My guess would be running economy since V02 max has a much stronger genetic component.
My guess would be running economy since V02 max has a much stronger genetic component.
Vo2max is measured in mL/(KG•min), so make of that what you will
just saying it wrote:
Vo2max is measured in mL/(KG•min), so make of that what you will
*Is usually measured
Seems like running economy and v02 max are synonymous but Sage Canady in his video doesn't draw a direct parallel between the two:
Both are just numbers and math, but based on specific measurement protocols. Vo2max is the maximum o2 volume per minute measured while for instance running progressively faster until exhaustion. The higher power and body work you can do, the higher reading. This volume is then divided by body weight in kg.
Running economy is measured as O2 volume per pace. O2 is a direct measurement of the current energy used, and when compared to the pace you can keep at that energy expenditure we get a number for how efficient you are at running.
If you loose weight, the vo2max formula will give a higher number even if the actual volume of O2 you can use is the same. You do not increase O2 uptake, but just get a better number.
Running economy will improve because you have to carry less weight and obviously the same effort and energy expenditure will result in a higher pace.
So weight loss alone does nothing to increase your max O2 uptake, but your vo2max number and running economy will increase.
Elites have different vo2max and running economy numbers even if all are very high. Even with a little lower running economy they can still compete well as long as there are enough O2 and energy available.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
My guess would be running economy since V02 max has a much stronger genetic component.
You are really ignorant. Where did you get the idea that VO2max is genetic?
If body weight drops then VO2max goes up. Simple math.
Maths wrote:
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
My guess would be running economy since V02 max has a much stronger genetic component.
You are really ignorant. Where did you get the idea that VO2max is genetic?
If body weight drops then VO2max goes up. Simple math.
He got it from Biology.
Absolute VO2max is genetics + cardiovascular health.
Weight relative VO2max is the simple math.
Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:
If you loose weight, the vo2max formula will give a higher number even if the actual volume of O2 you can use is the same. You do not increase O2 uptake, but just get a better number.
Running economy will improve because you have to carry less weight and obviously the same effort and energy expenditure will result in a higher pace.
It depends if you lose weight the healthy way, gradually, or the unhealthy way, too quickly.
If your metabolic rate drops, your absolute VO2max drops. Chronic glycogen depletion is bad for health and fitness.
Beware of quacks and diet gurus who don't understand basic nutrition.
Jack Daniels (jtupper) input from an old thread discussing effect of weight loss on VDOT loss suggests weight loss would primarily effect VO2max because your heart has to pump the same amount of oxygen to less body tissue :
"I typically calculate 2.7 sec per mile per pound of unnecessary tissue that you lose. It will vary with your ability level, but you have the idea -- (1) multiply your VDOT times your body weight in kg (pounds X .454 = Kg). (2) This will give your an absolute value for estimated VDOT (3) subtact the anticipated weight loss from current weight and (4) divide the new (lighter) weight into the Absolute VDOT value that you got in #2 above. This will give you a new VDOT to use for calculating performances. Naturally, the catch is that you must be getting rid of body mass that is not useful to your running. If you try to lose too much to make these mathematics look even better, you will start to lose muscle mass and the absolute VDOT value will decrease as fast or faster than the body mass is reduced and VDOT used for determining performances will not be to your liking."
If you gain 10% Body weight, but you keep training, how much of that is fat and how much is muscle?
That depends on the training. Endurance training and it will not be muscles, higher rep strength training a lot will be muscles.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
Seems like running economy and v02 max are synonymous but Sage Canady in his video doesn't draw a direct parallel between the two:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4555089/
No, not synonymous. You can have a high VO2 max and not be good if your economy is lousy, see the story of the highest recorded VO2 max:
https://www.outsideonline.com/2398524/highest-ever-vo2max-cyclist-oskar-svendsenI'd agree with the posts that suggest running economy and VO2 max both improve simply as a function of the math. However, both traits are fairly plastic and training dependent. I have nothing to base that on, but I was able to bring my VO2 max from 55 to 64 while gaining weight by replacing all my junk miles with nordic ski hill work and 50K races. Not recommended if all you care about is dropping weight to go fast, but great if you want to do a low-mileage marathon cycle and not look like a twig.
For half/marathon distances, VO2 max is less important; running economy, which ultimately factors things like running form, is probably the only thing worth thinking about.
This post was removed.