Dumb MAF question

[Bare Lee]

I don't read a lot of the national media because if your team isn't Green Bay, Dallas, New England, or the NY Giants they typically don't know anything and they spew info about the team as if it was the same team from ten years ago that sucked (not necessarily your team or even specifically ten years ago). Every game Seattle wins is not because they played better than the other team, but the other team played bad and let Seattle win. Irritates me a lot. Oh well, that's why I read local writers stuff and not the national pundits. Here's the link to SB Nations Vikings site. http://www.dailynorseman.com/ I'm not sure how good their info is, but it's a start at least for you.

Thanks Man! I know what you mean about the national media. But they're probably just pandering to whatever gets the most clicks. Most fans are boneheads after all (but not us of course).

 

[Sid]

Thanks for the great discussion! I've been too busy to post much lately.

I personally have found the greatest gains in my health and fitness from doing things that I enjoy. A critical part involves trying new things. I get the sense that there are probably many different paths to achieving superior performance. Sometimes this involves adherence to a plan. Other times this involves changing things up.

I don't know about using research to achieve elite performance. Research is good at determining what's good for general populations, but not necessarily at explaining exceptionalism. The reverse follows that what works for exceptional athletes may not work for the average person. Training like Phelps, Lochte, or Bolt won't necessarily make one perform like them. Then there's the not shaving, lucky numbers, and lucky shirts and socks that pros adhere to as well.

I've dabbled with distance. I've dabbled with speed, and now, I'm dabbling in running based on perceived level of exertion. I'm going to stick with whatever I enjoy, because that's what's going to help me keep going and progress furthest to my potential.

 

[Bare Lee]

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make Sid. Don't do the Maf method if it's frustrating, boring, whatever. Only do it because you enjoy it. The point of bringing up research showing that other forms of training, as used by 'elite' or 'pro' or even just competitive recreational distance runners, are more effective, wasn't to suggest that we must follow these protocols, but rather to show that there's no need to follow the Maf method. If you don't enjoy it but are doing it because you're under the impression that it's the most effective, well, there's good news: you can stop now. I think it's also important to know that higher volume type training seems to increase one's chances of injury. The idea that running faster is harder on your body doesn't seem to be born out by current research.

But I've always insisted that enjoyment should come first for recreational runners with modest performance or fitness goals. That is basically the whole point of my participation in this discussion. Or at least that was my original intent. In my own regimen, for example, I know I should probably do some HIIT or circuit-training on my weights days, but I enjoy a more leisurely, heavy weight orientation. It just feels good to lift a fair amount of weight several times a week. Plus I like doing the exercises slowly and very controlled so that I can minimize the chance of injury.

As far as elites and exceptionalism, that is also a very important point. Maf adherents bring up the example of Mark Allen, but one has to wonder what kind of results such an exceptionally talented athlete might have achieved using a more contemporary training protocol.

The reason I run is because it is hands down the most enjoyable form of exercise I know of. I still don't really consider myself a runner, but rather a guy who likes to run. And I like to run a bit faster (still very slow for most competitive runners), so I'm experimenting with different paces and distances, using a Garmin, but eventually I would like to train myself to be able to perceive my level of exertion more accurately, as you're doing. I would like to use more or less three paces or levels of exertion--fast, medium, slow--during my weekly runs, corresponding to interval work, tempo runs, and LSD runs. I think using different ranges of motion is good for me, but mostly I just like the variation.

But it's all an ongoing experiment. I'll continue tweaking things and changing things around. Recently I've broken up my weight routine into three days (front, shoulder, back) instead of two (front and back), and have added in more floor exercises, and that seems to be working for me. Maybe later I'll try something different. It's all good.