what's vo2 max

vo2 max is the maximum amount of oxygen u can take per minute.Its a benchmark for most.mostly people express it in

millilitre oxygen per minute u can take up per kilogram of bodyweight.
for example 65 ml/kg/min.

u could also express it in absolute values this is important in cycling on flat roads a person that has 65 mls a minute and weights 70 kilograms(154 pounds) can take 65x70=4.550 litres of oxygen a minute
The other value is more important in events where you literraly have to carry your own weight.Like mountainbiking,cycling on the mountains.

Note people cant operate at there vo2max for long times.Only a couple of minutes before they just cant move annymore.Here is where the anaerobic threshold comes in to the game.this means at what percentage of youre vo2max u can operate without making becoming tired to fast (say an half an hour) so this number is actually more important then the vo2max

Most people say vo2max is genetically limited i wont disagree with them BUT
this is the maximum vo2 max they could reach*.The anaerobic threshold is what we train for the higher that point is the better for cycling.

Another important thing u get with training is learning to ride economical.
How to use the least oxygen at what speed.

but dont give up if u think youre vo2max might be low read on instead

that is the reason why
non trained verry fat people in most cases are less fit then non trained
non fat people.And that is why athletes tend not to be fat.Even on sprinting vo2 max per kilogram has some importance...

*(this is my opinion from what i read)
to come back to the genetical case.
Lately i have seen more and more prove that vo2max can be trained more then most people thought.In the general public most people think when the took there vo2max they werent training they can imprtove it 15% in litres so if they lose fat they could get even higher values in ml/kg/min
BUT this is a wrong thought only the UPPER VALUE is genetically coded.
And that is more then most think and that can be different for most people.
Most people never even come close to that value.Some non fat athletes could improve say 15% but some 50%!!!!

To get to youre maximum u need to train like 6 hours or more or less for some (most)individuals at uncomfortable paces(interval training,training for longer periods above lactate threshold(anaerobic point)

further those guys who train for the upper limit train also a lot at a normal pace.....

pp online is a site that discusses training methods for increasing vo2max
especially the article of cross country skiers is intresting(skiers training already for years still increasing values of 64 ml/kg to 70+ml/kg)

smallyke said:

vo2 max is the maximum amount of oxygen u can take per minute.Its a benchmark for most.mostly people express it in

millilitre oxygen per minute u can take up per kilogram of bodyweight.
for example 65 ml/kg/min.

u could also express it in absolute values this is important in cycling on flat roads a person that has 65 mls a minute and weights 70 kilograms(154 pounds) can take 65x70=4.550 litres of oxygen a minute
The other value is more important in events where you literraly have to carry your own weight.Like mountainbiking,cycling on the mountains.

Note people cant operate at there vo2max for long times.Only a couple of minutes before they just cant move annymore.Here is where the anaerobic threshold comes in to the game.this means at what percentage of youre vo2max u can operate without making becoming tired to fast (say an half an hour) so this number is actually more important then the vo2max

Most people say vo2max is genetically limited i wont disagree with them BUT
this is the maximum vo2 max they could reach*.The anaerobic threshold is what we train for the higher that point is the better for cycling.

Another important thing u get with training is learning to ride economical.
How to use the least oxygen at what speed.

but dont give up if u think youre vo2max might be low read on instead

that is the reason why
non trained verry fat people in most cases are less fit then non trained
non fat people.And that is why athletes tend not to be fat.Even on sprinting vo2 max per kilogram has some importance...

*(this is my opinion from what i read)
to come back to the genetical case.
Lately i have seen more and more prove that vo2max can be trained more then most people thought.In the general public most people think when the took there vo2max they werent training they can imprtove it 15% in litres so if they lose fat they could get even higher values in ml/kg/min
BUT this is a wrong thought only the UPPER VALUE is genetically coded.
And that is more then most think and that can be different for most people.
Most people never even come close to that value.Some non fat athletes could improve say 15% but some 50%!!!!

To get to youre maximum u need to train like 6 hours or more or less for some (most)individuals at uncomfortable paces(interval training,training for longer periods above lactate threshold(anaerobic point)

further those guys who train for the upper limit train also a lot at a normal pace.....

pp online is a site that discusses training methods for increasing vo2max
especially the article of cross country skiers is intresting(skiers training already for years still increasing values of 64 ml/kg to 70+ml/kg)

thanks kind of confusing but I think I get it now

Off topic, but where is VO2?

keydates said:

Off topic, but where is VO2?

don't know I was expecting he/her(don't know which) to answer to this, isn't he (asuming it is a he) one of the administrarors?

smallyke said:

vo2 max is the maximum amount of oxygen u can take per minute.Its a benchmark for most.mostly people express it in

millilitre oxygen per minute u can take up per kilogram of bodyweight.
for example 65 ml/kg/min.

u could also express it in absolute values this is important in cycling on flat roads a person that has 65 mls a minute and weights 70 kilograms(154 pounds) can take 65x70=4.550 litres of oxygen a minute
The other value is more important in events where you literraly have to carry your own weight.Like mountainbiking,cycling on the mountains.

Note people cant operate at there vo2max for long times.Only a couple of minutes before they just cant move annymore.Here is where the anaerobic threshold comes in to the game.this means at what percentage of youre vo2max u can operate without making becoming tired to fast (say an half an hour) so this number is actually more important then the vo2max

Most people say vo2max is genetically limited i wont disagree with them BUT
this is the maximum vo2 max they could reach*.The anaerobic threshold is what we train for the higher that point is the better for cycling.

Another important thing u get with training is learning to ride economical.
How to use the least oxygen at what speed.

but dont give up if u think youre vo2max might be low read on instead

that is the reason why
non trained verry fat people in most cases are less fit then non trained
non fat people.And that is why athletes tend not to be fat.Even on sprinting vo2 max per kilogram has some importance...

*(this is my opinion from what i read)
to come back to the genetical case.
Lately i have seen more and more prove that vo2max can be trained more then most people thought.In the general public most people think when the took there vo2max they werent training they can imprtove it 15% in litres so if they lose fat they could get even higher values in ml/kg/min
BUT this is a wrong thought only the UPPER VALUE is genetically coded.
And that is more then most think and that can be different for most people.
Most people never even come close to that value.Some non fat athletes could improve say 15% but some 50%!!!!

To get to youre maximum u need to train like 6 hours or more or less for some (most)individuals at uncomfortable paces(interval training,training for longer periods above lactate threshold(anaerobic point)

further those guys who train for the upper limit train also a lot at a normal pace.....

pp online is a site that discusses training methods for increasing vo2max
especially the article of cross country skiers is intresting(skiers training already for years still increasing values of 64 ml/kg to 70+ml/kg)

A small inconsistancy that needs addressing:

Anaerobic threshold and lactate threshold ARE NOT the same thing. Many people think they are but it is just because they don't know. Anaerobic threshold is the point at which the energy needs for exercise shift from being obtained 100% from oxygen/fat to where the body begins to reduce glycogen to obtain energy. This can carry on until the intensity has increased to a point where the lactic acid is produced at a rate higher than it can be shuttled away to the liver, heart, non-working muscles , etc. so it starts to accumulate. The point where lactate production equals its clearance is called the maximum lactate steady state and it is at a point just below the lactate threshold. The lactate threshold is where LA production is greater than LA clearance. The amounts of LA in the blood will continue to increase and the point at which it equals 4 mmol/L is called Onset of Blood Lactate Accumulation (OBLA) and at this point glycolysis shuts down because of the excessive oxygen available at the conclusion of the Electron Transport Chain due to the slowed enzyme action from the excessive levels of LA. Confused yet? Probably, but the body works in quirky ways and only psychos such as myself have the desire to learn the specifics.

The point made about the VO2max (pronounced v-dot-O2max) being reported as L/min for non-weight bearing athletes (such as cyclists) is a good point that most people are unaware of.

I'm not one to agree with the "genetic coding" of your aerobic capacity. My VO2 max was measured at 76 ml/kg/min back in the late '90s and I was training hard but very haphazardly. As far as I know, I could have gotten it much higher but I won't know until I start my training for the Paralympic Trials in 2008. By saying that there is a genetic cap to ones limits is, in my honest opinion, only a way for people that have hit a plateau to "convince" themselves that they can do no better; but hard work never killed any healthy athlete!

trunks_cscs said:

A small inconsistancy that needs addressing:

Anaerobic threshold and lactate threshold ARE NOT the same thing.

shouldn't the inconsistency be, that AT is a no longer used expression?

Quoted post said:

Many people think they are but it is just because they don't know. Anaerobic threshold is the point at which the energy needs for exercise shift from being obtained 100% from oxygen/fat to where the body begins to reduce glycogen to obtain energy.

fat oxidation only occurs at extremely low intensities or after you've 'blown', CHO oxidation begins occuring way below "AT".

Quoted post said:

This can carry on until the intensity has increased to a point where the lactic acid is produced at a rate higher than it can be shuttled away to the liver, heart, non-working muscles , etc. so it starts to accumulate. The point where lactate production equals its clearance is called the maximum lactate steady state and it is at a point just below the lactate threshold.

MLSS is *above* LT and is the marker most closely represenentative of e.g., 1-hr TT power (although LT and other variables correlare very highly with 1-hr TT power)

Quoted post said:

The lactate threshold is where LA production is greater than LA clearance.

the most widely accepted scientific definition of LT is: the workload that elicits a 1 mmol/L increase in lactate over exercise baseline levels or the workload that elicits a lactate of 2.5 mmol/L

Quoted post said:

The amounts of LA in the blood will continue to increase and the point at which it equals 4 mmol/L is called Onset of Blood Lactate Accumulation (OBLA) and at this point glycolysis shuts down because of the excessive oxygen available at the conclusion of the Electron Transport Chain due to the slowed enzyme action from the excessive levels of LA. Confused yet?

people can work above OBLA, and that's another term that is no longer used

Quoted post said:

The point made about the VO2max (pronounced v-dot-O2max) being reported as L/min for non-weight bearing athletes (such as cyclists) is a good point that most people are unaware of.

i don't believe i've ever heard it pronounced V-dot-O2max, but that's how it's written with the dot above the V

Quoted post said:

I'm not one to agree with the "genetic coding" of your aerobic capacity. My VO2 max was measured at 76 ml/kg/min back in the late '90s and I was training hard but very haphazardly. As far as I know, I could have gotten it much higher but I won't know until I start my training for the Paralympic Trials in 2008. By saying that there is a genetic cap to ones limits is, in my honest opinion, only a way for people that have hit a plateau to "convince" themselves that they can do no better; but hard work never killed any healthy athlete!

VO2max is ~ 50% genetic. it's quite trainable.

On to the original posters query: VO2max is the maximum amount of O2 that can be extracted from the air and utilised by your organs, and represents the upper limit of your aerobic ability. in my opinion, i would say that VO2max itself is only really useful within a lab setting for research work. however, the power output that is produced at the end of an incremental test to exhaustion (where VO2max is tested) is very important, several researchers including myself term this "MAP" (maximal aerobic power). This MAP figure is an excellent way of measuring fitness and can be done independently of measuring VO2max (which requires having expired respiratory gases analysed - and therefore must be done in a lab with either online testing or the 'gold' standard of Douglass Bags).

You can read some more about MAP and how it pertains to cycling performance here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=powerstern

ric

ricstern said:

shouldn't the inconsistency be, that AT is a no longer used expression?

fat oxidation only occurs at extremely low intensities or after you've 'blown', CHO oxidation begins occuring way below "AT".

MLSS is *above* LT and is the marker most closely represenentative of e.g., 1-hr TT power (although LT and other variables correlare very highly with 1-hr TT power)

the most widely accepted scientific definition of LT is: the workload that elicits a 1 mmol/L increase in lactate over exercise baseline levels or the workload that elicits a lactate of 2.5 mmol/L

people can work above OBLA, and that's another term that is no longer used

i don't believe i've ever heard it pronounced V-dot-O2max, but that's how it's written with the dot above the V

VO2max is ~ 50% genetic. it's quite trainable.

On to the original posters query: VO2max is the maximum amount of O2 that can be extracted from the air and utilised by your organs, and represents the upper limit of your aerobic ability. in my opinion, i would say that VO2max itself is only really useful within a lab setting for research work. however, the power output that is produced at the end of an incremental test to exhaustion (where VO2max is tested) is very important, several researchers including myself term this "MAP" (maximal aerobic power). This MAP figure is an excellent way of measuring fitness and can be done independently of measuring VO2max (which requires having expired respiratory gases analysed - and therefore must be done in a lab with either online testing or the 'gold' standard of Douglass Bags).

You can read some more about MAP and how it pertains to cycling performance here: cyclingnews.comfitnessOpen ↗

ric

I only partially agree with your post. O2 oxidation is always taking place and glycolysis starts at AT, be it only slightly. AT occurs at a very low intensity in all people and one's LT can be increased through aerobic training. If all of your points were true, the papers I've come across during my reaserch have all been incorrect, even this one from 2003:

[font=AvantGarde-Book]
[left]Sports Med 2003; 33 (6): 407-426.[/left]

AT and OBLA are both still very commonplace in the literature and those lab reports are what dictate our field.

As for MLSS, how can it possibly be above LT? LT is the point where LA production is greater than LA clearance while steady state means all things are equal. With this being said and following the concepts to the tee, MLSS is just below LT.

[left]As far as douglass bags, never used them, only closed-circuit spirometry with a gas meter and collection tank, not douglass bags, hooked to O2 and CO2 analyzers, . I'm not saying that you are wrong (and I don't appreciate that you imply that I am), we've just learned differently. I don't know of your background and I'm sure it is as chock full of knowledge as is mine.[/left]
[/font]

trunks_cscs said:

I only partially agree with your post. O2 oxidation is always taking place and glycolysis starts at AT, be it only slightly. AT occurs at a very low intensity in all people and one's LT can be increased through aerobic training. If all of your points were true, the papers I've come across during my reaserch have all been incorrect, even this one from 2003:

[font=AvantGarde-Book]
[left]Sports Med 2003; 33 (6): 407-426.[/left]

AT and OBLA are both still very commonplace in the literature and those lab reports are what dictate our field.

they're not really commonplace, except in old papers.

Quoted post said:

As for MLSS, how can it possibly be above LT?

maybe you failed to see the definition provided. in any case check out Coyle et al 91, because LT is a low intensity that can be maintained for ~ 3+ hrs

[left]As far as douglass bags, never used them, only closed-circuit spirometry with a gas meter and collection tank, not douglass bags, hooked to O2 and CO2 analyzers, . I'm not saying that you are wrong (and I don't appreciate that you imply that I am), we've just learned differently. I don't know of your background and I'm sure it is as chock full of knowledge as is mine.[/left]
[/font][/QUOTE]

i'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, it's well established that the Douglass Bag method of collecting expired respiratory gases is the "Gold standard"?

ric

VO2max is ~ 50% genetic. it's quite trainable.

On to the original posters query: VO2max is the maximum amount of O2 that can be extracted from the air and utilised by your organs, and represents the upper limit of your aerobic ability. in my opinion, i would say that VO2max itself is only really useful within a lab setting for research work. however, the power output that is produced at the end of an incremental test to exhaustion (where VO2max is tested) is very important, several researchers including myself term this "MAP" (maximal aerobic power). This MAP figure is an excellent way of measuring fitness and can be done independently of measuring VO2max (which requires having expired respiratory gases analysed - and therefore must be done in a lab with either online testing or the 'gold' standard of Douglass Bags).

You can read some more about MAP and how it pertains to cycling performance here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=powerstern

ric[/QUOTE]

thanks this has been the most understandable yet and thanks for the link

Correct me if I'm wrong but...Stronger riders may be more likely to know this jargon, but knowing this Jargon will not make one a stronger rider.

Case in point. The soccer mom driving her van down the road. She has never had an accident and never violated any traffic laws. She is the best, safest driver out there. Can she replace an alternator? No!

The grease monkey. He can rebuild any vehicle blindfolded, but ouch, he just slammed into the back of a stopped car.

I'm definitely from the Eddie Merckx school of "Ride More."

jitteringjr said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but...Stronger riders may be more likely to know this jargon, but knowing this Jargon will not make one a stronger rider.

Case in point. The soccer mom driving her van down the road. She has never had an accident and never violated any traffic laws. She is the best, safest driver out there. Can she replace an alternator? No!

The grease monkey. He can rebuild any vehicle blindfolded, but ouch, he just slammed into the back of a stopped car.

I'm definitely from the Eddie Merckx school of "Ride More."

but what if the soccer mom learnt some mechanics, and the mechanic slammed in to her car. now she can repair the damage.

ric_stern/RST said:

but what if the soccer mom learnt some mechanics, and the mechanic slammed in to her car. now she can repair the damage.

She wouldn't need to. The mechanic would be "at fault" so it is his responsibility to repair the damages and he already knows how to. 🙂

That way she could devote more time to lifting weights so she can beat up the other soccer moms.

Boy that got off topic....

jitteringjr said:

She wouldn't need to. The mechanic would be "at fault" so it is his responsibility to repair the damages and he already knows how to. 🙂

That way she could devote more time to lifting weights so she can beat up the other soccer moms.

Boy that got off topic....

perhaps the mechanic was severly injured the crash....

LMAO!

ric_stern/RST said:

perhaps the mechanic was severly injured the crash....

LMAO!

Thats a posibility but mechanics are the partying type and this one was probably drunk when he caused the accident. It is rarely the drunk person who gets hurt in accidents, so that it not likely either.

Back to topic. The original question of this thread asked if it was worth finding out ones VO2 max and was asked by a 14 y/o. I can see how learning the theory would be beneficial, especially if he was thinking about a career in sports medicine / coaching. However, is knowing ones actual VO2 max value of any real benefit to anyone other than those in the professional (or about to become professional) ranks?

jitteringjr said:

Thats a posibility but mechanics are the partying type and this one was probably drunk when he caused the accident. It is rarely the drunk person who gets hurt in accidents, so that it not likely either.

but in this case, he'd forgotten to put on his seat belt and it served him right for being a drunk driver.

Quoted post said:

Back to topic. The original question of this thread asked if it was worth finding out ones VO2 max and was asked by a 14 y/o. I can see how learning the theory would be beneficial, especially if he was thinking about a career in sports medicine / coaching. However, is knowing ones actual VO2 max value of any real benefit to anyone other than those in the professional (or about to become professional) ranks?

i don't think it's overly important to know, unless you have them regularly done. it's more important for research.

what is however, important, is knowing what your MAP is, as this can be used to define training zones. as a MAP test and VO2max test are one and the same thing (not withstanding some differences in protocol between researchers) you might as well get your VO2max measured at the same time.

additionally, there's nothing wrong with having a basic understanding of exercise physiology and what the terms etc might mean. maybe the OP doesn't have a coach and is thus self-coached, having an idea of these terms, their meanings, the mechanics involved and the understanding of the physiology of the limiting factors that prevent us from going as fast as we like, is exceedingly useful

ric

ric_stern/RST said:

what is however, important, is knowing what your MAP is, as this can be used to define training zones.

ric

I copied this from your article posted earlier in the thread:

Zones
Zone Power Output Heart Rate Intensity
(% of MAP) (based on HRmax)

Recovery Up to 40 40 - 60 b/min below HRmax Recovery
1 40 - 55 45 - 50 b/min below HRmax Endurance
2 50 - 65 40 - 45 b/min below HRmax Endurance
3 60 - 70 30 - 40 b/min below HRmax Endurance
4 65 - 75 25 - 30 b/min below HRmax Intensive
5 70 - 85 15 - 25 b/min below HRmax Intensive
6 80 - 110 0 - 15 b/min below HRmax Maximal
7 110 - 150 0 - 15 b/min below HRmax Maximal

If one can base his zones on his Max HR, (something that can easily be determined with out paying for a special test) why does one need to do the test?

jitteringjr said:

I copied this from your article posted earlier in the thread:

Zones
Zone Power Output Heart Rate Intensity
(% of MAP) (based on HRmax)

Recovery Up to 40 40 - 60 b/min below HRmax Recovery
1 40 - 55 45 - 50 b/min below HRmax Endurance
2 50 - 65 40 - 45 b/min below HRmax Endurance
3 60 - 70 30 - 40 b/min below HRmax Endurance
4 65 - 75 25 - 30 b/min below HRmax Intensive
5 70 - 85 15 - 25 b/min below HRmax Intensive
6 80 - 110 0 - 15 b/min below HRmax Maximal
7 110 - 150 0 - 15 b/min below HRmax Maximal

If one can base his zones on his Max HR, (something that can easily be determined with out paying for a special test) why does one need to do the test?

i'm saying you should test to determine your MAP (and maybe your HRmax). the HR zones are just there as a rough approximation for people moving from HR to power to have an idea what it means.

ric

i find vo2max verry usefull for training.
Training at 70% of vo2max for instance gives you ST fibers an optimal boost
if you know at what heart rate what vo2max you have it would be handy.Note it wont differ a lot with the normal heart rates(standard people) for conditionning but it gave me a 5 beats difference and also explained why i wasnt improving...

if youre pretty serious about training a lactate acid meter would be the best tool for training i guess...