VO2max test ramp rate

[tonyzackery]

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 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No problem by me, Rick. Your caffeine dependency is much less benign than my ibuprofen addiction.

 

[rmur17]

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?

uhm .. I'm only doing the spin-ups for 1:30-1:45 ... my point being that was I certainly felt like I hadn't achieved Vo2max though the power level was well over the min. power required to elicit Vo2max for me. Not enough duration (~30-sec half-life and all that jazz).

 

[J-V]

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.

Right, I understand the first paragraph well enough.

"As long as the interval intensities and durations are suitable to stress the appropriate energy system..."

And thus, the million-dollar question(s)... Still trying to sort that all out.

For example, let's take the question down a different road: if I want to work on my 1-minute power, do I do intervals for 30 seconds, 45 seconds, or 1-minute? Intuitively, (for me) doing a 30-sec all-out interval is very different than doing one at 60 seconds.

Thanks,

-Jeff

 

[doctorSpoc]

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 not equating heavy breathing with VO2max training intensity.. i am giving an indicator to people of when one's body has reached a sufficient level of strain (after time x at intensity y) such that that exercise is being effective for VO2max adaptation.

i think it's pretty commonly accepted that in a VO2max interval that all the magic happens after the 1st 1min... just about the time of the onset of deep, heavy breathing and also that if sufficient intensity is used that is as well accompanied by deep heavy breathing after the interval as well.. if the interval is too long intensity will likely drop out of VO2max intensity and post interval heavy breathing.. i'm just using heavy breathing as a sort of yard stick..

are you saying that cardiac output (i assume you are using that as your yardstick for effective VO2max training) is the same during the 1st minute of a VO2max interval as say during the last 2-3 minutes? i have no idea, i'm just going by what i know as being commonly accepted... i suspect not but i'm sure you can tell us.

 

[frost]

Right, I understand the first paragraph well enough.

"As long as the interval intensities and durations are suitable to stress the appropriate energy system..."

And thus, the million-dollar question(s)... Still trying to sort that all out.

For example, let's take the question down a different road: if I want to work on my 1-minute power, do I do intervals for 30 seconds, 45 seconds, or 1-minute? Intuitively, (for me) doing a 30-sec all-out interval is very different than doing one at 60 seconds.

Thanks,

-Jeff

It is not that simple that you could deduct a rule-of-all from certain lenght of effort/test/interval. Eg.1 minute is dependend on all main metabolic systems (CP,Anaeorobic,Aerobic) and depending on your training backgound and talent you could improve by training one or more of these components.
When moving to longer efforts, effect of CP and Anaerobic components decrease and training them won't give that much value.

 

[frenchyge]

Right, I understand the first paragraph well enough.

Ok, that was the answer to "why do we train for intervals shorter than the max for that energy system...."

"As long as the interval intensities and durations are suitable to stress the appropriate energy system..."

And thus, the million-dollar question(s)... Still trying to sort that all out.

For example, let's take the question down a different road: if I want to work on my 1-minute power, do I do intervals for 30 seconds, 45 seconds, or 1-minute? Intuitively, (for me) doing a 30-sec all-out interval is very different than doing one at 60 seconds.

Now your question is getting more complicated. VO2max performance is a combination of several factors such as cardiac output, O2 intake, O2 delivery to the working muscles in question, aerobic energy production within the tissues themselves, pH stabilization in the tissues, etc. While it's pretty easy to identify any number of training regimes which produce a positive change in overall VO2max performance, as Dr. Coggan alluded to in post #16, we don't necessarily have our finger on exactly how and why those changes take place. So other than just doing it (training at/near VO2max), it's tricky to tweak things for exactly the changes we're looking for, based on the lack of definitive research.

Your new example is even more complicated because 1-min performance straddles the line between 2 energy systems (neuromuscular power + anaerobic capacity) and so there are many factors which contribute to 1-min performance. Again, it's easy to produce some change through training, and everyone has their opinions on what is best, but we're far from a grand unified theory for cycle training. Hope that helps.

FWIW, I do 1-min intervals with 1-min rests in sets of 3-4, with a slightly longer rest between sets.

 

[doctorSpoc]

Right, I understand the first paragraph well enough.

"As long as the interval intensities and durations are suitable to stress the appropriate energy system..."

And thus, the million-dollar question(s)... Still trying to sort that all out.

For example, let's take the question down a different road: if I want to work on my 1-minute power, do I do intervals for 30 seconds, 45 seconds, or 1-minute? Intuitively, (for me) doing a 30-sec all-out interval is very different than doing one at 60 seconds.

Thanks,

-Jeff

it's not about making the interval shorter, it's about making the interval a reasonable length of time to get the adaptations your are looking for. 20-30min is a reasonable length of time for a long interval... VO2max 2-5mins, for anaerobic capacity about 1 minute makes sense, NMP 5 sec etc.. and i think you should stop thinking about it in terms of to improve my 1hr power i do a 1hr interval.. if you road for 3hrs at an endurance pace you'd also be making adaptations that would impact your 1hr power... it's the underlying adaptations you are looking..

interval training allows you to ride more total time at a higher intensity than if you did a single uninterrupted workout... full stop.

if you want to work at an intensity that on a perfect day with lots of rest you could do for 1hr... then if you did that intensity multiple times for only 20min you could do that intensity more easily at any time in your cycle... one caveat.. with threshold training you do need a min time in to effectively train ~8-10mins but beyond that your good... VO2max i think the accepted number is 2mins

if you want to do an intensity that you could do for 1 minute then likely you could do that intensity or close enough to it to any old time so, it likely makes sense to just keep do 1min... but again if you wanted to do 10 total minutes at that intensity.. it would be impossible to do it for 10mins.. so you use 10 repeated 1min intervals to get more time at that intensity..

if you're working on neuromuscular power.. 5 second.. makes no sense to shorten it to 2 seconds...

i think you may just be over thinking it... what you want to do is get more time in the intensity you are after to get the adaptation you are after...

[edit] one more thing... the thing you give up in interval training is time i.e. added is the recovery time between intervals. to minimize this, you likely want to make the intervals as long as is reasonable i.e. less time to do the total duration at the target intensity you are after and then you are making more efficient use of your time.

have a look at this chart... look at "Magnitude of adaptations of by training level" you'll see how much overlap there is in terms of adaptations when training a certain levels... except for NMP and AC the levels only more or less affect this or that adaptation.. so are more or less a better uses of your time for x or y adaptation.
http://www.freewebs.com/velodynamics2/traininglevels.pdf

 

[J-V]

it's not about making the interval shorter, it's about making the interval a reasonable length of time to get the adaptations your are looking for. 20-30min is a reasonable length of time for a long interval... VO2max 2-5mins, for anaerobic capacity about 1 minute makes sense, NMP 5 sec etc.. and i think you should stop thinking about it in terms of to improve my 1hr power i do a 1hr interval.. if you road for 3hrs at an endurance pace you'd also be making adaptations that would impact your 1hr power... it's the underlying adaptations you are looking..

interval training allows you to ride more total time at a higher intensity than if you did a single uninterrupted workout... full stop.

if you want to work at an intensity that on a perfect day with lots of rest you could do for 1hr... then if you did that intensity multiple times for only 20min you could do that intensity more easily at any time in your cycle... one caveat.. with threshold training you do need a min time in to effectively train ~8-10mins but beyond that your good... VO2max i think the accepted number is 2mins

if you want to do an intensity that you could do for 1 minute then likely you could do that intensity or close enough to it to any old time so, it likely makes sense to just keep do 1min... but again if you wanted to do 10 total minutes at that intensity.. it would be impossible to do it for 10mins.. so you use 10 repeated 1min intervals to get more time at that intensity..

if you're working on neuromuscular power.. 5 second.. makes no sense to shorten it to 2 seconds...

i think you may just be over thinking it... what you want to do is get more time in the intensity you are after to get the adaptation you are after...

[edit] one more thing... the thing you give up in interval training is time i.e. added is the recovery time between intervals. to minimize this, you likely want to make the intervals as long as is reasonable i.e. less time to do the total duration at the target intensity you are after and then you are making more efficient use of your time.

have a look at this chart... look at "Magnitude of adaptations of by training level" you'll see how much overlap there is in terms of adaptations when training a certain levels... except for NMP and AC the levels only more or less affect this or that adaptation.. so are more or less a better uses of your time for x or y adaptation.
http://www.freewebs.com/velodynamics2/traininglevels.pdf

Thanks for the info above and the link, it does help. I think I seek answers that may not exist.

Appreciate the input!

-Jeff