Options

Winter training

Anyone care to share what their winter plan looks like, im currently looking to take a few weeks off but after that I want to be steadily ticking over swimming and running while improving my bike. Not sure how to schedule it though.

Comments

  • Options

    I have been on a bender since IM Wales and Chester Marathon! now paying for it with a nasty bout of manful!

    When I do get back to training I am going strictly Maff for 3 months in order to get some more Aerobic engine gains and before I start a build for Lakesman, however during this time I will be swimming three times a week as usual.

     

  • Options
    For me it will be a mixture of Maf efforts and some hard efforts to keep the body used to hard work as I think it reduce the risk of injury when the race build up starts.
  • Options

    Cross country and mountain biking

  • Options

    My objectives were always to try and do a three hour bike and a two hour run each weekend and then whatever I fancied during the week.  I tended to base train during winter.

  • Options

    Training and winter in the same sentence?

    image

  • Options

    What is Maf?

    I don't really change anything. Apart from not doing triathlons of course.

    I get my racing fix from XC running over the winter, probably a Half Marathon as well. 

    Otherwise I need to tackle the swimming which is way out of kilter with the running/cycling.

    Also seems like a good time to start doing some structured bike training as it will be a good time to do it indoors where I guess it's much easier.

    I've probably advanced as much as I can from just cycling to work and knocking out the odd weekend long ride.

     

  • Options

    Reg, its a method of build deep aerobic capacity by training at a very very low HR names after Mark Allens coach Dr Phil Maffetone.  The method is outlined here. Its is incredibly effective but takes a lot of discipline.

    https://philmaffetone.com/what-is-the-maffetone-method/

     

  • Options

    yep.. I'll focus on bike power with shit loads of intervals (probably micro intervals as I find them effective for me).... and on swimming endurance, by doing lots of CSS based pace work, and then just run enough to not make winter ultras and spring marathon too miserable!

    Overall, I plan on dialling weekly hours back to about 9 or 10 to make sure I don't overtrain, with a real effort to completely remove any junk miles, with every second counting.... and will stick in a week here and there through the winter of rest to keep the body from falling apart!

    (edit: I did a few months of Maff work last autumn, through to Jan, and it made a really big difference - technically, if its of interest to the OP, I got my de-coupling completely sorted for all but the longest sessions)

    lets be honest.... its all prep for an Ironman on my 100th birthday
  • Options

    Ah!! this is the link I meant to post although the other one is quite interesting too.

    https://philmaffetone.com/180-formula/

     

  • Options

    Interesting, seems very high though, not a very very low rate for me. Not sure if this is aimed at running or cycling? For cycling it's very high. 

    I'm 40 and fall into the +5 and I hardly ever get close to 145 on a ride. Seems about standard for running though, not slow but average easy run.

    What's more interesting is the diet stuff, he's basically telling me to cut out everything I eat! Maybe I should try that.

  • Options

    the 180- formula really doesn't work for some folks... it doesn't for me either... my pure aerobic zone is much higher than it predicts... which fits as the similar 'rules of thumb' for max HR are also well out... I think at my age, my max HR should be under 180, and in reality I can go over 190 if I really beat myself up...

    If you exercise regularly and track your HR, then you probably have a good idea what your max HR is from observation, rather than prediction, and can calculate the zones from that, and predict what is aerobic.... you may well need to be somewhat lower... 

    lets be honest.... its all prep for an Ironman on my 100th birthday
  • Options
    Simo429Simo429 ✭✭✭

    Yeah it doesn't work for me, I'm not the best runner in the world but 9.10 is really comfortable for me however to be running in zone 2 I have to actually be walking. 

     

  • Options

    don't immediately throw that concept away... when I ran Maff, I would have previously run 6 or 7 miles at 8:30 as an easy run.... but in order to get to my correct HRs was running that distance at 11:00, 12:00 or slower...  you do have to run (relatively) SERIOUSLY slowly to start with... so slow in fact that I found it a bit embarrassing when I saw other runners...  I was more making the point that you need to use the correct HR.... I can't remember for sure, but where I was typically averaging 155 or so for a steady run, I think I was running to keep HR below 132, and as you say, that was often not much more than a fast walk!

    lets be honest.... its all prep for an Ironman on my 100th birthday
  • Options

    I always do my standard easy runs around the level that formula suggest, I figure that's a coincidence rather than it actually making any sense though.

  • Options

    Its about training your aerobic system and you need to leave your ego at the door and trust in the HR.

    When I started this I was at 12:30/13:00 minute miles with walking up hills to stay at 136 Bpm which is Maff +5 for me.

    When rested I can now run at 8:30pace and maintain 136BPM QED it works!

  • Options

    How fit were you when you started it?

     

  • Options

    well, I'd done an IM in the previous 6 Months, so quite fit....

    lets be honest.... its all prep for an Ironman on my 100th birthday
  • Options
    I was also quite fit being a regular cyclist and a 2:30 Olympic Tri finisher
  • Options

    Interesting, 4 minutes per mile is a massive change but how much faster has that actually made you?

    If I followed this I would be doing about 7:20 pace I guess, which is not really what you describe, that's clearly not painfully slow and a pace I would normally run. If I dropped to 136bpm I'd be more around 7:45 pace. I very much doubt I would make the same sort of gains?

  • Options
    Reg, last time I did Maff I too was 7:30 per km. I did 3 months solid and got that to 5:50 per km. my Maff HR is 131. After the 3 months Maff I started to add in some race specific work in a build up to Manchester marathon. I did 3:11 at Manchester although my marathon pace HR is around 182 bpm. My max HR is around 196. So when I run at Maff pace it's a massive climb down. I tend to switch of the pace screen and leave my ego at the door. It takes huge dicipline but there are huge gains to be made too.
  • Options

    Duda, I was talking in miles, My Maff pace would be around 7:20 minutes a mile not KM's. So I was saying it wouldn't be a climb down at all. I get to take my ego with me image

    I have added 5 as I have been able to train pretty consistently for the couple of years, albeit with just the odd niggle. If I stick with 140bpm, I'm 40, then pace would be around 7:30mm or 4.40 per km.

  • Options
    Great, I would give it a go. It always seems a climb down to me because my engine is pretty high revving but it's always worth it.
  • Options
    Reg Wand wrote (see)

    Interesting, 4 minutes per mile is a massive change but how much faster has that actually made you?

    If I followed this I would be doing about 7:20 pace I guess, which is not really what you describe, that's clearly not painfully slow and a pace I would normally run. If I dropped to 136bpm I'd be more around 7:45 pace. I very much doubt I would make the same sort of gains?

    Reg, I guess there will be a point at which there is a diminishing return! However at 7:20 pace that return could put you at the pointy end of an IM marathon so like Duda I think you should give it a try.  We don't know if your pace is from great mechanics or great Aerobic capacity and running Maff is supposed to improve both!

     

Sign In or Register to comment.