Has anyone tried the Maffetone Method? There is a bottomless pit of information out there, but basically, it’s about improving your aerobic fitness (and the % of calories burned from fat) by never exceeding your “aerobic maximum heart rate” on your runs.
The formula for calculating your rate is 180-your age. There are some -5/+5’s thrown in for things like health conditions and how long you have been running for. I’m 43, so my aerobic max heart rate is 137, giving me a training zone of 127-137.
Now then, gang. Since day 1 of C25K my heart rate has spiked though the roof as soon as I go into a slow jog. I think my lowest average heart rate on a run has been something like 148. But my ability to pace myself is so awful that I thought I’d give it a go.
I got into my running gear and did about 10 minutes walking to warm up. You are meant to do a 15 minute warm up/cool down but hey ho. Then I was off! For about 80 strides, before my heart rate crept above 137 and I had to walk awhile to get it back under. Press repeat, about a zillion times. There were several moments where I had to slow down my WALK to get my heart rate back into the zone. I would describe that 11K as a brisk walk with the occasional 80 strides of very slow jog thrown in.
I felt a bit of a fool on the road at first. There I was, all dressed up in my running togs, complete with little running rucksack... walking. Then shuffling a bit, but mainly walking. After the first hour, I sort of got used to it. It was a lovely day to be out, cool and blustery, so who cares if I was walking or slow jogging or running?!
I kept it going for 10K because it really wasn’t very taxing, then walked for a cool down kilometre to see how long it would take. I was a bit bored so I tried to spell out a word in a car park that the tracker would pick up, but it is barely legible. I must have looked absolutely bonkers!
It was quite interesting. I reckon it takes me about 10’30 to walk a km at a comfortable pace, with my heart rate dropping into the 120s (in Zone 0). It takes about 9’20 to travel 1 km in Zone 1. The evidence says I am not aerobically fit enough to run constantly in Zone 1.
I realised when I got back that despite my very best efforts to stay below 137bpm (in Zone 1), I seemed to have spent over 39 minutes exceeding it. Lots of things can trigger a spike in heart rate, I have realised, from a gust of wind, a running dog, saying “hello”, hills, fast cars, thinking, lawn mowers starting up...
The jury is out. I wouldn’t call what I just did a run, but I covered about 12km all told (including the unrecorded warm up), which I guess is good exercise! I don’t feel tired and my legs feel pretty fresh... which is a good thing, because I have a lot to do after so much time got taken up with this ‘run’! 😂
Any thoughts on this method, VRBs?!
Written by
ktsok
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
There are a number of reasons why I think the Maffetone method is nonsense but it is a training plan and that in itself might produce results.
You cannot find your aerobic max HR with a simple formula, anymore than you can find your max HR by 220 minus age. Your physiology does not fit into nice one size for all zones according to age.
Mr Maffetone has sold lots and lots of books. Somewhere he appears to have picked a doctorate although his only listed higher education I could find is a BSc from a private college in NY state.
Just my personal opinion. I don't want to dampen anyones cornflakes. He certainly sounds impressive on his own website.
Haha, yes, I take it all with a very large dose of salt! A bit of this and a bit of that my preferred approach and it makes sense to do a combo of anaerobic, strength and flexibility training, for example. Having said that, it seems to work for some! So I would hesitate to call it nonsense 🙂
They say if you can fight the boredom and indignity of it for long enough, you become fitter and able to maintain a jogging pace at the same heart rate. It’s a strange way to get there, to be sure!
I have changed my max heart rate on my watch as the 220- age thing gives me 174 and I regularly hit high 180s. This has therefore messed with all my “zones”. While training for the 10k I did a lot of much shorter but slow runs, 2.5 or 3k runs at 8mins/Km or thereabouts. I found by doing this for a couple of weeks it kept my heart rate in zone 3 and 4 mostly, and my VO2 max on my watch kept creeping up and up. Recently life has got in the way, kids off school, stress at work, problems with ex husband etc etc, i’ve Run much less often and when I do it tends to be 5k as fast as I can manage (not fast by any means!). The result being that my heart rate is often in the red zone 5 again, and my VO2 max has fallen off the bottom of the scale!!! So from my experience I would say that what you are describing of the Maff.... whatever, it sounds like it should probably work, in theory. Meanwhile I am sitting on the sofa with my feet up thinking about how I haven’t run in almost a week.
Life does get in the way sometimes. Or perhaps life just happens! It’s tough to stick to routines when there are families and work and so on. And of course, our running routines change too as we try longer distances/different times/events and races. Sorry to hear you are having problems with your ex and work stress. That sucks. You know running will make you feel better, right?! 😉
The ex is the ex for a reason and I can’t really do much about that, I have however managed to bag myself a new job. Start at the beginning of October and it involves a lot less travel and should be more predictable hours so hopefully I will be able to get back into some sort of routine. I’m lucky (?) in that I live in a town with lots of street lights so the boring tarmac cycle tracks are still pretty safe to run in the winter when it’s dark.
Ps. My VO2 max has been dropping like a stone, from 44 to 39 today 😑
I’d kind of like to give the MAF a go for a few months, but what with work and the school run and nights drawing in, I’m not sure I have time to run that slowly, sandwiched by a half hour of warm ups/cool downs!
I had a bit of a go at this last year (one or two runs only). Running to a specific heart rate does make a lot of sense, though I agree with SlowLoris that working out what rate that should be is probably tricky.
I occasionally try and keep my heart rate below a certain level. One thing I’ve found that helps is to really focus on breathing properly.
I don’t know anything about the MAF method specifically. I do think there’s something to be said for doing the bulk of your training at an intensity that allows you to just about hold a conversation. Particularly if you are wanting to extend your distances. (Adding speed is a whole different thing and requires higher intensity training). It seems to me you can judge that fairly well without resorting to heart rate tracking. As for aiming to maintain a specific heart rate, we are all different and the various formulae are approximations that might not be right for you. Which brings me back to running to a perceived effort level.
I am unsure what’s to be gained by trying to stay in the so called fat burning zone. At higher intensities your body will start to need to use glycogen but it will continue to burn fat. Higher intensities also offer more cardio benefit (although there’s an obvious trade off between intensity and duration).
Well, there’s a lot of stuff written about a lot of things. I guess the best way to form an opinion is by trying it and seeing if it works for you... if you can stand the slowness of it!
I tried it for about 7 weeks as I had been overtraining and I needed to fix it, but I gave up as I went to the uk and wanted to just run faster while I was there. I would say that I really enjoyed the slower runs and I think it helped me recover. The trade off was a drop in my VO2max and slower 5k times than I was used to. But I could run further and more frequently which was nice.
I was sceptical about Maffetone when I first came across it, I downloaded the app and signed up for the emails and waited to be bombarded by the big sell. Nothing happened, most of the info is out there for free.
I did JuJu’s/Roseabi’s 10k plan before giving this a go. That was a bit tough going at times as I was having problems with shin splints and a tight calf.
I’m 49 so my MAF is 131, take off 5 (for having colds and suffering injuries) and I’m at 126. I tried that and it was ridiculously slow so now I’ve set and alarm that goes off at 140.
It took a while to get used to going so slow, especially at 126, but I had a breakthrough a couple of weeks back when I changed the way I was running. I managed to pick up my cadence to around 160 (from about 140) and my pace increased considerably.
One downside was my VO2 scores plummeting, it dropped by 6 points. Glad to say since the change in running style it’s now back where it was and no doubt due to increase.
My pace has gone from almost three minutes per Km more than my average at the start to now almost a minute more (almost a respectable 10km pace).
Shin splints don’t trouble me and my recovery times are great. A hard run was suggesting three days and now it’s less than 24 hours.
My plan is to get to the point where I can do 5k in less than half an hour at under 140bpm and then take the brakes off.
That’s good to hear! I think injury prevention/protection is probably one of its best selling points. It’s tough to see times and Vo2 scores drop though isn’t it?! Even when they aren’t that impressive in the first place (in my case anyway!). I hope those shin splints stay away and best of luck with your 5k in under 30m. I’d love to achieve that.
I don't bother with any of the technical side of things...I just tootle along enjoying the outdoors. I'm particularly slow and short right now because of having injury time out. But I enjoyed reading your post particularly about the bit where you try to spell out a word in the car park which is the kind of tootling along I could enjoy haha!
You would not believe how long I have spent studying the OS map to see if I could spell out a rude word or make a rude picture running around town. Not figured anything out yet though...maybe out in the fields I can go freestyle...
I have no idea about heart rate or VO2 either - just do what feels ok and push it a bit using a NRC run or jog/run/sprint when I want to go a bit faster.
This post inspired me to do a MAF run and I’m pleased to say I just ran the furthest I ever have! 15k and an average HR of 124. Must still have it in my legs from the last time I tried MAF running.
I was below 120 for about 10k but didn’t alter my pace until I hit 12k. It felt so easy. I know I’m aerobic because I can breathe only through my nose. I know it sounds weird but it worked for me when I was doing the MAF training. My pace was good too at avg 6.08/km. very happy with that.
I think you have to choose between lowering your heart rate to get fitter (going slowly over longer distances) or burning calories to lose weight (speedy over shorter distances). Hidden is this summer’s queen of HR training and has posted lots about it.
180 minus age is way, way too low for hr zone training. Even worse than the erroneous 220-age. There is a Scandinavian site that gives a more accurate assessment, but the best guide is what someone suggested to me: look at your highest hr when you were flat out and struggling and use that as your max hr. all last year I ran mostly in zone 5, the highest zone. I wasn’t out of breath or struggling. My watch was set at 220- age. Zone 4 should be only able to answer conversation in short sentences, and zone 5 is pushing to the limit. I was able to happily chat and run up and down hills in zone 5!
The way you are set up means it will be impossible to stay in zones 1&2. I began half marathon training in late June using hr zones. I was still set at 220- age. I was literally mincing around at way below walking speed in the bottom two zones. I’ve tinkered with the zones and now have them so I can run slowly in 1&2 but can manage the upper zones by really pushing myself. My max hr according to the 220- age formula is 146, my max hr according to my most strenuous runs is 176 or even higher. Set at 176 it is working: 75% of my runs are in zone 2 and my fitness and endurance have increased incredibly.
You can’t take a set calculation and say everybody of that age and gender is the same. Some people’s hearts beat slowly when active, some beat fast, and both are perfectly normal. I happen to have a very low resting hr and a very high active hr. as you get fitter you will be able to run faster in the lower zones.
Yes, I’m always a bit wary about one-size-fits-all formulas. I posted a piece about the 220 formula months ago. As I remember, it wasn’t based on good research, it was more a hypothesis that the fitness industry leapt on and made a huge amount of money from! And the 180 isn’t going to ‘fit’ everyone either.
I don’t know. My heart rate goes pretty high. I hit 182 or so as a high point on the run at a slow longer run pace and average in the mid 160s. It would be great to bring that effort level down somehow!
I ran a comfortable 5k this morning. When I say comfortable I mean that I didn’t feel like I was about to die. I didn’t feel like I absolutely could not run any further at any point, although I probably couldn’t hold a full blown conversation I was able to tell my four legged running buddy not to chase the squirrel! I ended the run feeling good and that maybe I could have gone a bit further. My watch says my average heart rate was 162, with a max of 179. Given that 220 - my age is 174 then I probably should have been dead at that point!!
MAF running is not based on Max HR calculations. The 180 - age (and other bits) is used to help calculate your max aerobic heart rate. The two are not related. Running in your aerobic zone is supposed to improve performance according to MAF
I’ve been maffing (or close to it) for the last 11 weeks.
After meeting up with running work colleagues at a conference this week, I was forced to switch off my heart rate alarm and creep over my 140 bpm limit.
After three days of consecutive running (I’m an every other day man usually), I fancied it was time to have a go at breaking my 5k PB (which has stood for close to 13 months).
Got up and out on my own this morning and managed to slice 21 seconds off.
Heart rate was just a fraction under my previous PB and the course was flat rather than a steep downhill for most of the first km on my previous best run.
Combined with my less than ideal preparation of three pints of Guinness last night, I’m pretty pleased with that.
It’s no proof that maffing works but it’s worked for me if that makes any sense.
That’s brilliant, well done! I haven’t been maffing (or running consistently, for that matter) but I’m tempted to give it another go reading this. Thanks for sharing. 👍
ktsok Just interested how you got on 5 months down the line? Did you stick with it? I’m just starting running (couch to 5k) and this method is really appealing in particular the recovery, and endurance to which I have non.
Hi Pink. I didn’t stick with it - my heart rate is so high, I was walking/slow jogging/walking the whole time, which I found really tedious - and slow. Perhaps with lots of perseverance it would have panned out; there are plenty of people saying it worked for them. Good luck with your C25k 🙂
Thanks for replying ktsok, I’m having a similar experience and just had walked my last training session to keep it in the aerobic zone. I’ll give it a few weeks though.
Good luck and keep us posted. I might give it another go one of these days. Maybe if I get laid up on the IC (injury couch) one day and need a gentle return to running!
Keep at it, your pace will naturally increase over 6 weeks. I was nearly standing still the first 2 times! I moved the bar up a bit higher so I am for 140 and find that easier.
Sorry I’ve only just seen your reply. I did manage to get a tiny run into my “run” yesterday but I’m of the opinion that I’ve got into running to get fit not to be in races, so as long as I’m getting a good workout at steady heart rate I’ll stick to it. And I must’ve say I do feel good for it!
I just started MAF training - 2 weeks ago- my pace has dropped from 6m/km to 9min/k today - so frustrating .. !
Reason I wanted to try MAF is that I was totally wiped after my runs and noted that my HR was in the red zone for 50% of the run!
However trying to keep below 123/min is proving so boring that I’m starting to hate ‘running’ (shuffling/walking). So I have lied about my age to my watch settings to adjust to 140max - I can talk at that level so I’m going to try that goal as a sort of compromise (although I love your idea of spelling out words in carparks 😊) I’ve just ordered the book 80:20 running which is supposed to be similar but more flexible than MAF..
I’ve just read that book. I’ve been training with this method and it’s had massive benefits! Knocked 2 minutes off my 5k time over 12 weeks of 80:20 training.
I tried MAF for 7 weeks now. The humidity in my area at the moment is way over the top. I started by averaging about 07:30 per Km. But now I am at around 06:45 depending on how hot and humid. Since last week I abandoned MAF as I found out that I am struggling to run 1k below 5 minutes which was a stroll for me in the past, I was able to do sub 50 minute 10k any day. May be this is natural with MAF. My training now is based on what Garmin watch tells me. So I run 1 or 2 days easy and third day I will speed up.
Did you continue with this? I’ve been doing it for 4-5 months now and it’s totally changed the way I train! It’s fantastic. I’m hoping to do 150 miles this month which I could never do before. My fast pace has improved massively as I did 80:20 training. It takes a couple of weeks to get used to it and then your pace gradually improves. I go by zones though as MAF is a bit low. I just stick in zone 3, trying to stay below 140.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Heart Rate Zones
8 km jog walk
Tales from a Slow-Jog Comeback #1
Easy run? Garmin thought so
