I think I understand the difference between VO2max and vVO2max but...

Citizen Runner wrote:

As Guppy says you should read Daniels since the concept of vVO2max as a basis for training is his thesis. The concept is that there are "optimum" paces for training specific physiological parameters that are correlated with running performance and that these paces are proportional to vVO2max.

As a short direct answer to your questions per (my interpretation of) Daniels.

1) Optimal pace for VO2max development is Daniels "I pace" which is vVO2max pace or the pace that one can race for about 10 minutes all out.

2) Daniels prescribes "I pace" workouts nominally as 3 to 5 minute repeats with approximately equal recovery time.

3) Daniels 5-10k training template has emphasis on "I pace" workouts in the 3rd of 4 phases, but they are done in phase 4 as well.

Daniels coined the term Velocity at VO2max vVO2max. However you should be aware that he has ignored the neuroscience of running because it was not his field.

But if you are going to write training prescriptions based on physiology and a book based on these prescriptions, to ignore the entired field of how the nervous system controls all movement.... well that is just plain ignorance.

However since most other well know exercise physiologists do the same, it is considered quite normal. This is not an acceptable situation.

When you train the Daniels way, you are training a wrong way, because you can't judge your effort by mathematical formulae and to suggest otherwise is stupidity and a recipe for over training.

S. Canaday wrote:

vVo2max takes Running Economy into account...which is the real key....and more variable.

And what inluences that variability?

I want to see if you've been paying attention Sage?

Jon Orange wrote:

. . . to ignore the entired field of how the nervous system controls all movement.... well that is just plain ignorance.

I don't think that he has entirely. Witness his discussions of running economy, justification for "R pace" workouts, and his emphasis on stride rate. You, of course, are entitled to your opinion.

Emphasis on stride rate? That is not a good strategy. You don't improve by increasing your stride rate, it is the other way round. As JD himself has pointed out, your natural stride rate is the most economical.

I will give him credit where it's due because I am one of the very few people who has actually studied and appreciates his research.

Thanks for your answer, Jon.

[Btw, my second post came across much more negative than I intended it to be. I just hoped that you would answer quick.]

Pawback is when your foot and leg already go backward before stancephase so that at the end of the recovery phase you hit the ground with a lot of pre-tension and can really 'slam' your feet into the ground and backward underneath your hips.

Like this:

Would you say that this guy makes good use of the elastic potential?

This one is very exaggerated but it does show what I mean by pawback. Of course this technique is too inefficient for distance running.

Jon Orange wrote:

And what inluences that variability?

I want to see if you've been paying attention Sage?

Sage's answer to everything is muscle fiber's, or muscle fiber tension

VO2max (more properly VO2peak) is not the same as vVO2.

More importantly more than one pace elicits VO2peak; the measure

is also strongly protocol dependent.

No one set running duration is applicable to all athletes. One athletes might

reach highest uptake at the end of 700m or 1000m test, another might be 5000m. And even then all this will vary some day to day.

Though the concept was well intended, running economy is a tad outdated at this point. A multitude of evidence collected demonstrates it can be dissociated from distance running performance.

My reccomedation is not the same as that technique.

What I am suggesting is that you make a conscious push off that has an extra stretching effect on the muslces and tendons of the feet, so you give yourself an extra flinging motion in your stride. Then after a few weeks, you forget about doing it and it happens subconsciously, because you have increased the strength, range of motion and timing of the technique enough for it to be part of your natural stride.

The important point here is that the feet are overlooked in most of the training advice given out, when in fact it's impossible to race well without well developed power and fatigue resistance in your feet, but it's possible to train and race with weak feet for years without realising it. So the solution is to consciously practice and develop a more efficient technique.

The little 'v' is for 'velocity' as some have said. VO2max can improve, to a point, and that can be accomplished with short intervals with short rest or with longer intervals requiring longer rest. Intensity (90%-100%) and durations (1:1 work/recovery) are important, so is the intensity of the recovery interval. Short intervals also are good for improving running economy, which Daniels recommends, and are important for racing faster for longer. Training at lactate threshold [LT] (tempos) helps to shift the lactate curve to the right, so one can race at a faster speed before lactate becomes an issue. So improving LT and economy improve performance even when VO2max has plateaued.

A point worth mentioning is what Drew Hunter's coach recently emphasized, avoiding 'going to the well'. Longer VO2max intervals can be tough to do and are hard on the body, employ them carefully.

Orange has a point, but a limited one, it is not all about the feet. There are other tendons and mechanisms that contribute to a kangaroo like storing and releasing of energy, and neuro pathways are important. An analogy is a free throw or 3-pointer: if you just flicked your fingers, good luck getting the ball to the hoop, but when the motion is coordinated from the feet through the body to the fingers ... easy. All those joints, tendons, and neuro pathways contribute to moving the ball. Runners have different body types and strides, messing with natural stride, other than gains through flexibility and power, in my opinion, is dicey.

Well muscle fiber characteristics/adaptation is a big one...neuromuscular coordination...fine tuning form etc.I only highlighted this difference because "pure Vo2max" of course for a runner could be measured on a bike or rowing machine (not accurate or specific). Running Economy is distance running is a variable we can continue to increase as we age (unlike pure Vo2max).More importantly (if you are a distance runner 10km-marathon) what is even better and a more specific metric to focus on is probably velocity at Lactate Threshold, (MLSS), and Aerobic Threshold. As far as stride rate goes...most faster runners seem to naturally select a cadence in the 170-190 step/min range for racing/faster workouts (5km to marathon).It's slower runners/beginners and ultra-trail runners that seem to struggle with stride rates dipping into the 160s-150s. Sloppy form (I do it personally and it hurt my marathons this past year). On a flat road at marathon pace that is probably not most economical for them.So if they do a workout like 12 x 400m at 3km pace with a 1:30 rest....they can work on specific economy.But yeah, the variable for faster runners (stride rate being constant) is the ability of power/strength length and a cardiovascular system (pure Vo2max) that can support that workload.

Jon Orange wrote:

S. Canaday wrote:

vVo2max takes Running Economy into account...which is the real key....and more variable.

And what inluences that variability?

I want to see if you've been paying attention Sage?

to correct my typos from above:

" Running Economy IN distance running is a variable we can continue to increase as we age (unlike pure Vo2max)."

and:

"But yeah, the variable for faster runners (stride rate being constant) is the ability of power/strength of ACTUAL STRIDE length and a cardiovascular system (pure Vo2max) that can support that work output."

Letsrunners shouldn't post about things they know sh't about.

That's all.

somebloke wrote:

Letsrunners shouldn't post about things they know sh't about.

That's all.

Then 99% of all threads will disappear...

You are technically incorrect in saying the heart does not change in size. It does actually,cardiologist's call it an enlarged heart or athletic heart.

Like any muscle in your body, work and applied effort against a specific muscle will cause it to strengthen and enlarge itself to power the additional workload you are stressing on it. A more obvious visual would be a body builder,the heart responds in somewhat the same way.

Mechanics as you indicate are a part of the total package but not the critical absolute end in which you describe. Great efficiency mechanically may allow you to train harder injury free and race faster but the premise is physiologically based on your cardiovascular engine and how it is trained up to maximize its capability for one to run faster.VO2max is just a simple measurement not an absolute determiner of anything.

I believe most gains in stroke volume can be made in the Left Ventricle...some swelling, but larger blood volume moved faster from a more forceful pump would help pure Vo2max. But (as Jon Orange hinted...not directly) it's kind of a limiting factor with age/training age.

And of course max HR goes down with age...so Vo2max is very limited and the additional stroke volume can only do some much with a lower max HR.

Gains in capillary bed density and mitochondria size/density as well as muscle fiber "conversion" (i.e. FT becoming more like oxidative ST) seem to be more key parameters that allow for future gains in Running Economy...which may increase vVo2max and VELOCITY at Lactate Threshold without actual pure Vo2max increasing. Actually those all could very well happen with pure Vo2max declining with age.

Thanks.

What I try to do myself is to make my ground contact time as short as possible. So that Im already pushing off when my foot hits the ground [at least as a mental cue... in reality there is of course a "transition"/time from first ground contact to push off]

Like your example of hopping in place I try to just bounce of the ground on the balls of my feet. Like hopping on a pogo stick your body is pre-tensed in anticipation of landing and ready to comress the stick as much as possible. Then when the stick is maximally compressed you tense up your feet and legs even more and the stick extends and you are "launched" into the air.

Is that like the flinging motion you talk about?

Your hear won't develop any more is you are training regularly. That only applies to people who are untrained.

Almost. To get maximum benefit from your feet they have to bend in a kind of wave motion, so you get extra propulsion added to the push off, a more springy motion. Combining this with trying to perfect the timing of the movements, we can all make great improvements in speed endurance. This is really the difference betwenn ordinary runners and the very fastest runners, they have much superior bio-mechanics. And this is all free energy. So the potential is there for almost every runner.

Not dicey at all. Look what Salazar has done with Mary Cain.