So would anyone care to explain VO2... (Read 2241 times)

    Right?
    We all are. Nobody on this thread will ever be in the Olympic 5000 meter final. So lets all take a deep breath and get over that and move on with the only thing that matters if we want to close the gap between our ultimate potential and our real world race performances; training. You chose your own level of mediocrity. Slow is a choice. It is simple,

    Runners run.

      But not easy.

      Runners run.

      obsessor


        Please stop saying that. Even if its true.
        What Trent does not say, though he implies (Trent - refute this if I am wrong.): Among Elite long distance athletes of equal ability (based on race performance), tested values of V02-max have varied greatly. All are relatively high, but you can't predict race times by vo2-max (actual, tested). So, you don't need to increase your vo2 max to get faster. And it doesn't mean you are fast or slow. But if it was higher, you'd be faster. Make sense? Also, no one stated the obvious, is that V=volume, and O2 is oxygen. In case there was any confusion. For physiological purposes, it's usually stated as a specific rate (per unit mass per time unit.)


        I've got a fever...

          If even a fraction of the stuff you post is true, you are incredibly fortunate and gifted.
          Runner92, I wanna believe in you. I really do. So go run a race. A real race, not a low humidity time-trial or some wacky treadmill test. Go race. Hell, you might even win. Write a race report. Link us to the results. Do it, dude. Seriously. Make beleivers out of the skeptics. You'll do RA and yourself proud.

          On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office.  But you will wish that you'd spent more time running.  Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.


          A Dance with Monkeys

            What Trent does not say, though he implies (Trent - refute this if I am wrong.): Among Elite long distance athletes of equal ability (based on race performance), tested values of V02-max have varied greatly. All are relatively high, but you can't predict race times by vo2-max (actual, tested). So, you don't need to increase your vo2 max to get faster. And it doesn't mean you are fast or slow. But if it was higher, you'd be faster. Make sense? Also, no one stated the obvious, is that V=volume, and O2 is oxygen. In case there was any confusion. For physiological purposes, it's usually stated as a specific rate (per unit mass per time unit.)


            A Dance with Monkeys


            Just Be

              Runner92, I wanna believe in you. I really do. So go run a race. A real race, not a low humidity time-trial or some wacky treadmill test. Go race. Hell, you might even win. Write a race report. Link us to the results. Do it, dude. Seriously. Make beleivers out of the skeptics. You'll do RA and yourself proud.
              I have a real race scheduled on the 8th of October. The biannual 2 mile that I've been training for. After that's over and I start base, I'll probably start racing a bit more. But right now I prefer to avoid any hard workouts (all out races) that will interfere with my training schedule. So I guess we'll see how I do at the 2 mile. I really want to go sub 11, like I've said before, but I'm still weak at anything longer than 1 mile, which I'm working hard to correct.


              Just Be

                If even a fraction of the stuff you post is true, you are incredibly fortunate and gifted. Never let a bitter middle aged "never-been" beat you down. Your fastest days are ahead of you. Mine are a bittersweet memory Undecided
                No worries, you're not beating me down. Smile I was just giving you a hard time. Returning the favor! Evil grin


                I've got a fever...

                  I have a real race scheduled on the 8th of October. The biannual 2 mile that I've been training for. After that's over and I start base, I'll probably start racing a bit more. But right now I prefer to avoid any hard workouts (all out races) that will interfere with my training schedule. So I guess we'll see how I do at the 2 mile. I really want to go sub 11, like I've said before, but I'm still weak at anything longer than 1 mile, which I'm working hard to correct.
                  Is that two mile race up a mountain or something? I'm still confused, because I saw you post recently that you ran a mile under 4:40, and a 10k treadmill run in like 35 minutes or something. Throw those in with a 79.8 VO2max and an 11-minute 2-mile should be a bad split in a 5k. Speaking of which, a few 5ks would be great tuneups for an October race.

                  On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office.  But you will wish that you'd spent more time running.  Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.

                    I had my VO2 max tested in college in a physiology lab, and it came out to 72--the highest value on the team, even though I was not the top runner. My lactic threshold was a low value, which perhaps accounted for some of the reason I was running slower than some folks who measured in the 60's. At the time of the test, I was running very close to 15:00 for 5k on the track--I could run an 11 minute 2 mile in my sleep. Translating between race times and VO2max values is a pretty dicey affair, and there is no reason at all to believe that an 11 minute two mile time indicates in any way, shape, or form a 78.9 VO2 max. I think Deena Kastor has one of the highest VO2maxes on record for women at 80; Prefontaine had 82. Frank Shorter, 69--worse than me. Fortunately for Shorter, they don't give out medals for VO2max scores.


                    I've got a fever...

                      I had my VO2 max tested in college in a physiology lab, and it came out to 72--the highest value on the team, even though I was not the top runner. My lactic threshold was a low value, which perhaps accounted for some of the reason I was running slower than some folks who measured in the 60's. At the time of the test, I was running very close to 15:00 for 5k on the track--I could run an 11 minute 2 mile in my sleep. Translating between race times and VO2max values is a pretty dicey affair, and there is no reason at all to believe that an 11 minute two mile time indicates in any way, shape, or form a 78.9 VO2 max.
                      Agree with all of the above. Plus, you can throw out the 79.8 because it's treadmill-generated, not a tested value. But my question still remains, why sweat an 11-minute 2-mile when you can run a 4:3x mile and a 35-minute 10k? Runner92, you do have your doubters, but I respect your ability to take it in stride. I look forward to the day when run a spectacular time in a real race, and write a race report that ends with the phrase, "WHAT NOW, BITCHES?"

                      On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office.  But you will wish that you'd spent more time running.  Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.


                      A Dance with Monkeys

                        you can throw out the 79.8 because it's treadmill-generated
                        Um. Why so?


                        A Dance with Monkeys


                        I've got a fever...

                          Um. Why so?
                          If it's a Bruce protocol on a lab treadmill, I'd buy it. However, I think VO2 numbers generated by a recreational treadmill are probably of dubious authenticity.

                          On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office.  But you will wish that you'd spent more time running.  Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.

                            Runners run.