Jack Daniels the Overestimator

They're just estimates. Lots of other factors affect performance. I wouldn't worry about it.

Thanks,

but it isn't exactly worrying stuff!! It would just mean I would have to adjust my workouts to get full effect of my vo2 max.

perhaps i'm too kind to myself on the easy runs?

perhaps i need to do more stuff in the weight room?

What i'd especially like to know is this; Were my better performances in march/april due to a higher VO2 max or better efficiency?? (I'd been running 100km/w for for about 12-16 weeks)

I might try to keep testing myself once every two months for the future to keep track of this, then again test results don't really matter unless they're converted on the track.

What JD's table could do is point out to me that i am too weak in other areas, which i need to work on to get up to the level where I want it to be.

As you age your VO2 max will decline. But you can still improve your performances because you can improve speed endurance.

So yes you can put it down to better efficiency.

When you start to approach Gebreselassie levels of speed endurance, let us know and we will help you find the right races and accomodation.

VDot is not VO2max. The website you linked treats them as equivalent, but Daniels very clearly states in his books that this is not the case. If you are faster this year than last then by definition your VDot went up.

well I'm a couple of years off 30 yet so don't think age comes too heavily into it. More of a problem that i wasted the first half of my 20's being fat and unfit i'm afraid.

So what to do to improve speed endurance? do i run 40 x 200m with short rest (30-45 secs)? Or 12x400 with longer (for example 3min) rest? Or or or what??

All that stuff is a joke and nothing to do with real running.

what's the difference then? It just seems to me that Vdot is another word for estimated vo2 max?

All that stuff is a joke and nothing to do with real running.

__________________________________

Really!?! Daniels has been studying the art & science of running for over 30 years. Just because you own a pair of running shoes & have a subscription to Running Times does NOT make you an expert!

Take a look at the people he's coached! Take a look at his research! What have you done!?!

I'll take Daniels studies, research, & understanding & explanation over some random poster on a website.

hereforalaugh wrote:

well I'm a couple of years off 30 yet so don't think age comes too heavily into it. More of a problem that i wasted the first half of my 20's being fat and unfit i'm afraid.

So what to do to improve speed endurance? do i run 40 x 200m with short rest (30-45 secs)? Or 12x400 with longer (for example 3min) rest? Or or or what??

You are 28, your VO2 max peaked when you stopped growing a few years ago. You can expect a slight decline.

For a more accurate figure, you need to look at absolute VO2, that is your actual oxygen uptake measured in liters per minute and compare this to previous figures.

Whatever the numbers, don't worry, with the right training you can carry on improving for many years.

hereforalaugh wrote:

what's the difference then? It just seems to me that Vdot is another word for estimated vo2 max?

VO2max is a direct measurement of the rate of maximum oxygen consumption during a particular exercise modality (i.e. running). VDot is performance based measurement of running fitness, that is, you run a race of some distance to determine VDot which can be used in turn to predict performance at other race distance or to prescribe appropriate training paces. VDot can be considered a function of VO2max and other factors such as running economy, thus is possible for one's VO2max to stay about the same (as it has in your case) while other factors improve (running economy) so that you get faster. Daniels does not advocate training based on VO2max testing, rather it is a performance/pace-based system.

This is explained in "Daniels Running Formula", which I think is worth reading, but there's a short synopsis of the Daniels method here:

Citizen Runner wrote:

VDot is not VO2max. The website you linked treats them as equivalent, but Daniels very clearly states in his books that this is not the case. If you are faster this year than last then by definition your VDot went up.

So why have a Vdot figure at all? If the numbers don't accurately reflect improvements in speed endurance measured agains actual VO2 max figures?

The whole Vdot concept is rendered meaningless by the number of physiological variables.

Yes we know Vdot is not VO2 max. However, a young distance runner with a large muscle mass is going to have a much higher VO2 max than an older distance runner with a smaller muscle mass, regardless of performance levels.

This renders the pseudo VO2 max (Daniels' words) of Vdot rather meaningless, and gives a false impression to the reader. The whole ' long term aerobic development' concept is physiologically unsound.

wellnow wrote:

So why have a Vdot figure at all? If the numbers don't accurately reflect improvements in speed endurance measured agains actual VO2 max figures?

VO2max doesn't directly correlate to running performance, as you well know. The better question is why VO2max should enter into a discussion of training methods.

The whole Vdot concept is rendered meaningless by the number of physiological variables.

Neither I nor Daniels would claim that his methods are the last word on training, but it's a framework that has been used successfully by large numbers of runners and coaches. Because it is a formulatic approach that requires no equipment beyond a stopwatch and a track, it's relatively easy for inexperienced/uncoached runners to follow. On the other hand, this lack of vagueness allows for critics to easily (and often wrongly by people who ought to know better) snipe at its shortcomings.

Dear God PLEASE dont get Wellnow started again. He loves to see his thoughts in print.

I'll take issue to some degree that Vo2max does not correlate with performance. If you take a small homogeneous group (say college D1 distance runners), then the relationship is not good. However, in a large population (say the entire college) you will find a good correlation.

VDOT assumes everyone has the same economy which makes it different from the actual measurement of VO2max.

You can estimate VO2max with several field tests.

Fair point. Rather than saying "VO2max does not correlate with performance" a more correct statement might be "VO2max does not accurately predict performance in an individual".

VDOT is not Vo2Max!!!!!

Daniels maybe should have called it "point level" because that is what it is used as.

Jack never says its is VO2 max and actually points out it isn't VO2 max, yet yahoos like you can't seem to read well enough to tell this and instead come on here and disparage Daniels for things he didn't say and wrong assumptions you make.

Go ahead and apologize for being so rude out of your own ignorance, to someone who has done so much for the sport.

Dr. Jack.... sorry there are morons like this who insist on posting this crap.

TupperUpper wrote:

Dear God PLEASE dont get Wellnow started again. He loves to see his thoughts in print.

You are one of the majority who doesn't understand how 'aerobic development' has been mythologized.

You are probably also unaware that Daniels' own research contradicts this myth.

You are surely unaware that his Vdot concept also contradicts his own research.

TupperUpper wrote:

Dear God PLEASE dont get Wellnow started again. He loves to see his thoughts in print.

wellnow wrote:

You are one of the majority who doesn't understand how 'aerobic development' has been mythologized.

You are probably also unaware that Daniels' own research contradicts this myth.

You are surely unaware that his Vdot concept also contradicts his own research.

Daniels faked the moon landing and controls your brain with fluorinated water.

He crossed the Loch Ness Monster and the Sasquatch to create the Lochsquatch.

You obviously don't understand his conspiracy to obfuscate physiology and undermine your training.