VO2 Max intervals?

alihisgreat

I've decided its probably about time to start doing some proper training and set out today for a 3x3min Vo2 max interval session

http://app.strava.com/activities/42208078

Was just wondering how best to approach the intervals? You should be able to see the HR data on Strava, is that the right kind of path? i.e. rising over the 3mins up to my just under my max HR

Or should I be kicking harder at the start and spending more time at higher HRs?

imposter2.0

HR is pretty irrelevant when you are at Vo2 max and I usually leave mine at home for those sessions. You should be going as hard as you can maintain for the three minutes, irrespective of HR. It might take a few intervals to get the level of intensity right.

Tom Dean

The efforts are too short for HR to be a good guide, but finishing a bit below max HR is probably about right if you are pacing the effort evenly.

I don't think 3 intervals is enough though. Try 6 as a starting point.

alihisgreat

Thanks guys - think I've got the pacing about right given that its a short climb that I do frequently, and target on strava so I'm familiar with pacing up it - might try and hit the bottom of the climb a bit harder next time and see how I fare.

and I'll start doing more intervals in a few weeks.. but 3 is enough for a morning ride I think! -> find it hard to fuel up and get the energy in the morning to be honest.

Gabbo

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

imposter2.0

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

It's not possiible to sustain MHR for three minutes, if that's what you are saying. You also need to be fully recovered before starting the next one, or you may not be able to sustain the required effort for the required time. If you are doing 6x3, for instance, then the aim is to complete six good intervals, rather than blow up after the first three.

Tom Dean

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If by this you mean it will be towards the harder end of the scale then, yes. HR is not a good guide to VO2.

Gabbo wrote:

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

Not sure what you are getting at. If you are at max HR, good luck increasing your speed by 10%!

Gabbo wrote:

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

As with any training, there is a trade-off between intensity, duration and rest periods. Most people do these kind of efforts with roughly equal on and off periods.

danowat

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

Whatever you do, don't listen to this guy.............

Vo2 max intervals are generally 3-5 mins as hard as you can go, as others have said forget HR it lags way too much, if you haven't got power, then pacing them with P.E. as hard as you can go for the interval, then you would be working at vo2max, intervals are generally equal on/off, although when its cold I tend to do my 6 x 5's with a 4min interval to stop me getting too cold.

I also find a 5min "blow out" then 5min recovery before the vo2max intervals sets you up nicely to do them

Gabbo

Tom Dean wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If by this you mean it will be towards the harder end of the scale then, yes. HR is not a good guide to VO2.

Gabbo wrote:

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

Not sure what you are getting at. If you are at max HR, good luck increasing your speed by 10%!

Gabbo wrote:

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

As with any training, there is a trade-off between intensity, duration and rest periods. Most people do these kind of efforts with roughly equal on and off periods.

Yep, completely aware of that having been coached when I was a distance runner.

Gabbo

danowat wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

Whatever you do, don't listen to this guy.............

And what credibility have you got? General knowledge doesn't usually suffice. Are you a coach?

danowat

Gabbo wrote:

danowat wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

Whatever you do, don't listen to this guy.............

And what credibility have you got? General knowledge doesn't usually suffice. Are you a coach?

No but I've been coached long enough to know.

Your credibility is shot to bits with statements like those you made in the post I quoted.

p.s. I don't answer PM's

Gabbo

danowat wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

danowat wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

Vo2 max occurs at or near 100% of maximum heart rate.

If 30mph on the turbo trainer elicits maximum heart rate, then cycling at 33mph say, will also elicit MHR. Seeing that the target of the workout is to target riding at your Vo2 max, in this instance, 30mph should achieve your goal.

And so I believe, the shorter the break between intervals the better (given you can maintain a decent performance throughout)

Whatever you do, don't listen to this guy.............

And what credibility have you got? General knowledge doesn't usually suffice. Are you a coach?

No but I've been coached long enough to know.

Your credibility is shot to bits with statements like those you made in the post I quoted.

That means absolutely nothing. If you actually read what I said, I said Vo2 max is at or near your MHR and this is supported by the literature. Ok, maybe it's not exactly MHR, but it's not far off. What else have I said that is controversial?

I never claimed to have any credibility, and I'm sure elite athletes have no credibility when it comes to exercise physiology unless, of course, they have more than a lousy degree in it.

danowat

Nothing controversial, just misleading is all

FatTed

I have read (Fred Matheny) that the correct intensity for a 3 min set is the same intensity that an all out as hard as you can go 5 min interval is. As stated before the aim is to do 5-8 sets of 3 min on 1-2 min off.

imposter2.0

FatTed wrote:

I have read (Fred Matheny) that the correct intensity for a 3 min set is the same intensity that an all out as hard as you can go 5 min interval is.

That doesn't make sense. If you can ride at the same intensity for five minutes, why would you want to ride at that level for a shorter amount of time? The whole idea of short intervals like that is to fully stress your CV/aerobic system, which you wont do if you ride at less than the maximum you can sustain for three minutes. By definition, the three minute interval should be a harder effort than the maximum effort you can sustain for five minutes.

Tom Butcher

Presumably because you are doing a set of them you need to be going slightly below the level you could sustain for one.

imposter2.0

Tom Butcher wrote:

Presumably because you are doing a set of them you need to be going slightly below the level you could sustain for one.

ok - I may have misunderstood. But isn't it easier just to say "ride as hard as you can sustain for 3mins" ?

Herbsman

Imposter wrote:

FatTed wrote:

I have read (Fred Matheny) that the correct intensity for a 3 min set is the same intensity that an all out as hard as you can go 5 min interval is.

That doesn't make sense. If you can ride at the same intensity for five minutes, why would you want to ride at that level for a shorter amount of time? The whole idea of short intervals like that is to fully stress your CV/aerobic system, which you wont do if you ride at less than the maximum you can sustain for three minutes. By definition, the three minute interval should be a harder effort than the maximum effort you can sustain for five minutes.

You don't just do one three minute interval in a session, surely. It's not just the intensity and duration of the interval that matters, it's the number of intervals and the itensity and duration of the recovery in between intervals. So the 'correct' intensity depends on the training goal. For example one might do 8 x 3 minute intervals at about 5 min power but with only one minute recovery inbetween.

Tom Dean

Gabbo wrote:

Yep, completely aware of that having been coached when I was a distance runner.

Of course you can change the rest intervals, but that is secondary to getting the efforts right and you haven't given any advice that would help with that.

Alex_Simmons/RST

When I hear that someone is looking to do VO2max intervals, I'll make an assumption that they are doing so with the primary aim being training to elicit an improvement in VO2max.

If that's the case, then I would recommend doing efforts longer than 3 minutes.

VO2 kinetics means that it takes some time for us to reach such a state, and if you cut a VO2 effort short at 3-minutes, and do say 5 or 6 of them, well in reality you'll only rack up a handful of minutes at VO2max. You'd probably get more time at VO2max doing one really hard 10-min effort.

I would suggest lengthening the efforts to 4-6 minutes, and choosing an effort level (power) that enables you to complete the minimum desired number and no more than the maximum desired number. Normally you are looking for between 20 and 30-minutes of riding at that power level (or say turbo speed as a proxy). Use an effort to recovery time ratio of 1:1 or thereabouts. Can get a little more rest if needed. Doing these can be a rude shock if you've not done them for some time.

This is not to say that 3-min efforts are not beneficial (they are), nor that they won't have a positive influence on VO2max (they will) just that they won't be nearly as effective as longer efforts if VO2max improvement is the primary aim of such a session.

I prescribe 3-min hill efforts at times, but usually at a power level somewhat higher (~ MAP).

However what the OP needs to do is a matter for them and what makes sense in the context of their training. I also at times have efforts that are 2-3 minutes but only at say 110% of threshold power. They are deliberately not that demanding. It all depends on where you are at in your training. No point smashing yourself to the max up a short hill if you are not ready for that sort of work.

alihisgreat

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

When I hear that someone is looking to do VO2max intervals, I'll make an assumption that they are doing so with the primary aim being training to elicit an improvement in VO2max.

If that's the case, then I would recommend doing efforts longer than 3 minutes.

VO2 kinetics means that it takes some time for us to reach such a state, and if you cut a VO2 effort short at 3-minutes, and do say 5 or 6 of them, well in reality you'll only rack up a handful of minutes at VO2max. You'd probably get more time at VO2max doing one really hard 10-min effort.

I would suggest lengthening the efforts to 4-6 minutes, and choosing an effort level (power) that enables you to complete the minimum desired number and no more than the maximum desired number. Normally you are looking for between 20 and 30-minutes of riding at that power level (or say turbo speed as a proxy). Use an effort to recovery time ratio of 1:1 or thereabouts. Can get a little more rest if needed. Doing these can be a rude shock if you've not done them for some time.

This is not to say that 3-min efforts are not beneficial (they are), nor that they won't have a positive influence on VO2max (they will) just that they won't be nearly as effective as longer efforts if VO2max improvement is the primary aim of such a session.

I prescribe 3-min hill efforts at times, but usually at a power level somewhat higher (~ MAP).

However what the OP needs to do is a matter for them and what makes sense in the context of their training. I also at times have efforts that are 2-3 minutes but only at say 110% of threshold power. They are deliberately not that demanding. It all depends on where you are at in your training. No point smashing yourself to the max up a short hill if you are not ready for that sort of work.

I'll start with 3x5min next time and go from there then -> might need to find a different hill though!

Thanks for the advice!

Alex_Simmons/RST

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

I'll start with 3x5min next time and go from there then -> might need to find a different hill though!

Thanks for the advice!

Well you can start the effort before reaching the base of the hill, and if you are riding back down for repeats, having the extra bit of flat road beforehand can help with the recovery time anyway.

bobones

There's a 14 day VO2Max boost training program available at the Training4cyclists site. I am not advocating this program, just pointing out its existence. If you look at this post on Peripedal forum you will find a download that contains Peripedal workout files for the 14 days as well as an Excel spreadsheet and Word document which summarise the workouts. Any opinions on the value of these workouts?

jgsi

Now I'm confused (happens too easily) - I thought vo2 max was what you had - aint going to change as it is genetically coded? .. but what can change is your ability to create more power/watts for more sustained periods.
I wouldnt know my own vo2 max from my elbow but I sure as know that I used to have the screaming abdabs holding xxx watts for 8 minutes and now I get the shrieking abdads at yyy watts ..has that got my vo2 max up?? (the actual numbers are race sensitive btw)

bobones

(Paraphrasing stuff I've read): No, VO2 max is trainable. Untrained subjects can expect large improvements (upto 30%?) with training. There will be a genetically limited ceiling as to how much you can improve it however. Perhaps you are getting confused with max HR which typically does not change with training?

markp80

JGSI wrote:

Now I'm confused (happens too easily) - I thought vo2 max was what you had - aint going to change as it is genetically coded?

Didn't that Mosely guy cover this a bit in his recent Horizon documentary?
The guy at the university had done some genetics work from which he had a test which would allow him to predict how you could improve your vO2 max through training. Some people had the genetic make-up to improve it dramatically, some people would never improve it, and there was a distribution between the two limits.
Mosely went away and did all his training and lo and behold, his vO2 max had not imrpoved one jot - just as Mr University Man's test had predicted would be the case for him.
I thought straight away how intersting it would be to be tested!

Edit - It was the University of Nottingham -
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/pressoffice/2012/03/01/exercise-challenged-by-science/
Sorry, that was a bit OT, but it was a really interesting programme.

Cheers,
MarkP

bobones

Saw that Mark, very interesting. However, the point has been made elsewhere that the results only showed that some of the population didn't respond to that particular test protocal for VO2Max increase (can't remember what it was exactly, something like 10s on/ 20s off x 3 x 3 times a week). Nothing to say that a different protocol (e.g. longer, more intervals) would not produce an improvement in VO2Max tests for those non-responders.

Alex_Simmons/RST

bobones wrote:

(Paraphrasing stuff I've read): No, VO2 max is trainable. Untrained subjects can expect large improvements (upto 30%?) with training. There will be a genetically limited ceiling as to how much you can improve it however. Perhaps you are getting confused with max HR which typically does not change with training?

While there is a strong genetic component to VO2max, it is definitely trainable. Not to the same extent that say the % of VO2max you can sustain at threshold, but it is definitely trainable.

Also, VO2max is typically quoted relative to body mass, and so one can see a rapid improvement in VO2max values with weight loss.

markp80

bobones wrote:

Saw that Mark, very interesting. However, the point has been made elsewhere that the results only showed that some of the population didn't respond to that particular test protocal for VO2Max increase (can't remember what it was exactly, something like 10s on/ 20s off x 3 x 3 times a week). Nothing to say that a different protocol (e.g. longer, more intervals) would not produce an improvement in VO2Max tests for those non-responders.

I haven't read any of the research to be fair, so can't disagree with what you've said. I don't remember what they specifically said in the programme, although they made the point that if their genetic tests show you as a non-responder then you're wasting your time training for that next olympics!
If response to vO2 max has a genetic link though, I'm not sure why it would be specific just to their HIT protocol.
There appeared to be a lot of very interesting research going on at present though.

Cheers,
MarkP

TakeTurns

I was once told - if you want to increase your VO2 max: breath through a straw while exerting :shock:

alihisgreat

TakeTurns wrote:

I was once told - if you want to increase your VO2 max: breath through a straw while exerting :shock:

I don't really fancy passing out to be honest?

I'm planning 3x5min intervals tomorrow so we'll see how that goes