sense now. Thanks for this video! 👍
The Karvonen method is the right approach, especially if you get your inputs correct. Still, in the end, the physiological response that you are having is the best measure.
Newbie runner here. This is perhaps the underlying of my problems. I always feel garmin required me to run my 'easy' at a pace that was unsustainable in zone 3, let alone zone 2. If I follow it, about the last third of the session will put me in zone 4. Always. Really frustrated and almost throw away my forerunner 255. Your comment about benchmark run the first time we used garmin prompt me to remember the first time I used the watch. It was an all out interval run! So I guess perhaps it calculated it wrongly and put a too high benchmark? If it so, then what should I do? Can the benchmark be reset?
I agree with using another formula and not the Garmin standard zones. I put in my LTHR and calculated my zones from there. Now Z2 feels really easy but not awkward. I used the formula from the 80/20 website. If I used the standard Garmin method of calculating my zones off my max HR (and that is wrong, too, because it uses 220-age), Z2 is a very slow plod which feels quite inefficient and I'm getting nowhere.
I really like this video, I definitely like Low Heartrate Training, but I don't recommend Maffetone training to anyone. For starters, like you said, the 180 - (your age) number was WAY OFF for me, I could barely stay in it just barely above a quick walk. Furthermore, Phil Maffetone also recommends NO fast training. I tried it for 5 months, and even with compensating and eventually raising my target heart rates, after 5 months of ONLY running slow, my ability to run fast was completely killed. And I never saw the speed improvements for heart rate. I think both are important and "Dr" Phil Maffetone is mostly a quack who got lucky with one point.
I've been aerobic training for years coming from a triathlon background. I now mostly do running. I have built weekly milage to 40 miles a week. My track times are the fastest they've ever been repping 8 x 800s at 2.50s. still though my running hasn't improved and I'm quite far away from where I was in my triathlon days 37.30 10km. I ran a 1.34 1/2 marathon last year and after all the efforts and improved speed work I still ran the same time this year. I'm thinking it has something to do with the lactate threshold work or lack of tempo running maybe?
For about a year I did LHRT and got faster and faster. As soon as I added mild resistance training to the mix I got slower. LHRT, for me, is only good if that is the only thing I did. I switched to a scheme like in "Run Less, Run Faster" and my 5K times plummeted.
Ive found the maf formula to work, i went from 6.45km pace to 5.50km in two and a half months. Much easier on the legs aswell, felt a lot fresher but my top speed did suffer a little. HR was at 138 or lower for the runs.
I can wholeheartedly recommend the book Training for the Uphill Athlete. Goes in to lots of detail about the physiology and adaptations the body goes through with different kinds of runs. It explains the WHY it all works. And a small amount of higher intensity work is required to maximise performance but only on top of a strong aerobic base. Which is what I didn’t do for the last year 😢
Hi James. Question: if you go out and do a 30 min run, and 27 is low HR and 3 mins is zone 3 or whatever - due to doing some strides, peaking on a hill by accident or something - have you managed a 27 min low HR run, or is the whole run junk miles? Suspect the former, because as youve said you heart doesn't understand different stressors, only heart rate. It should benefit from the 27 mins.
My Garmin keeps giving me higher LTHR estimates (always after the latest interval session, which I do once a week), which in a way is a relief, because my Z2 range keeps moving higher, and since my easy runs are set to Z2, I can run that little bit faster before my watch dings. This video gave me that final nudge to change my target HR for easy runs from Z2 to a custom range that will limit my effort by a further 3 bpm. Hopefully this doesn't have too noticeable effect on my pace, which can be a bit draggy in Z2.
Running slower seems to definitely help because I feel like lack of speed momentum can cause the muscle to have to work harder for you to keep moving which also allows strength to be built.
Karvonen formula makes only marginally more sense than MAF, to my mind, because it doesn't differentiate between men and women. On average, women have a naturally higher heart rate than men, and formulas need to take this into account. Unisex formulas are like unisex t-shirts. They're cut for men and women are just expected to deal with the fact that they're a really poor fit. 🤷
Have you read/watched anything by Stacy Sims Raphaela? Her catch phrase is "Women are not small men" and she researches and teaches about the differences in training needs between men and women. I've learned a lot from her and feel so much fitter, stronger and less frustrated since taking account of where I am in my cycle when planning my workouts.
@@JamesDunne Except for the part where every Karvonen calculator I've found online says "if you don't know your max heart rate, easily calculate it using 220 minus age" WITHOUT differentiating between men and women for this calculation. Is there some sort of official, authoritative Karvonen site that handles this differently?
Hi friend. Im fit 43 my heart rate supposed to be 137 max but always in my east runs i am like 115/125 range. Just in hills it might come to 132/137 does this mean i need to speed up???my resting heart rate is between 39 and 41. Should i increase the speed or Just keep running rhis way
@@isaacmendez3902 I have a similar "problem" with the low resting HR and I am not sure if the intensity is the same at HR 131 (I am 49) if your rest HR is below 40 or let's say 60. It would be logical to take that into account.
I wouldn't worry about speeding up. The MAF formula works well for some. But it's too high or too low for others. For you, it sounds like it's too high. I would just go by feel. You can always add in some speed work. The main point is keeping most of your running aerobically easy.
lots of lsd is fine but none of these formulas [180 - age, 220 - age for MHrate, Karvonen Formula] work for me? Age 57 RHR under 50 Max 186. I can get suggested range whilst brisk waling.
Suppose I have up to 10 hours I can possibly devote to training in a week. And suppose I somehw manage to swueeze strength and mobility into two hours, leaving me with 8 hours for running. What would be better: to run, say, 75 km at an average speed of 9.5 km/h (the slower end of my pace range, around 6:18 min/km), or to run 96 km at an average pace of 12 km/h (5 min/km; a bit slower than my tempo pace)? And more generally, since for the busier peoole among us, time is roughly constant and slowness and distance are, therefore, inversely proportional to one another, which should we prioritise, running slower or running longer? Oh, and there's sleep too! Sleep one hour longer each day and reduce the number of weekly training hours from 10 to 3? Sleep one hour less and add 7 more hours of slow running to the schedule?
If you follow a training plan for a race, you'll find that training involves runs at different intensities, which is very important. Firstly, if you always run hard, you'll likely get injured. Secondly, if you don't run enough slow runs on a regular basis, you'll find your form will suffer and fatigue will set in - slow runs help to build stronger muscles for better endurance. Similarly, if you only ever run slowly you won't improve your pace and won't hit your goals. Then of course you could run shorter runs here and longer runs there. Seriously, try a training plan from somewhere and see how you like them (McMillan is decent but you have to pay; The Running Channel does free ones and if they're as good as their channel is, they're worth a shot). That's not to say you need to train all the time, but it's good to have an idea of the sorts of runs you could mix into your weekly routine.
Many good questions in your post…along the same line that I have asked over the years without real definitive answers. So here’s my 2 cents on what I’ve done: I just finished (today) the final day of a 6 week training block dedicated almost exclusively to zone 2. In six weeks I have logged 16 hours of running in zone 2 and 16 hours of cycling in zone 2. The running consisted of no less than 45 minutes in zone 2 per session and the bike was always 1.5 hours of zone 2 done on an indoor trainer. I chose to do a “zone 2 block” instead of sprinkling zone 2 throughout my training year because of your above questions that no one answers. Like you, I want to ensure I get all the optimal zone 2 gains and not waste my time. The only way I could ensure this was doing a zone 2 block. On other podcasts I have heard that you need a minimum of 30 minutes in zone 2 to spur on mitochondrial biogenesis, angiogenesis, and unproven heart stroke volume (can’t remember why), and I have read that you absolutely can’t drift up into zone 3 for very long, otherwise you’ll slow down or completely stop the physiological processes that start mitochondrial biogenesis and angiogenesis. So there ya go….. I’m entering a Lactate Threshold block now which will take away 2 of my previous zone 2 sessions, but I’ll still be doing zone 2 for at least 45 minutes on my recovery days….just not the massive block of zone 2 I had been doing. This is the first time I have dedicated an entire block to zone 2, and I won’t know til June if it has truly given me the zone 2 gains that physiology promises….Sinai know that doesn’t help you in the short term…..but that’s the best I have for now.
One other item for you…with sleep: none of these running, cycling, or endurance gurus ever promote a particular bed or mattress, but they should. Go buy the most expensive and comfortable mattress you can afford and evaluate it using your sleep monitor in your smart watch. If you get the same amount of sleep but it’s higher quality, you should see huge results in 90 days or less for sure.
@@quengmingmeow My personal experience with mattresses to date has been that the quality of sleep is *inversely* proportional to the price of the mattress. The cheaper, the better.
I have only been able to objectively evaluate my current bed-a Sleep Number--which I’ve had for over 10 years. It happened to be expensive, but the objective data showed it was worth it. Had the data showed it was the same or worse than before, it would have been gone prior to the 30 day mark.
I don't know if running at a low heart rate works for me, because I can't do it. If I start from rest and try to run at an easy pace, within a minute my heart rate will hit 160.
@@Eirikkinserdal Who said I can't run? I once ran a half marathon just inside two hours. I know that's just beginner's level, but that's not the point. The point is I cannot run at any speed and keep my pulse below 150.
@@Eirikkinserdal In 1996 I ran a 15 k race in 1 hour 18 minutes, and during more than an hour my heart rate monitor, which I had set to a zone of 165-180, was beeping, which means my pulse was over 180, which I interpret as "in the red". Yet I felt just fine.
Really, the point should be making sure that your easy runs are aerobically easy the whole time and that they are easy to recover from. Depending on the individual, the heart rate during an easy run can be higher or lower. I would much prefer heart rate zones being based on lactate threshold heart rate. I'm 50 and my lactate threshold heart rate is 182. During my last half marathon, my average heart rate was 170. During easy runs, my heart rate rarely reaches as high as 150. So for you 160 might be just right.
After years of feeling like my evil alter ego came out to play if I had caffeinated coffee, I learned that I’m one of many who are genetically predisposed to not metabolize caffeine properly. What I’ve learned since being decaf only is that those couple of glasses of wine I occasionally enjoy jack up my HR by a good 10 bpm the day after even if my sleep was good.
I abandoned all slow running. Didn’t feel natural and I kept getting injured when I would run slow. Personally I don’t recommend zone 2 training at all unless you are training for a marathon PB. I found it impossible to run with good form when running slow, it felt like I was hobbling around. I’m have a basketball fitness background and once ran a 17min 5k on the treadmill from basketball training alone. So I maybe much different than everyone else.
I like the content of your videos, but seriously, i have the feeling of watching ads with all the slow moving, athletic people and place-holder shorts. What's worse, 99% of runners shown are heel-striking and, as a consequence, alot of them have some kind of bad, inefficient running form. Imho ppl would really benefit from using more minimalist shoes without the insane heel padding, and change the running style to something more natural - it's proven to be more efficient (=lower HR!) and less risky, and would fit far better in a holistic approach. Apart from that i can always pick this or that from your content, thanks.
