highest VO2 max ever recorded

a high vo2max is akin to a car that guzzles a lot of gas. it's much more important what you do with the oxygen and other efficiencies than how much oxygen you take in.

ever hear anything about a resting heart rate of 27? someone threw this out when we were talking about this thread at work today

meaningless wrote:

Derek Clayton was something like 69 and he ran a 2:08 marathon.

The number is meaningless except to compare improvements in one athlete over time. It has no utility comparing one athlete to another.

I've wondered how important other factors can be. I tested out at a lousy - for an endurance athlete - 65, but I ran 1:46 and a 4:04 mile, beating guys who could hit the 70's and one in the 80's. I couldn't hang with them in the 5k, but they couldn't hang with Clayton, so who knows?

The highest VO2 max ever recorded was Jashaun Agosto. Doctor's said he was off the charts!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oC3aIHg95A

To the guy that said that Matt isn't a national class runner.. he's more of a mountain/trail runner. He did, however, run sub 2:20 in his first and only serious road marathon.

Paul Tergat, I believe, measured at 93, as did Lance Armstrong ...

This is taken directly from Matt Carpenter's website related to his VO2, there were actually two tests:

90.2 VO2, recorded 9/13/90 at the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, CO at an altitude of 6,100'. One of the highest known VO2s recorded by a runner (average rate for non-athletes is 44-51; average for athletes is 60-84). This is a measurement of the body’s ability to deliver oxygen to the muscles. More test info: Treadmill protocol - 345 meters/min (4:40min/mile) starting at 0% and increasing the grade 1% every minute. I lasted 5m44s. Weight 55.7Kg (122.8 lbs). Max HR - 187. Max blood lactate - 13.8mmol. In 1994 my VO2 tested even higher (94.9) in Italy which was only logical since the test was done at sea level. However, they claimed their instruments must have been broken and therefore I go with the 90.2.

Wat wrote:

To the guy that said that Matt isn't a national class runner.. he's more of a mountain/trail runner. He did, however, run sub 2:20 in his first and only serious road marathon.

That's not true. I've known Matt for many years, and raced against him on occasion when we were both a lot faster. He ran a fair number of road marathons during his peak years. Offhand, I can think of about five. As I said earlier, his fastest was around 2:19:50, at the 1992 Houston marathon. I recall a couple in the 2:30s (1990 Columbus marathon and 1992 Olympic trials marathon), and I believe there were a couple in the mid-2:20s (maybe around 2:23+). He also ran at least one when he was much younger, but I don't know whether he would characterize that one as "serious."

Honestly, this obsession with VO2max is silly. Haven't any of you wondered why someone with a really high VO2max (say, 90 ml/kg/min) and really high economy (like that of Clayton or Stahl) hasn't run a 1:45 marathon or something? It's because those people don't exist! "Economy" is simply a dependent variable that accounts for the observed fact that people who happen to consume a lot of oxygen when they're running really hard aren't necessarily faster runners.

Somehow I tested to have a 67 vo2 max, max HR of 191 (tested at a state university using the Bruce protocol) when I was only in high school 17 yrs old and at the time I was running like just low 18s for 5k. I guess I severely underachieve or vo2 max doesn't mean much. I was also only running 35-40mpw then.

3:42 1500m runner with a VO2max of 65...doesn't mean anything.

I think Daehlie gets the nod.

The machine that measured Carpenter's VO2max consistently measured "high". So much so that it was replaced very quickly---not a cheap proposition especially at that time.

How do I know? I worked in the USOC lab shortly after that test and was in charge of calibrating the carts. The old one was still around and never could get it to calibrate within accepted tolerances.

Dr Death wrote:

Ever hear anything about a resting heart rate of 27?

Perfectly plausible. In college I used to take my pulse a lot and found that I could slow it down by thinking about it. I'd typically be 35 at my fittest (and I was a very mediocre runner) but could drop it to 30 for a minute or two just by trying to relax. I would not be at all surprised if some much better runners could do the same when they knew they were being measured.

luv2run wrote:

I think Daehlie gets the nod.

It barely makes sense to talk about VO2max except with respect to a specific activity. What would Daehlie's VO2max be on a running treadmill test?

But really, people would be better off if they understood just how useless this information is. If two runners of equal ability (essentially, identical vV02max, to use Jack's term) use vastly different amounts of oxygen when they're running at the same hard (vVO2max) pace, why do people marvel at the genetic gifts of the runner who simply requires more oxygen to run at the same pace? If VO2max and "economy" were actually independent parameters, and if VO2max could only be improved slightly while "economy" could be improved dramatically, then VO2max might be an important marker of talent for an aerobically taxing athletic event. But I've never seen any indication that such is the case.

Avocados Number wrote:

But really, people would be better off if they understood just how useless this information is.

I'm no expert, but it is my understanding that the correlation between VO2max and race performance is much better for nordic skiing and cycling than it is for running. The rationalization is that the ability to produce very high power in short bursts is a greater tactical advantage in these sports than it is in running which is more of a steady state affair.

Dr Death wrote:

I did mean humans, but sorry for not specifying.

Why limit it to humans? What are you a racist?

Should we really include results from the 90s?

mellon wrote:

Why limit it to humans? What are you a racist?

The term you are looking for is "speciesist".

Back in the 80s we used to have a t-shirt saying "Students against speciesism".

Citizen Runner wrote:

Avocados Number wrote:

But really, people would be better off if they understood just how useless this information is.

I'm no expert, but it is my understanding that the correlation between VO2max and race performance is much better for nordic skiing and cycling than it is for running. The rationalization is that the ability to produce very high power in short bursts is a greater tactical advantage in these sports than it is in running which is more of a steady state affair.

I think it is actually less of consideration in cycling. You can be a "sprinter" and win stages of major events. Road sprinters do not have exceptionally high VO2max. Time trial and pursuit are a different story.

does having the biggest dong make you the greatest lover?