Hbrown

I have heard of VO2 max testing for years. I finally Found out mine. From what I understand it basically tells you how well your body processes oxygen. But what I don't understand is, what is considered good, and what is bad? Is the number a percentage ? Are you born with the stated ability? Can you change it through training? And what is the scale? Is it 0-100 or what?

dave1442397

Just do a Google search. Here's a chart that will give you an idea of where you stand. TM is treadmill measurement.

https://www.medicine.virginia.edu/res...0Chart-men.pdf

RChung

It means that you've wasted your money.

KevinF

It's not a percentage; the units are ml/kg/min (i.e., the milliliters of oxygen you can consume per kilogram of body-weight per minute). If you get a zero, you're dead (i.e., you're not consuming any oxygen). Theoretically you could get any number, although if you get anything in the 80s or above, you're some sort of freak of nature.

Yes, you can change it through training, although genetics will almost certainly play a role as well.

How did you get your VO2 max number and why did you bother if you don't know what the number represents?

intransit1217

*raises hand to ask a related question*

merlinextraligh

What does it mean:

1) you'll never win the Tour de France,

2) depending on the number, you may or may not be able to lord it over your friends.

Maybe if you're trying to select people for entry into National level training programs it would be useful data. Other than that its not anumber that's ging to be helpful to you in establishing or following a training program.

The money spent on the test would be much better spent on a power meter.

merlinextraligh

That chart seems extremely low. It must be based on a general population of largely untrained people.

Years ago, our whole team had exercise physiology testing done to determine Lactate Threshold and V02 max. My V02 max, which was the worst on my team, was off the charts according to that link.

A V02 max of 52 would be very pedestrian for a bike racer.

RPK79

+1

therhodeo

In fairness I almost had mine tested a few years ago through a study at a local university. They needed data for something so they were doing free testing.

merlinextraligh

similar situation for me.

I've done lab testing twice, first time was through my team and part of a study.

Second time was in 2005 as part of a Training camp. The second time, they only did Lactate Threshold. I was kinda surprised that we stopped when I was at LT, and didn't go on to determine V02 max. The Exersice Physioligist, who is also an elite level USAC cycling coach and a Cat 1 Racer, said we could but it wouldn't produce any useful data and wasn't worth the effort.

The Lab test results for my LTHR, and functional threshold power were virtually the same as my field test results with a HRM and power meter. So I've never done lab testing after that and just rely on a power meter.

softreset

You might as well sign up to take the SATs or the LSATs while you're at it.

Panza

As an exercise physiologist I can chime in and say that it measures your body's ability to utilize oxygen out of the maximum available O2 in your body. Cross country skiers can have 91% and tour de france winners can see 88%+ VO2 max. It's confusing and complicated to determine. Instead it's much better to use that tells you exactly the same thing? Calculate your FTP instead. You'll be able to use an FTP to measure your performance and pace yourself in races compared to a VO2 max, which will maybe tell you how much of your max potential you are using. Your "max potential" which can also increase through training. So fairly arbitrary.

datlas 

Maybe not the most diplomatic answer, but pretty much accurate.

If you are serious about training and are a competitive athlete, this can be useful information. If you are just Joe Blow Cyclist, it's pretty much a waste. Same goes for your FTP and your HRmax, these can be very useful data to set up and track a "serious" training regimen. But otherwise it's very limited value.

gregf83 

I don't recall seeing VO2Max listed as a %. Top cross country skiers have a VO2Max of ~91 ml/kg/min but it's not a % of the maximum available O2 in your body.

And measuring VO2Max is not particularly confusing or difficult to measure.

Panza

Hrm, guess you're right about that first part. 2nd part is subject to debate though depending on the testing method used.

Seattle Forrest

I "got mine tested" by buying a power meter. Less accurate but you don't have to puke on the floor, and it's not like the number really matters anyway.

merlinextraligh

Power meter just allows you to puke outdoors when you do a V02 max test.

https://www.trainingandracingwithapow...sing-power.htm

Seattle Forrest

Isn't that what makes it moderately useful? Chart your VO2max against your training load to make sure what you're doing is effective.

merlinextraligh

Its not really even useful for training as a competitive athlete.

FTP is hugely useful in training. You set training zones off of it, and you can use it to pace, particularly time trial efforts.

Max HR is pretty much a useless number, that's unique to each individual, and largely a genetic accident. (While you can set zones off of it, it's more accurate to set zones off your LTHR determined in a field test, than Max HR).

V02 max likewise doesn't give you any really useful information. It can tell you whether you have no prayer of making the TDF, but most people know that without a test. You don't train based on V02 max. In the last 10 years of working with professional coaches, V02 max is not something any of my coaches have looked at or tracked, and I haven't done a V02 max test since I got a power meter.

Seattle Forrest

I got a Garmin multisport watch; it's paired to my HRM and PM, and (I think) updates its estimate of my aerobic capacity after every ride longer than 20 mins. Once it was all set up I did a bombrod. But I don't use the number for anything.

merlinextraligh

You'll see whether what your doing is effective in your FTP and other power numbers.

I suppose if your FTP was an abnormally low percentage of your power at V02 max, it could tell you that you're either a slacker unwilling to suffer, or you had something phyisiologically wrong.

But there are a number of power based metrics, that will address that question more directly

Seattle Forrest

Actually I guess if you don't have a PM, knowing your VO2max could lead to better calorie estimates if your computer can do that. Only "real" use I can think of, still kind of a reach.

I set my zones up by %HRR. Let the computers update max HR when they see a new one, test my resting HR every few weeks.

merlinextraligh

Andrew Coggan basically agrees with you, but it's pretty limited as to where it would be useful:

Estimating VO2max from power data: why bother?

Since it is the actual power that a cyclist produces that propels them forward, regardless of how it is generated (i.e., aerobically or anaerobically), the above discussion begs the question, why bother attempting to estimate VO2max from power data in the first place? Indeed, in many cases knowing a person’s actual VO2max (versus, say, the power they can produce for 5 min) merely serves to satisfy innate curiousity. There can be situations, however, that quantifying (or at least estimating using the above method) VO2max can be useful. For example, comparison of a rider’s VO2 at functional threshold power to their VO2max (especially across time/seasons) can provide insight into the extent to which the former ability has been maximized, and thus help guide training decisions. As well, an estimate of VO2max may be useful in adjusting training or racing (pacing) strategies when traveling to altitude (or from altitude to sea level). While such decisions can be made based simply on “raw” power data, being able to differentiate the aerobic and anaerobic contributions to, e.g., a maximal 5 min effort means that they can be made more confidently.

Personally, I still think it's in the why bother category. As to whether you've maximized your potential, I think the answer for the vast majority of this is already known and it's no. At a very elite level, perhaps its one more data point to fine tune a program for an elite athlete that has plateaued.

As for pacing strategy at elevation, there is good data that shows the effect on FTP at altititude which would help at least as much with that. Additionally just field testing at altitude would appear to be a better approach than extrapolating from V02 max.

Panza

I like the Garmin 9XX series but I wish that it would come with a built in HR monitor that can be used underwater, perhaps with a Garmin Forerunner 930XT... .I feel HR is more usable than power (off the bike) because you can run and pay attention to your heart rate. People will argue that HR has lag so it's not as useful but I love HR. Garmin likes to give you little records and you can make calculations from them at the end of your training sessions.

therhodeo

Alot of those upper end numbers come from athletes in the 90's who weren't exactly training on bread and water.