vVO2 MAX = what pace?

You can get to your v02 max at different paces. Also I think vV02 max can differ between individuals.

For the most part, the old school came at things from the endurance side. If you think about it, most incremental testing protocols start with very slow running speeds and bump up the speed, not visa versa, and much attention early on was paid to what predicts marathon performance. As long as they compared grandma's VO2 to an Olympic marathoner, it looked like oxygen delivery was the alpha and omega of distance running performance. Get that oxygen there and you are home free. Anaerobic became anaero-phobic for some, and in a way it was as if distances below the 3k/5k didn't exist.

Remember also that starting in mid 60's, up through the 80's there was much attention and debate about the "anaerobic" threshold, which of course turned out not to be anaerobic at all, not to be a threshold, not to be 4 mmol, and not to be a steady state. Ventilatory and lactate threshold were dissociated, and even worse, one fixed lactate value is about as good as another since the correlations turn out to be ~.98 or so. And worst of all, it turned out there is no steady state.

Eventually, scientists being scientists, the old ideas and orientations started getting knocked around pretty good -- as they should be. When Noakes and others pointed out that peak running velocity on a treadmill test was a much better predictor than any of the old school stuff, well that was pretty much the end of a paradigm. The v that tells you what's what in vV02peak is the little one, not the big one.

When you apply the old school paradigms to velocity-duration kinetics analysis for example, or the more current isolated muscle data on the cellular level, some real discrepancies pop up. Turned out the size principle wasn't even right, and FT muscle isnt so bad. The slow component of VO2 is also especially problematic since 1) it also has nothing to do with lactate and 2) it means more than one VO2peak pace. There was an effort to reconcile things somewhat with the critical velocity concept, but that turned out to be trouble too because CV turns out to be just about anything you want it to be, depending on how you look at it.

So here we are: you cannot read your vVO2peak from a formula given the wide individual variation. For one person it might be 3' pace and the other it might be 15' pace. My personal opinion is that what Daniels and others were calling VO2max pace 20+ years ago is the real critical velocity, the slowest speed that elicits 95-100% peak. What they called maximal lactate steady state is really just another asymptote in velocity-duration that corresponds roughly with 4 mmol velocity, but which is not 4mmol, can be higher or lower, and in reality is anything but a steady state.

If you are a runner or a coach you can let go of some of these old ideas and you'll be fine. You still want some volume, you still want frequency, you still want intensity, and you still want recovery. Bowerman was right, even when he was talking about raising chickens: you still have to find your own way. That could mean throwing away 98% of what you thought was right.

Holy crap, that post just rocked my world. Good info there. Thanks, ds.

Go Dreux GO

dsrunner, may I ask who you are or at least get some of your background? Whether what you say is true or not I don't know, but it sure is interesting and you seem very knowledgeable. I'd just like to know how you have arrived at your ideas (facts?).

Guppy wrote:

dsrunner, may I ask who you are or at least get some of your background? Whether what you say is true or not I don't know, but it sure is interesting and you seem very knowledgeable. I'd just like to know how you have arrived at your ideas (facts?).

I think he read the book

Bump. dsrunner, where would you suggest starting for someone who wants to filter out all the outdated information out there? I have 4 different books on my desk that say 4 different things about the "lactate threshold" and if your post above holds water they are ALL wrong.

The great thing about dsrunner is that the concepts written are/seem wholistic in nature (and thus to some people a priori flaky) but brought forward with extreme clarity and pragmatism. I like that. Worth experimenting.

After minimalism edging surplus technology, it might just be the turn of analogue runners outdoing their digitally driven counterparts...

Vigil uses an athlete's best mile time as their vVO2max, while Daniels would lean more toward (as stated earlier) 3k pace, and still others (like Joe Rubio) use closer to 5k pace (which Joe does not to be in line with science per se, but to avoid injury).

Pick your poison.

The whole topic reminds me of those whisper things that 5th graders pass around the room to see how distorted the original statment can get. So often a very specific value is identified amd over time various individuals apply their own definition to that term. I came up with the term vVO2max and have watched it become different things to different people. I stick with my original definition and feel perfectly happy about what I think it represents. It does get a bit tiring to have to explain it numerous times. Anyone interested in my explnation should feel free to email jack.daniels@nau.edu and sorry if someone you think more highly of has distorted the true meaning, because that means they did not get it right.

jtupper wrote:

The whole topic reminds me of those whisper things that 5th graders pass around the room to see how distorted the original statment can get. So often a very specific value is identified amd over time various individuals apply their own definition to that term. I came up with the term vVO2max and have watched it become different things to different people. I stick with my original definition and feel perfectly happy about what I think it represents. It does get a bit tiring to have to explain it numerous times. Anyone interested in my explnation should feel free to email

jack.daniels@nau.edu

and sorry if someone you think more highly of has distorted the true meaning, because that means they did not get it right.

This is why I asked dsrunner to please give some background on his knowledge and ideas. I find what he's said about different training on here interesting, but I never assumed it made the "old" information outdated or wrong. Out of all the books and articles I've read about running, DRF is the most clear and complete, and it REALLY helped me improve my training. It is always nice, however, to see other ideas, regardless of whether they're right or wrong.

dsrunner is similar to most of the democrats running for president.

They are real good at pointing out what they think others have done wrong but offer little or no real ideas on how things should be done.

jtupper - thank you for all your work for the betterment of distance running. I for one appreciate everything you have done. (and I hope the arm is healing nicely!)

I am thinking the 6 minutes comes from Veronique Billat's work where she found that average pace for all out 6 minute runs links nicely with the minimal velocity needed to elicit VO2max. Makes sense really and she has at least some sets of data (and published papers) to back it up.

I'm looking at the following by Joe Vigil and trying to determine what pace I would do these at, except I can't figure out what to use for my vVO2. In some ways his paces are conservative, but then I've heard that Vigil uses a 6 minute time trial whereas others would use 8-11 minute time trials to determine these things, in which case Vigil's paces aren't actually conservative. How do you think I should calculate vVO2 for these workouts?

Training Intensities:

Basic Speed/Power: From 60 to 100 up to 400M speed endurance. Below 200M, all out at 300-400M race pace early. Then pick up pace with each repetition. This workout aids in the development of running form, running mechanics and event-specific running economy.

Lactate Threshold: Training runs of 20-60 minutes at 85-87% of HR or 85-87% of vVO2 aids in developing a high level of aerobic threshold.

High-End Aerobic Endurance: Endurance training at 70-80% of maximum HR or 75-80% of vVO2. The duration of runs should be 30 minutes to three hours. The runs should be on soft surfaces and hills. Negative split effort is most desirable.

MVO2: Development of maximum volume of oxygen at 90-95% HR or 90% of vVO2. Three minutes to eight-ten minute duration or repetitions of 800, 1K, 2K and 3K. We use two minute intervals between repetitions at sea level and three minutes at altitude. These runs develop peripheral training adaptations, increase fat metabolism, increase concentration of aerobic enzymes, mitochondria and capillarization.

Recovery: Low intensity runs 25-30 BPM below lactate threshold HR. The runs are from 45 minutes 1 hour 20 minutes and can be run both in the AM and PM. It promotes recovery following high intensity workouts. This run energizes the athlete for the next hard workout.

http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_1/the-anatomy-of-a-medal.shtml

(Can't find a version with Table 2 anymore.)

Yes, the 6-minute value came from Billat, et al. That value was established using treadmill data. First, she put highly fit runners in a treadmill and they ran faster and faster (she and her colleagues tried 2 minutes and 1 minute ramp increases). Then, the speed used during that ramp that elicited V-O2 max was used for subsequent testing. Later, after a recovery period (I'd have to look it up, but I think it was 72 hours), the same subjects ran on the treadmill again. The second time they used the speed (velocity) that elicited V-O2 max, and the objective was to run as long as possible at that speed. It turned out that the average was approximately 6-minutes for people who (if I recall correctly) used the 2-minute ramp increases and less (less time) for those who had used the 1-minute ramp increases.

Note, other research, seldom talked about, done by Billat and her team used a track for the follow-up test, in which case runners averaged about 6:42/6:43 (they repeated the tests to see if the results were reliable, and they sure were!).

Much depends upon the protocol used in the first test, in my view. If you use 3-minute ramp increases, I suspect that the speed (velocity) determined from that ramp test will be one that is held for a longer time-frame, and thus closer to what jtupper uses. I tested just 4 runners this way, while I was in graduate school (and myself) and found that the average time held was 8:41 (but the range was 7:12 to 9:52). But, what I wonder, if I had used a faster initial speed for the test and higher incremental changes in speed, would the results be different? I am sure it would be. Many possibilities!

Thanks for the response, Tinman.

It makes it interesting to wonder if coaches have their athletes running at different % vVO2 only to find that they're basically telling their athletes to do the same thing after considering the different ways they calculated it. This makes it difficult as an objective outsider to try and match the desired effort.

(I'm trying to extend tempo duration at the right effort over several months, but am finding it tricky to map a progressive plan.)

To the OP.......right now the hot topic of vVo2 is coming from Billet and the vVo2 training off of a 6 minute time trial. The research in this matter was that you could improve running economy, Lactate threshold and hence VO2 max by running at what is considered your velocity at max VO2.....

Now you can take your mile time and do the math to find out how many meters per second you are running. I have done that and then went out and performed the 30/30 Billet workout a few times and it seemed like a great workout and over 3 weeks really jump started some good training. I think estimating your vVo2 off of 3k times is too slow.

So Billet explains how to calculate your vVo2 pace and the workouts to improve it. What is the frequency that someone might do these workouts? Every third day? Less because of tlimvVo2 workouts also during the cycle?

I dunno squat wrote:

So Billet explains how to calculate your vVo2 pace and the workouts to improve it. What is the frequency that someone might do these workouts? Every third day? Less because of tlimvVo2 workouts also during the cycle?

Calculating the running velocity that you hit during a mile race isnt hard. Take total seconds and divide by meters ran. Multiply meters per seconds by how long you want to run (in Billet's first workout its 30 seconds) and that tells you how far your repeats will be. The interval time is 30 seconds of jogging.

These Billet workouts are done till exhaustion so I would only do it once every 7-14 days. If you are wanting to jump start a training program and move into different phases of training I would only do 3 weeks of these (anaerobic LT only takes 4 weeks to reach)

So 3 weeks of the Billet 30/30 workout and then either move into a 45/45 or 60/60 workout.....maybe even at that point move into just straight repeats at a certain distance like 400's/600's etc...