VO2 Max

Edwin
Edwin Posts: 785
edited February 2008 in Training, fitness and health
I'm not one of these cyclists obsessed with the numbers, but I had a max test last night and produced a maximum aerobic power output (Wmax) of 352W.
I also had one about this time last year, which was 348W so I should have improved slightly. VO2 Max was 64ml/kg, although I couldn't get this figure for yesterdays test.

What I'd like to know is if anyone else has done this, and what kind of level do you ride at? Obviously there's more to racing than a few lab test results, but I'm wondering if these stats should be good enough to translate into reasonable amateur performances.

Thanks,

Ed
«1

Comments

  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    How much do you weigh?
  • Edwin
    Edwin Posts: 785
    About 10st 12, or 71.5 kg just before the test - I'm 5'10" and 12% bodyfat if that's any help.
  • Bronzie
    Bronzie Posts: 4,927
    Edwin wrote:
    What I'd like to know is if anyone else has done this, and what kind of level do you ride at?
    Summer 2006
    Power at anaerobic threshold = 270W
    VO2max = 55
    Level = blank licence 4th cat although I've done well in a few track league races - only really started road racing in 2006 at age of 38. PB10 23-40, PB25 59-30 (both in the 2006 season).

    OMG, I think I'm turning into one of those guys off the power training forum over at cyclingforums. "Hi I'm Bronzie, 270W, 73kg, 3.7W/kg"......................Nooooooooo! :lol:

    Edwin, at 352W I would think you'd be up there in 1st/2nd cat races, but as you say all these numbers mean nothing unless you can actually put in the performances.
    It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    I'd say strong 2nd cat/ potential 1st cat rider, 5W/kg is decent. You should easily break the hour for a 25.
  • cervelorider
    cervelorider Posts: 91
    Kléber wrote:
    I'd say strong 2nd cat/ potential 1st cat rider, 5W/kg is decent. You should easily break the hour for a 25.

    So what I assume from that, is that if anyone can go 'easily' under the hour for a 25tt, that they're equivalent to a cat1/2?
  • xover_runner
    xover_runner Posts: 228
    Are we getting confused here MAP is not the same as Threshold Power is it?
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    cervelorider wrote:
    So what I assume from that, is that if anyone can go 'easily' under the hour for a 25tt, that they're equivalent to a cat1/2?
    There's no direct translation. People can move up categories by racing 4 times a week and being good in sprints. A top time triallist can be an average road racer. But on average, I'd imagine a 1st cat would break the hour for a 25 on their road bike, no need for tri bars or bling wheels.
  • kant314
    kant314 Posts: 79
    xover_runner wrote:
    Are we getting confused here MAP is not the same as Threshold Power is it?

    yes, we're getting confused :oops:
    MY TRAINING BLOG!!
  • Bronzie
    Bronzie Posts: 4,927
    xover_runner wrote:
    Are we getting confused here MAP is not the same as Threshold Power is it?
    What's the definition of MAP then?

    I think we should create a sticky in the training forum defining the various terms that we bandy around on here for ease of reference by newbies (and regular users). Good idea :?:
    It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels
  • xover_runner
    xover_runner Posts: 228
    I'm new to this, had my Powertap for about 6 weeks but havng read a fair bit I thought MAP was the max power you can get to in a ramp test to exhaustion by increasing by say 10 watts every minute and keep going to you fall of the bike. Threshold or FTP is the max power you can keep going for an hour. MAP would be a fair bit more than FTP.

    Where are the RST boys when you need them?
  • Bronzie
    Bronzie Posts: 4,927
    xover_runner wrote:
    Where are the RST boys when you need them?
    Probably calibrating their SRM cranks :wink:
    It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels
  • blackhands
    blackhands Posts: 950
    Max power is the maximal power produced at the end of a ramp test - (the usual protocol is either a continuous ramp at 1 watt every 3 seconds or a 20 (or 25) watt jump every minute (lthough this might result in some anaerobic work as you lift the work rate to the next level). We usually work out the average power over the final minute.

    The term 'anaerobic threshold' has been used to mean so many things I would hesitate to give any sort of definition - we define it as the point where serum lactate exceeds 4mmol/l, but to use this definition you need lactate testing equipment.
  • John Kelly
    John Kelly Posts: 3
    Hi Edwin, my name is John Kelly, I'm an exercise physiologist who works at the University of Chichester. We carry out this kinda testing often. Firstly, it is important to know how was your VO2max recorded - was it predicted or measured? Secondly what kind of ramp test did you follow, i.e the length of interval and the wattage increment.

    Having said that - your value for VO2max is respectable if it was a directly measured test and not a prediction. Your peak power output is also reasonable, BUT what is more important in racing (and training) is your ability to sustain a high percentage of your maximum.

    If you like, your top end may well remain the same but your average can increase, thus allowing you to show an improvement in time.

    This can be guesstimated from heart rate data. You would need to know your maximum, and the averages for events. Although it doesn't always hold that heart rate and oxygen uptake are coupled - but in road cycling this is usually the case.

    drop me a line if you would like more details,
    jk
  • andrewgturnbull
    andrewgturnbull Posts: 3,861
    Edwin wrote:
    About 10st 12, or 71.5 kg just before the test - I'm 5'10" and 12% bodyfat if that's any help.

    Hi there.

    Which is it, 10-12 or 71.5kg?

    [clue - they're not the same!]

    Cheers, Andy
    http://www.andyturnbull.co.uk
    http://www.stirlingtri.co.uk
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    Isn't max aerobic power the same as threshold? My replies above were based on the same.
  • xover_runner
    xover_runner Posts: 228
    I see what you are saying but I think they are different. Anyone with 350W (and around 70kg) FTP or "threshold" is a pretty serious rider as you say, 350W MAP is pretty ordinary I think. I got to 310W MAP (71kg) and I am definitley Cat 4 or below!
  • NJK
    NJK Posts: 194
    Kléber wrote:
    I'd say strong 2nd cat/ potential 1st cat rider, 5W/kg is decent. You should easily break the hour for a 25.

    I would say that it is more 3rd cat territory if i have understood correctly. From a MAP test you would need to more than 350w at 70kgs to be 1st cat standard.
  • cervelorider
    cervelorider Posts: 91
    Kléber wrote:
    Isn't max aerobic power the same as threshold? My replies above were based on the same.

    Max aerobic power is the power that is sustained for the last minute of an incremental power ramp test to exhaustion.
    The term 'threshold' is used generally now to describe 'functional threshold power', or 60 minute power(25mile tt power), but has, and still is used to describe lactate threshold and anaerobic threshold, which is what makes it confusing when the only term used is 'threshold'.
  • Alex_Simmons/RST
    Alex_Simmons/RST Posts: 4,161
    Bronzie wrote:
    xover_runner wrote:
    Where are the RST boys when you need them?
    Probably calibrating their SRM cranks :wink:
    I see, only like us when you need us :lol:

    and Ric and I both ride with Powertaps! (although I have an SRM coming for my trainer).

    As I'm in Sydney, perhaps I was asleep when all this was going on ;)

    Let's see, I'll try to summarise.

    MAP is the average of the maximal 1 minute power at the end of a ramp test to exhaustion (usually the final minute before "failure"). The ramp protocol (W/min) has a significant impact on the final number. Typically we use 20 or 25 W/min, depending on the athlete's status (and preferably smaller increments, like +5W every 15 or 12 seconds).

    MAP / kg^0.67 correlates very well with cycling performance. See the table here for some guidance:
    http://www.cyclecoach.com/pageID-downlo ... _zones.htm

    Usually, FTP (Functional Threshold Power - the average power a rider can sustain in a quasi steady state for about an hour), is around 72% - 77% of MAP.


    "The anaerobic threshold is neither".

    Riders have siginificantly different blood lactate levels when riding at TT pace. There is no evidence to suggest 4mmol/L is a "magic number". However if you know your power at that level and it improves later on at the same level, then you are fitter.


    If you do happen to ride with a power meter, then there is no practical need to know your VO2 Max or blood lactate levels, other than for sheer curiosity. The power data will tell you all you need to know.

    "Training is testing, testing is training"
    RST Sport : Coaching - Training Plans - Powermeters -- My blog -- AeroCoach Australia
  • Alex_Simmons/RST
    Alex_Simmons/RST Posts: 4,161
    NJK wrote:
    Kléber wrote:
    I'd say strong 2nd cat/ potential 1st cat rider, 5W/kg is decent. You should easily break the hour for a 25.

    I would say that it is more 3rd cat territory if i have understood correctly. From a MAP test you would need to more than 350w at 70kgs to be 1st cat standard.
    More like cat 3/4.

    At 70kg you'd need a MAP of ~ 450W+ for Cat 1.
    RST Sport : Coaching - Training Plans - Powermeters -- My blog -- AeroCoach Australia
  • Alex_Simmons/RST
    Alex_Simmons/RST Posts: 4,161
    Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
    "The anaerobic threshold is neither".

    Riders have siginificantly different blood lactate levels when riding at TT pace. There is no evidence to suggest 4mmol/L is a "magic number". However if you know your power at that level and it improves later on at the same level, then you are fitter.
    The trouble with even that of course is that blood lactate levels are also dependent on the duration of exercise - even at the same power level - so again the protocol used to obtain BL can easily distort your numbers.
    RST Sport : Coaching - Training Plans - Powermeters -- My blog -- AeroCoach Australia
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
    From a MAP test you would need to more than 350w at 70kgs to be 1st cat standard.More like cat 3/4.

    At 70kg you'd need a MAP of ~ 450W+ for Cat 1.

    I agree now, since I've learned what MAP was. I wrongly thought it was the inflection point where you cross the aerobic/anaerobic threshold. If it's what your capable of at the end of the test, then I'd lower the ambitions.
  • Edwin
    Edwin Posts: 785
    Thanks everyone, it sounds like I should be able to avoid embarrasing myself in a few races, *theoretically*.
    Andy - I weigh myself in stones in the morning, so I'm normally 10st10 - 10st 12. The value in kilos was just before the test in the evening, so I expected it to be higher although it does seem a bit much.
    John - I think the protocol was to increase power by 30W every 2 minutes, but I can double check this if people are interested. The actual VO2 result was obtained last year using a mouthpeice connected to a gas analyser, but this wasn't available for the more recent test so any value would have been an estimate. To be honest, I felt terrible on the day of the test, and my max HR was only 177 (previous max is 188 and I'm 31) so I was probably a bit run down and slightly dissapointed to only increase by 4W after a year of training. I haven't bothered training by HR zones before but will probably look at starting intervals next month with a view to improving my sprinting. I've hit my objective of getting in 100-150 miles a week since xmas and avoiding illness, so hopefully if I can pick up the pace when the weather improves it should be going to plan.
  • cervelorider
    cervelorider Posts: 91
    Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
    Usually, FTP (Functional Threshold Power - the average power a rider can sustain in a quasi steady state for about an hour), is around 72% - 77% of MAP.



    "Training is testing, testing is training"

    Alex, what % of MAP is VO2max power?
  • Edwin
    Edwin Posts: 785
    Wouldn't that be the same thing? Surely anything above VO2max is anaerobic by definition?
  • cervelorider
    cervelorider Posts: 91
    Edwin wrote:
    Wouldn't that be the same thing? Surely anything above VO2max is anaerobic by definition?

    Not really........
    Training VO2max power is generally zoned above FTP work, at between 105-120%FTP(Coggan schema), targeting 3-8 minute durations, so I've just answered my own question really, which 1/2 hour ago I could not figure....DOH! :roll:

    I think what I was wondering was what the RST zone is for targeting VO2max power as a % of MAP, rather than a % of FTP?
  • Edwin
    Edwin Posts: 785
    OK, I've been to the pub, I'm confused...
    Presumably you are asking which training protocols would be aimed at increasing VO2max as opposed to increasing FTP, and what percentage of MAP you need to ride at? Can anyone tell me why training to increase one wouldn't increase the other?
    From what the power boys say, the actual value of VO2max doesn't really matter, so is there any point in training to increase it?
  • cervelorider
    cervelorider Posts: 91
    Edwin wrote:
    OK, I've been to the pub, I'm confused...
    Presumably you are asking which training protocols would be aimed at increasing VO2max as opposed to increasing FTP, and what percentage of MAP you need to ride at? Can anyone tell me why training to increase one wouldn't increase the other?
    From what the power boys say, the actual value of VO2max doesn't really matter, so is there any point in training to increase it?

    The point to training at VO2max power intensity is to increase MAP, and to keep the 'ceiling' loose, so that FTP can be improved to a maximum. If you were to concentrate solely on improving FTP, you would eventually stop improving because the energy system above it was untrained.
    On the other hand, if you only train VO2max power, your FTP would increase but not as much as if you trained at the FTP intensity, and for longer durations also.
    So to train FTP, target
    73-78% MAP for 15 mins to 2-3hrs.
    Train VO2max power, target,
    79-90% MAP for 3-8 minute intervals with 1/1 recovery

    Alex, please correct me if this is way off :wink:
  • NJK
    NJK Posts: 194
    Edwin wrote:
    OK, I've been to the pub, I'm confused...
    Presumably you are asking which training protocols would be aimed at increasing VO2max as opposed to increasing FTP, and what percentage of MAP you need to ride at? Can anyone tell me why training to increase one wouldn't increase the other?
    From what the power boys say, the actual value of VO2max doesn't really matter, so is there any point in training to increase it?

    The actual value of VO2max doesn't matter in the context of training out on the road. If you use a PM then knowing a range where you can improve power at VO2max is important. FTP is usually described as max power that you can average for an hr so to increase this value it makes sense to train at an intensity close to this figure. VO2max sessions have been described above as the highest aerobic power that you can sustain, usuallly 3-5mins maybe more. There will be a crossover between the two but to much of the VO2max intervals will decrease the amount of time available to train at FTP.
  • Mike Willcox
    Mike Willcox Posts: 1,770
    Edwin wrote:
    I'm not one of these cyclists obsessed with the numbers,
    Ed

    IMO you're not doing a bad imitation. :D

Categories