In one word: No. In a few more: The 180-age formula, and by extension most of Maffetone's model is pure, unadulterated nonsense, stemming from a complete misunderstanding of MaxHR as you age, namely MaxHR = 220 - age. That particular formula is meant to model a population average for maximum heart rate, and doesn't take activity type, training history or genetics into account. While there should be no dispute that the bulk of your training should happen at easy to moderate intensity, the formula leads to training paces and intensities that overall are far too slow and low. I've lost count of the forum and reddit posts I've seen from people who have been doing MAF for months on end, wondering why they're not getting faster. Running easy is not a pace, it's not a heart rate, and outside of elite athletes isn't even a lactate reading. It's a feeling, and the Borg scale or talk test during exercise is an actual useful metric, as opposed to a poorly researched and misinterpreted heart rate formula.
I tried it recently and found it extremely difficult to run and keep my heart rate low. Over the course of a few weeks, my VO2max actually fell! I kind of gave up and relied on the RPE method instead. My VO2max immediately went back up. I am going to rely on the RPE reference and hope that my heart rate will fall over time.
I tried it before and quit, and recently after many years tried it again with better results. The difference this time is that I emphasized keeping my cadence high. I do most of my running slow but I keep it tight. A lot of these MAF proponents seem to disregard that
I am now 55 and I started following the MAF approach in lock down. I found it hard at first as I had to do a lot of walking but in a few months I was running without walking. I found the next few months really motivating as my pace increased. I went from 7:15/km down to 5:30/km over the next year at the same HR. I am now running faster than when I was in my 40's. My 5 k time is down to 19mins and I've run a few ultras. It has transformed my running and I have been injury free for 2 years. I have introduced gym work and speed sessions on to 80/20 ration to my long slow runs. I'm coping with the increased intensity as I have built a strong resilient base. I really like the holistic view and new mantra - do no harm as opposed to the old school no pain no gain approach.
That's fantastic. I'm 59 and started MAF Jan 1st this year. My pace has already gone from 7m30s to 6m 50s. Hopefully I'll continue to improve as you have done. I'm targeting 22m for a 5K (would love to break 20m though) and 1hr 45m for a half marathon. Did you stick to the strict MAF HR? My rates above reflect that on 8km MAF tests, but using the Karvonen method my zone 2 limit is 12 higher at 133, and using this I can comfortably run at 6m 30s pace for 10-15km
Awesome job. Similar story so far for me but I’m only 10 months into it at age 50, pace change very similar to your first year - from over 7 minutes to around 5:40. 5k not nearly as impressive, though, (21 mins) but far beyond anything I could do when I was younger!
Sounds like it worked for you. How high was your Max HR? Did you follow the formula? How long in the early part did you notice an improvement? Maybe I just need to be more patient.
I am 72 and a lot of my training is done as a fast walk. With weights, yoga and martial arts, I can do a park run in 27 minuets. I dont think I am doing to bad.
I am nearly 3 months into MAF training and I’ve not only increased my volume by 160% since beginning, shaved 2:30 off my mile time, but have remained INJURY FREE! Additionally, I am breathing inly through my nose and smiling even at the end of my half marathon. If you’re not using this method, you’re missing out on the potential joys of running slow!
63 year old here. MAF has worked for me with PB's in 5k, 10k and half marathon this year. Been "Maffing" for 15 months. Consistency and patience is key. LOTS of walking in the beginning and leaving your ego at the front door is a must. You will be able to run high mileages after your body becomes more aerobically fit (3-6 months) You will need to run at least 5 -7 hours per week to see best results. No it is not a "one size fits all" method, but experimenting within 10 beats either way will work.
Started running in July 2022 using MAF. I am a 58 year old male who lives in an incredibly hot location with high humidity year round. This all plays havoc with the MAF method. I quickly thru it out the window, and adopted the "run at pace where you can easily talk" method. This has worked incredibly well. I have gone from hardly being able to run a mile, to now running 100 miles per week, and I will commence a 1000 mile run from Lands End to John O Groats in this May 2023 all at a slow and easy pace. Come and join me for the RUNNING CHANNEL.
I think that's sensible. Bollocks to HR. If you can talk, you aren't at your lactate threshold, so should be safe to keep running. I think it's better to run on the slow side but not obsess about HR than to run constantly close to your race pace, though, which is what I was doing involuntarily. I was doing 4-5 tempo runs a week. My military background ingrained in me to give it everything each workout but obviously that's unwise.
I used this method to train for a half marathon last year. My time had dropped to about 2:15, but after training with this method for 80% of runs, I ran a 1:59. Using it at the moment for a marathon next week.
I’ve been very successful using this method. I used it to train for Boston 2013. I started using it in September 2012. I ran exclusively using this formula from September 2012 to Jan 2013, it was extremely frustrating, in the beginning . I walked way more than my “ego” was happy with. Runners who I used to pass easily ran past me asking if was alright. By the end of the 4 months was covering 10 miles at a 9:23 pace at 112 heart rate. When starting in September I was covering 10 miles at 9:37 pace at 120 heart rate. ( i was 63) Then January of 2013 I stared my normal training and ran Boston and re-qualified at 3:50 my fastest marathon at the time. A warning for anyone using this method, I would use either a Garmin or Polar HR strap. Do not rely on a wrist sensor, they are too unreliable for this type of training. Also prepare for a bruised ego, in the beginning you will walk a lot but you will get faster over time just be patient. Everyone responds to this training differently and at their own pace. I’ve used this training successfully for many years but as you get older the MAF calculation gets almost impossible but now I just try to keep my HR between 105 and 118.
wow I just looked at my MAF and its 180-63 = 117, then looked at an easy pace Garmin run HR (using a Garmin HM) and average Heart rate was 125 and it was an easy run, but if I add 10 as suggested by Andy for the older runner then it does seem like something worth trying out.
I did strict MAF for 4 months. Yes, it worked to keep me uninjured and develop my cardio/ respiratory systems. Important for an asthmatic. However, it absolutely sucked the joy out of my running, made trail running virtually impossible, and turned running into a frustrating chore. I now think MAF is great for some, and is a wonderful way to START running, but I've switched to 80/20 training and have made huge improvements, and love running again.
I did strict MAF for a similar amount of time, as part of losing a lot of weight. But my experience of running was totally different. I found that a strict HR limit really helped me to enjoy going for a run, just taking my time and pottering along - walking as I needed. Previously, I’d always run too hard and ended up dreading going out - and never getting good enough to feel like I was “a runner”. I think MAF, and the strict limit, “gave me permission” to not push every time and as a result I got into the habit of running and enjoying it for the first time in my life. I found that after 3-4 months my MAF pace was faster than my 5k pace at the start - helped a lot by losing weight as well. Now, 10 months later, I run almost every day but I’m doing a couple of faster sessions a week as I train for a half marathon. I’m still not a great runner, but I run about 80k a week and love it!
I totally agree with you. I do recommend the MAF approach to complete beginner runners for a very limited time, maybe 6 weeks or so. But to truly experience the joy of running, the 80/20 approach with a mix of slow and speed workouts, is the way to go.
I started training with the MAF method three months ago for base building during the winter and have really enjoyed it. I am now slowly adding a day of repeats and a tempo run day for the 80/20 ratio. It is initially shocking how slowly I had to run at first, but now my slow running pace is getting closer to what it was before I started MAF training.
I don’t stick to the Maffetone method but I have slowed down all my ‘easy day’ runs which in turn has brought my heart rate down. I’m 51 and my heart rate used to be in the 150’s or higher for every run but now I’m generally in the 130’s/low 140’s on my easy days. And I’m getting PBs in all distances! I definitely think there is truth in running slower makes you faster.
Yep I'm 48 and my slow runs are around 130-135 bpm very similar to your h/r. I do find that even though my resting heart rate is in my 40s, it's doesn' take much for it to spike over 140 bpm so I need to be careful going up hill or even into headwind. Accordng to Maffotone, I would need to be running under 132 bpm which is a real struggle and not much fun.
The 180 minus age always seems like a blunt instrument to me, a bit like 220 minus age for MHR. I'm now 65, which puts my MAF limit at 115. Since my measured MHR is currently 174 and resting HR is 40, the MAF limit is not even in Zone 2. Even adding the 10 bpm still just puts it into the bottom of Zone 2. I'd say the MAF limit needs to be a lot more scientific to be accurate for each individual. For now I'll keep my endurance/HR training in the upper half of my Zone 2!
Tim, isn’t your ‘limit’ a bit low? Blending Maffetone and a few others I can’t remember now, I’m doing marathon plan long runs in 120-123 range at age 64 (65 soon). Seems to work for me.
@@roadrunner708 Agreed as I said: 180-65 does seem an artificially low limit. It's a bit hilly round me and I'm likely less fit than you but I manage to hang around 130-134, upper Z2, and it works well for me.
@@Pablito-uv3wc A good mix of Zone 2, intervals, threshold and race pace has to be the best formula.
Рік тому+8
@Tim Gosling: I'm in a similar situation. I'm 62, have been running for 8 months, with a maximum recorded HR of 174 and a resting heart rate down to just above 50. For the past two months, I have been following the Garmin daily suggested workout, with most running done in "base" at a 130 bpm target or a recommended speed of 7:25/km (down from 7:30/km). The "recovery" suggested speed is 8:45/km which supposedly correspond to a target HR of 120 bpm - lower than the MAF limit. I can walk at that speed but can definitely not run as it is just too slow for the body mechanics to work correctly. My zone 2, based on reserve HR, is 125-136. I aim to stay very close to 130 bpm on flat roads, dipping lower when going downhill and trying to avoid going above 134. The MAF recommended HR seems to me to be as simplistic as the "maximum HR = 220 - age", which would indicate that my max HR "should" be 158, whereas it is at least 174 for me.
I use 100% MAF training for my base building (and have switched to a more Orthodox Marathon training block for race prep , still using MAF for my easy runs), as an older post 50 runner it works for me , the main advantages is my base (Z2 /easy ) is always kept within the 117-132 range , even on climbs (MAF -10..+5) and it has given me much better flexibility with my heart where I can be running at my marathon pace for 15 miles (HR 138-144) and chill for half a mile (so 9 minute miles for me) bring my HR back down to 126-127 .. and then get back on it giving me sort of a rest in between a hard session. Stopping the intake of sugar and making sure my sleep is 7-8 hours a night has been a revelation. I have been doing it long enough (over a year) , where I do not have to look at my watch much .. 126 for me feels kind of like a brisk walk but I sweat more .. The one thing I would strongly advise .. leave the ego at home. It is not one for the Strava boasters. You guys should seek out Floris Gierman he is probably the leading advocate for this method of training currently
I'm 35, fit and healthy, but my HR goes up to 150+ even doing a ridiculously gentle warm up. Even if I can sing a song. So running at 70% of my max (129 bpm) is absolutely out of the question, so it's more frustrating than it's worth for me.
I used MAF when training for the Zugspitze Ultra (85Km) and to increase the weekly training volumes without getting injured or to fatigued. It really works very well and when your body starts to use fat efficiently as a fuel source then eating all those sugar gel's isn't really needed anymore which is much nicer for my body. The difficulty with MAF is running slow because most people like to get results fast. People will pass you but you can just keep going for much longer. If you do it for a few weeks then you will already see the results without getting injuries.
Yup. Prof. Tim Noakes has a presentation on low carb for athletes and points out that fat adapted individuals can rely on fat at least for 2:40 pace marathon runs, if you run faster you might want to add gels.
I’ve not used MAF before but been training predominantly at zone 2 for the last few months and managed to shave 14 mins off my half marathon PB. So this gives me encouragement to look into this more closely.
I’m a 51 year old novice who started running 2 years ago. Made great, though tough, strides using MAF method. Keeping HR at 129 was very very difficult. I’ve added 5 to bring it to 134 which makes it more realistic. One top tip from me- don’t forget to ad tempo/speed work to the runs as well. I do and it’s the secret sauce on the MAF burger to getting the performance going in the right direction.
Whilst the formula is crude, it will get everyone into a reasonable range. Whether you use some more advanced formula, a max HR from a 5k race or numbers from a lab test, MAF is immediately accessible and puts you in an aerobic zone. I didn't do strict maf but I kept slowing down over a number of runs until I learnt to leave the ego behind and do most runs to build the base aerobic system. I've been uninjured pretty much since I learnt this... the slightest niggle and I back off then try an easy run. I.e. maf. It works.
i have started MAF in Aug 2022. join my first running event on early march. it was life changing. as someone that never into running or even sport, it give me alot of benefits especially for my general health,cardio. started with walking since my HR already reach max, now pace 7-8 maintaining low HR. it can be boring and frustrating cause you can only walk to maintain the HR but you will need to trust the process, be patient, be consistent and you will see the amazing result!
I have tried it for 4 months. I've seen a couple of interviews with him on youtube, read his book and started. I had ~1 year running background behind me, first year without structure then 16 weeks of RWR method following Coah Jeff Galloway's training plan on Garmin. When started with MAF I could run 10k at average ~6:25/km. My max MAF HR was 131bpm. Week after week I was getting slower. At the end of 4 months I was happy to complete 1 km in 7 minutes. It was frustrating to say the least. After 4 months I run a 10k trial and to my surprise I improved my PB by 1 min. I attributed this improvement mainly to better pacing, as I learned to control my pace and not to start too fast. In the meantime I also lost a couple of kgs, even though I was not particularly overweight. As I added intervals and tempo runs to my training my easy run HR was going down again ... or in other way, I could run faster at MAF HR. Went to a sport lab and done a proper lactate test. The result was that my recommended Z2 HR pace was 142bpm, ... 11 bpm faster as recommended by the basic MAF formula. It's true that even Maffetone recommends to adjust the zone upwards by 10 bpm for fit athletes. Since then, I mainly train by Coach Greg McMillan's plan on Garmin. It works better for me. It's based on pace and the easy runs align well with my Z2 HR and the easy PRE. The plan has a good variety, close to 80/20 method.
I've been running for 3 months and MAF would be impossible unless I ran for like 1 minute at a time. The consensus by experts according to Endure by Alex Hutchinson is that RPE (rating of perceived exertion i.e how hard it feels to you on a scale of 1-10) is literally what your brain uses to determine how fast/long you can run - when it feels too hard, you slow down or stop. It is a summation of every signal like HR, muscle fatigue etc. So you can just run at an RPE of 4-5/10 instead of obsessing over a strict HR number. In that sense MAF is pretty much the same as the standard advice of 80% easy runs but this takes it to 100%. But HIIT, anaerobic training, speed has its benefits too, so most people throw in a fast run once a week and you're back to 80/20! In the end running is just not that complicated :)
I'm relatively a new runner. I've recently come across this technique and I can say that its effective coz as soon as I finish my run, my HR comes down within a few min whereas previously it used to take more than an hour to get back to normal run. This means my body is less stressed when I use MAF method. I hope my performance will improve with time.
Thank you for sharing this. I am 72 and joined Orange Theory Fitness several months ago. OTF definitely pushes you to increase intensity in intervals. While pushing myself I injured my calf muscle and could hardly walk for several weeks much less run. As I recovered I discovered slow jogging. Then I went back to OTF and practiced slow jogging on the treadmill. I noticed my heart rate stayed around 108 which is exactly where I should be for the MAF method. What was surprising to me was how many more calories I burn compared to my previous workouts and compared to others around me who are pushing themselves much harder. I find it very comfortable to keep my heart rate below 108 and I feel very little risk of injury. Thank you for this information 😊
I did maf for about 4 months instead of 6. I was coming from off the couch and 36. I thought it would work well because it's really easy to hurt yourself when you have essential ly 0 previous fitness for the last 14 years. It is a good way to build base fitness. Your heart rate does become more efficient and of course starting from 0 you do see gains in progress. I was clocking significant mileage during this journey 40-80kms weekly. However I decided in January to enter a marathon in May 2023 and decided I had decided to try a more formal training block with speed sessions so I am no longer formally training maf. I've caught the running bug and I'm trying for a sub 4 attempt as my A goal. I've fallen behind in volume as I live in Canada and gate treadmill. I was formerly running 7-10 hours a week dropped down to 3-5 for February. Bringing the volume to 10 hours again approaching the peak weeks. Hoping to get in over 100km a week without injury. Watching Sarah's journey for Osaka is giving me a bit of chills and motivation. I'm scared of running the distance as I've only run 27km in training. I'm going to be doing 30-36 this Sunday and I'm trying to convince myself to find maf again.
After 10 years removed of being a 3:02 marathoner (a chronically injured one at the end) I decided to give low HR training a go. I had known about it since competing in triathlons in the late 90's but always chose to run by feel . This led to always going too hard and running through niggles that turned into bigger injuries. Now, 4 months into MAF training my mileage is up along with my health and enjoyment while my pace at 134 or less is continually dropping. It has forced me to limit runs with my group as they like to push the pace. Current plan is too continue through the spring and summer with mostly MAF and attempt a fall marathon (first since the 2014 Boston). While this may not be for everyone, it has salvaged my running career and I couldn't be happier!
I’ve started to do my easy runs at a deliberately slower pace than I would usually do. This was out of necessity really as I was getting back into running after a few weeks of illness. I’ve really benefited from it and have seen my fitness improve consistently. Where I struggle is psychologically as I have to tell myself it is ok to run slower than I can, especially as I use Strava to share my runs. The benefits outweigh the negatives, so I will continue to follow this approach.
Really great breakdown and very interesting. I did MAF for 7 months last year and for me it was a disaster! In that time I barely did any actual running. To keep my HR below the recommended rate I had to walk most of the time, despite already having been running for a while and therefore having a relatively good aerobic base. I ended the trail less fit than I started and completely demotivated! Fortunately it pushed me to seek out a coach to get some guided training and advice and am back to loving running and actually running for long distances again. I'm sure it's a wonderful method for many, just wasn't for me!
I haven't done MAF. However I did up my long run to 3.5 to 4 hours, and drop the long run HR very low (low end of MAF) and that meant that I had more energy for the tempo type runs. I credit this very long, very slow runs, as the ones that helped me dip under 3 hours in the marathon
I run 5k once or twice a week. I recently started running and I can not stop trying to beat PR's at 175-190 bpm. Based off this video I will really try a full, low bpm, slow paced run! Thanks for the good information!
I have been practising the MAF method (not to every letter of the word) for 12 mos now. It feels like a more holistic and balanced approach, marathon build last year didn't feel as draining and I managed a 23 min PB. I still run at intensity when I am time poor, I feel that way I still have quality runs that create gains when I don't have the time for hours of volume.
I use the method since two months to get ready for a 6h trail run. I’m quite happy with it and just worked on increasing my weekly mileage since I started with the maf training. I think it is also easier to follow if you can only run on hilly terrain compared to a pace based plan.
I started using MAF at May-1 2023. The first thing I noticed is that I have to run extremely slow to keep my heartrate below, in my case, 129. Currently I run at about 8:30/km, and the first two kilometers at about 9:00/km (I can do a fast walk at 9:30/km so it is that slow). What makes it a little more difficult is that I usually run in the woods close to my home, but the terrain is not completely flat and also parts of it are unpaved, both causing my heartrate to go up. Also it is currently quite hot and humid here which also has an effect. But as difficult as the first runs were, now I am used to this pace and it is not difficult at all anymore. The biggest benefits so far are for me: (1) you run so slow that you greatly reduce the risk of getting injured (no muscle problems whatsoever so far, not even small ones); (2) because you run so slow you recover faster, which means that you can go out for a run more often (in my first month of MAF I immediately broken my all-time monthly running distance record). At the moment it gets more easy to keep running each kilometer below MAF-pace, but I am also more aware of kilometers where my heartrate all of the sudden goes up (in the beginning of a training, because my body needs some time to adapt to the workout, and sometimes in the last few kilometers). Currently I see the first results: sometimes I manage to do a kilometer just below 8:00/km while keeping my heartrate below 129, which was impossible in the beginning. A few days ago I did a 10km run at around 8:30/km with average kilometer heartrates in the low 120's, which was also quite new for me. Because all of this I am quite motivated to give it a chance (as I am only doing this for 1,5 month at the moment I write this), to see how much I can improve over a longer period of time.
A few athletes I know have used MAF and became very good slow long distance runners, with the emphasis on slow. If that's what you're looking for - great. But.....they were not able to run a more intense pace for very long, simply because they were physically and maybe even more importantly mentally not trained to do so. Also - any formula which puts everyone in the same bracket with relation to heart rate makes no sense as most people have a different max HR and resting HR, and this even fluctuates throughout the day or month. I believe athletes should take a much more holistic approach and get a sense how they feel - use data where it makes sense - but listen to your body and align you workouts to your objectives with regards to periodisation of training stress.
True... Extended training in running really slow won't be able to help you run fast. I think if you want to run fast you need to have some days you do speed. Maybe 20% of the time do speed and 80% do MAF.
YOU SHOULD KNOW: "Dr" Phil Maffetone has his doctorate in the chiropractic field, which in the US is absolutely littered with all kinds of quacks. Maffetone himself subscribes to a lot of junk science. I think he got close with his method, in the way a broken clock is right twice a day. Your mileage may vary. While I can agree with low heart rate training in an 80/20 ratio, I do NOT recommend the MAF method, as it's very inflexible in the "180" formula, plus the part where he says to never run above that level. When I tried MAF training I saw very minimal gains despite following it as closely as I could for months, and by the end of it, my ability to run fast was completely destroyed. Phil would probably argue that I did it wrong, or didn't go long enough - how long should I not enjoy running? A year? Two? More? So while some people might see gains from this, I don't think it's even close to the best method of increasing your performance. I really wish The Running Channel had included these caveats.
I started doing it a year ago or so, after searching for help often damaged knee and shinbones. I was then living in a big city where it was easier to keep me HR down (after newbie difficulties already addressed in the comments below) on the flat-ish surface and I felt it worked amazingly well for me. I have now moved to an island, with steep hills, even though I still have the MAF-thinking in the back of my head, as arrive at the bottom of a steep hill I chose to forget about MAF, as even power walking gets my HR 5/10 bpm above the zone. To summarize, its is said in the video; even though not a new concept, it is a good methodology to follow. And if for nothing else, my knees of shins doesn't hurt any longer, I can't even remember last time I had any injuries (not counting injuries related to false steps or other accidents on the trails) caused by overdo it on my two feet and I run about 100K a week.
Great video! Can't believe I missed this. Shared this as it's such a good video to explain why it's beneficial to run 'slow', it's not all about speed to begin with, it's building a good base.
I'm a casual runner, doing Zone 2 HRR training (141bpm), which is slightly above my MAF HR (137bpm). It was painfully slow for me when I started in Feb, as slow as 10:30 per km on a hotter day. Now, I am still slow, at about 9:40 per km on a cooler evening. It's really humbling to see some older folks overtake me on my runs. I do enjoy it more though, with less pain and more time to look at the surroundings and the sky. I do hope my pace will improve... and I am starting to feel my patience is waning. VO2 Max dropped from 39 to 35 in the period I was doing Zone 2, and that's a little alarming. Really hoping to get back to 6:00 per km paces.
bro, I put my faith on MAF a year ago, joining fb MAF group etc, with target the same as u, to be faster at the same heart rate, & I've been a slave to my hr strap & watch for the whole year, doing 100% MAF (maf 134-144), 5-10 hours a week.. before maf, i was able to do 2 hour long run starting at pace 7 & end it with faster pace 5 or something like that.. with MAF, i have to run at pace 9, sometimes pace 8 if the weather is cooler (i live in hotter climate), after a year of maf, the fastest pace i got is 7.25min/km.. frustrated,i went back to do my long run at my previous pace (7 to 5), it feels hard now bro.., i feels like i was breathing hard with that pace, it feels like i loss my fitness somehow... please don't do it bro, now i'm in the process of regaining my fitness with interval, threshold, & tempo work, & easy run between those workouts, easy run just run it by feel, if it feels easy, IT IS easy... MAF worked for some people, but not me. if u can't see improvement in one month, i advise u to abandon it bro.. if u want, u can run at zone 2 for easy run, using LTHR zoning, that one is more appropriate for you, cuz it is customized according to your lactate threshold heart rate
As always a great video with lots of interesting information. I will tell on my example. Like most runners, I also trained too intensively, which caused me to have an oxygen deficit - to improve it, I had to start running in the 2nd heart rate zone. Unfortunately, at my age of 44, I would have to run 126-136, which was practically impossible for me. Then I came across calculations for the Karvonen method - where knowing your resting and maximum heart rate, you can calculate your zones. For this method, my 2nd zone is 135-149 which corresponds to an intensity of 60-70%. I started running like this last year and I must say that the effect is more than satisfactory for me. Of course, I'm not forcing anyone, but it's worth reading about both methods and choosing the right one for yourself.
Very informative video! I have a Garmin VivoAcrive 3 watch and a chest strap HR monitor. The watch is always wrong...way up most of the time. I know it because I tested it with 2 different chest straps. My son and a friend of mine have the same result. So, to me, watch HR monitor is the least desirable device for MAF method.
Thank you, you explained and broke everything down so well. I have been a runner my whole life. My heart rate, even when moderately fit shoots right up to 190bpm - I am 41 (female)
I read his yellow book and just started to apply what I learned from the book. I hope I can overcome this initial frustration by walking mostly to maintain my max aerobic HR.
Professor Andy!! I’ve been trying the MAF method for 5 months now and I definitely see an improvement is staying in HR Zone 2 with tweaked zones based on other activities like Soccer (football). Coming from Soccer, it’s been extremely difficult to get my HR under control. I felt like Zone 2 was a shuffle rather than a jog or a run. However, I found runs to be great now. The best advice I got was to first focus on 30 min easy runs and then go back to Zone 2. Coming from soccer has been super difficult but now I’m running farther distances for longer periods of time.
Great explainer on MAF, probably the most balanced between detailed and digestible!! I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing -- like you said! Good nutrition, managing stress, and most runs should be a bit slower/easier. I'm still a novice runner and have definitely had periods where I pushed too hard and ended up not running for long stretches. Trying to be more sensible in my approach this time!
If I ran at the heart rate worked out from the simple MAF method of 180 minus my age it would be in the 7(ish)m/km range which is painfully slow. According to my Garmin a 6:40m/km is in my Aerobic zone which is 136-154bpm and feels very comfortable and I can do this for a long time with no adverse effects. Most of my runs are easy with the odd park run/10km race at a higher pace so I'm pretty much doing the 80/20 split of slow to faster mix. There'll also be some track interval sessions when the weather warms up. My V02 max (51) is good for my age (53) and I'm comfortable with how I'm training. Have my first ultra booked for September.
I think MAF is a really great tool for beginner runner's to make them understand just how hard they are running. When I first tried running, in my head I thought I had to run at least 10-12"/mi for it to count as "running". When I started again, I took it slower because I didn't want to injure myself and ran around 14-15"/mi. Then I heard about the MAF method and tried it and my comfortable pace was 17-18"/mi!!! I think MAF can be a bit boring, so on shorter runs I'll go 15-16"/mi, but MAF really helped me take my ego out of my running and realize my only competition is with myself and that it's okay to have (speedy) walkers surpass you 😅
Definitely going to give this a try, it sounds like a really well balanced plan. I'm not sure how I'm going to go with the low heart rate as an overweight 57 year old, but I'm certainly going to give it my best shot.
View it as a more structured version of "lots easy slow runs, some limited harder runs and eating properly and running to be happy" anything like the MAF formula can only ever be a rule of thumb at best, everyone is going to be physically slightly different.
Here is my experience of the MAF method. I have been using the MAF method for the majority of my runs for nearly 2 years. Luckily for me I have been able to run a decent pace with this low heart rate. For some of my running friends they couldn’t do this so I suggested them just dropping to an easy effort (which has reaped the same rewards of reducing their heart rate for the same pace). It seems when you talk about HR while out for a run we are all different so as good as this method worked out for me it definitely isn’t a ‘one size fits all’. As a lot of runners could get frustrated with running slowly or having to run too slowly it doesn’t not always work. But in my experience it has made running very enjoyable as once I had improved enough I’m able to have chatty social runs at this MAF heart rate (for me 136-146) and staying injury free. One note is that when dropping your pace to achieve the low heart rate your biomechanics change therefore working different muscles (and leaving others out) which can then cause injury when returning to faster pace (or higher cadence). Therefore I would suggest mixing in the faster pace runs earlier than 6 months in, and if you are walking too much at the start of the MAF journey up the heart rate a little or run to a slow pace or ‘easy effort’. I’ve have seen an improvement in my paces at my MAF heart rate but also at that heart rate I can run for a lot longer. Also I get to enjoy my surroundings and don’t get that feeling of wanting to finish the run because I am tired. I would definitely recommend adding this to your training!
I tried it. Ran 3 months rediculously slow and then did a lab test learning my fatmax threshold was at 168 bpm. Made the runs much more fun, but still running 3/4 runs under this fatmax bpm and obly every ; run high intensity (and even then mostly easy but with some hard episodes”, the biggest gain for me is the radically higher mileage I can pull off this way, and the flexibility of being able to run consecutive days, soon after big meals, slightly ill and such without any backlashes ❤️ My pace is marginally faster than before, but my heart rate is lower for the same pace!
I tried MAF for 2 months. I'm 62, and tried it as I was starting to think more about being kind to my body. Eventually, I gave MAF away, as like others said, it sucked the joy out of running for me. What I prefer to do now is use a run/walk approach in most of my run sessions. I vary it between run 3 min / walk 1 min, up to run 5 mins / walk 1, for between 40-60 minutes. Also, I vary the terrain and elevation to keep from getting stale. I still run a hard session once a week (usually at parkrun). I focus on good weight management, rest days or cross training, and regular strength work to ensure a balanced approach, which Dr Maffetone also promotes. In summary, MAF zone training is too regimented for me.
I always believed in the MAF method. It helped me get comfortable and progress with the long run. It also helped me achieve my PB by getting used to slower paces, so on race day it didn't feel uncomfortable to pick up my pace. To sum it all up, the MAF method will always help you in the long run (no pun intended).
I decided to try for at least 3 months at the beginning of this year. I'm a 46 year old woman; been running since I was 12, with a couple of years' gap in my 30s. It has helped me slow down my slow runs. I am able to keep my heart rate down for longer, but last week I noticed that actually means running at a pace slower than my walking pace!! 😂 Just using my garmin venu sq as my heart rate monitor, I'm dealing with loads of factors - hills, altitude, heat. Life = stress most days :/ I've always steered towards eating "real food." I've been roughly the same weight and size since I was in high school. All in all, I feel like it was a good experiment, but I will begin to miss the joy of running if I try to continue past my 3 month commitment. I plan to spend April doing a more structured run-walk approach, then choose a race and start training, with my newfound sense of how slow is "slow" on my easy days.
I do 80% walking, and 20% jogging. I was 25 lbs overweight when I started. I'm still 3 lbs away from my wt. goal. I'm just 2 months in... although when I jog at all my HR jumps up to near max to max level. I'll keep it at 80/20 while I continue to interval train and lose weight. Once I establish some fitness and I am within normal weight ranges I'll begin adhering to MAF training in earnest as aerobic fitness will be my next goal after weight loss and building up to doing a 5k.
I got back into running last summer and most of my training is low heartrate. I definitely appreciate the lower likelihood of getting injured and seem to be making good progress, albeit it's been a bit stop and start for various reasons. About the only tip I've got is how helpful it is to have a treadmill. Doing my hour+ runs at a set speed which I know keeps my heartrate where I want it is so much easier than going outside. I've done a few outside and my heartrate is up pretty quickly because I'm going too fast or there's an incline or something. Now the weather's getting better I'll be outside again soon and have to run/walk/run/walk until I get it right!
You can't build the house without solid base and this is what the MAF is all about. Many people starting their adventure with running ang go all out during each training session and this is a first step to disaster. Even Kipchoge doesn't do it! MAF is an excellent way to build a solid base and aerobic endurance needed so much for further development in your training whether you run flat, tarmac, marathons or trails in the mountainous terrain which is my preference. I started my adventure with trail running 3 years ago and after implementing MAF into my training nearly a year ago I can't be happier than I am now. Running 70-90km each week with 3000m+ in ascents seems to be an easy and pleasant training along with trail races in the Canary Islands where I live at moment. Just over a year ago my heart rate was sky rocketing during very similar workouts and my aerobic endurance was just very average if not poor. I used to struggle during races and after the race day due to slow recovery but aerobic training changed a lot if not everything. Back in February this year I run trail marathon in El Hierro, almost 45km and about 5600m accumulated drop. 48 hours after the race I was back on trails enjoying this beautiful sport! Recovery now is just outstanding. Of course, healthy eating and nutrition must come with it, healthy life style, so building this bubble around is extremely important. Also, aerobic endurance training helps to burn fat(with healthy life style) and make your life easier during training sessions and races so you don't have to rely so much on carbs which are good to some extent. Aerobic training makes up 70-90% of my training sessions with the remaining part being fartlek, tempo, threshold or vo2max workouts. I do recommend to focus on aerobic endurance training to everyone to become healthier and more efficient athlete. Put your egos away, leave it behind you, focus on your workouts, breathing, heart rate and be patient! Running is a process and you should focus on it not the outcome. I'm 45 now, started 3 years ago in the UK thanks to pandemic and the only thing I regret didn't start running adventure earlier. I love it now though!
I'm about to start MAF training for London Marathon. I'm going to do all of my training until 8 weeks before at MAF or slower before adding some speedwork in last 8 weeks. I currently do between 60/80km per week over 6 days. I'm also going to be upping this to 100km or so, as I'm doing a 70 mile Ultra in June
I am going to be 61 this January and I am going to try this as I am getting back into training and getting my goal to run the Detroit Free Press Marathon Oct 3rd 2024
I done only maf for a while and after about 6 months I only noticed small changes. Most of my runs are still done relatively easy. However , I have noticed a big change in my fitness since I joined a club and do a regular weekly track and tempo sessions. Maf enables you to run very high mileage weeks but for me personally I don't have the time to run such mileage. So to finding the balance and backing off when more recovery is required is working for me.
I'm fairly new at running and found out about this method. I'm not following the method, because I use another training plan. What I do is doing my slow runs following the MAF method. Running in het heart zone is so nice and I feel getting fitter in the last few months. My goal is the get fitter and a better health and MAF makes sure I don't train to hard. I love easy runs now and listen to some music. Great way to start the day. The last few years I have been cutting out carbs in my diet and follow a more ketogenic approach. Next to slow running this should adopt me to be more fat adapted instead of carbs. I'm just curious where this brings me and I enjoy the process.
I generally follow my Garmin's suggested workout and run to HR. The watch seems to adjust my HR and time value dependant on all sorts of things. E.g. It's suggesting I run 30mins at 142bpm today with a 5 or so bpm buffer either side. Keeps things simple and I just do as I'm told :)
I’ve seen a few alactic conditioning workout for powerlifters, strength athletes and ice hockey players using the MAF zones. For strength athlete’s it wants you to an EMOM style workout, kettlebell swings recommended, make sure you don’t go above you adjusted MAF during the work phase. For most people with was like 10-15 swings every round. Ice hockey was 2min run or assault/air bike intervals or until you reach max MAF whichever comes first then recover to 20bpm below max MAF. Then I’ll see running programs recommend the MAF zone for long duration events for aerobic conditioning. It’s so conflicting that the same max heart rate can be used for aerobic or alactic work tailored for different sports but I’m not a professional. So one program will tell me I’m developing my aerobic and the other my alactic.
I used to run all the time, but took 10 years off and am now getting back into it. I used to exclusively run 5ks, but want to try a 10k once I have gotten the 5k down again. I seem to have a lot of success training in zone five. For me zone 2 would basically be fast walking since I’m out of shape, and that seems like it won’t help me at all. My last run was 4.25mi and I spent almost 40 minutes of that run in zone five. Is this bad for me or something? I always feel great after, and in the last month I’ve gone from about a 10:45 pace for 4 miles down to 10:15. It seems like zone five is working for me.
Very interesting. I did not realize that MAF translates into 117-127 for me. After some trial and error, I started following Jack Daniel's pace formula and these MAF values now fall squarely at the upper end of my easy zone based on last autumn race. I can't really believe this can be a pure coincidence. Over the last 3 years since I started running, my pace has been increasing while my heart rate kept dropping. This has been particularly significant over the last 4 months, when I stuck to easy runs due to the weather in Canada and my desire to avoid injuring myself by falling. In a certain sense, I would have been doing 4-5 months of MAF. In any case, I have noticed an improvement in my easy runs (faster at lower heart rate). When spring comes, I will be adding reps, intervals, etc. I wonder if the overall performance will have improved by the summer or whether I will be stuck at being more efficient at low paces.
Hi im 48, overweight, runner since 4 years recently increased my running time. Ended with a back injury, i think will try MAF style when i can tnrun again. Thanks
My long runs when I am out by myself I try and keep my heart rate below 130 (180-51) it can feel slow but I know in myself the run is doing me good and I don’t need to push it just try and take it sort of easy.
For those who've had success with MAF, how much running per week were you doing? Was a lot required to see any positive results? My schedule allows for about two to three hours per week for running. Not sure if that's enough to be effective..
Interesting video. I tried MAF for 2 month's and noticed only a marginal improvement (I was reasonably fit anyway)... but here lies the conundrum, my high HR is 180 and I am 54 so does the formula still apply? I do not hear any athletes using this method, in fact one coach told me to ignore MAF and just use pace. For sure in the winter months run base training which is slow but at a percentage of your best 5k/10k race pace and then follow the 80/20 principle leading up to races etc. Coaches keep a lot of useful information to themselves until they are paid, so I would have liked to have heard more insights into this and your opinion if it actually works and if athletes swear by it. Not saying it does not work and I see evidence from a few , I mean few, people using it that it does work but is it because their HR is adaptable to it and mine is not. I see their HRs low 120s, low 110s and they are in their 30s/40s... is it because they have been running a lot longer than me (4 years). Anyway I am still unsure about it without trying another 2-6 months running at HR 125 or lower... almost walking
I haven’t tried MAF specifically. I tried to do strict zone 2 training last spring. I wasn’t that successful. I’m going to try something similar though this year in hopes of building fitness and preparing for my next training cycle. Hoping to get faster but want to be smart about it.
Thinking about giving it a try… the MAF calculation suggests I should be running at about 154 BPM which sounds fair as I‘ve heard of the benefits of slow running but struggled with 130 - 140 BPM lately because it‘s been nervewreckingly sloooow. 5 years ago I started off with running at 170 BPM but lately at my „natural“ pace it‘s at about 160 BPM (natural meaning not running with maximum effort but also not paying attention at keeping the BPM low)
I’ve had good luck with the MAF approach. That said, long-slow runs seem to make me a long-slow runner. I need to incorporate some speed work into my training since race days seem like a shock to my body if I’m only doing MAF.
What's the reason for having to stick religiously to this low HR for the first few months? Why not do 80:20 from the get go? I've definitely started sticking to the adage of keeping easy runs easy, which I've found enjoyable
Although it's great that there is research behind the MAF 'run slow to run fast approach', the unreliability of heart-rate monitors and the numerous reasons behind heart-rate variations, for practical prurposes the formula is too crude a tool. I prefer the Arthur Lydiard approach of aerobic base training at a conversation pace. Trusting your body's response to stresses applied to it (running, terrain etc.) is a more reliable way of monitoring effort which may (or may not) be reflected in heart-rate readings which may (or may not) be accurate. I understand that for many runners this 'scientific' approach helps them discipline themselves to run at an appropriate aerobic pace.
I’m 100% on the balance of 80/20 but I prefer the RPE way of assessing if I’m doing an 80% or 20% run. It’s as always worth trying and if it works for you then great.
I'm 77 years old and have been running for 40+ years. A long time ago "long, slow distance" was recommended and, to some extent, was my staple. Reading recently about Zone 2 training, I've calculated my target in a couple of ways (220-age x 60% = 85 ; 180-age = 103). On a 6 mile run this morning, I was able to maintain 107± on all but the most hilly parts. Is this a good Zone 2 target, or should I "add 10" and run with 105-115 as my target?
Very interesting breakdown of the MAF method. How does one get guidance on this. There’s a subscription and a kindle book. Is there a paperback or hardcover? I could not see that but I am eager to give this method a try.
Great method, although I'd recommend adjusting that heart rate more individually. Something around middle of personal Z2 (in typical 5 zone system) is I think a much better starting point, the rest of calculations can stay the same. So for example if Z2 is between 135 and 151 bpm, middle would be 143, so you'd run at 133-143 heart rate.
180 - 54 (my age) will get me to a heartrate slower than 126, that will never work. For me keeping it below 150 is all I can achieve running. At 54 my max heartrate is still 200, so 150 is pretty slow for me.
Does it have to be for 6 months do you think? I'm 1 and a half months in and itching to do some other types of training! Will definitely stick with it for 3 months at least. Just not sure I can handle 6 months (unless it's 100% worth it!)
I am in week 6 of running at LHR of 115 - I run a set hour at least 5 times/week I can now focus on technique which influences the distance run in an hour at this pace have now added hill sprints and was surprised by my enjoyment of them have also run 2 hours LHR which is short of my only half marathon time I am enjoying my experiment in LHR + 80/20
I tried it, but at 60 and I live in the hills. Then add in southern US is humid. But all that being said I learned a lot I grew a little bit so now what I do is 80 to 90% of my runs don’t worry as much about heart rate I just make sure I can run conversational when I see a hill I just say heck with it and I run up the hill and then I just coast down and enjoy my run when I feel my heart rate is going too high I just walk in for where I live my age, and all that kind of stuff that those better.
I worked at low heart rate running in the past and don't really worry too much these days. But my easy run HR would come close to the MAF value. This is basically "Zone 1" running in the 5+ zone model.
I thought the 'subtract your age' method had been shown to be pretty inaccurate now. Without doing a lactate test in a lab (which I haven't been able to do yet), I think heart rate reserve is supposed to be the most accurate method. I use my resting and max heart rate to calculate HR zones and then use that for my zone 2 runs, which make up about 80 per cent of my runs. And for the other 20 per cent, I throw in threshold, hill reps or sprint repeats.
I highly recommend Floris Gierman, who has a podcast that talks about MAF training quite a lot. He has some very good runners on there who talk about their experiences with the method as well as some fairly "normal" runners and their experience too. James Dunne is another UA-camr that talks about it a fair bit.
i've tried it but i am 57 so it's quite limiting. that said, i do try to keep hr down when doing the 80% easier runs each week. it seems to help me be mindful of breathing and form as well
No, I'll stick with my HR zones in my Garmin, do some runs slow, some intervals, some threshold work and some hill repeat training. Much more fun than doing everything at the same intensity..
@@runningchannel I really enjoy my speed intervals, digging deep and then recovering. Waiting delivery of my Garmin FR255 (upgrade from current FR55) and curious to the daily training suggestions that will give. Perhaps worth a video as well following up upon Sarah's video about that. Algorithmes should be much better with the Race day widget if you set goals in your agenda right?
In my experience the MAF method has several advantages: 1. It's running-centric. As a runner I appreciate that. 2. It's easy to fall off and get back on. If life gets in the way and you have to stop running for any reason, it's easy to pick the method back up. 3. Yes all of these things are generally accepted, but are they distilled in the same easy to understand way? The MAF seems more approachable than other holistic programs.
This is a very useful video. I've definitely benefited from low heart-rate training.However, I have to take issue with your assertion that you need quickly available sugars before or during an event. Ths human body is a wonderful and adaptable system. Experiments done on low-carb fat-adapted athletes proved that their glycogen levels were the same as carb-eating athletes both before and straight after a strenuous work out. Not only this but several hours after the event, glycogen levels had recovered to the same level. If you follow a low carb diet for around six months your will not only develop the ability to replenish your own glycogen without carbs you will also burn fat at a much higher rate, saving your glycogen deposits and delaying hitting the dreaded wall. It might be an interesting subject for a future video.
Would you try it?
In one word: No.
In a few more: The 180-age formula, and by extension most of Maffetone's model is pure, unadulterated nonsense, stemming from a complete misunderstanding of MaxHR as you age, namely MaxHR = 220 - age. That particular formula is meant to model a population average for maximum heart rate, and doesn't take activity type, training history or genetics into account. While there should be no dispute that the bulk of your training should happen at easy to moderate intensity, the formula leads to training paces and intensities that overall are far too slow and low. I've lost count of the forum and reddit posts I've seen from people who have been doing MAF for months on end, wondering why they're not getting faster.
Running easy is not a pace, it's not a heart rate, and outside of elite athletes isn't even a lactate reading. It's a feeling, and the Borg scale or talk test during exercise is an actual useful metric, as opposed to a poorly researched and misinterpreted heart rate formula.
I tried it recently and found it extremely difficult to run and keep my heart rate low. Over the course of a few weeks, my VO2max actually fell! I kind of gave up and relied on the RPE method instead. My VO2max immediately went back up. I am going to rely on the RPE reference and hope that my heart rate will fall over time.
No. I do zone zero on the sofa, and add in a few faster runs a week. By this method I achieved a 50 min PB for the half marathon.
No, it's complete garbage. You wouldn't choose your shoe size based on your height. Why on earth would you choose you training HR on your age?
I tried it before and quit, and recently after many years tried it again with better results. The difference this time is that I emphasized keeping my cadence high. I do most of my running slow but I keep it tight. A lot of these MAF proponents seem to disregard that
I am now 55 and I started following the MAF approach in lock down. I found it hard at first as I had to do a lot of walking but in a few months I was running without walking. I found the next few months really motivating as my pace increased. I went from 7:15/km down to 5:30/km over the next year at the same HR. I am now running faster than when I was in my 40's. My 5 k time is down to 19mins and I've run a few ultras. It has transformed my running and I have been injury free for 2 years. I have introduced gym work and speed sessions on to 80/20 ration to my long slow runs. I'm coping with the increased intensity as I have built a strong resilient base. I really like the holistic view and new mantra - do no harm as opposed to the old school no pain no gain approach.
That's fantastic. I'm 59 and started MAF Jan 1st this year. My pace has already gone from 7m30s to 6m 50s. Hopefully I'll continue to improve as you have done. I'm targeting 22m for a 5K (would love to break 20m though) and 1hr 45m for a half marathon. Did you stick to the strict MAF HR? My rates above reflect that on 8km MAF tests, but using the Karvonen method my zone 2 limit is 12 higher at 133, and using this I can comfortably run at 6m 30s pace for 10-15km
Fair play. But how do you run a 19 min 5k without going out of zone 2???
Awesome job. Similar story so far for me but I’m only 10 months into it at age 50, pace change very similar to your first year - from over 7 minutes to around 5:40. 5k not nearly as impressive, though, (21 mins) but far beyond anything I could do when I was younger!
Sounds like it worked for you. How high was your Max HR? Did you follow the formula? How long in the early part did you notice an improvement? Maybe I just need to be more patient.
@@conradburdekin722 He dont, he just states that his 5k race time is 19mins with his new slower pace training.
I am 72 and a lot of my training is done as a fast walk. With weights, yoga and martial arts, I can do a park run in 27 minuets. I dont think I am doing to bad.
"With weights, yoga and martial arts, I can do a park run in 27 minuets" - that would be one hell of a Park Run, I'd pay to see that! LOL
@Immortal__ Thanks but there are people faster than me and older, were ardy folk up on Pennines.
You are a badass sir 💪🏻
That's brilliant good sir
Respect
I am nearly 3 months into MAF training and I’ve not only increased my volume by 160% since beginning, shaved 2:30 off my mile time, but have remained INJURY FREE! Additionally, I am breathing inly through my nose and smiling even at the end of my half marathon. If you’re not using this method, you’re missing out on the potential joys of running slow!
Nose only breathing when running is awesome.
What was your volume and mile time?
@@bendigeidfranemmanueljones5694that's the real question
How often did you run / what volume?
@@gm2407is that in and out through the nose, or best to breath out through the mouth?
63 year old here. MAF has worked for me with PB's in 5k, 10k and half marathon this year. Been "Maffing" for 15 months. Consistency and patience is key. LOTS of walking in the beginning and leaving your ego at the front door is a must. You will be able to run high mileages after your body becomes more aerobically fit (3-6 months) You will need to run at least 5 -7 hours per week to see best results. No it is not a "one size fits all" method, but experimenting within 10 beats either way will work.
Started running in July 2022 using MAF. I am a 58 year old male who lives in an incredibly hot location with high humidity year round. This all plays havoc with the MAF method. I quickly thru it out the window, and adopted the "run at pace where you can easily talk" method. This has worked incredibly well. I have gone from hardly being able to run a mile, to now running 100 miles per week, and I will commence a 1000 mile run from Lands End to John O Groats in this May 2023 all at a slow and easy pace. Come and join me for the RUNNING CHANNEL.
I think that's sensible. Bollocks to HR. If you can talk, you aren't at your lactate threshold, so should be safe to keep running. I think it's better to run on the slow side but not obsess about HR than to run constantly close to your race pace, though, which is what I was doing involuntarily. I was doing 4-5 tempo runs a week. My military background ingrained in me to give it everything each workout but obviously that's unwise.
I used this method to train for a half marathon last year. My time had dropped to about 2:15, but after training with this method for 80% of runs, I ran a 1:59. Using it at the moment for a marathon next week.
I’ve been very successful using this method. I used it to train for Boston 2013. I started using it in September 2012. I ran exclusively using this formula from September 2012 to Jan 2013, it was extremely frustrating, in the beginning . I walked way more than my “ego” was happy with. Runners who I used to pass easily ran past me asking if was alright. By the end of the 4 months was covering 10 miles at a 9:23 pace at 112 heart rate. When starting in September I was covering 10 miles at 9:37 pace at 120 heart rate. ( i was 63) Then January of 2013 I stared my normal training and ran Boston and re-qualified at 3:50 my fastest marathon at the time. A warning for anyone using this method, I would use either a Garmin or Polar HR strap. Do not rely on a wrist sensor, they are too unreliable for this type of training. Also prepare for a bruised ego, in the beginning you will walk a lot but you will get faster over time just be patient. Everyone responds to this training differently and at their own pace. I’ve used this training successfully for many years but as you get older the MAF calculation gets almost impossible but now I just try to keep my HR between 105 and 118.
Hello for a newbie in the maf of a 30 year old boy like me, how do you manage to maintain that frequency at what pace does it run?
wow I just looked at my MAF and its 180-63 = 117, then looked at an easy pace Garmin run HR (using a Garmin HM) and average Heart rate was 125 and it was an easy run, but if I add 10 as suggested by Andy for the older runner then it does seem like something worth trying out.
I did strict MAF for 4 months. Yes, it worked to keep me uninjured and develop my cardio/ respiratory systems. Important for an asthmatic. However, it absolutely sucked the joy out of my running, made trail running virtually impossible, and turned running into a frustrating chore. I now think MAF is great for some, and is a wonderful way to START running, but I've switched to 80/20 training and have made huge improvements, and love running again.
I did strict MAF for a similar amount of time, as part of losing a lot of weight. But my experience of running was totally different. I found that a strict HR limit really helped me to enjoy going for a run, just taking my time and pottering along - walking as I needed. Previously, I’d always run too hard and ended up dreading going out - and never getting good enough to feel like I was “a runner”. I think MAF, and the strict limit, “gave me permission” to not push every time and as a result I got into the habit of running and enjoying it for the first time in my life. I found that after 3-4 months my MAF pace was faster than my 5k pace at the start - helped a lot by losing weight as well. Now, 10 months later, I run almost every day but I’m doing a couple of faster sessions a week as I train for a half marathon. I’m still not a great runner, but I run about 80k a week and love it!
I’m with you on this, that was my experience (tho I didn’t last anywhere near as long with trying it)
I totally agree with you. I do recommend the MAF approach to complete beginner runners for a very limited time, maybe 6 weeks or so. But to truly experience the joy of running, the 80/20 approach with a mix of slow and speed workouts, is the way to go.
Switching to 80.20 after several months IS part of the MAF method.
@@davesharratt917 The MAF method is 100% slow.
I started training with the MAF method three months ago for base building during the winter and have really enjoyed it. I am now slowly adding a day of repeats and a tempo run day for the 80/20 ratio. It is initially shocking how slowly I had to run at first, but now my slow running pace is getting closer to what it was before I started MAF training.
I don’t stick to the Maffetone method but I have slowed down all my ‘easy day’ runs which in turn has brought my heart rate down. I’m 51 and my heart rate used to be in the 150’s or higher for every run but now I’m generally in the 130’s/low 140’s on my easy days. And I’m getting PBs in all distances! I definitely think there is truth in running slower makes you faster.
Yep I'm 48 and my slow runs are around 130-135 bpm very similar to your h/r. I do find that even though my resting heart rate is in my 40s, it's doesn' take much for it to spike over 140 bpm so I need to be careful going up hill or even into headwind. Accordng to Maffotone, I would need to be running under 132 bpm which is a real struggle and not much fun.
The 180 minus age always seems like a blunt instrument to me, a bit like 220 minus age for MHR. I'm now 65, which puts my MAF limit at 115. Since my measured MHR is currently 174 and resting HR is 40, the MAF limit is not even in Zone 2. Even adding the 10 bpm still just puts it into the bottom of Zone 2. I'd say the MAF limit needs to be a lot more scientific to be accurate for each individual. For now I'll keep my endurance/HR training in the upper half of my Zone 2!
Tim, isn’t your ‘limit’ a bit low? Blending Maffetone and a few others I can’t remember now, I’m doing marathon plan long runs in 120-123 range at age 64 (65 soon). Seems to work for me.
For me it’s the opposite I’m 17 and 153 to 163 seems a bit high
@@roadrunner708 Agreed as I said: 180-65 does seem an artificially low limit. It's a bit hilly round me and I'm likely less fit than you but I manage to hang around 130-134, upper Z2, and it works well for me.
@@Pablito-uv3wc A good mix of Zone 2, intervals, threshold and race pace has to be the best formula.
@Tim Gosling: I'm in a similar situation. I'm 62, have been running for 8 months, with a maximum recorded HR of 174 and a resting heart rate down to just above 50. For the past two months, I have been following the Garmin daily suggested workout, with most running done in "base" at a 130 bpm target or a recommended speed of 7:25/km (down from 7:30/km). The "recovery" suggested speed is 8:45/km which supposedly correspond to a target HR of 120 bpm - lower than the MAF limit. I can walk at that speed but can definitely not run as it is just too slow for the body mechanics to work correctly. My zone 2, based on reserve HR, is 125-136. I aim to stay very close to 130 bpm on flat roads, dipping lower when going downhill and trying to avoid going above 134.
The MAF recommended HR seems to me to be as simplistic as the "maximum HR = 220 - age", which would indicate that my max HR "should" be 158, whereas it is at least 174 for me.
I use 100% MAF training for my base building (and have switched to a more Orthodox Marathon training block for race prep , still using MAF for my easy runs), as an older post 50 runner it works for me , the main advantages is my base (Z2 /easy ) is always kept within the 117-132 range , even on climbs (MAF -10..+5) and it has given me much better flexibility with my heart where I can be running at my marathon pace for 15 miles (HR 138-144) and chill for half a mile (so 9 minute miles for me) bring my HR back down to 126-127 .. and then get back on it giving me sort of a rest in between a hard session. Stopping the intake of sugar and making sure my sleep is 7-8 hours a night has been a revelation. I have been doing it long enough (over a year) , where I do not have to look at my watch much .. 126 for me feels kind of like a brisk walk but I sweat more .. The one thing I would strongly advise .. leave the ego at home. It is not one for the Strava boasters. You guys should seek out Floris Gierman he is probably the leading advocate for this method of training currently
I'm 35, fit and healthy, but my HR goes up to 150+ even doing a ridiculously gentle warm up. Even if I can sing a song. So running at 70% of my max (129 bpm) is absolutely out of the question, so it's more frustrating than it's worth for me.
I used MAF when training for the Zugspitze Ultra (85Km) and to increase the weekly training volumes without getting injured or to fatigued. It really works very well and when your body starts to use fat efficiently as a fuel source then eating all those sugar gel's isn't really needed anymore which is much nicer for my body. The difficulty with MAF is running slow because most people like to get results fast. People will pass you but you can just keep going for much longer. If you do it for a few weeks then you will already see the results without getting injuries.
Yup. Prof. Tim Noakes has a presentation on low carb for athletes and points out that fat adapted individuals can rely on fat at least for 2:40 pace marathon runs, if you run faster you might want to add gels.
I’ve not used MAF before but been training predominantly at zone 2 for the last few months and managed to shave 14 mins off my half marathon PB. So this gives me encouragement to look into this more closely.
The force is already strong with you young Jedi.
I’m a 51 year old novice who started running 2 years ago. Made great, though tough, strides using MAF method. Keeping HR at 129 was very very difficult. I’ve added 5 to bring it to 134 which makes it more realistic. One top tip from me- don’t forget to ad tempo/speed work to the runs as well. I do and it’s the secret sauce on the MAF burger to getting the performance going in the right direction.
Yeah.. without the speed/tempo runs slow running won't give any real progress. I found it makes me slower actually.
Whilst the formula is crude, it will get everyone into a reasonable range. Whether you use some more advanced formula, a max HR from a 5k race or numbers from a lab test, MAF is immediately accessible and puts you in an aerobic zone. I didn't do strict maf but I kept slowing down over a number of runs until I learnt to leave the ego behind and do most runs to build the base aerobic system. I've been uninjured pretty much since I learnt this... the slightest niggle and I back off then try an easy run. I.e. maf. It works.
i have started MAF in Aug 2022. join my first running event on early march. it was life changing. as someone that never into running or even sport, it give me alot of benefits especially for my general health,cardio. started with walking since my HR already reach max, now pace 7-8 maintaining low HR. it can be boring and frustrating cause you can only walk to maintain the HR but you will need to trust the process, be patient, be consistent and you will see the amazing result!
I have tried it for 4 months. I've seen a couple of interviews with him on youtube, read his book and started. I had ~1 year running background behind me, first year without structure then 16 weeks of RWR method following Coah Jeff Galloway's training plan on Garmin. When started with MAF I could run 10k at average ~6:25/km. My max MAF HR was 131bpm. Week after week I was getting slower. At the end of 4 months I was happy to complete 1 km in 7 minutes. It was frustrating to say the least. After 4 months I run a 10k trial and to my surprise I improved my PB by 1 min. I attributed this improvement mainly to better pacing, as I learned to control my pace and not to start too fast. In the meantime I also lost a couple of kgs, even though I was not particularly overweight.
As I added intervals and tempo runs to my training my easy run HR was going down again ... or in other way, I could run faster at MAF HR. Went to a sport lab and done a proper lactate test. The result was that my recommended Z2 HR pace was 142bpm, ... 11 bpm faster as recommended by the basic MAF formula. It's true that even Maffetone recommends to adjust the zone upwards by 10 bpm for fit athletes.
Since then, I mainly train by Coach Greg McMillan's plan on Garmin. It works better for me. It's based on pace and the easy runs align well with my Z2 HR and the easy PRE. The plan has a good variety, close to 80/20 method.
I've been running for 3 months and MAF would be impossible unless I ran for like 1 minute at a time. The consensus by experts according to Endure by Alex Hutchinson is that RPE (rating of perceived exertion i.e how hard it feels to you on a scale of 1-10) is literally what your brain uses to determine how fast/long you can run - when it feels too hard, you slow down or stop. It is a summation of every signal like HR, muscle fatigue etc. So you can just run at an RPE of 4-5/10 instead of obsessing over a strict HR number.
In that sense MAF is pretty much the same as the standard advice of 80% easy runs but this takes it to 100%. But HIIT, anaerobic training, speed has its benefits too, so most people throw in a fast run once a week and you're back to 80/20! In the end running is just not that complicated :)
I'm relatively a new runner. I've recently come across this technique and I can say that its effective coz as soon as I finish my run, my HR comes down within a few min whereas previously it used to take more than an hour to get back to normal run. This means my body is less stressed when I use MAF method. I hope my performance will improve with time.
Thank you for sharing this. I am 72 and joined Orange Theory Fitness several months ago. OTF definitely pushes you to increase intensity in intervals. While pushing myself I injured my calf muscle and could hardly walk for several weeks much less run. As I recovered I discovered slow jogging. Then I went back to OTF and practiced slow jogging on the treadmill. I noticed my heart rate stayed around 108 which is exactly where I should be for the MAF method. What was surprising to me was how many more calories I burn compared to my previous workouts and compared to others around me who are pushing themselves much harder. I find it very comfortable to keep my heart rate below 108 and I feel very little risk of injury. Thank you for this information 😊
I did maf for about 4 months instead of 6. I was coming from off the couch and 36. I thought it would work well because it's really easy to hurt yourself when you have essential ly 0 previous fitness for the last 14 years. It is a good way to build base fitness. Your heart rate does become more efficient and of course starting from 0 you do see gains in progress. I was clocking significant mileage during this journey 40-80kms weekly. However I decided in January to enter a marathon in May 2023 and decided I had decided to try a more formal training block with speed sessions so I am no longer formally training maf.
I've caught the running bug and I'm trying for a sub 4 attempt as my A goal. I've fallen behind in volume as I live in Canada and gate treadmill. I was formerly running 7-10 hours a week dropped down to 3-5 for February. Bringing the volume to 10 hours again approaching the peak weeks. Hoping to get in over 100km a week without injury.
Watching Sarah's journey for Osaka is giving me a bit of chills and motivation. I'm scared of running the distance as I've only run 27km in training. I'm going to be doing 30-36 this Sunday and I'm trying to convince myself to find maf again.
After 10 years removed of being a 3:02 marathoner (a chronically injured one at the end) I decided to give low HR training a go. I had known about it since competing in triathlons in the late 90's but always chose to run by feel . This led to always going too hard and running through niggles that turned into bigger injuries. Now, 4 months into MAF training my mileage is up along with my health and enjoyment while my pace at 134 or less is continually dropping. It has forced me to limit runs with my group as they like to push the pace. Current plan is too continue through the spring and summer with mostly MAF and attempt a fall marathon (first since the 2014 Boston). While this may not be for everyone, it has salvaged my running career and I couldn't be happier!
I’ve started to do my easy runs at a deliberately slower pace than I would usually do. This was out of necessity really as I was getting back into running after a few weeks of illness. I’ve really benefited from it and have seen my fitness improve consistently. Where I struggle is psychologically as I have to tell myself it is ok to run slower than I can, especially as I use Strava to share my runs. The benefits outweigh the negatives, so I will continue to follow this approach.
Really great breakdown and very interesting. I did MAF for 7 months last year and for me it was a disaster! In that time I barely did any actual running. To keep my HR below the recommended rate I had to walk most of the time, despite already having been running for a while and therefore having a relatively good aerobic base. I ended the trail less fit than I started and completely demotivated! Fortunately it pushed me to seek out a coach to get some guided training and advice and am back to loving running and actually running for long distances again. I'm sure it's a wonderful method for many, just wasn't for me!
sounds like my experience. I really wanted it to work but it wasnt for me. But alteast I have learn to run slow , it is so easy to run to fast.
You messed around for 7 months with a method in which you weren’t even running ? Come on man. That’s weak.
I haven't done MAF. However I did up my long run to 3.5 to 4 hours, and drop the long run HR very low (low end of MAF) and that meant that I had more energy for the tempo type runs. I credit this very long, very slow runs, as the ones that helped me dip under 3 hours in the marathon
I run 5k once or twice a week. I recently started running and I can not stop trying to beat PR's at 175-190 bpm. Based off this video I will really try a full, low bpm, slow paced run! Thanks for the good information!
I have been practising the MAF method (not to every letter of the word) for 12 mos now. It feels like a more holistic and balanced approach, marathon build last year didn't feel as draining and I managed a 23 min PB. I still run at intensity when I am time poor, I feel that way I still have quality runs that create gains when I don't have the time for hours of volume.
I use the method since two months to get ready for a 6h trail run.
I’m quite happy with it and just worked on increasing my weekly mileage since I started with the maf training.
I think it is also easier to follow if you can only run on hilly terrain compared to a pace based plan.
I started using MAF at May-1 2023. The first thing I noticed is that I have to run extremely slow to keep my heartrate below, in my case, 129. Currently I run at about 8:30/km, and the first two kilometers at about 9:00/km (I can do a fast walk at 9:30/km so it is that slow). What makes it a little more difficult is that I usually run in the woods close to my home, but the terrain is not completely flat and also parts of it are unpaved, both causing my heartrate to go up. Also it is currently quite hot and humid here which also has an effect. But as difficult as the first runs were, now I am used to this pace and it is not difficult at all anymore. The biggest benefits so far are for me: (1) you run so slow that you greatly reduce the risk of getting injured (no muscle problems whatsoever so far, not even small ones); (2) because you run so slow you recover faster, which means that you can go out for a run more often (in my first month of MAF I immediately broken my all-time monthly running distance record). At the moment it gets more easy to keep running each kilometer below MAF-pace, but I am also more aware of kilometers where my heartrate all of the sudden goes up (in the beginning of a training, because my body needs some time to adapt to the workout, and sometimes in the last few kilometers). Currently I see the first results: sometimes I manage to do a kilometer just below 8:00/km while keeping my heartrate below 129, which was impossible in the beginning. A few days ago I did a 10km run at around 8:30/km with average kilometer heartrates in the low 120's, which was also quite new for me. Because all of this I am quite motivated to give it a chance (as I am only doing this for 1,5 month at the moment I write this), to see how much I can improve over a longer period of time.
Have done this on and off for years, it works if you stick to it and are consistent, patience is required.
Consistency is always key, are you using it at the moment to train for something?
A few athletes I know have used MAF and became very good slow long distance runners, with the emphasis on slow. If that's what you're looking for - great. But.....they were not able to run a more intense pace for very long, simply because they were physically and maybe even more importantly mentally not trained to do so. Also - any formula which puts everyone in the same bracket with relation to heart rate makes no sense as most people have a different max HR and resting HR, and this even fluctuates throughout the day or month. I believe athletes should take a much more holistic approach and get a sense how they feel - use data where it makes sense - but listen to your body and align you workouts to your objectives with regards to periodisation of training stress.
True... Extended training in running really slow won't be able to help you run fast. I think if you want to run fast you need to have some days you do speed. Maybe 20% of the time do speed and 80% do MAF.
YOU SHOULD KNOW: "Dr" Phil Maffetone has his doctorate in the chiropractic field, which in the US is absolutely littered with all kinds of quacks. Maffetone himself subscribes to a lot of junk science. I think he got close with his method, in the way a broken clock is right twice a day. Your mileage may vary.
While I can agree with low heart rate training in an 80/20 ratio, I do NOT recommend the MAF method, as it's very inflexible in the "180" formula, plus the part where he says to never run above that level. When I tried MAF training I saw very minimal gains despite following it as closely as I could for months, and by the end of it, my ability to run fast was completely destroyed. Phil would probably argue that I did it wrong, or didn't go long enough - how long should I not enjoy running? A year? Two? More?
So while some people might see gains from this, I don't think it's even close to the best method of increasing your performance.
I really wish The Running Channel had included these caveats.
I started doing it a year ago or so, after searching for help often damaged knee and shinbones. I was then living in a big city where it was easier to keep me HR down (after newbie difficulties already addressed in the comments below) on the flat-ish surface and I felt it worked amazingly well for me. I have now moved to an island, with steep hills, even though I still have the MAF-thinking in the back of my head, as arrive at the bottom of a steep hill I chose to forget about MAF, as even power walking gets my HR 5/10 bpm above the zone.
To summarize, its is said in the video; even though not a new concept, it is a good methodology to follow. And if for nothing else, my knees of shins doesn't hurt any longer, I can't even remember last time I had any injuries (not counting injuries related to false steps or other accidents on the trails) caused by overdo it on my two feet and I run about 100K a week.
Great video! Can't believe I missed this. Shared this as it's such a good video to explain why it's beneficial to run 'slow', it's not all about speed to begin with, it's building a good base.
I'm a casual runner, doing Zone 2 HRR training (141bpm), which is slightly above my MAF HR (137bpm). It was painfully slow for me when I started in Feb, as slow as 10:30 per km on a hotter day. Now, I am still slow, at about 9:40 per km on a cooler evening. It's really humbling to see some older folks overtake me on my runs. I do enjoy it more though, with less pain and more time to look at the surroundings and the sky. I do hope my pace will improve... and I am starting to feel my patience is waning. VO2 Max dropped from 39 to 35 in the period I was doing Zone 2, and that's a little alarming. Really hoping to get back to 6:00 per km paces.
bro, I put my faith on MAF a year ago, joining fb MAF group etc, with target the same as u, to be faster at the same heart rate, & I've been a slave to my hr strap & watch for the whole year, doing 100% MAF (maf 134-144), 5-10 hours a week.. before maf, i was able to do 2 hour long run starting at pace 7 & end it with faster pace 5 or something like that.. with MAF, i have to run at pace 9, sometimes pace 8 if the weather is cooler (i live in hotter climate), after a year of maf, the fastest pace i got is 7.25min/km.. frustrated,i went back to do my long run at my previous pace (7 to 5), it feels hard now bro.., i feels like i was breathing hard with that pace, it feels like i loss my fitness somehow... please don't do it bro, now i'm in the process of regaining my fitness with interval, threshold, & tempo work, & easy run between those workouts, easy run just run it by feel, if it feels easy, IT IS easy... MAF worked for some people, but not me. if u can't see improvement in one month, i advise u to abandon it bro.. if u want, u can run at zone 2 for easy run, using LTHR zoning, that one is more appropriate for you, cuz it is customized according to your lactate threshold heart rate
As always a great video with lots of interesting information.
I will tell on my example. Like most runners, I also trained too intensively, which caused me to have an oxygen deficit - to improve it, I had to start running in the 2nd heart rate zone. Unfortunately, at my age of 44, I would have to run 126-136, which was practically impossible for me. Then I came across calculations for the Karvonen method - where knowing your resting and maximum heart rate, you can calculate your zones. For this method, my 2nd zone is 135-149 which corresponds to an intensity of 60-70%. I started running like this last year and I must say that the effect is more than satisfactory for me. Of course, I'm not forcing anyone, but it's worth reading about both methods and choosing the right one for yourself.
I will give it a go thanks to your explicit instruction. Thank you!
Let us know how you get on!
Very informative video! I have a Garmin VivoAcrive 3 watch and a chest strap HR monitor. The watch is always wrong...way up most of the time. I know it because I tested it with 2 different chest straps. My son and a friend of mine have the same result. So, to me, watch HR monitor is the least desirable device for MAF method.
Thank you, you explained and broke everything down so well. I have been a runner my whole life. My heart rate, even when moderately fit shoots right up to 190bpm - I am 41 (female)
I read his yellow book and just started to apply what I learned from the book. I hope I can overcome this initial frustration by walking mostly to maintain my max aerobic HR.
Professor Andy!!
I’ve been trying the MAF method for 5 months now and I definitely see an improvement is staying in HR Zone 2 with tweaked zones based on other activities like Soccer (football).
Coming from Soccer, it’s been extremely difficult to get my HR under control. I felt like Zone 2 was a shuffle rather than a jog or a run. However, I found runs to be great now. The best advice I got was to first focus on 30 min easy runs and then go back to Zone 2. Coming from soccer has been super difficult but now I’m running farther distances for longer periods of time.
Great explainer on MAF, probably the most balanced between detailed and digestible!! I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing -- like you said! Good nutrition, managing stress, and most runs should be a bit slower/easier. I'm still a novice runner and have definitely had periods where I pushed too hard and ended up not running for long stretches. Trying to be more sensible in my approach this time!
If I ran at the heart rate worked out from the simple MAF method of 180 minus my age it would be in the 7(ish)m/km range which is painfully slow. According to my Garmin a 6:40m/km is in my Aerobic zone which is 136-154bpm and feels very comfortable and I can do this for a long time with no adverse effects. Most of my runs are easy with the odd park run/10km race at a higher pace so I'm pretty much doing the 80/20 split of slow to faster mix. There'll also be some track interval sessions when the weather warms up. My V02 max (51) is good for my age (53) and I'm comfortable with how I'm training. Have my first ultra booked for September.
I have used it and was hugely successful
Give us more details, mate. How long for, how many miles per week, what did you resting HR drop to etc.
I think MAF is a really great tool for beginner runner's to make them understand just how hard they are running. When I first tried running, in my head I thought I had to run at least 10-12"/mi for it to count as "running". When I started again, I took it slower because I didn't want to injure myself and ran around 14-15"/mi. Then I heard about the MAF method and tried it and my comfortable pace was 17-18"/mi!!! I think MAF can be a bit boring, so on shorter runs I'll go 15-16"/mi, but MAF really helped me take my ego out of my running and realize my only competition is with myself and that it's okay to have (speedy) walkers surpass you 😅
Definitely going to give this a try, it sounds like a really well balanced plan. I'm not sure how I'm going to go with the low heart rate as an overweight 57 year old, but I'm certainly going to give it my best shot.
View it as a more structured version of "lots easy slow runs, some limited harder runs and eating properly and running to be happy" anything like the MAF formula can only ever be a rule of thumb at best, everyone is going to be physically slightly different.
Here is my experience of the MAF method.
I have been using the MAF method for the majority of my runs for nearly 2 years. Luckily for me I have been able to run a decent pace with this low heart rate. For some of my running friends they couldn’t do this so I suggested them just dropping to an easy effort (which has reaped the same rewards of reducing their heart rate for the same pace). It seems when you talk about HR while out for a run we are all different so as good as this method worked out for me it definitely isn’t a ‘one size fits all’.
As a lot of runners could get frustrated with running slowly or having to run too slowly it doesn’t not always work. But in my experience it has made running very enjoyable as once I had improved enough I’m able to have chatty social runs at this MAF heart rate (for me 136-146) and staying injury free. One note is that when dropping your pace to achieve the low heart rate your biomechanics change therefore working different muscles (and leaving others out) which can then cause injury when returning to faster pace (or higher cadence).
Therefore I would suggest mixing in the faster pace runs earlier than 6 months in, and if you are walking too much at the start of the MAF journey up the heart rate a little or run to a slow pace or ‘easy effort’.
I’ve have seen an improvement in my paces at my MAF heart rate but also at that heart rate I can run for a lot longer. Also I get to enjoy my surroundings and don’t get that feeling of wanting to finish the run because I am tired.
I would definitely recommend adding this to your training!
Thanks for the run down!
I tried it. Ran 3 months rediculously slow and then did a lab test learning my fatmax threshold was at 168 bpm. Made the runs much more fun, but still running 3/4 runs under this fatmax bpm and obly every ; run high intensity (and even then mostly easy but with some hard episodes”, the biggest gain for me is the radically higher mileage I can pull off this way, and the flexibility of being able to run consecutive days, soon after big meals, slightly ill and such without any backlashes ❤️
My pace is marginally faster than before, but my heart rate is lower for the same pace!
I tried MAF for 2 months. I'm 62, and tried it as I was starting to think more about being kind to my body. Eventually, I gave MAF away, as like others said, it sucked the joy out of running for me. What I prefer to do now is use a run/walk approach in most of my run sessions. I vary it between run 3 min / walk 1 min, up to run 5 mins / walk 1, for between 40-60 minutes. Also, I vary the terrain and elevation to keep from getting stale. I still run a hard session once a week (usually at parkrun). I focus on good weight management, rest days or cross training, and regular strength work to ensure a balanced approach, which Dr Maffetone also promotes. In summary, MAF zone training is too regimented for me.
I always believed in the MAF method. It helped me get comfortable and progress with the long run. It also helped me achieve my PB by getting used to slower paces, so on race day it didn't feel uncomfortable to pick up my pace. To sum it all up, the MAF method will always help you in the long run (no pun intended).
I decided to try for at least 3 months at the beginning of this year. I'm a 46 year old woman; been running since I was 12, with a couple of years' gap in my 30s. It has helped me slow down my slow runs. I am able to keep my heart rate down for longer, but last week I noticed that actually means running at a pace slower than my walking pace!! 😂 Just using my garmin venu sq as my heart rate monitor, I'm dealing with loads of factors - hills, altitude, heat. Life = stress most days :/ I've always steered towards eating "real food." I've been roughly the same weight and size since I was in high school. All in all, I feel like it was a good experiment, but I will begin to miss the joy of running if I try to continue past my 3 month commitment. I plan to spend April doing a more structured run-walk approach, then choose a race and start training, with my newfound sense of how slow is "slow" on my easy days.
I do 80% walking, and 20% jogging. I was 25 lbs overweight when I started. I'm still 3 lbs away from my wt. goal. I'm just 2 months in... although when I jog at all my HR jumps up to near max to max level. I'll keep it at 80/20 while I continue to interval train and lose weight. Once I establish some fitness and I am within normal weight ranges I'll begin adhering to MAF training in earnest as aerobic fitness will be my next goal after weight loss and building up to doing a 5k.
I went from walk/run for a mile at my MAF HR to 9:00 miles. Only did 10 miles a week volume. It’s great
After 4 month of MAF training i've increased my min/km by 1:47/km. Need i say, i love MAF!
I got back into running last summer and most of my training is low heartrate. I definitely appreciate the lower likelihood of getting injured and seem to be making good progress, albeit it's been a bit stop and start for various reasons. About the only tip I've got is how helpful it is to have a treadmill. Doing my hour+ runs at a set speed which I know keeps my heartrate where I want it is so much easier than going outside. I've done a few outside and my heartrate is up pretty quickly because I'm going too fast or there's an incline or something. Now the weather's getting better I'll be outside again soon and have to run/walk/run/walk until I get it right!
You can't build the house without solid base and this is what the MAF is all about. Many people starting their adventure with running ang go all out during each training session and this is a first step to disaster. Even Kipchoge doesn't do it! MAF is an excellent way to build a solid base and aerobic endurance needed so much for further development in your training whether you run flat, tarmac, marathons or trails in the mountainous terrain which is my preference. I started my adventure with trail running 3 years ago and after implementing MAF into my training nearly a year ago I can't be happier than I am now. Running 70-90km each week with 3000m+ in ascents seems to be an easy and pleasant training along with trail races in the Canary Islands where I live at moment. Just over a year ago my heart rate was sky rocketing during very similar workouts and my aerobic endurance was just very average if not poor. I used to struggle during races and after the race day due to slow recovery but aerobic training changed a lot if not everything. Back in February this year I run trail marathon in El Hierro, almost 45km and about 5600m accumulated drop. 48 hours after the race I was back on trails enjoying this beautiful sport! Recovery now is just outstanding. Of course, healthy eating and nutrition must come with it, healthy life style, so building this bubble around is extremely important. Also, aerobic endurance training helps to burn fat(with healthy life style) and make your life easier during training sessions and races so you don't have to rely so much on carbs which are good to some extent. Aerobic training makes up 70-90% of my training sessions with the remaining part being fartlek, tempo, threshold or vo2max workouts. I do recommend to focus on aerobic endurance training to everyone to become healthier and more efficient athlete. Put your egos away, leave it behind you, focus on your workouts, breathing, heart rate and be patient! Running is a process and you should focus on it not the outcome. I'm 45 now, started 3 years ago in the UK thanks to pandemic and the only thing I regret didn't start running adventure earlier. I love it now though!
Very balanced advice, thanks
I'm about to start MAF training for London Marathon. I'm going to do all of my training until 8 weeks before at MAF or slower before adding some speedwork in last 8 weeks.
I currently do between 60/80km per week over 6 days. I'm also going to be upping this to 100km or so, as I'm doing a 70 mile Ultra in June
I am going to be 61 this January and I am going to try this as I am getting back into training and getting my goal to run the Detroit Free Press Marathon Oct 3rd 2024
I done only maf for a while and after about 6 months I only noticed small changes. Most of my runs are still done relatively easy. However , I have noticed a big change in my fitness since I joined a club and do a regular weekly track and tempo sessions. Maf enables you to run very high mileage weeks but for me personally I don't have the time to run such mileage. So to finding the balance and backing off when more recovery is required is working for me.
Its helped me radically improve my performance over three months when I combined it with intervals once a week
Great! Do you still use it?
I'm fairly new at running and found out about this method. I'm not following the method, because I use another training plan. What I do is doing my slow runs following the MAF method. Running in het heart zone is so nice and I feel getting fitter in the last few months. My goal is the get fitter and a better health and MAF makes sure I don't train to hard. I love easy runs now and listen to some music. Great way to start the day. The last few years I have been cutting out carbs in my diet and follow a more ketogenic approach. Next to slow running this should adopt me to be more fat adapted instead of carbs. I'm just curious where this brings me and I enjoy the process.
I generally follow my Garmin's suggested workout and run to HR. The watch seems to adjust my HR and time value dependant on all sorts of things. E.g. It's suggesting I run 30mins at 142bpm today with a 5 or so bpm buffer either side. Keeps things simple and I just do as I'm told :)
I’ve seen a few alactic conditioning workout for powerlifters, strength athletes and ice hockey players using the MAF zones. For strength athlete’s it wants you to an EMOM style workout, kettlebell swings recommended, make sure you don’t go above you adjusted MAF during the work phase. For most people with was like 10-15 swings every round. Ice hockey was 2min run or assault/air bike intervals or until you reach max MAF whichever comes first then recover to 20bpm below max MAF. Then I’ll see running programs recommend the MAF zone for long duration events for aerobic conditioning.
It’s so conflicting that the same max heart rate can be used for aerobic or alactic work tailored for different sports but I’m not a professional. So one program will tell me I’m developing my aerobic and the other my alactic.
I used to run all the time, but took 10 years off and am now getting back into it. I used to exclusively run 5ks, but want to try a 10k once I have gotten the 5k down again. I seem to have a lot of success training in zone five. For me zone 2 would basically be fast walking since I’m out of shape, and that seems like it won’t help me at all. My last run was 4.25mi and I spent almost 40 minutes of that run in zone five. Is this bad for me or something? I always feel great after, and in the last month I’ve gone from about a 10:45 pace for 4 miles down to 10:15. It seems like zone five is working for me.
Very interesting. I did not realize that MAF translates into 117-127 for me. After some trial and error, I started following Jack Daniel's pace formula and these MAF values now fall squarely at the upper end of my easy zone based on last autumn race. I can't really believe this can be a pure coincidence. Over the last 3 years since I started running, my pace has been increasing while my heart rate kept dropping. This has been particularly significant over the last 4 months, when I stuck to easy runs due to the weather in Canada and my desire to avoid injuring myself by falling. In a certain sense, I would have been doing 4-5 months of MAF. In any case, I have noticed an improvement in my easy runs (faster at lower heart rate). When spring comes, I will be adding reps, intervals, etc. I wonder if the overall performance will have improved by the summer or whether I will be stuck at being more efficient at low paces.
Hi im 48, overweight, runner since 4 years recently increased my running time. Ended with a back injury, i think will try MAF style when i can tnrun again. Thanks
I replace the MAF number by zone-2 calculated using my average HR in a tempo run. It comes out as a bit higher than MAF but not far off.
My long runs when I am out by myself I try and keep my heart rate below 130 (180-51) it can feel slow but I know in myself the run is doing me good and I don’t need to push it just try and take it sort of easy.
For those who've had success with MAF, how much running per week were you doing? Was a lot required to see any positive results? My schedule allows for about two to three hours per week for running. Not sure if that's enough to be effective..
I started MAF 4 or 5 years ago, and I was running 6:45 min/km, now I am running 5:28 min/km.
Hope to start again! 😢 i broke a toe two weeks ago. But watching your videos and podcast encourage me to be ready when my toe gets well 😅
Very skeptical at first but the improvement is undeniable
Interesting video. I tried MAF for 2 month's and noticed only a marginal improvement (I was reasonably fit anyway)... but here lies the conundrum, my high HR is 180 and I am 54 so does the formula still apply? I do not hear any athletes using this method, in fact one coach told me to ignore MAF and just use pace. For sure in the winter months run base training which is slow but at a percentage of your best 5k/10k race pace and then follow the 80/20 principle leading up to races etc. Coaches keep a lot of useful information to themselves until they are paid, so I would have liked to have heard more insights into this and your opinion if it actually works and if athletes swear by it. Not saying it does not work and I see evidence from a few , I mean few, people using it that it does work but is it because their HR is adaptable to it and mine is not. I see their HRs low 120s, low 110s and they are in their 30s/40s... is it because they have been running a lot longer than me (4 years). Anyway I am still unsure about it without trying another 2-6 months running at HR 125 or lower... almost walking
I haven’t tried MAF specifically. I tried to do strict zone 2 training last spring. I wasn’t that successful. I’m going to try something similar though this year in hopes of building fitness and preparing for my next training cycle. Hoping to get faster but want to be smart about it.
Thinking about giving it a try… the MAF calculation suggests I should be running at about 154 BPM which sounds fair as I‘ve heard of the benefits of slow running but struggled with 130 - 140 BPM lately because it‘s been nervewreckingly sloooow. 5 years ago I started off with running at 170 BPM but lately at my „natural“ pace it‘s at about 160 BPM (natural meaning not running with maximum effort but also not paying attention at keeping the BPM low)
Bought the yellow book of running and it's great. I can't run and maintain MAF heart rate ranges, I walk xD but it works!
I’ve had good luck with the MAF approach. That said, long-slow runs seem to make me a long-slow runner. I need to incorporate some speed work into my training since race days seem like a shock to my body if I’m only doing MAF.
What's the reason for having to stick religiously to this low HR for the first few months? Why not do 80:20 from the get go? I've definitely started sticking to the adage of keeping easy runs easy, which I've found enjoyable
Just to dofferentiate this plan for everyone else promoting 80/20?
Although it's great that there is research behind the MAF 'run slow to run fast approach', the unreliability of heart-rate monitors and the numerous reasons behind heart-rate variations, for practical prurposes the formula is too crude a tool. I prefer the Arthur Lydiard approach of aerobic base training at a conversation pace. Trusting your body's response to stresses applied to it (running, terrain etc.) is a more reliable way of monitoring effort which may (or may not) be reflected in heart-rate readings which may (or may not) be accurate. I understand that for many runners this 'scientific' approach helps them discipline themselves to run at an appropriate aerobic pace.
I’m 100% on the balance of 80/20 but I prefer the RPE way of assessing if I’m doing an 80% or 20% run. It’s as always worth trying and if it works for you then great.
I'm 77 years old and have been running for 40+ years. A long time ago "long, slow distance" was recommended and, to some extent, was my staple. Reading recently about Zone 2 training, I've calculated my target in a couple of ways (220-age x 60% = 85 ; 180-age = 103). On a 6 mile run this morning, I was able to maintain 107± on all but the most hilly parts. Is this a good Zone 2 target, or should I "add 10" and run with 105-115 as my target?
Very interesting breakdown of the MAF method. How does one get guidance on this. There’s a subscription and a kindle book. Is there a paperback or hardcover? I could not see that but I am eager to give this method a try.
Great method, although I'd recommend adjusting that heart rate more individually. Something around middle of personal Z2 (in typical 5 zone system) is I think a much better starting point, the rest of calculations can stay the same. So for example if Z2 is between 135 and 151 bpm, middle would be 143, so you'd run at 133-143 heart rate.
180 - 54 (my age) will get me to a heartrate slower than 126, that will never work. For me keeping it below 150 is all I can achieve running. At 54 my max heartrate is still 200, so 150 is pretty slow for me.
Does it have to be for 6 months do you think? I'm 1 and a half months in and itching to do some other types of training! Will definitely stick with it for 3 months at least. Just not sure I can handle 6 months (unless it's 100% worth it!)
I am in week 6 of running at LHR of 115 - I run a set hour at least 5 times/week
I can now focus on technique which influences the distance run in an hour at this pace
have now added hill sprints and was surprised by my enjoyment of them
have also run 2 hours LHR which is short of my only half marathon time
I am enjoying my experiment in LHR + 80/20
I tried it, but at 60 and I live in the hills. Then add in southern US is humid.
But all that being said I learned a lot I grew a little bit so now what I do is 80 to 90% of my runs don’t worry as much about heart rate I just make sure I can run conversational when I see a hill I just say heck with it and I run up the hill and then I just coast down and enjoy my run when I feel my heart rate is going too high I just walk in for where I live my age, and all that kind of stuff that those better.
I’m doing it, it takes discipline and it will pay off in the long run
I worked at low heart rate running in the past and don't really worry too much these days. But my easy run HR would come close to the MAF value. This is basically "Zone 1" running in the 5+ zone model.
I thought the 'subtract your age' method had been shown to be pretty inaccurate now. Without doing a lactate test in a lab (which I haven't been able to do yet), I think heart rate reserve is supposed to be the most accurate method. I use my resting and max heart rate to calculate HR zones and then use that for my zone 2 runs, which make up about 80 per cent of my runs. And for the other 20 per cent, I throw in threshold, hill reps or sprint repeats.
I was hoping The Running Channel was going to test this method 😢
This method still interests me but I'm not sure how beneficial or efficient it is.
I highly recommend Floris Gierman, who has a podcast that talks about MAF training quite a lot. He has some very good runners on there who talk about their experiences with the method as well as some fairly "normal" runners and their experience too. James Dunne is another UA-camr that talks about it a fair bit.
i've tried it but i am 57 so it's quite limiting. that said, i do try to keep hr down when doing the 80% easier runs each week. it seems to help me be mindful of breathing and form as well
No, I'll stick with my HR zones in my Garmin, do some runs slow, some intervals, some threshold work and some hill repeat training. Much more fun than doing everything at the same intensity..
Fair enough! What's your favourite session?
@@runningchannel I really enjoy my speed intervals, digging deep and then recovering. Waiting delivery of my Garmin FR255 (upgrade from current FR55) and curious to the daily training suggestions that will give. Perhaps worth a video as well following up upon Sarah's video about that. Algorithmes should be much better with the Race day widget if you set goals in your agenda right?
In my experience the MAF method has several advantages:
1. It's running-centric. As a runner I appreciate that.
2. It's easy to fall off and get back on. If life gets in the way and you have to stop running for any reason, it's easy to pick the method back up.
3. Yes all of these things are generally accepted, but are they distilled in the same easy to understand way? The MAF seems more approachable than other holistic programs.
It seems like running to how you feel is easier than being tied to your HRM and a strict number to follow, but everyone is different.
This is a very useful video. I've definitely benefited from low heart-rate training.However, I have to take issue with your assertion that you need quickly available sugars before or during an event. Ths human body is a wonderful and adaptable system. Experiments done on low-carb fat-adapted athletes proved that their glycogen levels were the same as carb-eating athletes both before and straight after a strenuous work out. Not only this but several hours after the event, glycogen levels had recovered to the same level. If you follow a low carb diet for around six months your will not only develop the ability to replenish your own glycogen without carbs you will also burn fat at a much higher rate, saving your glycogen deposits and delaying hitting the dreaded wall. It might be an interesting subject for a future video.