VO2max test ramp rate

[J-V]

I figured I wouldn't dredge up an old thread that didn't answer my question anyway, so here we go: I recently did a VO2max test in an exercise physiology lab that used a ramp rate of 25w/2min. Any idea why they'd use that protocol? I can't believe I wouldn't have failed at a higher wattage if they'd used 25w/1 minute.

Also, if anyone knows of a good reference for interpreting the results (all aspects) of the VO2 max test, I'd be indebted for a reference.

Thanks!

Jeff

 

[Spunout]

They did what they did. Just do it the same when re-testing.

25w/1 minute ramps too fast, you would be doing a sprint without eliciting VO2 Max responses.

 

[tonyzackery]

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:zLhs2cgz6CsJ:faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/PeifferV3.doc+vo2max+of+pro+cyclists&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=42

Take a read of this study WRT ramp rates. 1min ramp will give you much higher power numbers than 3min ramp rate. Suppose 2min ramp will give you something in between. As mentioned, consistency of testing is the key to determine improvement. Further, appears Vo2max intervals (after the first interval) need not be as long (~1.5min) as currently thought (4-5min).

 

[J-V]

They did what they did. Just do it the same when re-testing. 25w/1 minute ramps too fast, you would be doing a sprint without eliciting VO2 Max responses.

So if 25w/1 min is too fast for VO2 max tests, wouldn't it also be too fast for the MAP test protocol that is often quoted around here? I could swear that 25w/1m is the most often suggested ramp rate, but it sounds like not using something like 25w/2m would overestimate one's MAP, would it not?

Take a read of this study WRT ramp rates. 1min ramp will give you much higher power numbers than 3min ramp rate. Suppose 2min ramp will give you something in between. As mentioned, consistency of testing is the key to determine improvement. Further, appears Vo2max intervals (after the first interval) need not be as long (~1.5min) as currently thought (4-5min).

Thanks for that link, read through it, interesting stuff. Maybe I missed it, but it seems they didn't get too specific about the optimal interval length for training VO2 max. It sounds like 90 seconds is the minimum to elicit the response in that specific system, so does that mean that 90 seconds is optimal (or most efficient, in this case)? Or is 2 minutes better?

The reason I ask is that the hill that I've been using in my neighborhood takes about 3.5 minutes, and if I'm wasting my time by starting at the bottom, it'd be great to know sooner than later...

Thanks for the responses!

-Jeff

 

[Alex Simmons]

A MAP test is not a VO2 Max test but you do elicit a state of VO2 Max during a MAP test.

The ramp rate used for testing MAP is part of the definition of MAP, i.e. the maximal 1-minute average power during a ramp test to exhaustion at a ramp rate of 15, 20 or 25W/min (or 5W per 20, 15 or 12 seconds) depending on category of rider being tested.

Yes the different rates will give slightly different result but that's not really a problem since:
- the purpose of the test is to set a benchmark for MAP & to set power based training levels
- you use the same test protocol each time
- the training levels set from such a test are broad enough and in fact overlap to some degree, such that relatively minor differences in MAP don't effect training presciption all that much

If you want to test VO2 Max, then do a VO2 Max test.

Likewise, if you want to test TT power, do a TT.

 

[J-V]

Thanks Alex, that helps.

-Jeff

 

[Simone@Italy]

Further, appears Vo2max intervals (after the first interval) need not be as long (~1.5min) as currently thought (4-5min).

How do you deduce that? What do you mean by "after the first interval"?

 

[tonyzackery]

How do you deduce that? What do you mean by "after the first interval"?

I presume you read the article, but the time references I made are particular to my training rx - YMMV. IOW, a Vo2max interval of 60% of Tmax is ~1.5mins for me. Further, as the article mentioned "the primary interval done at Pmax for 60% of Tmax may not end in the attainment of Vo2max, subsequent intervals would most likely reach Vo2max." This has been my experience, so my first interval is always 30s longer than subsequent intervals...Hope this helps you...

 

[daveryanwyoming]

...subsequent intervals would most likely reach Vo2max." ...

Reaching VO2 Max is the first step, but spending enough time up there to train VO2 Max is another question.

FWIW, I wouldn't structure training intervals for the minimum time it takes to elicit the physiological response you're targeting. IOW, even if you can reach VO2 Max in 90 seconds in your later efforts I would still target 3 or more minutes so that you actually get some training time at that intensity.

The commonly prescribed 3 to 5 minute L5 intervals assume 2.5 minutes to elicit the VO2 Max response, sounds like the response might come a bit quicker in later efforts which is cool but you'd still want to hold that effort for a bit.

-Dave

 

[tonyzackery]

Reaching VO2 Max is the first step, but spending enough time up there to train VO2 Max is another question. FWIW, I wouldn't structure training intervals for the minimum time it takes to elicit the physiological response you're targeting. IOW, even if you can reach VO2 Max in 90 seconds in your later efforts I would still target 3 or more minutes so that you actually get some training time at that intensity.

-Dave

There are varying camps on this aspect of which is most effective - duration at Vo2max or frequency of attaining Vo2max. I understand the camp you're in; I'm in the other camp. My lab test later this month will more than likely demonstrate that my training rx is effective for me...YMMV

 

[daveryanwyoming]

... I understand the camp you're in; I'm in the other camp. ...

Fair enough.

 

[rmur17]

1.5min for Vo2max?

I do some 'fun' efforts like that on the ergo at the end of a couple of weekly workouts this time of year. Main threshold/tempo work is done and I'm under no pressure to hit any targets.

Typically I'll do 3-5 reps on the ergo set @500W. 1:30 starting off and build that to 2:00 over a few w/o. Rest interval 3-3.5min (5-min cycle time) around 250W.

I do NOT feel like I'm even close to Vo2max during these intervals - not breathing that hard at the end - more of a longish spinup to hit some unused fibers than anything else.

I'm too much of a wimp to do any REAL Vo2max work!!

 

[tonyzackery]

^^
All you need is some ibuprofen, Rick .

 

[rmur17]

^^
All you need is some ibuprofen, Rick .

I gave that up in 2007 ...when it started to become a bit of a crutch for me.
Now I only take one if my sometimes dodgy left hip is paining.

Don't ask me to give up coffee though !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[doctorSpoc]

There are varying camps on this aspect of which is most effective - duration at Vo2max or frequency of attaining Vo2max. I understand the camp you're in; I'm in the other camp. My lab test later this month will more than likely demonstrate that my training rx is effective for me...YMMV

i'm with you here...

the thing with training VO2max that most people over complicate it.. VO2max training is really about eliciting the most minutes of exercise induced heavy breathing. the time after the interval heavy breathing, in oxygen debt counts in this as well.. so unlike other zones, it's not really about riding at power x for time x it's about.. how is it best from me to maximize my minutes of heavy breathing and that is going to be an individual thing physiologically as well as a individual thing preference wise as well...

 

[acoggan]

VO2max training is really about eliciting the most minutes of exercise induced heavy breathing. the time after the interval heavy breathing, in oxygen debt counts in this as well

I'm sorry, but I don't think that there is any scientific/physiological basis for such claims. First, even if you equate "heavy breathing" with exercising at/near VO2max, there are no experimental data to support the "time in zone" idea. Second, since VO2 (and probably much more importantly, cardiac output) drop much more rapidly following cessation/reduction in the intensity of exercise than ventilation, I can't see why one would assume that the latter contributes equally or even significantly to the training stimulus.

 

[swampy1970]

^^
All you need is some ibuprofen, Rick .

I think Rick must use something strong than that for the pain - maybe laughing gas.

500 watts and not out of breath? Are you on moose steroids?

 

[bubsy]

I think Rick must use something strong than that for the pain - maybe laughing gas.

500 watts and not out of breath? Are you on moose steroids?

Maybee Red Bull steriods

 

[J-V]

I'm sorry, but I don't think that there is any scientific/physiological basis for such claims. First, even if you equate "heavy breathing" with exercising at/near VO2max, there are no experimental data to support the "time in zone" idea. Second, since VO2 (and probably much more importantly, cardiac output) drop much more rapidly following cessation/reduction in the intensity of exercise than ventilation, I can't see why one would assume that the latter contributes equally or even significantly to the training stimulus.

I'm glad this thread has gone down this path, as that was going to be my next question: What is the ideal length of interval to train the VO2max system? I've been using 3.5 to 4 minutes, and I guess I want to make sure that I'm maximizing my training time, without killing myself unnecessarily.

My second question about this, which perhaps you can answer Dr. Coggan, revolves around the common consensus on how to determine your training zone (wattage) for this. It seems like we reference a percentage of FTP to determine our training zone, but why don't we use some percentage of our 5-min test value? Wouldn't it be more accurate, since we're referencing the specific system being trained?

Lastly, it would seem that training durations are always less than the 'interval' of the system being trained. For example, for FTP we start at 20 minutes and perhaps go up from there. VO2max (which I believe is generally believed to be 4-6 minutes?) training durations seem to be from 3 to 4 minutes from what I've seen. Of course I understand that in either case you can go toward the longer duration and still get the benefit of training, but what is the reason we use durations that are less than that of the system being trained? Is it simply that (as in the case of FTP) it would be very hard for most of us to remain focused for the full 60 minutes? Does the same hold true of VO2max, or is there more going on there? I did five 4 minute intervals today that averaged 117% of FTP, and I'd have been hard pressed to have done those for 6 minute durations, that's for sure!

Sorry about all the questions that I'm certain have been asked and answered repetetively, but I've been training with power for 2.5 years, and only recently have migrated to WKO+. Thus my increasing understanding is leading me to further question the vast knowledge that I now know I lack. I recently went back in this forum page by page 2.5 years looking for answers to my questions, but I'm still a bit hazy on some of this stuff...

You guys are a wealth of information, and I've learned much over the last few years from many of you, and I thank you for that.

Regards,

Jeff

 

[frenchyge]

Each interval taken individually is shorter than the maximum amount of time which that intensity could be held, but the duration of the entire set is far beyond what could be done in one effort. The benefit of interval work is to increase the total amount of work which is accomplished, albeit in repetitions of smaller bites.

As long as the interval intensities and durations are suitable to stress the appropriate energy system, the interval set allows us to generate greater overall training stimulus than a single maxed effort.