High VO2 max
Clyde Soles
Rosa Mota, Marathon runner, 67.2
Derek Clayton, Australian ex-Marathon World Record holder, 69.7
Paula Ivan, Russian Olympic 1500M Record Holder, 71.0
Ingrid Kristiansen, ex-Marathon World Record Holder, 71.2
Frank Shorter, US Olympic Marathon winner, 71.3
Jarmila Krotochvilova,Czech Olympian 400M/800M winner, 72.8
Jeff Galloway, US Runner, 73.0
Grete Waitz, Norwegian Marathon/10K runner, 73.5
Steve Prefontaine,US runner, 84.4
Miguel Indurain, professional cyclist, 88
Matt Carpenter, Pikes Peak marathon course record holder, 92
Greg LeMond, professional cyclist, 92.5
Highest Recorded Female (Cross-Country Skier): 74
Highest Recorded Male (Cross-Country Skier): 94
Thouroughbred horse: 150
Can anyone add to the list?
--
DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise indicated, this post is personal
opinion and NOT an official statement of my employer.
Dave Bailey
Joan Culpan
Wayne Lim
max would have to climb way better than Boardman does. Chris is more
often in the grupetto than in the first group on an HORS category climb.
If you want to look at this using a mathematical analysis, let's guess
that Boardman weighs 70 kg. With a VO2 max of 91 ml/kg/min, his O2
consumption would have to be 6.37 liters of O2 per minute. A typical
elite male cyclist makes around 78 watts per liter/minute of O2, which
then calculates out that Boardman should make 497 watts. No way! He'd
be able to outclimb Pantani.
More realistically, I think his world hour record was at about 430
watts. Again, assuming Boardman is 70 kg and that he can ride very
near or at his VO2 max for the hour, this figures out to 5.51 l/min of
O2, or 78.7 ml/kg/min. That's probably more likely.
Wayne Lim
In article <37A37201...@ihug.co.nz>,
Joan Culpan <jfcu...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> Chris Boardman, World hour and 4km pursuit record holder ~91
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Wayne Lim
absorbed by your body. Testing is usually done by using a mouthpiece
and having your nose clamped shut. Your inspired and expired gases are
analyzed as you perform a gradually increasing physical workload,
usually until failure.
This is generally thought to be a value that is mostly genetically
determined and not very trainable.
Measurements are usually in units of liters of O2 per minute (l/min),
or probably more commonly by dividing the rate of consumption in l/min
by the bodyweight in kg, then expressed as ml/kg/min.
Wayne Lim
In article <37A3ACD6...@loudoun.com>,
dba...@loudoun.com wrote:
> what exactly is VO2 Max and how does one measure it?
>
>
hoffman
> Derek Clayton, Australian ex-Marathon World Record holder, 69.7
> Paula Ivan, Russian Olympic 1500M Record Holder, 71.0
> Ingrid Kristiansen, ex-Marathon World Record Holder, 71.2
You can find alot of these stats in various
running and cycling books; here is just
a few more.
Note: values are not "absolute", rather ml-kg-min.
Also, you have to be careful because alot of the
statistics that you see listed are merely "equivelants"
based on predictions as opposed to direct measurements
done in a laboratory enviroment; which makes the values
pretty much inaccurate; worthless in fact.
Sebastion Coe - Word Record 1000metre - 82.6
Daniel Komen (3000m WR) 83.5
Haile Gebrselassie (Numerous WR's) - 84.7
Arturo Barrios - (Half-marathon record) 81.0
Noureddine Morceli - WR holder
(predicted equivelant 84.5)
Wang Junxia 3000 & 10000m WR
(predicted equivelant 74.7)
Qu Yunxia (1500m WR)
(predicted equivelant 73.5)
Ingrid Kristiansen - Fmr. Marathon WR -
(predicted equivelant 71.2)
Tom Morley
> On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:11:39 -0400,
> Dave Bailey <dba...@loudoun.com> wrote:
> >what exactly is VO2 Max and how does one measure it?
>
> VO2 max is the maximum quantity of Oxygen (O2) that one can absorb (per
> unit volume of blood, I believe). (What is the unit for this, mg/mL?)
Standard unit:
ml per kg per min
ml of Oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute.
>
> A typical test stand consists of a tread mill or stationary bike and a
> breathing apparatus connected to a machine that detects carbon dioxide
> exhaled and measures air volume inhaled (can't recall if oxygen is
> detected directly or derived). Your local University may have
> a physical education department that might have such a setup.
>
> The VO2 max is relevant for periods of exertion and recovery, your
> sub-max is where you spend most of your exercise time, if your not
> slacking.
>
> --
> William Burrow -- New Brunswick, Canada o
> Copyright 1999 William Burrow ~ /\
> ~ ()>()
Tom Morley | The scale does not measure
mor...@math.gatech.edu | fitness, and it does not
tmo...@bmtc.mindspring.com | measure beauty. It only
http://www.math.gatech.edu/~morley | measures gravitational pull.
ICQ: 24798603 (tmorley) | --Matt Madsen
Andrew Coggan
> This is generally thought to be a value that is mostly genetically
> determined and not very trainable.
Depending on the frequency, duration, and intensity of training, VO2max
can change by 15-25%, or even more - there are reports in the literature
of individuals who have increased their VO2max by up to 45% after just a
few months of training, and by up to 60% after several years of
training. Environmental factors (i.e., level of physical activity)
therefore play a very important role in determining VO2max. Heritability
estimates based on studies of identical vs. fraternal twins originally
concluded that VO2max was almost entirely genetically determined, but
the analyses in those early studies was flawed. More recent studies by
Bouchard et al. place much less emphasis on genetics (though it is still
a very important factor).
IOW, to have a really high VO2max you need to not only pick your parents
wisely, but also train very hard...
Andrew Coggan
Andrew Coggan
Boardman's first record that his max was almost 88 mL/kg/min. I also
remember reading a subsequent article by Keen alluding to Boardman's
greater fitness at the time of his 2nd (and still standing) hour record.
Your calculations of Boardman's power at VO2max are correct, but there's
no guarantee that Boardman can climb at 100% of VO2max, especially at
the end of a TdF stage. Boardman probably is, or at least was, an
excellent climber in shorter, timed events - in fact, I believe he was
national hillclimb champion of the U.K. at one point. Perhaps all the
road, stage, and especially TT/pursuit training have blunted that
ability - the guy who used to own the US hour record (Paul Liebenrood
(sp?)) wasn't that big, but he couldn't climb well at all (despite
hailing from hilly Cincinnatti). Based on observations like this as well
as other considerations, I have a theory that the optimal muscle
contractile properties for TTing on the flats are no ideal for climbing,
and vice versa.
Andrew Coggan
Frank Warren
hoffman wrote in message
<01bedbd1$e0ded3e0$faab...@northeast.northeast.net>...
>> Here are some impressive VO2 max's I found on the web:
>> Can anyone add to the list?
>> Rosa Mota, Marathon runner, 67.2
>> Derek Clayton, Australian ex-Marathon World Record holder, 69.7
>> Paula Ivan, Russian Olympic 1500M Record Holder, 71.0
>> Ingrid Kristiansen, ex-Marathon World Record Holder, 71.2
JFK Jr., New York socialist, publisher, attorney, 0.0
-sorry
naomi and eric
I once read that Indurain's was 96. Can't verify it, of course! The
same source said that his lung capacity was 7.7 liters!
Andrew C., if you are reading this - why does it seem that measured
VO2max numbers are so much higher these days than just maybe 10 years
ago? Is it just that training has gotten more effective? More people
taking the tests? Pharmaceuticals? 8*(
It seems that 80 used to be phenomenal, but I semi-regularly see small
studies where the "average" is over 80.
Just wondering,
Eric
Clyde Soles wrote:
>
> Here are some impressive VO2 max's I found on the web:
>
> Rosa Mota, Marathon runner, 67.2
> Derek Clayton, Australian ex-Marathon World Record holder, 69.7
> Paula Ivan, Russian Olympic 1500M Record Holder, 71.0
> Ingrid Kristiansen, ex-Marathon World Record Holder, 71.2
> Frank Shorter, US Olympic Marathon winner, 71.3
> Jarmila Krotochvilova,Czech Olympian 400M/800M winner, 72.8
> Jeff Galloway, US Runner, 73.0
> Grete Waitz, Norwegian Marathon/10K runner, 73.5
> Steve Prefontaine,US runner, 84.4
> Miguel Indurain, professional cyclist, 88
> Matt Carpenter, Pikes Peak marathon course record holder, 92
> Greg LeMond, professional cyclist, 92.5
> Highest Recorded Female (Cross-Country Skier): 74
> Highest Recorded Male (Cross-Country Skier): 94
> Thouroughbred horse: 150
>
> Can anyone add to the list?
>
Andrew Coggan
good answer. It would be very interesting to know from a human
limits/evolutionary perspective.
Andrew Coggan
hoffman
> type of VO2 max would have to climb way better than
> Boardman does. Chris is more often in the grupetto
> than in the first group on an HORS category climb.
You could attempt compare Boardman to Haile Geb,
and I think that would demonstrate that the fastest
persons in a "flat-out" race who often has the highest
VO2max will not necessarily be the best when faced
with varying terrain. Alot of famous track (running)
guys who were among the best had a very tough time
when they attempted to make the transition between
track running to entering their first road race, because
they really were not trained to deal with the varying terrain.
I think theres a big difference between a person who
trains primarily for steady-state, constant effort
with a precise cadence determined for maximum
efficiency over flat terrain such as a track or
velodrome versus a person who mainly trains on
the road and in the mountains and is used to
constantly varying the pace, due to terrain and wind.
Also, I dont really see why a person who has
a high VO2 max should be inherently superior
when climing hills anyway.. Steep hill climbing
is often done at submaximal pace which is not
even close to your VO2max... In the hills it is
more a matter of overall strength, and strength
to weight ratio, and your lactate threshold
probably plays a big part in it too.. But since
your operating submaximally in the hills, VO2max
doesn't seem extremely important for hill climbers.
That's just my observation as a bicyclists myself.
I'm an EXTREMELY good hill climber, in fact I
kick the butt of most people on my local cycling
team (in the hills)... but when it comes to the
flats; that's something different.. thats where
VO2max kicks in (and that's where I get my
butt kicked).
Sam
>
>
>This is generally thought to be a value that is mostly genetically
>determined and not very trainable.
Au contraire mon frere, it is quite trainable. There may be some
limit but you will never really know if you reached it or not.
If you take a couch potato and give him/her a training program, VO2max
can increase upwards of 30%. If you start with a high VO2max, you
will not get as big an increase.
Wayne Lim
person were already fairly serious in a sport, that VO2 would not be
that trainable. Is this still correct?
I've had a number of VO2 tests (though at different facilities, using
different protocols and different machines), but they still generally
show that early in the year, my muscular capabilities seem to be unable
to fully tax my cardiovascular system and so my VO2 scores are lower.
When I'm more fit, my muscles are able to handle higher levels of
exertion, and it even seems that my O2 consumption on the readout
increases even though I feel like I'm working at full aerobic capacity
and only increasing the anaerobic portion of my output. From year to
year, though, my VO2 max tested when I'm fit seems fairly stable.
Mistaken impressions?
Wayne Lim
In article <37A428...@erols.com>,
andya...@erols.com wrote:
> Depending on the frequency, duration, and intensity of training,
VO2max
> can change by 15-25%, or even more - there are reports in the
literature
> of individuals who have increased their VO2max by up to 45% after
just a
> few months of training, and by up to 60% after several years of
> training. Environmental factors (i.e., level of physical activity)
> therefore play a very important role in determining VO2max.
Heritability
> estimates based on studies of identical vs. fraternal twins originally
> concluded that VO2max was almost entirely genetically determined, but
> the analyses in those early studies was flawed. More recent studies by
> Bouchard et al. place much less emphasis on genetics (though it is
still
> a very important factor).
>
> IOW, to have a really high VO2max you need to not only pick your
parents
> wisely, but also train very hard...
>
> Andrew Coggan
>
Wayne Lim
1. Boardman has shown, via his breakaway at the end of a stage in
Britain in the TdF a few years back, that he can operate at very high
levels after riding for a few hours. He managed to hold off the entire
pack for the last 10k or so, including a pretty tough climb. This
seems to indicate that unless he lost this ability, he should be able
to operate at pretty high levels on a finishing climb as well. Aren't
all Euro pros trained to the point that their LT is at least 90% of
their VO2 max anyway?
2. Climbing seems to be a matter of pure power output, since
aerodynamics plays a smaller role. If Boardman can put out 430 watts
for an hour in a highly aerodynamic position, it seems like he should
be able to do at least this, if not more, in a climbing position. He
does seem to use fairly low cadences when climbing, and I don't know if
this is his problem or not, but I wonder why he hasn't tried to more
closely emulate his TT cadences when climbing if he can put out more
power that way, even at the expense of some efficiency.
If you don't mind, do you mind describing your theory on muscle
contractile differences? Personally, I seem to have noticed that in
recent (probably EPO laced) years, the good time trialists have been
generally passable climbers at least (unless they're really large, like
Backstedt), and good climbers unless they were really small in stature,
have been pretty good time trailists. I guess my recent list would
include Indurain, Zulle, Ullrich, Riis, Tonkov, Gontchar, Armstrong,
Hamilton, Julich, Jalabert, Olano, and even Pantani.
It's always a learning experience for me discussing things with you.
Thanks!
Wayne Lim
In article <37A42A...@erols.com>,
andya...@erols.com wrote:
> Peter Keen reported in a Cycle Sport article published soon after
> Boardman's first record that his max was almost 88 mL/kg/min. I also
> remember reading a subsequent article by Keen alluding to Boardman's
> greater fitness at the time of his 2nd (and still standing) hour
record.
>
> Your calculations of Boardman's power at VO2max are correct, but
there's
> no guarantee that Boardman can climb at 100% of VO2max, especially at
> the end of a TdF stage. Boardman probably is, or at least was, an
> excellent climber in shorter, timed events - in fact, I believe he was
> national hillclimb champion of the U.K. at one point. Perhaps all the
> road, stage, and especially TT/pursuit training have blunted that
> ability - the guy who used to own the US hour record (Paul Liebenrood
> (sp?)) wasn't that big, but he couldn't climb well at all (despite
> hailing from hilly Cincinnatti). Based on observations like this as
well
> as other considerations, I have a theory that the optimal muscle
> contractile properties for TTing on the flats are no ideal for
climbing,
> and vice versa.
>
Wayne Lim
very close to their VO2 max. So sure, on the earlier hills, they're
climbing very submaximally, but on the last hill, they should be able
to go at least at their LT.
Since aerodynamics plays a much lesser part during climbing, it's
really a matter of how many watts you can make per unit weight. I
believe strength plays only the major part in what gears a rider might
choose when climbing, or in sprinting at the finish line.
On the flats, it's hard to know how aerodynamic your position really
is. That might be the major problem in your ability to roll along on
the flats if you are a good climber, rather than being limited by VO2
max.
Wayne LIm
In article <01bedc83$20d355a0$eeab...@northeast.northeast.net>,
"hoffman" <hof...@northeast.net> wrote:
> Also, I dont really see why a person who has
> a high VO2 max should be inherently superior
> when climing hills anyway.. Steep hill climbing
> is often done at submaximal pace which is not
> even close to your VO2max... In the hills it is
> more a matter of overall strength, and strength
> to weight ratio, and your lactate threshold
> probably plays a big part in it too.. But since
> your operating submaximally in the hills, VO2max
> doesn't seem extremely important for hill climbers.
>
> That's just my observation as a bicyclists myself.
> I'm an EXTREMELY good hill climber, in fact I
> kick the butt of most people on my local cycling
> team (in the hills)... but when it comes to the
> flats; that's something different.. thats where
> VO2max kicks in (and that's where I get my
> butt kicked).
>
>
Andrew Coggan
>
> To what extent is VO2 Max predictive of ability for running and
> cycling?
More so in running (where events are more like TTs), less well so in
cycling (where tactics, etc., play a major role). Still, in both sports,
the predictive ability is greatest when you have a large spread of
values, and less so (even zero) when you are dealing with a very
homogeneous group.
> Swimmers do NOT correlate well. Janet Evans had a number in
> the 50's.
A VO2max in the 50's for a female swimmer is still a pretty decent
value.
One point that hasn't been touched upon (apparently) in this discussion
is the importance of economy of movement. This places the biggest role
in swimming, less in running, and less still in cycling. This dilutes
the importance, if you will, of having a high VO2max.
> Most swim coaches put little value on VO2 Max.
This is probably true of coaches in other sports as well.
> Also, I had mine tested when I was about 43 and it was 86. I've never
> broken 3:30 for a marathon, and if my bike runs over a worm I've just
> done some major hill work!
No offense, but I have serious doubts about that value.
> I would think for runners stride length as
> a ratio to body height, anaerobic threshhold, body weight, and
> percentage of body fat, would be much more predictive of ability. Yes?
> No; maybe?
Stide length, weight, body fat, etc., wouldn't next much about a
person's performance ability, unless you were comparing extremely
divergent athletes in this regard. So-called "anaerobic threshold",
OTOH, would be a very, very good predictor of endurance performance
ability, IF expressed in the correct units, i.e., in terms of VO2, or,
better yet, pace or velocity (which takes into account running economy).
But, if threshold were simply given as a percentage, it wouldn't be
worth much - for example, even a threshold of 99% of VO2max wouldn't
make you much of a runner if your VO2max were only 35 mL/min/kg.
Andrew Coggan
hoffman
> number in the 50's. Most swim coaches put little value on
> VO2 Max.
VO2max usually correlates extremely well for shorter
(or shall I say) "middle" distance races, whether your
talking about running or cycling. Just about all of the
worlds best track runners and track cyclists usually
have a relatively high VO2max in the range of mid 80's
to low 90's.
VO2max however becomes less and less
important as the distance increases. In running,
the threshold is around 10km. Thats when your
lactate threshold and economy or efficiency start
to make the most difference, and this is especially
true when you get up to marathon distance or
100++ miles on the bike.. Likewise, in many of
the worlds best long-distance endurance athletes;
their VO2max is often not impressive, often in
the mid to high 70's range. But thats because they
dont really need a high VO2max, because you
aren't running at an extremely fast pace like the
track runner is (i.e. 4:50 - 5:00min/mile as opposed
to 4min/miles of middle distance [1-3miles] runners.)
I'm not too familar with the nuances of professional
swimming... but it should be similar to both running
and biking, insofar as VO2max probably is alot more
important in shorter races... but probably does not
mean a whole lot in really long ultra swims. Also, in
swimming, "technique" and the methods of propulsion
probably make alot of difference, so a person with
efficient technique may be able to compensate for a
slightly lower VO2max.
David T. Blake
> If you don't mind, do you mind describing your theory on muscle
> contractile differences? Personally, I seem to have noticed that
> in recent (probably EPO laced) years, the good time trialists
> have been generally passable climbers at least (unless they're
> really large, like Backstedt), and good climbers unless they were
> really small in stature, have been pretty good time trailists. I
> guess my recent list would include Indurain, Zulle, Ullrich,
> Riis, Tonkov, Gontchar, Armstrong, Hamilton, Julich, Jalabert,
> Olano, and even Pantani.
For a somewhat less educated view than Andrew's, try considering
the cyclical load forces during the pedal stroke while climbing
and while TTing. There are proportionally fairly large changes in
velocity while climbing, and velocity is proportional to load on the
pedals. For TTing the load and velocity are much more constant. This
certainly requires a different sort of training in order to optimize
one's climbing stroke.
--
Dave Blake
dbl...@phy.ucsf.edu
David T. Blake
> Thanks to everyone who responded.
>
> Swimming does not tax the oxygen capacity of one's lungs to the same
> extent running does. Runners are using large muscles, with
> correspondingly large O2 demands (and the concomitant problems with
> LT). Swimmers are using a large number of much smaller muscles,
> tendons, etc. LT is a big problem because of the difficulties flushing
> lactate out of small muscles, but O2 consumption rarely is.
The relationship between oxygen usage and exercise is due to a
large extent to the ability of the working muscles to return
blood to the heart. Running utilizes to a minor extent almost all
the muscles in the legs, lower torso, and arms. Cycling uses much
less upper body movement than running, and well-trained athletes
will test LOWER for VO2Max on cycling than running. Swimming is
even worse as it is primarily upper body only, and there is even
less blood returned to the heart, so VO2Max is even lower when
tested among swimmers.
As an addendum this is also why, as a cyclist, it is easier to
sustain a high heart rate while climbing compared to riding on
the flats. While climbing, try stopping pulling on the handlebars
and see what happens to your power and your sustained heart rate.
--
Dave Blake
dbl...@phy.ucsf.edu
Vaughn Cooper
about anything I've ever done, including brutal track workouts or a hard
TT on the bike. At the end of a race like the 400IM many swimmers go
numb in their extremities because they're in such oxygen demand. I
suspect some of the VO2 max differences between swimmers and various
land athletes has to do with the denominator: kg. Swimmers tend to
weigh more than other athletes.
Swimmers incorporate running in dryland for cardio, yes. But that's
usually for overall fitness in the early season when folks come back out
of shape. There are plenty of outstanding swimmers who rarely run.
Runners usually get substantially less cardio benefit from swimming
because they're not doing it "right," just as swimmers don't do running
"right."
Cheers,
Vaughn
"Robert H. Diday, Jr." wrote:
>
> Thanks to everyone who responded.
>
> Swimming does not tax the oxygen capacity of one's lungs to the same
> extent running does. Runners are using large muscles, with
> correspondingly large O2 demands (and the concomitant problems with
> LT). Swimmers are using a large number of much smaller muscles,
> tendons, etc. LT is a big problem because of the difficulties flushing
> lactate out of small muscles, but O2 consumption rarely is.
>
> Technique, as Mr. Hoffman notes, is supercritical in swimming because
> of the many forms of drag swimmers encounter. I've seen swimmers get
> out of the pool after a hard 400 IM and be hardly breathing. But if
> runners run a mile all out they can barely speak for quite some time.
> They've obviously taxed their cardio systems to a far greater degree.
> Thus, swimmers incorporate some running in their dryland routines to
> improve their cardio. Unfortunately, runners get substantially less
> cardio benefit from swimming. Swimming is a great way to rehab,
> though! :)
>
> -Robert
> >
> >I'm not too familar with the nuances of professional
> >swimming... but it should be similar to both running
> >and biking, insofar as VO2max probably is alot more
> >important in shorter races... but probably does not
> >mean a whole lot in really long ultra swims. Also, in
> >swimming, "technique" and the methods of propulsion
> >probably make alot of difference, so a person with
> >efficient technique may be able to compensate for a
> >slightly lower VO2max.
--
Vaughn Cooper
Center for Microbial Ecology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824 phone (517) 353-3953
coop...@pilot.msu.edu fax (517) 353-3955
Head Coach, MSU Women's Water Polo
Magnus Jonsson
you might say that the VO2 max dont always say mutch about the capacaty of
a rider(or a runner) but Id realy like to go over 80 in a nother life so I
can kick some butt again.
Magnus cross country rider from Sweden..
Runner's Web
I hope you did not pay for your "testing" because it was not worth it.
Ken
On Mon, 02 Aug 1999 00:15:09 GMT, rdi...@twcf.rr.com (Robert H. Diday,
Jr.) wrote:
>To what extent is VO2 Max predictive of ability for running and
>cycling? Swimmers do NOT correlate well. Janet Evans had a number in
>the 50's. Most swim coaches put little value on VO2 Max.
>
>Also, I had mine tested when I was about 43 and it was 86. I've never
>broken 3:30 for a marathon, and if my bike runs over a worm I've just
>done some major hill work! I would think for runners stride length as
>a ratio to body height, anaerobic threshhold, body weight, and
>percentage of body fat, would be much more predictive of ability. Yes?
>No; maybe?
>
>-Robert
Ken Parker
Runner's Web
Runne...@sirius.ca
www.runnersweb.com/running.html
A running and triathlon resource site.
Mail List Community : http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/RunnersWeb
Mark Linenberg
> Janet
>Evans, a distance freestyler (one would expect her number to be quite
>high) had a relatively low number (I'm sure many similar examples
>could be marshalled), I submit that at best the jury will be out for
>awhile on this one.
With regards to Evans- Swimming has a huge, and I mean HUGE, emphasis
on technique and efficiency of the body going through the water- which
is not correlated to VO2max. Endurance Swimming is a very different
sport compared to endurance: cycling/running/crosscountry skiing etc.
Mark Linenberg
o
__o </\_
\< __/\
/\o_ (()) (()) /
^^^^^^^^^^
Jean Dufresne
impact on the VO2 max of some drugs taken by athletes? Will the number
go up ?
Clyde Soles a écrit:
Ken Parker
Sorry if my comment seemed flippant.
I just do not believe the reading you were given.
Regarding the correlation of VO2 Max to performance, as with all
measurable parameters there is a wide variance. However while
anaerobic threshold may be a better indicator, it makes sense that a
high threshold (in % terms) with a high VO2 Max should give a better
performance.
At the lower end of the scale there is a reality that with a low Max
you will not perform very well.
To me the challenge is to get an athlete to perform to the limit of
their ability. If they did not have the right parents and/or were not
born and raised at altitude, it is not their fault.
And yes I run for the same reasons that you do.
Ken
On Mon, 02 Aug 1999 23:33:08 GMT, rdi...@twcf.rr.com (Robert H. Diday,
Jr.) wrote:
>Ken: Maybe the physician who charged me $300 in 1986 to do the test
>didn't know what he was doing, but I suspect the test is not
>predictive of performance, even in runners and cyclists.
>
>Don't have all my research at my fingertips, but did stumble on this
>crumb:
>
>"One study compared the VO2 and times of top marathon runners. The
>runners examined all had maxes between 69.7 and 85.0 mg/kg/min.
>However, beyond that fact, there was no correlation between VO2 and
>performance, even for the fastest runners."
>
>http://www.bicyclesource.com/body/training/numbers/vo2-max-performance.shtml
>
>So actually, you are right. The test isn't worth $300. It may not be
>worth one red cent.
>
>And, since VO2 max is utterly worthless for sprinters, and Janet
>Evans, a distance freestyler (one would expect her number to be quite
>high) had a relatively low number (I'm sure many similar examples
>could be marshalled), I submit that at best the jury will be out for
>awhile on this one.
>
>I run for the sheer joy a few moments of peace gives me. Unless you
>are in the top .05% of the world's elite runners, I hope you are doing
>likewise.
>
>By the way, I do love your web site, and yes, I saw your section on
>VO2 max.
>
>Dominus vobiscum
>
>-Robert
>
>>I hope you did not pay for your "testing" because it was not worth it.
>>
>>Ken
>
Ken Parker
Runner's Web
A running & triathlon resource site.
http://www.runnersweb.com/running.html
Runne...@sirius.ca
Try our Voting Booth @ http://www.runnersweb.com/running/rw_vote.html
Sam
can give big boosts in performance.
Jack/Kathy
Well put. We all have to confront these realities. Its good to
maintain a level of fitness but competiting against those with superior
genes is futile (given similar training). Many americans think anything
can be obtained through effort and hard work-it ain't so! At 5:11, 54
years old and no vertical jump, I won't be playing the NBA this year.
Jack
Ken Parker
A doctor at a Canadian University did studies on this 20 years or so
ago and boosted an athletes VO2 Max substantially. The athlete had the
best performances of his career while doped.
Ken
On Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:42:01 -0500, Jean Dufresne <jea...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Ken Parker
David T. Blake
> Blood doping will have a major effect on VO2 Max.
>
> A doctor at a Canadian University did studies on this 20 years
> or so ago and boosted an athletes VO2 Max substantially. The
> athlete had the best performances of his career while doped.
Of course. Did you think the 1984 Olympic cycling results were
a result of hard training ? Or doping ??
VO2Max is limited by cardiac output in normals. It can be
boosted by boosting blood volume or hematocrit. Generally blood
volume increases with aerobic training anyway by boosting plasma
proteins, but hematocrit does not rise. Doping or EPO use will
result in yet further improvements by improving oxygen carrying
capacity of the blood (hematocrit) and to a lesser extent blood
volume.
--
Dave Blake
dbl...@phy.ucsf.edu
Tom Morley
> Ken Parker <runne...@sirius.ca> wrote:
> > Blood doping will have a major effect on VO2 Max.
> >
> > A doctor at a Canadian University did studies on this 20 years
> > or so ago and boosted an athletes VO2 Max substantially. The
> > athlete had the best performances of his career while doped.
>
> Of course. Did you think the 1984 Olympic cycling results were
> a result of hard training ? Or doping ??
Both, actually.
--
Walt&Ann
Clyde Soles wrote:
> Here are some impressive VO2 max's I found on the web:
>
> Rosa Mota, Marathon runner, 67.2
..snip
The common dog: 200
cog...@grecc.ab.umd.edu
Compared to humans, dogs are better aerobic athletes. However, 200
mL/min/kg is an overestimate - IIRC, mongrel dogs are typically around
90-100 mL/min/kg, while purpose-bred breeds like greyhounds can reach
125 mL/min/kg.
More comparative exercise physiology trivia: unlike humans, dogs
seem to shunt blood away from internal organs towards exercising muscle
only under extreme conditions, e.g., hypoxia or anemia. In humans, this
mechanism is operative beginning at about 40% of VO2max.
Andrew Coggan
Ron Gilcreast
--
TriathRon
_
- o
' - __o - </\_
` ' - \< - __/\
/\o_ - (()) (()) - /
^^^^^^^^^^
(ASCII art blatantly plagiarized from TriBaby's sig . . . )
Walt&Ann wrote in message <37AAC59A...@worldnet.att.net>...
W Scott Elliot
>wa...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
>>
>> Clyde Soles wrote:
>>
>> > Here are some impressive VO2 max's I found on the web:
>> >
>> > Rosa Mota, Marathon runner, 67.2
>>
>> ..snip
>>
>> The common dog: 200
>
>mL/min/kg is an overestimate - IIRC, mongrel dogs are typically around
>90-100 mL/min/kg, while purpose-bred breeds like greyhounds can reach
>125 mL/min/kg.
>
>More comparative exercise physiology trivia: unlike humans, dogs
>seem to shunt blood away from internal organs towards exercising muscle
>only under extreme conditions, e.g., hypoxia or anemia. In humans, this
>mechanism is operative beginning at about 40% of VO2max.
I also seem to remember reading somewhere that dogs cheat by blood packing.
They store extra red blood cells in the liver that are injected into the
bloodstream when additional VO2 max is required. Because the size of a
dog's heart is much larger than a human's in comparison to body size, the
thickening of the blood with the extra red cells does not kill them as it
would a human.
The next time a dog passes you on a run, demand that it get a blood doping
test.
Scott
Andrew Coggan
> I also seem to remember reading somewhere that dogs cheat by blood packing.
> They store extra red blood cells in the liver that are injected into the
> bloodstream when additional VO2 max is required. Because the size of a
> dog's heart is much larger than a human's in comparison to body size, the
> thickening of the blood with the extra red cells does not kill them as it
> would a human.
>
> The next time a dog passes you on a run, demand that it get a blood doping
> test.
More trivia: there is at least some evidence that the same mechanism
(i.e., contraction of the spleen to reduce additional red blood cells
during intense exercise) is operative in humans. Even at best, though,
the quantity of additional RBCs released is quite small, and hence it is
common to assume that total red cell volume is a constant during
exercise.
Andrew Coggan
David T. Blake
> ... Because the size of a dog's heart is much larger than a
> human's in comparison to body size, the thickening of the blood
> with the extra red cells does not kill them as it would a human.
This does not follow. The excess ORGAN resistance causes lack of
flow in the organ, and organ failure. In the spleen, generally.
This then cascades until the heart is crushed.
Many misunderstandings liket this arise because people mistake
the well-being of the cardiovascular system for those of the
heart. Generally, the heart does quite well if it receives good
inputs. When faced with increase vascular resistance, it still
does what it can.
There is lots different in the cardiovascular system of the dog.
I was always struck by the inverted T wave.
--
Dave Blake
dbl...@phy.ucsf.edu
Sam
>
>
>There is lots different in the cardiovascular system of the dog.
>I was always struck by the inverted T wave.
>
>--
>Dave Blake
>dbl...@phy.ucsf.edu
Maybe they all had MIs as puppies from being scared of the
thunder.....
Wayne Lim
since it doesn't appear a very fit dog would be suffering at oxygen
consumption levels that would make a human spew. Perhaps dogs have a
saying that that they "suffer like humans"?
Wayne Lim
In article <7ofdq7$mke$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
cog...@grecc.ab.umd.edu wrote:
> Compared to humans, dogs are better aerobic athletes. However, 200
> mL/min/kg is an overestimate - IIRC, mongrel dogs are typically around
> 90-100 mL/min/kg, while purpose-bred breeds like greyhounds can reach
> 125 mL/min/kg.
>