I would have to disagree that VO2max is over-rated. It is an awesome tool to know potential, however getting the athlete to perform at or near VO2max is the critical key. In fact, I would rather use the term VO2peak, which is becoming more widely used in the scientific world because "max" may be a misnomer at the time of testing. Meaning, that the values achieved during that one particular test indicate their "peak" for that day, but not necessarily their max.
I would say that those percentages are pretty close for near-elite athletes. The real key isn't truly what their "max", but their lactate threshold. The longer the race the more time that you have for lactate to build up to the point of physiologically needing to slow down in order to clear it out. You also have other factors that would induce fatigue, in that theoretically you may be able to clear lactate at 90% of your VO2max/peak, but the race is long enough that neurological fatigue could occur, dehydration could set in (will also affect threshold), physical changes (cross bridge breakdown, etc..).
Again, If given a choice I would rather have a runner that has a VO2max/peak of 80 compared to a 70 or 60, because I would hope that I could train all of them to run at 90% of their peak and the runner with the greatest potential would end up being the best. However, we all know that the most-gifted aren't always the best because the athlete with the 70, 60 ml/kg/min VO2 may be willing to work harder, train better, adapt better, etc...
Just my 2 cents
Catch you later...