vo2 re test results

poynedexter

i had my vo2 max and anaerobic threshold tests done in early feb and had the same test done by the same equipment last week, with mixed results. 2 months of training and 3 road races fell in between. the feb test showed

max hr 184
peak vo2 59
anaerobic threshold hr 158
vo2 at 158 = 41.3
2 min recovery to 138 bpm

the april test

max hr 181
peak vo2 51
anaerobic threshold hr 160
vo2 at 160 = 44.4
2 min recovery to 129bpm


so all my vo2 numbers were up, recovery better but my vo2 max was way down. I was rested the same before the test but still poor top end. I had done a race the week before and did worse than I expected. having spoken with my tester, it seems I have overdone the HIIT with too much work happening at hr at or above 170, including racing. I felt ok but obviously I wasn't. not enough rest not enough recovery and therefore not proper adaption.

has anyone else had a similar experience of 1 step forward and 2 back with their training. for me the next 6 weeks will be different

Tom Dean

I wouldn't read too much into these figures or one bad race. Did you do any power testing?

twotyred

VO2 max is mostly genetically hard wired and doesn't respond much to training and in some people not at all. Also there might be quite a variation in the test method so your VO2 max data may in fact be the same to within the error of the test.

The tester seems to have collected a fairly useless set of figures for you. Lactate threshold, FTP and some other power data would have been more useful.

jibberjim

It shows that the test is completely useless... Stop wasting your time and money on it, and find a better way of testing progress...

BeaconRuth

I'd question anyone who tries to suggest there is such a thing an an 'anaerobic threshold HR'. Very woolly 'science' IMO.

I've rarely seen test results of the type you've got which have been illuminating or helpful. If the numbers are emphatically up then you probably realise you're fitter anyway. If they're not then you probably haven't noticed an improvement. So there's not much to be gained from doing the test really. The outcome of doing tests like this is usually "so what?"

Ruth

j_marvin

Maybe you weigh more now

poynedexter

no power testing as such but I have started to work with taxc turbo which does have a power meter (a cheap one though). I'm going to do a power threshold test with it soon and compare the threshold hr in this test with the vo2 max anerobic threshold result (160). I'm the same weight too. since cycling is an aerobic activity and this test is about measuring processed o2, surely its a good indicator of fitness change?

twotyred

since cycling is an aerobic activity and this test is about measuring processed o2, surely its a good indicator of fitness change?

Not really. Yes your VO2 max is your fundamental limiter as it measures the max amount of oxygen your cardiovascular system can move to your muscles but knowing what it is is pretty useless as its not really trainable. More important is how efficiently your muscles use that oxygen when it gets to them and also how close you can work to your VO2 max and for how long because these things do respond to training. Its perfectly possible for a cyclist with a lower VO2 max to be faster than another cyclist with a higher VO2 max. Your VO2 max may well not have changed but that doesn't mean your training has had no effect as now you may be able to work closer to your VO2 max for longer periods i.e. you are a fitter and faster cyclist despite apparently not having increased your VO2 max. The test data you've posted won't tell you that. I know you have made an investment in measuring this data and you'd like to think you haven't wasted your money but its not telling you anything of value.

Alex_Simmons/RST

VO2max is most definitely trainable
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... 73182-g004

Alex_Simmons/RST

poynedexter wrote:

since cycling is an aerobic activity and this test is about measuring processed o2, surely its a good indicator of fitness change?

VO2max comparisons are a good indicator of changes in cardiovascular fitness, however that's an incomplete indicator and only one element of the fitness puzzle. Significant changes do also occur wrt muscular metabolic fitness, with many peripheral changes also taking place. The impact of changes in peripheral muscular metabolic fitness is often larger than changes in cardiovascular fitness.

Hence why power output is far more useful as a measure of fitness and performance, since power output is an integral expression of all the underlying factors. VO2max tests (good ones at least) can provide a little extra insight into some of the underlying factors, but they are largely redundant if you are measuring power output, and do not measure all the factors that influence performance (which is why VO2max and performance are not well correlated beyond very large scale differences).

RutlandGav

poynedexter wrote:

the feb test showed

max hr 184
peak vo2 59
anaerobic threshold hr 158
vo2 at 158 = 41.3
2 min recovery to 138 bpm

the april test

max hr 181
peak vo2 51
anaerobic threshold hr 160
vo2 at 160 = 44.4
2 min recovery to 129bpm

Well, your VO2 at threshold is 10% better and your recovery is streets ahead...

Alex_Simmons/RST

RutlandGav wrote:

poynedexter wrote:

the feb test showed

max hr 184
peak vo2 59
anaerobic threshold hr 158
vo2 at 158 = 41.3
2 min recovery to 138 bpm

the april test

max hr 181
peak vo2 51
anaerobic threshold hr 160
vo2 at 160 = 44.4
2 min recovery to 129bpm

Well, your VO2 at threshold is 10% better and your recovery is streets ahead...

Without actual threshold test data, we can't actually know that. I certainly wouldn't be relying on some arbitrary HR threshold.

Peak VO2 isn't of much use either. VO2max would be a more useful number to report.

ric/rstsport

additionally, if VO2peak has declined by 8 mL/kg/min,

then you've either:
gained ~11 kg (if absolute VO2peak in L/min has remained unchanged)
you went into the second test in considerably different 'acute' fitness position (e.g., you were very fatigued)
you didn't try hard enough (e.g., motivation was low and when you needed to dig in you didn't)
the equipment wasn't calibrated correctly