V02 Max how much faster will I be (please answer)

No it doesn't.

It's not.

It's "VO2max" not "V-zero-2 max." The O is for oxygen. This matters. If you don't understand this then you don't understand anything.

Go run a 2 mile time trial and find out.

You're welcome.

For a 5km chances are you will improve roughly a minute.

https://blog.myworkout.no/app/uploads/2018/08/Estimert-lopetid-basert-pa%CC%8A-VO2max.jpg

I stopped at "my Garmin gives me my V02max".

Useless thread

Firstbeat conducted their own study to validate the technology and its effectiveness at estimating VO2max. They found that “[t]he accuracy of the method when applied for running is 95% (Mean absolute percentageerror, MAPE ~5%), based on a database of 2690 freely performed runs from 79 runners whose VO2max was tested four times during their 6-9 -month preparation

https://sites.udel.edu/coe-engex/2019/03/16/how-accurate-is-your-garmins-vo2max-estimate/

The OP is asking a fair question.

Throw out the VO2max thing and just call it the "Garmin Number." The GN number on his watch is supposed to reflect fitness. When it read 65, he could run a 9:54. Now that his GN is 69, what's a reasonable estimate of his 2-mile time? People whose GN is similar or who have seen a 4-point increase in their GN might have some ideas.

I'd guess he stands a decent shot of breaking 9:30, but it will depend on his workouts. It also depends on the details of how the GN is calculated, and I don't know enough about that part of it.

According to my calculations exactly 9:19.02 no wind, no rain, solorun on dry track.

You’re getting pretty bad answers, even if some of what respondents say is correct ,it’s disrespectful, rude, and incomplete.

Yes, there is a direct correlation between running performance and VO2Max. Unfortunately, VO2Max has its limits as a means to measure performance:

1. There is thought to be a limit to what you can achieve through specifically targeting it. VO2Max is basically the same measurement as the stroke volume of your heart combined with the oxygen-carrying capacity of your blood. There are genetic factors to both these aspects. It’s also why cheaters opt for blood doping and/or EPO.

2. Your Garmin isn’t providing actual VO2Max - it’s using a few proxy measurements, big data and a bit of clever mathematics to provide a performance figure number that may have some resemblance to actual VO2Max in some athletes. Do not for a single second mistake it for the real thing, though.

3. “Mistake it for the real thing” is sort of central. Your watch will fail to account for a number of physiological, psychological and environmental factors. Garmin and/or Firstbeat won’t know whether you’re pushing yourself, whether you’re running hills, difficult turns, if you’re stressed out because you’r boss or spouse was difficult, or if it was cold/hot, rainy, windy.

4. The Firstbeat algorithm will not account for changes in running economy. While a high-end Garmin with a chest strap will collect some of the data, it won’t use it in the calculation

By all means in the long term, Garmin’s figures will provide you with data on whether you’re progressing or not, but it’s not giving you an actual VO2Max. For that, you will need a lab test.

The value of a lab test is dubious to any non elite. I am comfortable sitting on the Noakes side of the performance debate, while advocating the Daniels VDOT proxy for training paces, until you’ve gone so far that you need to measure lactate

My big issue with Firstbeat is that they are trying to use lab values and use them to estimate real-world efforts.

As a slow-sampled metric for an individual, or as a proxy for well-trained athletes in lab conditions, it might have value, and for the latter group even be correlated with actual VO2Max. I just don’t like the name, or the implication that it is the VO2Max

There are lots a variables other than VO2max that will effect your performance. But using just that number your 2 mi. time should be in the 9:24 range.

Semiler wrote:

For a 5km chances are you will improve roughly a minute.

https://blog.myworkout.no/app/uploads/2018/08/Estimert-lopetid-basert-pa%CC%8A-VO2max.jpg

Thanks so much I was looking for a chart like this

ned_farrington wrote:

So my garmin gives me my V02max. I know it’s probably not that accurate but I think it’s at least consistently wrong.

I think it’s reasonable for you to want to know how the change in this metric could be expected to map to a change in performance, but I think this is the most questionable assumption, that it’s consistently wrong. A gain of 4 points could easily just be measurement error. Not to say your hard work isn’t doing anything, it’s just hard to find the signal amidst the noise.

I just pulled the last 6 months of the VO2MAX estimate from Garmin Connect and there are these swings that have no connection to fitness. Just in the last month it’s ranged from 53 to 63, and it’s not like I’m any fitter today than I was in mid-June.

based in insider information you will run under 15:50

Purrwegian wrote:

VO2Max is basically the same measurement as the stroke volume of your heart combined with the oxygen-carrying capacity of your blood.

I'm curious where you got that information.

Avocado's Number wrote:

Purrwegian wrote:

VO2Max is basically the same measurement as the stroke volume of your heart combined with the oxygen-carrying capacity of your blood.

I'm curious where you got that information.

I heard the same thing just recently (YouTube?). Although you can increase your stroke volume to a point, you'll be limited by max heart rate. So doing other aerobic training beyond vo2max work yields higher capillary density, more mitochondria, more red blood cells, and etc.

Registered User. wrote:

Avocado's Number wrote:

I'm curious where you got that information.

I heard the same thing just recently (YouTube?). Although you can increase your stroke volume to a point, you'll be limited by max heart rate. So doing other aerobic training beyond vo2max work yields higher capillary density, more mitochondria, more red blood cells, and etc.

1. That's not remotely what Purrwegian said.

2. That, like Purrwegian's statement, doesn't come close to explaining what VO2max is.

3. You can't do "other aerobic training beyond vo2max work." VO2max is a measurement of the body's maximal rate of aerobic metabolism (typically normalized by dividing by kilograms of body mass). If you're working at a metabolic rate higher than VO2max, that's because you're also relying on anaerobic metabolism, not because you're "doing other aerobic training beyond vo2max work."

4. I'd still like to see sources for some of these statements.

So much pseudoscientific blather has been written about VO2max, a concept that has some utility, but now exists primarily to give students of exercise physiology something to measure in a lab and authors of pop physiology articles something to write about. Most runners might be better off having never heard the term.

Here is a definition: "the maximum or optimum rate at which the heart, lungs, and muscles can effectively use oxygen during exercise, used as a way of measuring a person's individual aerobic capacity."

However, when speaking about VO2max training an emphasis is usually put on the role of the heart as it is a vital limiting factor of oxygen distribution. The heart rate cannot be trained but the stroke volume of each heart beat can be improved through training the heart pumping muscle.

The capillaries also play an important role in oxygen distribution and is commonly improved by slow long runs. That sort of training is not included when talking about VO2max training although it is directly related to improving VO2max as it is defined.

VO2max is often measured in milliliters of oxygen consumed in one minute, per kilogram of body weight (mL/kg/min). Hence, it is comparable between individuals of different weight.

Avocado's Number wrote:

So much pseudoscientific blather has been written about VO2max, a concept that has some utility, but now exists primarily to give students of exercise physiology something to measure in a lab and authors of pop physiology articles something to write about. Most runners might be better off having never heard the term.

What if those guys doing real science started to share their results of VO2max training with runners as well as common people. Even better, what if they published training recommendations based on those results.

Guess what, it's there already. It is all as simple as watching a video: