Maffetone Heart Rate Training

[Gammmmo]

I think in a lot of ways this is right but we should remember, you can improve a lot from low intensity training as you work up to those hours.

Sure, just depends on how well trained you are but I would wager that the majority of people who are researching principles such as Maffetone, already are fairly well trained (or at least done a reasonable amount of training) and are looking for something to take them to a new level.

[nick rockliff]

Sure, just depends on how well trained you are but I would wager that the majority of people who are researching principles such as Maffetone, already are fairly well trained (or at least done a reasonable amount of training) and are looking for something to take them to a new level.

This was me back in 2005, I'd been training on the erg for about two years and got to the stage where my 2K time was around 6.20 and wasn't getting any faster. Was doing a lot of mixed sessions and racing most of them due to the competitiveness of the old UK forum back then.

Decided to change the way I did things, so went to the local Uni and had a full physiological assessment which included blood lactate profiles and VO2MAX testing. The results of this gave me my HR training zones. Most of my training was UT2 to strict zones with a smaller amount of UT1. After 5 months I did a mile race mid summer with a couple of sprint sessions but mainly aerobic work and ended the race with a PB. After 7 months I did a 6.16 2k PB.

I was doing about 11 sessions a week, UT2 would have been 16k r20 twice a day sometimes but around 400 to 450k a month. UT2 HR zone was higher than 70% max though.

[MiddleAgeCRISIS]

This feedback has sparked a lot of thought so thanks to every one for that.

I think there are going to be lots of people approaching this from different angles.

My approach is that I've historically only trained through sprint work and weights. Having given up sport 15 years ago i've retained a great deal of strength but got quite chunky on top.

In this context' I'm not looking for strength or to build muscle but to create better endurance and burn fat.

This high volume exercise is moving me away from being an anaerobic power athelete to an endurance one so it seems to be perfect for me.

Wonder if there is any benchmarking research about Maffetone and the individuals starting point.

[Gammmmo]

This feedback has sparked a lot of thought so thanks to every one for that.

I think there are going to be lots of people approaching this from different angles.

My approach is that I've historically only trained through sprint work and weights. Having given up sport 15 years ago i've retained a great deal of strength but got quite chunky on top.

In this context' I'm not looking for strength or to build muscle but to create better endurance and burn fat.

This high volume exercise is moving me away from being an anaerobic power athelete to an endurance one so it seems to be perfect for me.

Wonder if there is any benchmarking research about Maffetone and the individuals starting point.

You're doing the opposite to me.

[Tony Cook]

This feedback has sparked a lot of thought so thanks to every one for that.

I think there are going to be lots of people approaching this from different angles.

My approach is that I've historically only trained through sprint work and weights. Having given up sport 15 years ago i've retained a great deal of strength but got quite chunky on top.

In this context' I'm not looking for strength or to build muscle but to create better endurance and burn fat.

This high volume exercise is moving me away from being an anaerobic power athelete to an endurance one so it seems to be perfect for me.

Wonder if there is any benchmarking research about Maffetone and the individuals starting point.

You are where I am/was. Many years of playing and training rugby so an emphasis on power play. Lots of short explosive work, strength, fast recovery. Never seriously trained an aerobic base as there just wasn’t the time to add on several long slow sessions to a packed programme.
If ‘muscled out’ some decent times on the erg - 6:31 2k as a big, fit 30 year old but am now nearly twice as old with arthritic knees and 15kg lighter.
Since lockdown I’ve built on technique and have worked my way to being able to actually sit on that painful seat for more than 20 mins. Done a lot of metres (for me) at UT2 and am on a second cycle of the Pete Plan.
I’m taking my baselines as 40 mins at 130HR to see if I go further = increased aerobic base; and I will self test my 30’ @ 20SPM distance to see if my power in the stroke improves.
Looking at it as a long term plan but knowing that the end of lockdown will make it difficult to keep having the time available.

[mitchel674]

I just finished his free ebook. I'm intrigued and certainly would consider this low HR aerobic training. My biggest question is that he doesn't plainly state the amount of volume required to have the desired impact. How many hours per week do I need to do in my 120-130 heart rate zone?

I currently row 100km per month. Most of these are long steady state rows but my HR is typically 130-145 with a 2:20 pace. I do throw in some harder pieces 1-2 times each week (5k @ 2:10). I suspect a long row capped at 130 would currently have me at 2:30 pace. What should my week look like following the Maffetone plan?

[Gammmmo]

Sure, just depends on how well trained you are but I would wager that the majority of people who are researching principles such as Maffetone, already are fairly well trained (or at least done a reasonable amount of training) and are looking for something to take them to a new level.

This was me back in 2005, I'd been training on the erg for about two years and got to the stage where my 2K time was around 6.20 and wasn't getting any faster. Was doing a lot of mixed sessions and racing most of them due to the competitiveness of the old UK forum back then.

Decided to change the way I did things, so went to the local Uni and had a full physiological assessment which included blood lactate profiles and VO2MAX testing. The results of this gave me my HR training zones. Most of my training was UT2 to strict zones with a smaller amount of UT1. After 5 months I did a mile race mid summer with a couple of sprint sessions but mainly aerobic work and ended the race with a PB. After 7 months I did a 6.16 2k PB.

I was doing about 11 sessions a week, UT2 would have been 16k r20 twice a day sometimes but around 400 to 450k a month. UT2 HR zone was higher than 70% max though.

Thanks for sharing...clearly you went about it all the right way!

[dknickerbocker]

I think in a lot of ways this is right but we should remember, you can improve a lot from low intensity training as you work up to those hours.

Sure, just depends on how well trained you are but I would wager that the majority of people who are researching principles such as Maffetone, already are fairly well trained (or at least done a reasonable amount of training) and are looking for something to take them to a new level.

fair but you can surprise yourself. Like when I first started trying to add volume at low intensity, i was already training a decent amount and fairly hard. Yet if I would do an hour or an hour and a half of low intensity, there was still a decent chance I'd wake up in the morning with higher HR and lower HRV and low energy. Not be able to hit the quality if there was a hard day scheduled. Doesn't happen anymore. I can now do quite a lot and wake up feeling fine and ready to go, but it took a couple months for it to "click."

But your point about not detraining is good one and that' why if it were me, I'd also do hard intervals as well as increasing the volume of low intensity. The trick is just to keep that low intensity nice and low so that you don't accidentally overdo it.

To the guy who wants to go from being more anaerobic to aerobic, i think if you increase your volume of low intensity training that will happen automatically. You might still have a high glycolitic capacity (not a bad thing for a rower) but your aerobic capacity will increase and be able to start gobbling up that lactate and using it for fuel. And I don't even think you need to avoid super high intensity for that to happen, as long as you're getting your low-HR volume. Like, right now on the bike, my aerobic fitness is better than it has ever been, and one of the key workouts is 10x1 minute at max with 15 minutes of recovery in between. It's an anaerobic capacity workout but you're sneaking in a LOT of aerobic work in between and it adds up.

FWIW, i think specific interval design is probably overrated in terms of its impact. I think it probably goes, #1 consistency, #2 volume, #3 intensity distribution (2 and 3 are related of course, because in order to increase volume over a certain amount, most of it has to be low intensity), with then #4 interval design and #5 periodization coming in as a more distant 4th and 5th.

[Rod]

How much volume roughly below 70% of MHR did you do per week? My contention with this method on the ergo (as opposed to on the bike) is it's hard to do sufficent volume into order to reap the benefits.

Hi Paul, I was doing around 60 to 70k a week of the sub 70% plus one or two (at most) faster sessions.

I agree that if you are not able to do the volume required then some slightly faster stuff may be the way to go but whilst I know what worked for me I've really no idea what sort of volume levels would be be needed for other people or what to recommend as a minimum so guess we all need to do what we feel will work for us.

The main thing is that the method of doing around 80% of the weeks metres this slowly was completely new to me as previously I'd blasted away too hard too often....and regularly burned out as a result so glad I found out about Maffetone as it set me on the right path.

I've moved on from there now and am still getting faster but wouldn't be if I hadn't done that back then.

[MiddleAgeCRISIS]

This feedback has sparked a lot of thought so thanks to every one for that.

I think there are going to be lots of people approaching this from different angles.

My approach is that I've historically only trained through sprint work and weights. Having given up sport 15 years ago i've retained a great deal of strength but got quite chunky on top.

In this context' I'm not looking for strength or to build muscle but to create better endurance and burn fat.

This high volume exercise is moving me away from being an anaerobic power athelete to an endurance one so it seems to be perfect for me.

Wonder if there is any benchmarking research about Maffetone and the individuals starting point.

You are where I am/was. Many years of playing and training rugby so an emphasis on power play. Lots of short explosive work, strength, fast recovery. Never seriously trained an aerobic base as there just wasn’t the time to add on several long slow sessions to a packed programme.
If ‘muscled out’ some decent times on the erg - 6:31 2k as a big, fit 30 year old but am now nearly twice as old with arthritic knees and 15kg lighter.
Since lockdown I’ve built on technique and have worked my way to being able to actually sit on that painful seat for more than 20 mins. Done a lot of metres (for me) at UT2 and am on a second cycle of the Pete Plan.
I’m taking my baselines as 40 mins at 130HR to see if I go further = increased aerobic base; and I will self test my 30’ @ 20SPM distance to see if my power in the stroke improves.
Looking at it as a long term plan but knowing that the end of lockdown will make it difficult to keep having the time available.

Thanks Tony. That's helpful for me to start thinking about structure after this initial phase.

Are you changing drag at all? I've been mostly at 130 ( 4 to 5) and have done the last couple at level 10.

I'm waiting on weight loss before i address the technique. My stroke length is typically 97cm vs a max of 130 cm ish. I have no catch and no swing back tbh.

Not wishing to stalk you but are you on strava or the logbook so I can have a nosey ?

[Tony Cook]

Thanks Tony. That's helpful for me to start thinking about structure after this initial phase.

Are you changing drag at all? I've been mostly at 130 ( 4 to 5) and have done the last couple at level 10.

I'm waiting on weight loss before i address the technique. My stroke length is typically 97cm vs a max of 130 cm ish. I have no catch and no swing back tbh.

Not wishing to stalk you but are you on strava or the logbook so I can have a nosey ?

I started with 130-140 DF as I do some traditional heavy boat fixed seat rowing and read that that DF equates to the feel of that type of boat. Since then I’ve dropped to mainly 120 but have gone as low as 90 but still maintaining pace and HR capped at 130.
Today I did the Pete Plan speed pyramid and started at 135 DF - unfortunately my damper slips sometimes and by the time I’d finished it was down to 122.
Not on Strava but have the Concept2 logbook. You’re welcome to have a look, I think you can see if you’re logged on.

[Erik A]

this has been an interesting read... i may have to try these longer low rate works to get me back to some semblance of fitness

[Dangerscouse]

this has been an interesting read... i may have to try these longer low rate works to get me back to some semblance of fitness

It's worth a try. I have increased my metres and lowered my HR cap to circa 130 from 140 for my long distances and have set six new PBs, with hopefully a few more to come.

Everyone is different so it's worth keeping an eye on it and adjusting it if it isn't working

[mitchel674]

I tried this yesterday for a 12k keeping my HR at the Maffetone suggested 130. Rowing at 20spm, I wound up keeping my pace at 2:29 to avoid increasing my HR. I'm very slow, but I typically do these steady state rows at 2:20 and my HR is typically 140-145. Should I really be doing these long rows so slowly? I'm willing to put the time in if there is benefit. Perhaps I have been training in the grey area black hole heart rate all this time?

[hjs]

I tried this yesterday for a 12k keeping my HR at the Maffetone suggested 130. Rowing at 20spm, I wound up keeping my pace at 2:29 to avoid increasing my HR. I'm very slow, but I typically do these steady state rows at 2:20 and my HR is typically 140-145. Should I really be doing these long rows so slowly? I'm willing to put the time in if there is benefit. Perhaps I have been training in the grey area black hole heart rate all this time?

Depends a bit. M does not use real hf numbers, but sees everybody as the same. So if we take two rowers, one with a high max hr and an other with a low max.
This would mean that the guy with the high max relative to the other works out at a lower intensity. In some cases two people the same age can have 20/30 beats difference in Max Hr.

For you, look at your max. Is that 220 minus your age or a good bit different. If its much higher, 130 would low.
On the other hand if you try this, your pace with this cape should come down. If its working.