ric_stern/RST comment please- VO2 max

Quadsweep said:

I come from a running background and I am fairly new to cycling.

As a runner I was taught to never run VO2 max intervals all out.

<snip>

When doing VO2 max intervals on the bike, without a power meter, I was told by a very good rider(national champ) to just do them all out for the time specified.

And here is a quote from multiple national tt champ Jane Gagne."Basically you ride as hard as you can to complete the interval"
Would you concur with this advice? It seems to "fly in the face" of the advice given by exercise physiologists and caoches that work with runers.

No it doesn't. Gagne says to maintain the max pace you can complete the interval. Since VO2 max intervals are typically 3-8 minutes long, that it clearly not an "all out" starting pace as you could never hold that for even 3 minutes. You should definitely feel strained, and pushing to hold the pace by the end of the interval, but that's still well below a 30s sprint pace.

Check out the tables at the end of this document for a good illustration of the typical power zones, expected adaptations, and example workouts to develop each adaptation. peakscoachinggroup.comPower Training Chapter.pdfOpen ↗

Quadsweep said:

What is the cyclist trying to accomplish with intervals of say 45 seconds to 2 minutes long at an intensity higher than he would use for a 5 minute interval?

And why, if doing longer intervals that are clearly for VO2 max improvement(3-6 minutes), would a cyclist ride harder in a 3 minute effort as compaired to a 5 or 6 minute effort ?

Let's see. Leadouts, bridging gaps, short hills, sprints etc, etc etc....

You can only compare running to bicycle time trialing, not bike racing. Bicycle racing is all about "moments" and has little to do with seeing if a pack can record some sort of time for a certain course, like a runner would for say a 10k race. Racing bikes comes down to who can recover from violent efforts best. You need to be able and to go again and again, and then maybe something for a sprint as well.

So my answer to why we might do shorter, more intense intervals, is for those very reasons.

I personally (almost) never do intervals of 1-5 minutes, as I get all I need out of the many group rides and races I will do throughout the year. If I was to try and do VO2max training by myself to often, burnout would come fast, as the mental anguish you must put yourself through is much easier done in a competitive situation.

Good question though. I expect we'll see plenty of similar responses to mine.

I'm a bit old-school and not up on the latest training theories.

I will say that the higher intensity/shorter duration intervals are valuable to a bicyclist for a few reasons. As was already mentioned a bike race consists of a lot of short, intense anaerobic hill climbs (depends on a lot on your terrain), and a lot of fast-reaction sprints when a crash occurs, everyone uses that opportunity to cull the herd. If you want to hold someone back from a breakaway, or be ready to go with it then you need a very powerful 30 second sprint followed by a period of maintaining maximal aerobic output.

And really you need to understand that going anaerobic isn't the enemy of aerobic capacity. Aerobic isn't anaerobic, but anaerobic is aerobic...meaning that all oxygen debt that you accumulate will need to be paid in full. You CAN and will improve your max VO2 through a training program that heavily utilizes anaerobic training.

frenchyge said:

No it doesn't. Gagne says to maintain the max pace you can complete the interval. Since VO2 max intervals are typically 3-8 minutes long, that it clearly not an "all out" starting pace as you could never hold that for even 3 minutes. You should definitely feel strained, and pushing to hold the pace by the end of the interval, but that's still well below a 30s sprint pace.

Check out the tables at the end of this document for a good illustration of the typical power zones, expected adaptations, and example workouts to develop each adaptation. peakscoachinggroup.comPower Training Chapter.pdfOpen ↗

Sorry I wasn't clear.
What I was trying to get across is that runners always run intervals at the speed that elicits 95-100% of VO2 max. So it's always your 3000-5000 meter race speed for ALL intervals be they 3 minute or 6 minute.

Lonnie Utah said:

Let's see. Leadouts, bridging gaps, short hills, sprints etc, etc etc....

The above are examples of efforts of 45 sec-2 minutes, except for sprinting. What I want to know is what the physiological purpose is in doing intervals of this duration. What do they do that a longer interval doesn't do?

Quadsweep said:

I come from a running background and I am fairly new to cycling.

As a runner I was taught to never run VO2 max intervals all out. We were taught to run very close to all out but not quite. We were taught to run at 95-100% of our VO2 max and a heart rate of 95-98% of our max. We gauged our efforts by perceived effort, time(if on a track) and heart rate. Heart rate was only used if we were fresh and not fatigued from our training week because we were aware that heart rate at all exercise intensities is depressed with fatigue. We were also aware that many other factors can effect heart rate.

We were taught to run all intervals at the same speed. It was taught that if we ran faster than 95-100% of our VO2 max we would not be providing as great a stimulus to the VO2 system for two reasons, and I quote."First when you run faster than VO2 max you increasingly use your anaerobic system, which stimulates that system to improve.......the other reason that running your intervals too fast provides less stimlus to improve VO2 max is that you simply can't do as much volume. Remember, the total volume of time accumulated at VO2max is what's important."Pete Pfitzinger national marathon champ and exercise physiologist.
I do not think that cyclists ride 3 minute intervals at the same speed/intensity as 5 minute intervals.??

When doing VO2 max intervals on the bike, without a power meter, I was told by a very good rider(national champ) to just do them all out for the time specified.

And here is a quote from multiple national tt champ Jane Gagne."Basically you ride as hard as you can to complete the interval"
Would you concur with this advice? It seems to "fly in the face" of the advice given by exercise physiologists and caoches that work with runers.

Runners(10k and up) do not believe in intervals below 3 minutes in duration. As mentioned above due to the short time that the body is near or at VO2 max with these intervals many more are required in order to stimulate an improvement in VO2 max. Distance runers(10k and up) run intervals 3-6 minutes long, and most favor 4-5 minutes, and a total of 20-30 minutes per session.

Would you concur with the above for VO2 max improvement reasons?

What is the cyclist trying to accomplish with intervals of say 45 seconds to 2 minutes long at an intensity higher than he would use for a 5 minute interval?

And why, if doing longer intervals that are clearly for VO2 max improvement(3-6 minutes), would a cyclist ride harder in a 3 minute effort as compaired to a 5 or 6 minute effort ?

Thank you for you comments.

Well, I'm not Ric, be we tend to agree on most things....
How to perform VO2max/MAP intervals is something of a matter of choice and what your training goals are, but I agree with your running coach and it's the approach that I *tend* to take with my clients. Cycling is an aerobic sport, and although starting a VO2max/MAP effort at a power output over the goal average will still primarily be an aerobic effort in the end, I do encourage a slight "ramping" sensation to such intervals while in training (to avoid any excessively hard starts to the intervals and to help achieve a greater volume of interval time). I also vary the duration of the VO2max/MAP intervals based on the cyclist and their goals as well.
As a few have mentioned, road cycling is a mix of steady state and stochastic power output, so intervals of all durations have their applications, depending on your goals and experience.

Quadsweep said:

The above are examples of efforts of 45 sec-2 minutes, except for sprinting. What I want to know is what the physiological purpose is in doing intervals of this duration. What do they do that a longer interval doesn't do?

Increases anaerobic capacity and muscle strength.

But beyond those 2 factors, your method of training for running will translate very well to cycling; especially if you are a triathlete training for time trials.

frenchyge

Thank you for the link as it has cleared things up for me as have the comments from others above, jyeager and Smartt/RST.

I see that the shorter intervals are targeting the anaerobic system. This is why distance runners do not do them unless they race in events under 5000 meters. In 5000 meters races a highly developed the VO2 system is what wins the race and in distances of 10,000 meters a combo of great VO2 and lactate threshold is what wins the race and in longer races it's a high Lactate threshold that wins the race.

A couple questions for you (and others).

Regarding the longer intervals(3-8 minutes) which are designed to increase VO2 max. Would you say that most road racers do the 3 minute interval faster than say a 6 minute interval and if so then why? The idea of these intervals is to do tham at a speed/intensity that is 95-100% of VO2 max so as to improve that system. Going faster/harder will target more of the anaerobic system and improve that system more than the VO2 system.

I have a good lactate threshold. I can hang with all but the best Cat 1-2 riders on rides that target lactate threshold.
I also have a decent sprint.
Muscle strength is not an issue either as I have big and strong legs for my size, which is why I left running in favor of cycling.:o

BUT I get dropped in the tough group ride in roughly the same spot each time. I hang with the best but after a series of short (about 6) tough hills I blow up, even though I feel pretty good but working very hard.

Between efforts the pace is still high, perhaps threshold pace for me, so after about 20 minutes of this I am dropped. So the issue is RECOVERY as I can produce the power to stay with them in their hammering until I blow up and then my power goes to [censored]🙄. This really upsets me as it rarely happened to me as a runner. I try to be smart and draft as much as possible when they are not jamming but to no avail!

Do you think I need to work more on VO2 max intervals or the shorter anaerobic type intervals?
Based on what I have said do you think I lack anaerobic fitness or VO2 max or BOTH😠
I have only been doing VO2 max intervals in training(4-5 minutes each and 20-25 minutes total). I have only been doing them for about 6-7 weeks once a week. I do most on a hill but some on my trainer at a higher cadence.

Thank you to all🙂

Quadsweep said:

frenchyge

BUT I get dropped in the tough group ride in roughly the same spot each time. I hang with the best but after a series of short (about 6) tough hills I blow up, even though I feel pretty good but working very hard.

Between efforts the pace is still high, perhaps threshold pace for me, so after about 20 minutes of this I am dropped. So the issue is RECOVERY as I can produce the power to stay with them in their hammering until I blow up and then my power goes to [censored]🙄....Based on what I have said do you think I lack anaerobic fitness or VO2 max or BOTH😠

Well, the indicator there ("short tough hills"😉 is that you don't have enough anaerobic capacity to survive these dips in to oxygen debt.
However, if the flat pace between these hills is at 100% of your aerobic capacity then there is no hope that you can survive any hills. But if the pace is 90% or less then you should be able to survivee these hills simply by increasing your anaerobic capacity.

A simple method is to sprint between telephone poles and using your cyclometer, ensure that you maintain a steady minimum pace between these intervals. (not just 2 poles, but a certain number of them)
For instance, if you average 20mph for your ride, throw in pole sprints at 30mph and make sure to keep that 20mph pace afterwards until recovered. At first that might be 5 minutes to recovery, but later you will be able to push that down to less time.

Also, climbing hills out of the saddle will accomplish the same thing as long as you maintain a decent pace after the hill.

When I was a serious competitive distance runner I forsook interval training because I was extremely prone to injury. I regret that now because I found out later in my athletic career how valuable anaerobic capacity can be to a distance runner, even a marathoner.
Like I said before, anaerobic is aerobic so this training will also serve to increase your VO2 max at the same time.

Quadsweep said:

Between efforts the pace is still high, perhaps threshold pace for me, so after about 20 minutes of this I am dropped. So the issue is RECOVERY as I can produce the power to stay with them in their hammering until I blow up and then my power goes to [censored]🙄. This really upsets me as it rarely happened to me as a runner. I try to be smart and draft as much as possible when they are not jamming but to no avail!

Recovery is part of the issue, but from what I understand LT fitness is the best indicator for that, so you should be on par with the 'big dogs' in that respect. The real issue, in my mind, is that their MAP (max aerobic power) is greater than yours, and so while they are hammering you into the ground, they are working at a lower percentage of their max power and are taxing their system less. That's why they can go through that effort repeatedly and eventually drop the weaker riders.

Quadsweep said:

Do you think I need to work more on VO2 max intervals or the shorter anaerobic type intervals?
Based on what I have said do you think I lack anaerobic fitness or VO2 max or BOTH😠
I have only been doing VO2 max intervals in training(4-5 minutes each and 20-25 minutes total). I have only been doing them for about 6-7 weeks once a week. I do most on a hill but some on my trainer at a higher cadence.

I think you need more VO2Max intervals. Keep in mind that it's not VO2Max directly, but *power at VO2Max* that dictates your ability to hold the pack during high efforts. You may have an exceptional VO2Max from your running, but you'll have to develop that into power on the bike. 4-5 min intervals going *as hard as you can maintain for that duration* should do the trick eventually.

Quadsweep said:

The above are examples of efforts of 45 sec-2 minutes, except for sprinting. What I want to know is what the physiological purpose is in doing intervals of this duration. What do they do that a longer interval doesn't do?

When short intervals are used, such as the range you are asking about, the logistics of the workout will completely alter the emphasis on energy systems and the power produced. However, when performed from a relatively recovered state, short, all-out intervals will develop the anaerobic glycolytic energy system. This certainly has applications to road cylcing that you won't find in 5k+ running races, but as others in this forum would submit, it's not as critical as many make it out to be.

Quadsweep said:

Regarding the longer intervals(3-8 minutes) which are designed to increase VO2 max. Would you say that most road racers do the 3 minute interval faster than say a 6 minute interval and if so then why? The idea of these intervals is to do tham at a speed/intensity that is 95-100% of VO2 max so as to improve that system. Going faster/harder will target more of the anaerobic system and improve that system more than the VO2 system.

1 comment that I forgot to mention:
Yes, a 3-min interval will be done at higher power than a 6-min interval. That does not mean that it is chiefly anaerobic though, as a 3-minute effort is still very much aerobic. A 3-min effort just allows you to get closer to that max aerobic power, since you don't have to hold it as long.

If you look at that chart again, you'll see that the anaerobic capacity training is done in the next higher power zone (level 6) at suggested intervals of 1 minute duration.

frenchyge said:

1 comment that I forgot to mention:
Yes, a 3-min interval will be done at higher power than a 6-min interval. That does not mean that it is chiefly anaerobic though, as a 3-minute effort is still very much aerobic. A 3-min effort just allows you to get closer to that max aerobic power, since you don't have to hold it as long.

If you look at that chart again, you'll see that the anaerobic capacity training is done in the next higher power zone (level 6) at suggested intervals of 1 minute duration.

Thank you again.

I think I should start including those hard 1 minute intervals like the example in the article link you gave me. Great stuff!

Smartt/RST said:

When short intervals are used, such as the range you are asking about, the logistics of the workout will completely alter the emphasis on energy systems and the power produced. However, when performed from a relatively recovered state, short, all-out intervals will develop the anaerobic glycolytic energy system. This certainly has applications to road cylcing that you won't find in 5k+ running races, but as others in this forum would submit, it's not as critical as many make it out to be.

Ric can you clearify.

Are you thus suggesting that those really tough short hills on my group ride are actually not really working the anaerobic system that much because the effors are not done from a recovered state?

So if that's the case then I would need to do more VO2 max workouts as power at VO2 max is probably more of the "issue". Would you concur? Remember, this same group does not drop me when we do LT rides and only the best are faster when we actually do planned TT efforts.

Quadsweep said:

I think I should start including those hard 1 minute intervals like the example in the article link you gave me. Great stuff!

Yep, that's a great article by the leading guru in power training and an occasional poster on this forum. 🙂

As I mentioned in post #12, I think VO2 intervals are where you should continue to focus your attention, as they will have a greater impact on developing your MAP.

Quadsweep said:

BUT I get dropped in the tough group ride in roughly the same spot each time. I hang with the best but after a series of short (about 6) tough hills I blow up, even though I feel pretty good but working very hard.

Between efforts the pace is still high, perhaps threshold pace for me, so after about 20 minutes of this I am dropped. So the issue is RECOVERY as I can produce the power to stay with them in their hammering until I blow up and then my power goes to [censored]🙄. This really upsets me as it rarely happened to me as a runner. I try to be smart and draft as much as possible when they are not jamming but to no avail!

Do you think I need to work more on VO2 max intervals or the shorter anaerobic type intervals?
Based on what I have said do you think I lack anaerobic fitness or VO2 max or BOTH😠

You mention repeated short hills over 20min: MAP and LT are the primary concerns here, with small amounts of anaerobic capacity to push over the hills. You have to realize that even if there are peaks and valleys of effort (that correspond to the peaks and valleys of these rolling hills) the effort is primarily aerobic if it's continued steadily over the course of 20min. The greater the recovery between efforts, the greater the anaerobic contribution.
I don't know how long you have been a cyclist now, but perhaps it's just that you are training with riders that have much more experience than you. You could soon alter your training program anyway, since it sounds like you have been doing the same intervals for some time now, and see how the long term progression works out for you.

Quadsweep said:

Ric can you clearify.

Are you thus suggesting that those really tough short hills on my group ride are actually not really working the anaerobic system that much because the effors are not done from a recovered state?

So if that's the case then I would need to do more VO2 max workouts as power at VO2 max is probably more of the "issue". Would you concur? Remember, this same group does not drop me when we do LT rides and only the best are faster when we actually do planned TT efforts.

Good comments from the others, but if I can add my two cents...

1. In cycling there is a fitness component that may be trained by short hard intervals that remains active and valuable over a 40km TT. As such there is a study where the protocol was (from memory) 30 seconds at 175%VO2max with 2 minutes at self-selected (low) recovery pace until either exhaustion or 15 intervals are completed, whichever comes first. This resulted in similar improvements in 40km TT time to VO2max intervals and was far better than the control group. In running intervals of this duration probably function differently and thus isn't trained this way - in particular it may be impossible to go at an equivalent running speed to 175% VO2max due to the inability of tendons and connective tissue to store sufficient elastic energy. That said, I have known marathoners who incorporate 400m and 800m intervals, and Tim Noakes theories suggest that in well trained endurance runners a component of pure speed that is largely neuromuscular is necessary. Anyway, in addition to the stochastic nature of the sport, there is an argument for doing these short intervals anyway. I believe the mechanism of the adaptation is likely to concern either one or both of buffering capacity against acidosis or neuromuscular recruitment patterns.

2. As far as getting dropped on group rides, it is possible that you still need to learn to find the sweet spots in the bunch. If you really have a higher LT than the riders there is a good chance you would be able to sit in and stay with them on all but the most aggressive hills. Tactics like drafting and sagging will help here. Ask about them in the forum...

3. There are actually two possibilities concerning always getting dropped in the same place. The first is that the power requirements remain the same but you fatigue, meaning I would prescribe L2/L3/L4 power work (according to RST zones). The second is that for some tactical or training reason the bunch surges here and there is a brief but very high power requirement to stay with them, in this case, I would suggest L5 and above workouts to combat the problem.

Corrections and concerns welcomed - an interesting discussion guys, sorry to jump in late.

Roadie_scum said:

1. In cycling there is a fitness component that may be trained by short hard intervals that remains active and valuable over a 40km TT. As such there is a study where the protocol was (from memory) 30 seconds at 175%VO2max with 2 minutes at self-selected (low) recovery pace until either exhaustion or 15 intervals are completed, whichever comes first. This resulted in similar improvements in 40km TT time to VO2max intervals and was far better than the control group. In running intervals of this duration probably function differently and thus isn't trained this way - in particular it may be impossible to go at an equivalent running speed to 175% VO2max due to the inability of tendons and connective tissue to store sufficient elastic energy. That said, I have known marathoners who incorporate 400m and 800m intervals, and Tim Noakes theories suggest that in well trained endurance runners a component of pure speed that is largely neuromuscular is necessary. Anyway, in addition to the stochastic nature of the sport, there is an argument for doing these short intervals anyway. I believe the mechanism of the adaptation is likely to concern either one or both of buffering capacity against acidosis or neuromuscular recruitment patterns.

Close....
ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗