Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: MAF Test [MuffinTop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
no, for that i mix in a couple days of speed work. then i get really fast.



----------------------------------------------------
Striving to have sex more than 66 times per year
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [j3ckyl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Yeah, only during my base periods though, which typically last 12-16 weeks. When I first started triathlon, someone gave me a copy of Mike Piggs training software which has a built in MAF test. My first year I used this software and then just started doing my own training programs, but have always kept the 5 mile MAF test cause I liked to see the progress.

I have last years numbers in excel, 05' in Polar, and 04' in Pigg. I have been meaning to get them all over to excel anyways. I'll post them when I get them compiled. It's pretty interesting. I recall my first year starting at ~9:30 minute miles and ending at ~8:45. I think 05' I started around ~8:30 and finished at ~ 8:00. Last year I started at ~7:55 and ended at ~7:40. This year has been particularly good. I switched my training program over to a high frequency running program. 7 days of run. 1 LR varying terrain/surface each week, 1 negative incline, 1 postive incline, 1 right at AT, 1 active recovery, 1 water running and 1 brick. For the MAF I just swap the AT Run.


It's been invaluable as far I am concerned. I know Paulo mentions Hydration etc.. etc.., but I do actually preprare slightly for an MAF test. If I do not prepare for example being dehydrated, well that will reflect in the test. Hell I think I got a good enough feel for this test that I think I can determine quite a lot regarding impact from hydration, nutrition, sleep, overtraining, and even differences in shoes.

That's pretty awesome that it has worked so well and so consistently for you for so long. The fact that you are improving year over year as well as within each season is a great thing to see in the tests. It looks like you are not following a Maffetone protocol (ie. all runs below your MAF heart rate) with your training this season. Did you follow one in past seasons?


I'm not a huge believer in the Maffetone system but I definitely see the value of the tests themselves. You have obviously used them to great effect as a tracking tool for the past few seasons. I think in a perfect world, the data point that *I* would want would be 5k or 10k pace. It would certainly be impossible (for me, at least) to run a max effort 5k or 10k every two weeks. Have you found a good correlation between your MAF test paces and your race paces? I would think that especially given the training that you are doing - that is, well rounded, a range of intensities, terrains, and distances - an improvement in your MAF test pace *should* correlate with an improvement in other paces. Have you found that to be the case?
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [MuffinTop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]I would be really interested to see your data going back a while further if you have it. Have you really been doing these consistently for 4 years?[/reply]

10 months. My first tests were around the 7:40 range.

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Mr. Consistent] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is there an aerobic function test that is easy to do without getting a VO2 test done?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Mr C,
I was just reading through the amusing banter between Bryce and Paulo here, and looked back at the rest of this thread to see where it all came from. Came across your question above. I can suggest an incremental (and maximal) bike test you can do that you can easily translate to quite an accurate estimate of VO2max. It does require an accurate power meter, but so many ST'ers seem to have PM's I guess there's a chance you have one too. I'll need to scratch up some specific details about it, but if you're still interested then reply to this post and I'll give you the run down.

Randy
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [MuffinTop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Everything in base is done below my MAF except the AT. I really like the 0%, -1% and -2% grade runs. You can keep the HR down below your MAF yet still work on strides and retain leg speed. Even the inclines are still done nelow the MAF. The first year I was pretty religious about keeping my HR well below, but I have found that throwing one right at AT doesn't seem to hurt me any.

My race pace has definately increased every year, but I really don't know how I would form a relationship between that and base. You throw in the build period and peak and all that speedwork would just throw off the relationship. I could keep doing the MAF during my build periods, but I would probably only do them during a recovery week as I would want to waste a good race simulation workout or speedword, tempo session by replacing it with an MAF test.

I have a 10k benchmark race coming up before I start my build period, plus another carconi test. I will be curious on the results given another significant increase this year to my MAF test. I am sure there has to be a relationship, just not sure how to make it given a build period. Unfortunately, I haven't really tracked a lot of my speedwork sessions in the past. It's always been hard for me to get out there and do it in the first place. Planning on changing that this year.

I don't think it would be a bad idea for sure to do a variation of the MAF test during a build or peak period, perhaps a LTR + X.

I would still want to keep it on an indoor track. To this day I still do all the MAF test on an indoor track, thursday morning @ 7:00. Call it anal, but I like to keep the variables as close as reasonbly possible.
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Randolph] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]Is there an aerobic function test that is easy to do without getting a VO2 test done?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Mr C,
I was just reading through the amusing banter between Bryce and Paulo here, and looked back at the rest of this thread to see where it all came from. Came across your question above. I can suggest an incremental (and maximal) bike test you can do that you can easily translate to quite an accurate estimate of VO2max. It does require an accurate power meter, but so many ST'ers seem to have PM's I guess there's a chance you have one too. I'll need to scratch up some specific details about it, but if you're still interested then reply to this post and I'll give you the run down.

Randy[/reply]

Bryan...not Bryce :)

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Bryancd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Crap, sorry Bryan. I must be dyslexic, or just plain can't read too well. Sincerest apologies.

bye, Randy
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Randolph] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Is there an aerobic function test that is easy to do without getting a VO2 test done?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Mr C,
I was just reading through the amusing banter between Bryce and Paulo here, and looked back at the rest of this thread to see where it all came from. Came across your question above. I can suggest an incremental (and maximal) bike test you can do that you can easily translate to quite an accurate estimate of VO2max. It does require an accurate power meter, but so many ST'ers seem to have PM's I guess there's a chance you have one too. I'll need to scratch up some specific details about it, but if you're still interested then reply to this post and I'll give you the run down.

Randy
Maximal??? You're losing the point here. The MAF test is for people who don't like to suffer ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Paulo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maximal??? You're losing the point here. The MAF test is for people who don't like to suffer ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haha! I see your point. I'm would prefer not to judge, however, as if the MAF test is good enough for the likes of Allen, Pigg and Deboom, I certainly won't slag it off.

Back to my suggestion to Mr Consistent though, if you want to get a measure of maximal aerobic function, ie VO2max, without going to the lab to get on the gas analyser and so on (and have the required PM, of course), then I may be able to help.........
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Randolph] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Maximal??? You're losing the point here. The MAF test is for people who don't like to suffer ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haha! I see your point. I'm would prefer not to judge, however, as if the MAF test is good enough for the likes of Allen, Pigg and Deboom, I certainly won't slag it off.
Strangely, I became extremely tired while reading that sentence...
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Randolph] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your measurement is using a bike test in order to determine HR ranges for the run?

I also wouldn't use some of the Pro's you mentioned as a reason to use MAF. The reasons they "improved" on Maffertone's concept wasn't because of a magic HR range or test like the MAF.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Rob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your measurement is using a bike test in order to determine HR ranges for the run?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, this is not what I'm suggesting. Mr Consistent just asked a generic question about a way to measure aerobic capacity without having to go to a lab to get tested. I figure a bike test is as relevant as a run test for anyone reading/posting here!!


I also wouldn't use some of the Pro's you mentioned as a reason to use MAF. The reasons they "improved" on Maffertone's concept wasn't because of a magic HR range or test like the MAF.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry Rob, I was misconstrued a little I guess, as might be gleaned from Paulo's response, implying he has heard it all before, many times over!!! I'm not saying I think MAF testing/training is the be all and end all, just that that I don't feel I'm in any position to judge it harshly based on the fact that some very successful pro athletes used it very successfully, as did some amateur athletes I'm led to believe. I can see that around here, it doesn't get particularly good press, and that's fine, and possibly deserved. That being said, I do understand the basic theory of why it should/might work, in the right context, and can easily explain if anyone cares to know, but there's enough talk of that around here, and I don't feel much like joining in that battle.

bye, Randy
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Randolph] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:

I figure a bike test is as relevant as a run test for anyone reading/posting here

When you're talking about assessing fitness levels, the test must apply to the intended purpose, especially for the bike and run. Majority of the time when assessing max O2 consumption for multisport athletes, the bike is typically a peak VO2 while the run is a max VO2. This means you can't (or shouldn't) use a bike test for run parameters, or vice versa.

Quote:

That being said, I do understand the basic theory of why it should/might work, in the right context, and can easily explain if anyone cares to know, but there's enough talk of that around here, and I don't feel much like joining in that battle.
My fault if that was how things came across, but if you feel like explaining your view I'd like to hear it.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MAF Test [Rob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When you're talking about assessing fitness levels, the test must apply to the intended purpose, especially for the bike and run. Majority of the time when assessing max O2 consumption for multisport athletes, the bike is typically a peak VO2 while the run is a max VO2. This means you can't (or shouldn't) use a bike test for run parameters, or vice versa.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely no disagreement here. I think, once again, I didn't explain myself. When I say bike and run are relevant for everyone here, I mean we generally all bike and run, therefore a bike test of some sort will be useful for our cycle training. I figured Mr C might be able to use the suggested test as a measure for his bike training. I probably should have kept in context with the rest of this thread, ie, running.........
Quote Reply

Prev Next