Training by Time

[Jonny00GT]

I'll be interested to hear

I'll be interested to hear how it goes as well. If you're not wearing a monitor, then how will you be pacing yourself, or will you just be running based on how good you feel? I've heard of using a "conversational pace".

I know you don't have this problem, but I've never been a runner, so my cardio base is crap! I'm also kinda a numbers whore, so I gotta know my rate, my pace, my split, etc. so I can track my progress. I lost 30lbs in 4mo when I started running cause my pace was all about comfort and a conversational speed. Then I joined a running club and tried to keep up with those poeple and haven't lost since. I believe, from what I've read, that I'm running too high for my heart rate, so I'm only burning sugar. I figure thinner people go faster for longer easier, so I'm training for my full based on mileage and heart rate zones the way Jimmy drew it up for me. Once I have a good base and a smaller pants size, I may dedicate some time to running by time after June. I wanna make it through that monster Maffetone book first though!

-Jonny

 

[migangelo]

i can talk and breathe

i can talk and breathe through my nose with my hr pushing 200. i'll talk rapidly and breathe harder but it's still possible. my comfortable running and conversational pace is well above my maf pace. it's still almost tortous, especially with the watch breaking, twice. luckily they have good customer service and are sending me a brand new watch this time. even paid for me to ship it.

 

[Alejandro 10]

migangelo wrote:i can talk

i can talk and breathe through my nose with my hr pushing 200. i'll talk rapidly and breathe harder but it's still possible. my comfortable running and conversational pace is well above my maf pace. it's still almost tortous, especially with the watch breaking, twice. luckily they have good customer service and are sending me a brand new watch this time. even paid for me to ship it.

Mike,

God has given you a gift, man, a true gift. Don't waste it!

 

[Barefoot Gentile]

Pjruns2 wrote:BarefootG:The

BarefootG:

The guy who wrote the training schedule for Runner's World that I mentioned above was Joe Henderson. It was my first Marathon and that method worked good for me. I still think there is a difference is going out for time vs. distance as I seemed to settle into a good pace knowing that I was not going to stop until I ran the time, therefore did not rush through it.

I probably shouldn't mention it, but I have never used a HR monitor or even checked my pulse when running. My personality is mainly "phlegmatic" so consequently I just don't care. Least not when I am out for a run.



Per

I will try to find the article, I am interested to read it, thanks! I think we have somewhat the same personality.

 

[Barefoot Gentile]

Jonny00GT wrote:I'll be

I'll be interested to hear how it goes as well. If you're not wearing a monitor, then how will you be pacing yourself, or will you just be running based on how good you feel?

Hi, You got it! It's just all about feel for me. If the body feels good to run fast I will do it, if it's telling me to chill out and have a nice relaxed run, I will listen. I already have a job, I don't want running to become a job

 

[Jonny00GT]

migangelo wrote:i can talk

i can talk and breathe through my nose with my hr pushing 200. i'll talk rapidly and breathe harder but it's still possible. my comfortable running and conversational pace is well above my maf pace. it's still almost tortous, especially with the watch breaking, twice. luckily they have good customer service and are sending me a brand new watch this time. even paid for me to ship it.

Holly crap! When I hit 195, I see spots! Ok...not really, but I can only hit that when I'm doing speed work and I've never even thought about trying to speak except maybe to yell, "MAN DOWN!!!"!

-Jonny

 

[migangelo]

ok, i did it for about 5 secs

ok, i did it for about 5 secs and i didn't have anyone to talk to at that point. i slowed down to around 185 or so because i couldn't sustain that pace. it was the final "sprint" to the finish line.

 

[Barefoot Gentile]

Great article about Ed

Great article about Ed Whitlock. Keep it simple!

http://www.joehenderson.com/runnersworld/312.html

 

[JosephTree]

Heck, I've been running by

Heck, I've been running by time for years. I get out of my car and say "OK, I gotta pick up ____ (name of child here) in ___ minutes. Allow 30 seconds for cooling off. That's how long I get to run today!

 

[BFwillie_g]

Chaserwilliams wrote:I think

I think Maffetone mentions something about perception of time, and how to adjust your own perception of it. Very interesting stuff! !

The two clocks theory - an argument against exercising with music. Good stuff, yes!

I'm base-building/ preventing overtraining now by running low HR and for time. Got 5:45 hours this week, will gradually build up to ten or eleven by the end of April, then do about two weeks of higher HR training followed by a recovery week before my ultra on May 22. That's the 'plan' anyway ....

 

[palouserider]

I always run by time now,

I always run by time now, started it soon after starting Maffetone. For me it is a lot lower stress and therefore very helpful. I don't have to pay attention to anything since my heart rate monitor let's me know when I'm too fast.

I also started out without heart rate monitor and got pretty good at taking my pulse when I first started Maffetone. The delay in reading was still significant enough to where I thought I was within my heart rate at 4.6 mph and once I started using a heart rate monitor I was going at 3.6 mph at the same heart rate. I've also tried running without a heart rate monitor occasionally since and find that I still go over my target heart rate by up to 10 sometimes, so for me using one simplifies things a lot and keeps the stress level way down, allowing me to just enjoy the run.

 

[Barefoot Gentile]

palouserider wrote: I don't

I don't have to pay attention to anything since my heart rate monitor let's me know when I'm too fast.

This is what I don't get.

 

[BFwillie_g]

Barefoot Gentile wrote:This

This is what I don't get.

huh. I don't get what you don't get, Adam. You wear a watch and a chest strap, you dial in a number, you run, watch goes beep when your pulse hits that number, you back off. You don't even need to look at the watch, could actually carry it in your pocket. It's just a reminder that some of need because without it, we run too fast and get burned out.

I overtrained a few years ago (thank's Pfitz!) and it's a very frustrating condition to deal with. I do just go out and run. I run like a kid, across fields, jumping ditches, leaping over fallen trees, splashing through deep mud puddles, with my dog.

But after a while, my pulse stops coming down to rest and I have trouble sleeping, and get irritable and unhappy ... so now I'm regenerating, boosting the aerobic system (which is a mess), all that stuff...

IF I could get away without it, I would, though! Maybe by the time I'm 70

Now, there are people who overthink pulse training and create crazy-ass-retentive plans based on time spent in three zones and all that stuff. That's definitely not my world.

 

[migangelo]

i ran the other day on a

i ran the other day on a trail loop i've been using. i wore my TG's and a few layers as it was cold. as i was still walking uphill for my warm up an older man passed me walking at a brisk pace. this day i wasn't able to settle into a good rythm at all. my hr kept beeping at me any time i got some rythm going. it was frustrating and a long slow run. much slower than i anticipated.

when i was approaching the halfway mark, about a mile to go, the old man passed me still looking fresh and with his brisk pace. it was demoralizing and inspiring at the same time.

 

[BarefootGburg]

So, for those of you that

So, for those of you that follow Maffetone, what if the heart rate calculation provides you with a rate so low that you can't run and stay below it?

Seriously, I'm 52, so that's a HR of 128 according to the Maffetone calculation When I run, breathing really easy, my heart rate is about 145. I don't know that I could do more than walk moderately with a heart rate of 128.



Note: Strike this question. I just found the Maffetone thread.

 

[BarefootGburg]

I imagine that, at some

I imagine that, at some speed, walking is more efficient than running.

i ran the other day on a trail loop i've been using. i wore my TG's and a few layers as it was cold. as i was still walking uphill for my warm up an older man passed me walking at a brisk pace. this day i wasn't able to settle into a good rythm at all. my hr kept beeping at me any time i got some rythm going. it was frustrating and a long slow run. much slower than i anticipated.

when i was approaching the halfway mark, about a mile to go, the old man passed me still looking fresh and with his brisk pace. it was demoralizing and inspiring at the same time.

 

[palouserider]

My run today was the perfect

My run today was the perfect example of how easy time plus heartrate works. My legs were still a little sore from having done ice skating as well as running a couple of days ago but I had already skipped my long run and wanted to do at least a couple of miles.

It was the first time this season that I was running on snow with water shoes and winter spikes attached. It was pretty windy as well. The plan was to run for about 70 minutes at my usual heartrate of 130-4. I know I went about 1/2 mile shorter than I usually would but it was better to know that I had put in a certain amount of effort and did not increase my chance of injury. I still felt good about the run.

 

[BFwillie_g]

BarefootGburg

Seriously, I'm 52, so that's a HR of 128 according to the Maffetone calculation When I run, breathing really easy, my heart rate is about 145. I don't know that I could do more than walk moderately with a heart rate of 128.

well, that's the strict interpretation of 180 minus age but you could probably also use the 132ish number that I use. The point is, that's the number you don't go over and everytime you hit it, you have to back off and really let the pulse drop down. The average HR should be a bit lower than than that number. So, really, if you have any kind of aerobic fitness, you should be able to maintain at least a mild 'jog' on flat ground (very important variable there) without hitting that number. Let's say, maintain an HR of 125. If you can't do that (physically, not mentally which is another story altogether, lol) then, actually, you may well be just the kind of person who would benefit from this kind of training.

You can do a 'MAF' test to give you ann idea of your aerobic fitness.

Anyway, during my run today, I was thinking about Gentile's original post here and the time vs distance formulas. I found myself wishing I had never gotten hung up running for distance/pace in the first place. It makes such perfect sense that a specific level and duration of stress is what trains the body most efficiently - and this is very individual. All those training plans I've followed in the past (like I said, thanks Pfitz! lol) totally ignore this element of training, and very often result in people like me, in that sort of middle-ground of acheivment, becoming overtrained.

 

[Blind Boy]

Apparently, I'm kind of

Apparently, I'm kind of following Maffetone at the moment without knowing it. When I run on the treadmill I set my heart rate monitor to tell me when I exceed 145 and when I do, I back off to let it sink back down. I'm 28 by the way so I guess I should really set it to 150-ish but I want to keep it really low. I almost always go out for time instead of distance too. I've tried basing my training on distance but time just suits me better. I've also tried the Daniels approach, going by pace instead of heart rate and that works pretty well too if I run time trials often enough. My long runs end up at about the same pace regardless.

 

[BarefootGburg]

Thanks for your response.I

Thanks for your response.

I tried last night to run more aerobically. I don't have a heart rate monitor so I just stuck with always being able to breath through my nose. I still ran three miles, and I definitely felt great afterwards - more energy, and my heart rate was back to 60 or so within a few minutes. I'm also an insulin-dependent diabetic, and I noticed a distinct improvement in my blood glucose (Bg) level. I didn't drop nearly as much as usual during my run, and I dind't carb load nearly as much before I went out to run. I always carry glucose with me in case my Bg drops.

I'm just not sure I'm interested in strapping a heart rate monitor on before I go out. Always having to make sure I have glucose, a phone, and ID, and my Bg test kit with me is enough of an ordeal. But, I do have a metronome on my smart phone, so I can set it to quietly run at 130, then check my pulse against it... crude, but probably effective enough?

Seriously, I'm 52, so that's a HR of 128 according to the Maffetone calculation When I run, breathing really easy, my heart rate is about 145. I don't know that I could do more than walk moderately with a heart rate of 128.

well, that's the strict interpretation of 180 minus age but you could probably also use the 132ish number that I use. The point is, that's the number you don't go over and everytime you hit it, you have to back off and really let the pulse drop down. The average HR should be a bit lower than than that number. So, really, if you have any kind of aerobic fitness, you should be able to maintain at least a mild 'jog' on flat ground (very important variable there) without hitting that number. Let's say, maintain an HR of 125. If you can't do that (physically, not mentally which is another story altogether, lol) then, actually, you may well be just the kind of person who would benefit from this kind of training.

You can do a 'MAF' test to give you ann idea of your aerobic fitness.

Anyway, during my run today, I was thinking about Gentile's original post here and the time vs distance formulas. I found myself wishing I had never gotten hung up running for distance/pace in the first place. It makes such perfect sense that a specific level and duration of stress is what trains the body most efficiently - and this is very individual. All those training plans I've followed in the past (like I said, thanks Pfitz! lol) totally ignore this element of training, and very often result in people like me, in that sort of middle-ground of acheivment, becoming overtrained.