The Maffetone Method: A Breakthrough?

Continuing a recent theme on this blog....

Today marks my fourth day of practicing the Maffetone Method. The Maffetone Method was developed decades ago by Dr. Phil Maffetone. World-class endurance athletes like Mark Allen and Stu Mittleman have seen remarkable results with the Maffetone Method. But it's not just for top athletes; Maffetone is practiced every day by thousands of endurance athletes--from runners to triathletes to cyclists.

I'm still learning about the Maffetone Method. Here's what I know: It revolves around heart-rate monitoring based on the "180 formula," which determines your maximum aerobic function or MAF. This is the zone you want to train in while base-building because it's all aerobic and low-stress. The formula goes as follows:

1) Subtract your age from 180.
2) Modify this number by selecting among the following categories the one that best matches your fitness and health profile:

• If you have or are recovering from a major illness (heart disease, any operation or hospital stay, etc.) or are on any regular medication, subtract an additional 10.
• If you are injured, have regressed in training or competition, get more than two colds or bouts of flu per year, have allergies or asthma, or if you have been inconsistent or are just getting back into training, subtract an additional 5.
• If you have been training consistently (at least four times weekly) for up to two years without any of the problems just mentioned, keep the number (180�age) the same.
• If you have been training for more than two years without any of the problems listed above, and have made progress in competition without injury, add 5.

So, for me, since I'm 39 and very experienced, my formula goes as follows: 180-39+5=146. My MAF zone is then 136-146 beats per minute, meaning I want all of my training for the next few months, while I base-build, to be between 136-146 without exception. If I stay in that zone, I'm within my aerobic zone. I'm within the "safe zone."

Here's why I like MAF. When we're aerobic, we're mostly burning fat for fuel--and we have lots and lots of fat even if we're lean like I am--and it's very low-stress compared to anaerobic training. When we go anaerobic, like in a tempo run, we start burning a lot of glycogen and ask a lot of our muscles and endocrine system and that can stress our bodies and ultimately put us in the overtraining hole (check out this blog by Lucho for more info on that). When faced with diminishing returns because of overtraining, usually I just train even harder (I am, after all, a determined runner). This is not a good situation, especially in high-altitude places like Colorado. By trying to push through instead of listen to my body's signals, I'm basically burning the candle on both ends. MAF can keep you from doing that.

That's not to say going anaerobic is bad; quite the contrary, it's essential to peak fitness. But it has to be done at the right time. When base-building for the upcoming racing season, it's vital to first establish aerobic strength, which in turn will provide a solid foundation for some purposeful anaerobic strength-building running later in your training. Without a solid aerobic base, doing anaerobic training is in essence like building a house on sand.

Whereas lots of people get frustrated with MAF in the early stages because they have to run so slow to stay within their MAF range, I'm really enjoying it. Armed with my heart-rate monitor and some residual fitness from the Phoenix Marathon, I'm finding that I can run as fast as 6:30 pace within my MAF range, but on average I'm at 7:20-7:40/mile while at MAF. I haven't yet tried MAF in the mountains, and I'm due for a bona fide MAF test once the snow clears. Sometimes you literally have to stop running and start walking in order to stay within your MAF range. That can frustrate folks. The good news is that, with patience and firm commitment to MAF, your speed will increase as your aerobic capacity improves. You'll also lose some body fat. Or so I've read.

The kicker for me is that not until I dug in and started to learn about MAF did I realize that I used to train pretty much exclusively in my MAF range without even knowing it. From 2004 to the spring of 2008 I'd say 95% of the miles I ran were at MAF. I didn't do tempo runs, save the occasional fast mile here and there. I ran at MAF and I was pretty satisfied and rarely injured. In the spring of 2007, while training for my first 100-miler, I dramatically upped my mileage to 100+ miles a week (from 50-60/week), pretty much all of it at MAF! And I got a satisfying result on race day.

In the spring of 2008, I adopted intensity as part of an overall high-mileage program. Within weeks of 100-110 miles I was doing tempo runs along with intervals, meaning I was going anaerobic quite a bit. And in 2008 and most of 2009 I was mostly healthy (save a minor knee issue in 2008 and some tweaks following a 131-mile performance in a 24-hour race in 2009) and I still did some MAF training on "easy" days. I attribute my fairly good health in that time span in part to relative youth but also to the fact that for all those prior years I'd built up a super strong aerobic base that carried me to some good performances in 2008 and 2009. In short, those performances were due to years of MAF training. Or so I now believe.

Over the past few years--really since we moved to Colorado in April of 2010--I've been injured a lot. I've done a lot of soul-searching around why I've been injured. Is it age? Have I just broken down? Am I training wrong? Is my body not reacting well to the altitude? Last week, while reading Brad Hudson's book (he, too, advocates a base-building stage), it hit me that I've done a poor job of building a solid aerobic base at the start of the year. I've asked too much of my body and I've habitually plateaued too early, only to go stale or get injured by race day. Last year, for example, I had clearly gotten myself into good shape by late April, but by July I was injured and that set me up for the DNF at Leadville. My training wasn't well-timed; I had no base-building stage and zero progression except for a simple mileage build-up! I also think going anaerobic at 6,200+ feet is really tough on the body (don't know how guys and gals much higher up do it). You have to be smart about it and go anaerobic on the right days, when you're recovered. For me, many East Coast running rules don't apply to Colorado! These are lessons I'm just now learning as I become more and more familiar with MAF.

Poorly timed anaerobic training has paradoxically weakened my body and made me susceptible to injury--severe plantar fasciitis in 2010, tendonitis in my shin in 2011, Achilles issues in 2012, metatarsalagia in late 2012/early 2013, etc. Of course, age has only worsened the situation. Now 39, I'm losing muscle and that, in turn, stresses my tendons and ligaments when I'm running a lot. The weight-training I'm now doing is intended to reverse muscle loss and in fact add raw strength. I'm already seeing results, not only in how my legs feel but also in how they look. The good news is that my body weight remains around 167.

So for the next eight weeks I'm going to dedicate myself to MAF training (up to 70 miles a week) while also continuing my weight training amd regular mountain trail running. Fortunately, I'm already in decent shape; I can run a MAF mile after a four-mile warm-up in 6:30! I'm starting in a good place and over the next two months I'm going to lay a solid foundation upon which I can train for Leadville. After these two months, I'll start to introduce some steep hill climbs and lactate threshold training to build strength, gradually increasing the duration of anaerobic training as Leadville approaches. But the bread and butter of my training will be lower-intensity running. In many respects, I've gone back to what I used to do.

I really believe I've stumbled onto the holy grail of training for me. Only time will tell if it really works, but so far I'm liking it.