MAF Test and Measuring Performance
I began working with Linda just after her successful fall racing season. Her first MAF Test in early December was about an 8:25 pace for the first mile. I explained that this aerobic pace was related to her average pace for a flat 5K race, which a week previous averaged around 6:50 per mile (and a finishing time of 21:10). As Linda’s MAF Test began improving through the winter months, she was feeling better overall with more energy, better sleep, and fewer allergy symptoms. Her MAF Test improved to 7:45 for the first mile just prior to her spring racing season. Her first race in early April, after only training aerobically through the winter, was a 5K, and she ran a personal best of 18:57. The important point is that as Linda’s aerobic function improved, as demonstrated by her MAF Test, so did her race pace.
The MAF Test is directly related to your competitive performance, including race results. As your aerobic system and MAF Test results improve, so will your competitive ability.
Beginning in the early 1980s, I collected a lot of MAF data on runners. After hundreds of tests and several racing seasons, it was evident that the pace a runner could perform at his or her max aerobic heart rate—the MAF Test—was positively correlated with race pace. I collected more data for 5K and 10K distances and charted this information (see right). Through the years it also became obvious that performance in all endurance events—triathlons, marathons, cycling events, swimming—could be improved by developing a faster aerobic pace. Even athletes involved in basketball, soccer, tennis, and other events that required significant amounts of aerobic efforts could improve.
MAF Test vs. Running Race Pace
MAF Pace 5K Race Pace 5K Time
10:00 7:30 23:18
9:00 7:00 21:45
8:30 6:45 20:58
8:00 6:30 20:12
7:30 6:00 18:38
7:00 5:30 17:05
6:30 5:15 16:19
6:00 5:00 15:32
5:45 4:45 14:45
5:30 4:30 13:59
5:15 4:20 13:28
5:00 4:15 13:12
Question: I have been playing with heart-rate monitor training for a little while. I am intrigued with your ideas. One thing that I am concerned with is the 180 Formula that relies on age. I am forty-three years old, in good condition from years of martial arts training. My max heart rate while running is 193 (tested doing intervals on hills). The standard formulas for predicting max heart rate predict significantly lower than my actual max heart rate. According to your formula, 180-43=137. I am on a low dose of HCTZ for a slightly elevated blood pressure, so subtract 10. That makes the number 127. I have had a cold this year and a stomach bug (might have been food poisoning, not sure), so I guess I miss out on the +5. This seems pretty low.
Answer: Remember, max heart rate is not factored into the 180 Formula. Be conservative. The 180 Formula is incredibly accurate, albeit sometimes difficult because it slows you down, but only initially.
