[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on August 5, 2021 at 7:04 am · in reply to: Strength running podcast #56193

Scott,

Apologies, I have been doing lots of reading and listening to podcasts recently, and confused your podcast with something else.

Thanks for your reply, this makes sense.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on July 30, 2021 at 4:24 am · in reply to: Lab Test Vs. Drift Test -> comparison #56063

That is an extremely low AeT. Did this come from the lactate test (i.e. 2 mmol), or was it derived from the gas analysis?

ps, I have no idea how to open/read/use fit files.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on May 16, 2021 at 8:25 am · in reply to: Over-Training #54058

Thanks for responding.

How do you do this in practice? Maffetone is always careful to only speak in generalisations and tends to shy away from recommending specific details on training.

I am particularly interested in this, as I am in my mid 60s. I need both volume and frequency to perform, but am not fresh to race, even at short distances, without a taper week. The monthly MAF test, itself needs to be performed after sufficient rest. Does this suggest a 4 week cycle is optimum, e.g. 3 weeks of volume/frequency and 1 week of taper including the MAF test?

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on May 16, 2021 at 6:10 am · in reply to: Over-Training #54052

Phil Maffetone’s philosophy prioritises health over performance, and this is admirable for the long term.

However, training to perform well in a Marathon/Ultra etc, can never really be considered to be healthy. Optimal training means running large frequent volumes with accumulated fatigue, over many years. In such training, the Taper period is crucial, prior to the race. Would there not be an expectation that fitness would decline, as shown by a MAF test, during this long build up of accumulated fatigue?

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on May 16, 2021 at 5:55 am · in reply to: Podcast: Maffetone and AET/ANT numbers #54051

Fair comment, but what is “real AeT?

My MAF, by formula is 122 bpm. I have had a lab test, both Lactate and Gas Exchange measured. This gave a Fatmax of 131 bpm ( by Gas test), and an AeT of 145 bpm (by Lactate at 2 Mmol).

The Lab test gave me an AnT of 161 bpm.

I also believe that big aerobic gains can be made with high volume in Zone 1.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on April 27, 2021 at 10:27 am · in reply to: Exhausting Slow Twitch Muscle Fibres #53433

Thanks Scott.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on March 15, 2021 at 10:01 am · in reply to: Metabolic efficiency test results: Improving poor fat utilisation #52041

That is a very high Aet, as measured by lactate levels. Although your fat crossover is well below this, could it be that your crossover hr is not too low in terms of %age of max hr? (eg 20 bpm below 171 bpm, is not a low hr for training).

What is your AeT and crossover in %ge of max hr?

I suspect the advice from here, will be to do most of your aerobic runs at intensities up to the crossover hr?

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on January 30, 2021 at 8:11 am · in reply to: Aet Lab test best protocol #50091

Hi Scott,

Where do I find the article that you have referenced, “It’s A Jungle Out There”?

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on July 22, 2020 at 8:07 am · in reply to: FT dominant athlete. Expectation? #43771

Thanks for the helpful responses.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on July 18, 2020 at 9:15 am · in reply to: FT dominant athlete. Expectation? #43686

I presume that the normal Calculators do not work as well for predicting Marathon times for FT types. It is normal to take 1/2 Marathon time, double it, and add, say 10 or 15 mins, to predict Marathon time.

Just wondering if there is a more accurate way for predicting Marathon times for FT types? Say add 20 mins?

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on March 7, 2020 at 4:15 am · in reply to: Long sessions – HR drift – zones #39363

Many thanks Scott.

[maforbes2000]

maforbes2000 on March 6, 2020 at 11:01 am · in reply to: Long sessions – HR drift – zones #39335

Hi Scott,

Cardiac Drift is one area that particularly interests me, as I am finding it difficult to stop my HR drifting upwards. I have been running at Low HR for a couple of years now, so should be well adapted, but apparently not?

My target max Hr is 125. I start off running at about 100 bpm, and it rises to say 120ish after about 3 miles. From this point onwards I have to keep a close eye on it as it rises very easily (eg a small hill, speeding up to cross a road etc). I have to keep slowing down to stop HR going above my target of 125. If I ignored the HRM and maintained same RPE, HR would probably drift up to about 135bpm (say on a 12 mile run).

Some reference sources suggest that if you are truly running aerobically, cardiac drift should be minimal, or less than 5%. Mine rises by more than this.

Some say that you should slow down (walk if necessary) to keep to target, otherwise fatigue will increase and negate part of the reason for running at low HR.

I am running 50 miles per week, so volume shouldn’t be the issue. However, I am more naturally a sprinter than a distance runner, and wonder if genetics could be an issue?

I am reasonably happy slowing down as distance/duration increases, but am I then “under training”?