Vo2 max not corresponding to race times

Speed is important too. And of course conditioning. I have competed in both sports and raced against and trained with professional cyclists, so I know what is involved.

Yes believeability. 88 is not a credible number. 79 is, in real Bioenergetic terms not the usual nonsense that gets bandied about constantly.

Indurain started as a 400 meter runner in school. I don't know how fast he was, I guess about 52 seconds. His size helped him in the time trials, but it took him a long time to develop.

Great nonsense, as Thr60, LT2 or Vt2 or whatever you call or define it is always a fraction of VO2max, having at least 'enough' Vo2max is therefore important. You can not run 2h marathon with 60ml/kg/min. Even with the best running economy and the highest %Vo2max you can utilice.

If the human body was a car then "Vo2max" is like raw horsepower and "Running Economy" is like fuel efficiency or your miles/gallon.

As others have mentioned "Running Economy" is generally a better measure at predicting distance running performances....especially at paces around goal race paces (be it a 5km or marathon).

If you have a relatively high VO2max you have more "wiggle room" with Running Economy values and how they relatable to race performances....but having high values in both is certainly very helpful for running fast and being elite.

I got both tested after already running PRs of 14:29, 29:47, 1:04:32, 2:16:52 etc and my Vo2max was "only" 69. However, my Running Economy is quite efficient (much more above average) at around half marathon to marathon pace. I could've guessed that just based on my PRs and relative Vo2max number.

Running Economy can be improved through years of high mileage, aerobic base and running form drills/speed work etc. It can also be improved by simply switching shoes.

Daniel's VDOT values apply Running Economy numbers together with Vo2max numbers and have relatively high correlations.

But yes, in terms of "Running Economy" the muscles play a huge role. We're talking about running form/movement patterns/muscular strength and coordination as well as what kind of shoes you might be wearing and what your stride rate is even. We're also looking at cellular adaptations, blood flow, and muscle fiber activation etc.

Running economy can be relatively better at faster paces for some runners (while obviously at a higher % of Vo2max and higher intensity....it does not necessarily decrease with speed).

Both are dealing with oxygen delivery and usage.

Yeah it does mean something...other factors as well, but if your VO2max is not above some number you are going to have a really, really hard time succeeding in endurance sports.

Elite distance runners don't have very high VO2max numbers. There has been a lot of number fudging going on and some very good research.

I think we have to go back to 1972 when the more thorough and honest researchers were publishing their data and then trace the lineage of supporting data. This is the best way forward, but there will always be those with ulterior motives spreading misinformation and disinformation.

The lineage is Hill and Lupton 100 years ago to Daniels and Costill 50 years ago to Jones et al today.

You also have half decent speed too Sage, and that contributes to your superior running economy. This also explains why the best distance runners are so efficient, they tend to have good 400m speed endurance and a VO2max around the 70 mark @ around 10% body fat.

This is why Jack Daniels' numbers and Andy Jones' numbers concur. Because they have tested true elite distance runners with reliable methodology.

Elite endurance cyclists definitely have a much higher VO2max than elite distance runners. But the good information gets marred by misinformation and disinformation about blood boosting methods. I want to see people in positions of authority take a more responsible attitude towards how young athletes are informed about Bioenergetics.

Obviously your running economy and/or lactate threshold are limitations here.

Lots of elite cyclists, xc skiers and rowers have vo2 max scores that outshine even the best runners in the world, but they don't run faster than them.

You've got to think of Vo2 Max like horsepower. You can have a huge engine, but if you put it in a tractor, it's not gonna go fast.

Running economy is made up of a heap of different components. To list a few:

- body weight, body composition, biomechanics, efficiency of movement, skeletal muscle capillarisation, metabolism, etc.

Maybe you have a body adapted to another sport? Like cycling?

I also have VO2max close to 60, and in cycling can produce about 4.2 w/kg for around 20 minutes (almost 330 watts). But in running, Garmin is estimating my VO2max at 51, and I can 5k in 20:xx only.

Ya'll are missing the point.

Of course someone with a 50 VO2max is not going to run a 13:30 5k but what is the magic number? Reported elite VO2maxes have been anywhere from the low 70s to the high 80s....if you believe the reported numbers? Why is my 5k time so drastically different than others with similar VO2maxes?

It is all about Running Economy. RE is simply the O2 cost at a specific running SPEED and is affected by a grocery list of factors.

SPEED affects TIME and PLACE so the faster you can run and the longer you can run without fatiguing the better you are!

Alan

VO2 means nothing, grow a pair and run faster.

All elite runners have a higher than average VO2max. Not all people with a higher than average VO2max will be an elite runner. Or something like that.

I concur with what others have said: VO2 max testing is a waste of time for most people (including yourself). If you are concerned with how to improve your 5k time, don't bother looking for answers in a lab.

I would venture to guess with your 20 minute PB you run about 30-40 miles per week. Try running 40-50 mpw and see if your 5k time drops. You might be surprised what you find out.

One of the benefits of running higher mileage is that it generally can improve Running Economy quite a bit. Even mostly "Easy Aerobic Miles" at higher volume can improve 5km PRs (without any improvement in Vo2max number).

If you have better Running Economy you can simply run faster for longer at a higher % of your Vo2max (and max Heartrate ) for example.

Racing an all-out 5km (well ideally 3km) is actually a really good predictor of velocity at Vo2max or "Vo2max Pace". For example if you time-trialed a 5km on a flat track in good conditions and evenly paced you could simply look at Daniels "VDOT" table and get a pretty good reading on what your current relative number is based on your current fitness level. Then you have a good reading on what pace range to start Tempo or LT workouts at and how you might want to run 800m or 1km Vo2max intervals at to improve progressively.

At the end of the day the Vo2max number it doesn't really matter (although like others have said it would be very hard to be an elite with pretty much any Vo2max under 65 or so....as most are well over 70 and even 75-80+), but the value is that you can optimize your training and match up the correct intensity (much like HR or lactate testing). And don't ever rely on your Garmin to "estimate" Vo2max....it's just guessing.

This nails it - it will help optimize your training paces which "should" get you better - where better ends is up to you

This is the worst popular thread since Titan Will Fall. Sorry.

There's getting fit and there's racing well. The first does not guarantee the second. Racing is its own skill and your job now is to translate your fitness into faster racing. Maybe you just need to learn to push harder when you race. Maybe not. There's just no reason to think you can look at your VO2 max and decide what your race times are supposed to be.