Other/Mixed MAF forumula - why?

[Steve Freides]

And, I also need to change my target HR to 132 for MAF tests, since I'm a year older

@aciampa and @Anna C, I need a bit of an education about the MAF heart rate.

Isn't it better to find your real max through an all-out effort that guesstimate? I recall doing this one time - I took a run of a few miles, gradually picked up the pace as the end neared, and for the last few hundred yards, went absolutely all-out, and since I was wearing a HRM, I used that value as my max. I was 45 years old and got a value of 184 bpm.

From what I read on his site, he's saying he's finding a max hr value at which you can train aerobically - what is the significance of that? Haven't we determined that in some protocols, e.g., Tabata, that one can benefit the aerobic system while training anaerobically?

Is Maffetone saying that max heart rate isn't relevant, and using a percentage of that isn't relevant, either?

I ramble - he seems to say that we never should train above our MAF-predicted heart rate - do you agree with that?

-S-

 

[Anna C]

Disclaimer: I'm not the expert. So this is just more rambling, really

My thoughts: Yes, it may be better to find your real max with an all-out effort, but it's not a clear answer. First, it may not be medically advisable for some people to perform at that high of an exertion level. Second, it's more accurate to use an all-out effort in something that is a slow-twitch fiber aerobic activity when done at lesser intensity, like running, cycling, or rowing, and gradually increase the intensity (after a proper warm-up) until you are going at high intensity, as hard as you can go. You will get a different result if you begin too quickly as with an all-out sprint, or if you tire yourself out before you get to max intensity by ramping up too slowly. Third, it will vary with how many muscle groups you are using and how much lactate you are producing (related to fast-twitch fibers, I believe... so, more lactate and lower max HR with something kettlebell-related like swings or snatches). So for a max, I get something like 170 with snatches, 175 with cycling, and 180 with running (while 220-age = 172...so, a decent approximation, for me). The scenario you describe above sounds right, Steve, but that was a lot of years ago, and your max likely has gone down a few bpm since then as it does tend to decrease with age, even for the fit.

As for finding the max HR at which you can train aerobically, this is relative to building your aerobic base, or slowly building the amount of work you can do while remaining aerobic, with minimum glycolytic fueling. Yes, other protocols will benefit the aerobic system also. What he mostly talks about is a way to focus exclusively on the aerobic system, stimulating primarily mitochondrial development in the slow-twich fibers, which is the biggest part of the aerobic engine... in my understanding. And is a lower-stress (i.e. healthier) way to train the majority of the time. So for the training that HE recommends, yes, don't train above that. But that's one of many types of training; and further, one of many types of aerobic training. So overall, no, I don't agree that we should never train above that MAF-predicted HR. I'm not sure Maf does either, but I'd have to re-read the bigger context in his books.

So overall these two things -- max HR and max aerobic HR -- are two different things, and not actually much related or relevant to each other.

 

[trosen]

I’m not an expert but perhaps the following is helpful.

As Anna suggests, testing maximum heart rate may be unhealthy for anyone other than a highly trained and experienced athlete. Estimating a maximum aerobic heart rate based on age, health and athletic experience will likely be safer.

The training approach of an athlete is related to their objective. The principle of specificity describes training similar to the way you will perform your sport. Many sport activities use the slow twitch aerobic systems more than the fast twitch anaerobic systems. Training at an aerobic heart rate teaches the body to burn more fat as a fuel source providing a longer term efficiency compared with anaerobic carbohydrate based fueling. Maintaining an aerobic heart rate during training is intended to build slow twitch muscle, and burn fat. The duration and intensity of the sport should guide the athlete regarding the balance of aerobic/anaerobic training, and it seems that most sports require a base of aerobic endurance training.

Dr. Maffetone developed the MAF (maximum aerobic function) method to assist athletes improve healthy endurance performance. He observed that endurance athletes caused themselves injury and limited progress through overtraining and excessive training intensity prior to building a strong aerobic base. The MAF formula allows the athlete to estimate an aerobic heart rate maximum to guide training intensity. The MAF test is a means to measure performance improvement or decline. If an athlete is improving performance (such as running speed) as demonstrated by a monthly MAF test, based on training at the MAF heart rate, without experiencing injury or health issues, the system is working correctly. Since training improvement also requires a progressive increase in training stress, the training program would include some progression of duration and/or intensity, and the training effect should allow this to happen within the aerobic heart rate.

If an athlete has a competition objective, there will likely be a training plan specific to the competition demands, which will incorporate anaerobic training. Exactly what that is depends on the individual athlete, the sport, skills required, objectives, etc. The MAF approach intends to build the athlete’s endurance capacity to support the objective. If the objective is primarily health and fitness, aerobic training may be the better choice.

Dr. Maffetone also writes extensively about health, nutrition and lifestyle choices in addition to the MAF principles.

Ted

 

[Steve Freides]

Thank you both for your detailed responses.

I guess I should be clear that my interest is academic and not personal here. I am very happy with my current training and its results. (I have 275 lbs. on a deadlift bar that I can walk up to at any time and lift for reps, and my midday resting pulse was 48 yesterday. ) Other than deciding to compete in an endurance event, which I have no plans to do, I can't see a need for improving my specific endurance for any activity - I can already walk long distances comfortably. If you have specific links on the MAF web site that might give me insight into his overall approach, I'd appreciate those.

-S-

 

[Bill Been]

If you figure this out @Steve Freides, do please feel free to mansplain it to me. Please write slowly.