Physiological testing in NYC?

Before you shell out all that money, decide how you will use the information. The key to running
well is 1) running and 2) having a good solid training program. I would suggest hiring (or working
with a coach at a runnning/track club) to design a good training plan. A training plan can be based
on race performances or field tests that will cost you nothing.

The advantage to lab based testing is to monitor progress. If you are not going to do frequent
follow ups with the same lab, same equipment, I think you are wasting your money just to have some
cool, gee whiz information.

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know (or a
comparable race depending on the distance(s) on which you wish to focus).

Keep in mind, I was trained as an exercise physiologist and have done more lab based testing on
a wide variety of abilities (from cardiac patients to Olympic gold medalists) that I can count
or remember.

Anecdotally, the Kenyans are not getting tested except in rare cases for a scientific study
or paper...

"Jesse Sheidlower" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As I'm starting to get more serious about my running, I am thinking that it would make sense to
get some real numbers for my cardiovascular abilities, rather than guessing based on whatever my
HRM says when I think I'm working hard.

Is there a good place to go in New York City for getting the basics tested, like VO2Max, AT, LT,
and so forth, without spending a fortune? If they know about running and can say, "Those shoes are
awful for you," so much the better ;-).

Thanks.

Jesse Sheidlower

I seriously doubt you'll find that kind of testing in a one horse town like New York City. You may
have to book a flight to a more metropolitan area.

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know

At my age I can hardly be called an athlete of any sort but I do know my 10K time. So how do I
figure out what that number is telling me?

[email hidden] (Jtiche) wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know

At my age I can hardly be called an athlete of any sort but I do know my 10K time. So how do I
figure out what that number is telling me?

If it's a recent 10K that is based on your current fitness level, then you can use that time to
figure your training paces.

Go here tinyurl.com34hazOpen ↗, plug in your 10K time, then see what your pace should be for the
various types of workouts.

-Phil

In article said:

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know

At my age I can hardly be called an athlete of any sort but I do know my 10K time. So how do I
figure out what that number is telling me?

You can use your pace for a race to get an estimate of your pace at different percentages of VO2
max. For example, I have an online calc based on Jack Daniels' formulas
panix.comvdot.htmlOpen ↗. This prescribes training paces for different workouts (easy
training runs, VO2max intervals, LT workouts)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>,

Donovan Rebbechi said:

In article said:

As I'm starting to get more serious about my running, I am thinking that it would make sense to
get some real numbers for my cardiovascular abilities, rather than guessing based on whatever my
HRM says when I think I'm working hard.

How would that help your training ?

You may want to take a look at "Daniels running formula" by Jack Daniels. What this book does is
provides estimates of *what pace* corresponds to your VO2 max (and LT), and how to integrate these
into a program that is based on using these paces to determine workout intensities.

Thanks for the suggestion, and your followup in the other message. I picked up the Daniels book and
will be reading through it more thoroughly soon. One early reaction is that while it's true he talks
about how important it is to just go by how you feel, and how you can reduce everything to the magic
VDOT, he also does talk alot about how you should train for such-and-such with your so-and-so
between 88% and 91% of your vV[dot]O2Max, and shows pictures of superfit guys on treadmills with gas
analyzers in their mouths, and discusses his testing of Olympians. So there's at least the
impression that he thinks there's some value in these tests.

But the main issue seems to be that training for running is sufficiently different from training for
cycling that I need to readjust my framework.

Jesse Sheidlower

In article <[email hidden]>,

Sam said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know (or a
comparable race depending on the distance(s) on which you wish to focus).

This may be true for running 10K races, but it is certainly not true, mutatis mutandis, for cycling,
so I need to start thinking of training issues with running rather than cycling in mind.

Thanks,

Jesse Sheidlower

In article said:

In article said:

In article said:

As I'm starting to get more serious about my running, I am thinking that it would make sense to
get some real numbers for my cardiovascular abilities, rather than guessing based on whatever my
HRM says when I think I'm working hard.

How would that help your training ?

You may want to take a look at "Daniels running formula" by Jack Daniels. What this book does is
provides estimates of *what pace* corresponds to your VO2 max (and LT), and how to integrate these
into a program that is based on using these paces to determine workout intensities.

Thanks for the suggestion, and your followup in the other message. I picked up the Daniels book
and will be reading through it more thoroughly soon. One early reaction is that while it's true he
talks about how important it is to just go by how you feel, and how you can reduce everything to
the magic VDOT, he also does talk alot about how you should train for such-and-such with your so-and-
so between 88% and 91% of your vV[dot]O2Max, and shows pictures of superfit guys on treadmills
with gas analyzers in their mouths, and discusses his testing of Olympians. So there's at least
the impression that he thinks there's some value in these tests.

He certainly would think that there's some value in these tests -- he's a research scientist who
often tests these people. The tests are more useful to the research community than they are to the
athlete, though athletes also benefit from advances made by the research community.

There are a number of circumstances under which it's desirable to measure VO2, besides VO2 max
testing: any time you want to measure the energy cost of something. Energy cost is *very* important,
so scientists measure the effect of all sorts of variables on energy cost -- fatigue, footwear,
running surface, training protocol, training experience, age, weight (and weights placed in
different places), height, etc.

Quoted message said:

But the main issue seems to be that training for running is sufficiently different from training
for cycling that I need to readjust my framework.

Yeah, I thought about this, and it occurred to me that speed varies much more depending on gradient
in cycling than it does in running, so this probably makes speed less useful to cyclists than to
runners. I can see why treating speed as the "gold standard" (as Daniels does) would seem very
strange to a cyclist.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

That is a close approximation of your pace at lactate threshold (as I determine it), but you can
take that pace and based all training off of it. The best part is that when you get ready to "test"
yourself again it is a lot cheaper than getting to a lab.

"Jtiche" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know

At my age I can hardly be called an athlete of any sort but I do know my

10K

Quoted message said:

time. So how do I figure out what that number is telling me?

Jack has not suggested that his tables give you VO2max, only that it can estimate and he makes some
large assumptions about one's economy as well (as he elucidated recently at a USA Triathlon coaching
conference). However, you can use them to figure out Jack's VDOT and use them accordingly.

Ultimately racing is the best testing to me.

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know

At my age I can hardly be called an athlete of any sort but I do know my

10K

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

time. So how do I figure out what that number is telling me?

You can use your pace for a race to get an estimate of your pace at

different

Quoted message said:

percentages of VO2 max. For example, I have an online calc based on Jack Daniels' formulas
panix.comvdot.htmlOpen ↗. This prescribes training paces for different workouts
(easy training runs, VO2max

intervals, LT

Quoted message said:

workouts)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

"Jesse Sheidlower" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

In article said:

As I'm starting to get more serious about my running, I am thinking that it would make sense to
get some real numbers for my cardiovascular abilities, rather than guessing based on whatever
my HRM says when I think I'm working hard.

How would that help your training ?

You may want to take a look at "Daniels running formula" by Jack Daniels.

What

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

this book does is provides estimates of *what pace* corresponds to your

VO2

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

max (and LT), and how to integrate these into a program that is based on

using

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

these paces to determine workout intensities.

Thanks for the suggestion, and your followup in the other message. I picked up the Daniels book
and will be reading through it more thoroughly soon. One early reaction is that while it's true he
talks about how important it is to just go by how you feel, and how you can reduce everything to
the magic VDOT, he also does talk alot about how you should train for such-and-such with your so-and-
so between 88% and 91% of your vV[dot]O2Max, and shows pictures of superfit guys on treadmills
with gas analyzers in their mouths, and discusses his testing of Olympians. So there's at least
the impression that he thinks there's some value in these tests.

Recently having heard Jack speak, he was clear that he does not trust the results from most
labs, and I agree with him. I have had top athletes whom I have tested get different numbers
at two labs in a very short period of time. I would say that Jack has used lab data to
develop and support some of his principles but that one needs to be skeptical of a result
from a lab.

Quoted message said:

But the main issue seems to be that training for running is sufficiently different from training
for cycling that I need to readjust my framework.

The principles remain the same, both are aerobic sports (dammit--to quote a friend and
colleague). Both require a little skill tweaking and cycling probably a bit more
alterations in cadences since one will probably encounter that over time, but doing
aerobic, lactate threshold and VO2max workouts all follow the same principle. In a
discussion with a person I consider to be a top cycling scientist and applicator, we
discovered that our favorite workouts were 2x20 min at what is essentially lactate
threshold. He just does his on a bike and I do mine running.

Quoted message said:

Jesse Sheidlower

Well, considering the discussion is on a running forum....

For a cyclist I would say the 40K TT is your mark. If you cannot do a 40K tt, use a 20K and figure
that you can then adjust down by 5%.

For a cyclist I recommend using power as the measure.

Another way to do this is the figure the intensity one can maintain for an hour and use that for the
basis of training.

"Jesse Sheidlower" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Sam

Quoted message said:

If you are an endurance athlete your 10K time tells about all you really need to know (or a
comparable race depending on the distance(s) on which

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wish to focus).

This may be true for running 10K races, but it is certainly not true, mutatis mutandis, for
cycling, so I need to start thinking of training issues with running rather than cycling in mind.

Thanks,

Jesse Sheidlower

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

In article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Jesse Sheidlower wrote:
>
> As I'm starting to get more serious about my running, I am thinking that it would make sense
> to get some real numbers for my cardiovascular abilities, rather than guessing based on
> whatever my HRM says when I think I'm working hard.

How would that help your training ?

You may want to take a look at "Daniels running formula" by Jack

Daniels. What

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

this book does is provides estimates of *what pace* corresponds to your

VO2

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

max (and LT), and how to integrate these into a program that is based on

using

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

these paces to determine workout intensities.

Thanks for the suggestion, and your followup in the other message. I picked up the Daniels book
and will be reading through it more thoroughly soon. One early reaction is that while it's true
he talks about how important it is to just go by how you feel, and how you can reduce everything
to the magic VDOT, he also does talk alot about how you should train for such-and-such with your
so-and-so between 88% and 91% of your vV[dot]O2Max, and shows pictures of superfit guys on
treadmills with gas analyzers in their mouths, and discusses his testing of Olympians. So
there's at least the impression that he thinks there's some value in these tests.

He certainly would think that there's some value in these tests -- he's a research scientist who
often tests these people. The tests are more useful

to

Quoted message said:

the research community than they are to the athlete, though athletes also benefit from advances
made by the research community.

There are a number of circumstances under which it's desirable to measure

VO2,

Quoted message said:

besides VO2 max testing: any time you want to measure the energy cost of something. Energy cost is
*very* important, so scientists measure the

effect

Quoted message said:

of all sorts of variables on energy cost -- fatigue, footwear, running

surface,

Quoted message said:

training protocol, training experience, age, weight (and weights placed in different places),
height, etc.

Quoted message said:

But the main issue seems to be that training for running is sufficiently different from training
for cycling that I need to readjust my framework.

Yeah, I thought about this, and it occurred to me that speed varies much

more

Quoted message said:

depending on gradient in cycling than it does in running, so this probably makes speed less useful
to cyclists than to runners. I can see why

treating

Quoted message said:

speed as the "gold standard" (as Daniels does) would seem very strange to

a

Quoted message said:

cyclist.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

In cycling one can easily (if not cheaply) measure power.

Hey [censored] when you post you don't have to include the post you're responding to

As a "[censored]" who does that, I argue that it helps follow a conversation since others and the
original can see exactly that to which I am commenting.

"cwo3" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hey [censored] when you post you don't have to include the post you're responding to

But whatever you do, don't top-post. ;-)

Sam said:

As a "[censored]" who does that, I argue that it helps follow a conversation since others and the
original can see exactly that to which I am commenting.

"cwo3" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hey [censored] when you post you don't have to include the post you're responding to

Tim

--
Remove the obvious to reply by email. Please support rheumatoid arthritis research! Visit
justgiving.comspeysideOpen ↗ or justgiving.comspeysideOpen ↗ if you're a UK
tax payer.