On the lactate test he is running 5.12 mile pace from 25-30 minutes at 3.4 mmol. Therefore, one would presume is actual lactate threshold of 4.0 mmol is somewhere in the region of 5 minutes to 5.05 per mile.
On the lactate test he is running 5.12 mile pace from 25-30 minutes at 3.4 mmol. Therefore, one would presume is actual lactate threshold of 4.0 mmol is somewhere in the region of 5 minutes to 5.05 per mile.
Barakus Obama wrote:
Cam wrote:Average guy is low-mid 40s. Cam is at least 63.
Bjørn Erlend Dæhlie is a freak XC skiier who tested out of competition at 96, his coach estimates him to be 100 at his peak.
Since this forum doesnt support scandinavian letters:
*Bjoern Daehli
Thanks. Shoulda said:
Yorn desh born, der ritt de gitt der gue,
Orn desh, dee born desh, de umn bork! bork! bork!
HardLoper wrote:
thelogistician wrote:What is "RE" and why is a 1500/mile PR the "most specific marker"? Not calling you out, I genuinely would like to know.
Running economy = VO2 divided by speed... By my calculations he was consistently around 190 mL/kg/km
Very confused about this. Wouldn't less O2 uptake with greater speed imply greater efficiency?
Paula Ivan is Romanian, says she's Russian.
Hardloper was mostly right...running economy is VO2 AT a specific speed. Not divided by it. So running economy is measured is units of mL/kg/min. Dividing VO2 by the speed would give you SMALLER numbers for someone who is more economical - which is why you are rightly confused. So, you are right- smaller VO2 at a given speed implies greater economy (actually, it defines it.)
lt and vowho wrote:
From his Instagram:
http://instagram.com/p/yxExYCPB0p/I'm not an expert when it comes to these results, but doesn't 73 seem low to people for a 13:16 guy? And looks like he was going faster than he should have in that Flotrack Workout!
The protocol they used for LT was inappropriate- it should have lasted longer. There is no clear inflection point. It looks like lactate conc is about to jump up, at a faster speed, but we'll never know. Also, the stages didn't have to be 5 min in duration if you just want LT data. I guess they were also evaluating economy, in which case, 5 min is good, but if you're gonna do that, use more stages if you also want LT data. Maybe they didn't want to have him on the tmill for more than 30 min. If so, don't try to cram all the tests into one. It's poor science. I would think the lab director at Chula Vista would know better.
I don't blame those of you who are slamming exercise science, but trust me- there are labs who get it right consistently. But there are some bad apples.
How has no one noticed his max heart rate? 203 bpm is stupid high. Most elite trained endurance athletes can't reach as high of a max heart rate as an untrained person, and 203 would be high for an untrained individual, especially someone who is his age (29 years old). I have a hard time believing that is an accurate measurement. I would anticipate something closer to 185
That's not so unusual...there is little difference in age-matched max heart rate between a trained and untrained person. Don't put much stock into that "220-age" estimate. It is very unreliable. I have seen 40-year-olds with a max HR of 200.
college soph wrote:
HardLoper wrote:Running economy = VO2 divided by speed... By my calculations he was consistently around 190 mL/kg/km
Very confused about this. Wouldn't less O2 uptake with greater speed imply greater efficiency?
Right, lower = better economy, those are the units it is normally expressed in. According to old posts on here by Jack Daniels the "best" he ever measured was Jeff Wells 162 mL/kg/km, followed by Alberto Salazar 164 mL/kg/km. He measured Frank Shorter at 192 ml/kg/km. Frank Shorter = 190 and Galen Rupp supposedly = 195, but it's probably only worth comparing running economy values for the same runner.
HardLoper wrote:
college soph wrote:Very confused about this. Wouldn't less O2 uptake with greater speed imply greater efficiency?
Right, lower = better economy, those are the units it is normally expressed in. According to old posts on here by Jack Daniels the "best" he ever measured was Jeff Wells 162 mL/kg/km, followed by Alberto Salazar 164 mL/kg/km. He measured Frank Shorter at 192 ml/kg/km. Frank Shorter = 190 and Galen Rupp supposedly = 195, but it's probably only worth comparing running economy values for the same runner.
Your last sentence summarized everything important about physiological tests. Use the data, along with the more important race times, and compare it to future data. Comparing to other individuals is a goose hunt. These tests are good at making general assumptions about large populations and they can be used as specific data points on an individual level.
Alan
Paula Ivan was not Russian.
Woodchopper wrote:
On the lactate test he is running 5.12 mile pace from 25-30 minutes at 3.4 mmol. Therefore, one would presume is actual lactate threshold of 4.0 mmol is somewhere in the region of 5 minutes to 5.05 per mile.
I'm not sure where he is getting 5:20 mile pace for his threshold. Maybe he transposed a few number when typing and meant 5:02?
The lactate test didn't go high enough to get to 4.0 mmol, which is the accepted value for the lactate threshold. All of the tests I have administered we try to take it to 5-6 or even higher. Ideally you should go to exhaustion, and take samples and increase pace every 3-4 minutes.
Vo2 max is useless, because it doesn't tell you anything on its own.
What is impressive is that his lactate threshold is at or above 80% of his Vo2 max. (depending on exactly where it is)
Just by the protocol used you can see that the "scientist" in charge of the testing is absolutely clueless.
Kind of rough on Galloway. I think his methods are probably ok for runners who are trying to avoid pain but still complete distance goals.
An interesting point here is that Galloway's marathon PR was 2:16 (that used to make an olympic team!) but Grete Waitz' PR was 2:24.
Given the VO2 max numbers, I would conclude that either 1) VO2 max is no good for predicting marathon performance or 2) there is something about men that makes them better at the marathon and it is not the cardiovascular system or 3) women except Paula Radcliffe are underperforming in the marathon.
If you look on the comments on the instagram picture. He says he did both tests on the same day and the way he says it implies he did the max test prior to the lactate submax test. Therefore his lactates are likely much higher due to being tired from the earlier effort. That would be like running a 3k race and trying to determine his threshold later in the day. Also not sure where everyone is getting that 4mmol is your threshold? It is not. It is used to determine your current 10k fitness for some people (depending on the shape of your lactate curve). 3mmol is the high end of threshold for most. Also dont really understand the 1% grade of the treadmill. I guess its supposed to make up for the lack of wind resistance. Ive never seen it done personally in tests Ive helped conduct. Another thing to consider is the type of treadmill. Woodways are typically softer so less energy return than a more traditional belt treadmill
Some people here really don't have practical experience.
That his lab LT (I call it "lab LT" because often the measures in the lab are somewhat diffenet from running outside, idk why, perhaps bc of the treadmill running) is 5:23 and his VO2max at 73 wouldn't make you wonder if you knew enough datas from elites. I always laugh when everyone thinks that all good runners have 80+ VO2max or 2,0 mmols lactate after a 8 x mile at 4:40 pace without tapering ;)
Oh, and with LT in my post I meant "2-3 mmol speed", so aerobic Threshold if you want. Really: 5:20ish looks ok when you have some background. Not crazy good, but ok. I have done a couple tests like this and have seen the results from some faster guys and that could be for a speed based runner.
Only thing I don't understand is: Sometimes relatively "slow" runners have exceptional thresholds in the lab but get smoked in every distance, even half marathons or marathons by the "faster" people like Torrence. I really think that some people must be able to run at MUCH higher lactate values than 2 or 4 mmol for quite some time.