Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

simplifaster.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#31

Post by sidibe »

rhizome wrote: post #24
nradov wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes VO2 Max tests for the same athlete will usually yield scores that differ by a few points for cycling versus running. I know at least one pro cycling team tried to identify potential new riders from outside the sport by recruiting athletes from other sports who had exceptionally high VO2 Max scores. Race results were disappointing.

I wanna say speed skating is the only dependably crossover sport so far? Not just from the Heidens 40 years ago, lots of other examples here: https://www.google.com/search?q=speed+skating+cycling

I think besides great endurance and ability to recover, being able to turn down the self-preservation knob is important in cycling. This is also true in speed skating moreso than the other endurance sports. Being able to relax on the downhills or in a fast moving peloton is essential to save energy

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#32

Post by diskzero »

gameswithgo wrote: post #21
nradov wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty obvious when you look at amateur endurance races that a lot of those age group guys are heavily geared. There's no testing out of competition at all, and hardly any in competition either.

How is it obvious when you look at them? I mean, it is obvious that people cheat, because people cheat everywhere, but what does looking at them have to do with anything?

We can "look at" a variety of factors and I am pretty sure that is what the poster meant. Not so much their physical appearance, but the overall visibility of their results. Cycling, for example, is an endurance sport, and gains usually take several years to manifest. Yes, you have some gifted juniors who get to Cat. 1 very quickly. In the masters levels, if a competitor has performed very poorly for several seasons and then is on fire all of a sudden, we tend to be suspicious. There were several masters level racers who did get tested at state and national level events and they got caught. All of this just for an amateur state champions jersey! We have also had older cyclists die as a result of doping. I have no compulsion to pack my blood with cells to boost my hematocrit percentage to 60% and have a heart attack, but it has happened several times to other cyclists.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#33

Post by theknocker »

typon wrote: post #25
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reality is that you can build upon your genetic platform, but you are going to get to level where you simply can't compete against someone who is doing everything you are doing, but just have better genetics. This is the hardest thing for us to admit, culturally, even though there are some glaringly obvious examples, like height. That said, I think most people can generally train themselves to compete at high l…

It's also overstated, culturally, especially in online circles. Most people will never be elite in anything in their lives, so these genetic limits don't impact most people. They're sometimes used as a crutch to justify not working harder.

Yeah and also, culturally, sometimes there are hardasses who go around using that as an excuse to ignore individual differences when they're making demands of people or postulating how much credit they should receive for accomplishments that already benefit them.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#34

Post by redis_mlc »

bojo wrote: post #30
gameswithgo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it obvious when you look at them? I mean, it is obvious that people cheat, because people cheat everywhere, but what does looking at them have to do with anything?

In bodybuilding heavily rounded shoulders is usually a sure sign of steroid use, as an example.

Well ...

- what you're referring to is called 3D shoulders at the Mr. Olympia level

- most bodybuilders are on roids, but they're also doing an extreme number of sets, often 10 sets, so that's the main reason for the 3D effect.

I was huge (couldn't walk through doors normally) but natural, not quite 3D, though natty pros used to stare at me, especially when I worked in on their sets.

Mostly I slept a lot and ate about 3,500 calories a day. I did a lot of Arnold's bicep concentration exercises (nobody else did that at Gold's) and maxed out all the upper body machines. I was planning to do the Thomas Inch lift (only roids have done that), but never got around to it.

I recommend if you're an engineer, stay small since nobody needs otherwise in the office.

You can learn a lot from watching Youtube videos by the Mr. Olympias - they're PhD level on lifting and nutrition, but stay small.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#35

Post by rodary »

Former professional racer here (USSR), former world champion (junior TTT).

The article describes a methodology (high volume, low intensity) commonly practiced by many teams in the USSR, especially my team who took it to the next level supported by a group of scientists and researchers.

Prior to hiring, every candidate (I'm talking about my team) went through intensive testing. A lot of guys (but not all) were sent home based on low VO2Max numbers.

I was 17 when I got a call and tested at low 60 VO2Max on my first test and was offered a ride. I came from a completely different training methodology based around short, high intensity intervals. Within a year, my VO2max moved to high 70 and eventually settled around 80- mid-80 depending on various factors during the season. I've seen this growth in others, sometimes even more dramatic.

To give you an idea, we clocked around 40,000 km per year of mostly low intensity training. A typical training day was made up of 3 rides: 40 km in the morning before breakfast, 3-5 hour ride (depending on the cycle) after breakfast, and another 40 km ride in the late afternoon. We lived on the bikes 11 months a year.

We were often told to pull out of dog fights on the climbs during a race to keep that low intensity in check and just ride tempo far away from threshold (although we used heart rate monitors in training, crude, early version of them, this wasn't possible in a race because the signal was sent to a team car, nothing was displayed on a bike). Not knowing your exact heart rate, we had to go by feel and to this day I can quite accurately tell what my heart rate is at different level of intensity.

For high intensity work, we practiced 20-25 km intervals at race or somewhat higher than race pace intensity, usually 4 or 5 of them per session, pretty much mimicking a 100 km TTT which is what our specialty was at the time (Olympic gold was important for propaganda).

In 8 years of its existence, that team went from an unknown startup to delivering several world champions. When the Soviet Union collapsed, those who survived the crash managed to make it to the west and raced in pro peloton. One guy in particular, my former teammate, did well in the Giro and the Tour. Others, who went through the similar system, went on to win Grand Tours and major Classics.

That is to say - the methodology has merit even though a lot of literature suggests a different kind of training.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#36

Post by asdfge4drg »

"is the total amount of oxygen that your muscles can extract from your blood per minute"

genuine question, but wouldn't this also correlate with muscle mass? you can put on a LOT of muscle, so doesn't more muscle mean more oxygen being extracted from your blood?

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#37

Post by ramblerman »

elric wrote: post #26
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reality is that you can build upon your genetic platform, but you are going to get to level where you simply can't compete against someone who is doing everything you are doing, but just have better genetics. This is the hardest thing for us to admit, culturally, even though there are some glaringly obvious examples, like height. That said, I think most people can generally train themselves to compete at high l…

> This is the hardest thing for us to admit, culturally Is it? It seems pretty obvious. And unless you're aiming to be an elite in whatever field, it's pretty much irrelevant. Barring serious defects, most people can do reasonably well in most disciplines (physical & mental) if they apply themselves. Of course, if everyone were to apply themselves equally, the genetic lottery would still win out, but that's not somet…

> Is it?

John McEnroe got in trouble for suggesting Serena Williams couldn't compete in the top men's circuit.

If we can't even discuss the biological differences at elite level between men and women without controversy, then yes I'd say so.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#38

Post by throwaway210222 »

ramblerman wrote: post #37
elric wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the hardest thing for us to admit, culturally Is it? It seems pretty obvious. And unless you're aiming to be an elite in whatever field, it's pretty much irrelevant. Barring serious defects, most people can do reasonably well in most disciplines (physical & mental) if they apply themselves. Of course, if everyone were to apply themselves equally, the genetic lottery would still win out, but that's not somet…

> Is it? John McEnroe got in trouble for suggesting Serena Williams couldn't compete in the top men's circuit. If we can't even discuss the biological differences at elite level between men and women without controversy, then yes I'd say so.

> John McEnroe got in trouble for suggesting Serena Williams couldn't compete in the top men's circuit.

There is no need (well, outside the student-union) to speculate about this. Serena lost in 2017 to the number 203 ranked man.

And then he beat her sister.

[1] https://www.tennisnow.com/Blogs/NET-POSTS/November-2017-(1)/...

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#39

Post by matsemann »

rhizome wrote: post #24
nradov wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes VO2 Max tests for the same athlete will usually yield scores that differ by a few points for cycling versus running. I know at least one pro cycling team tried to identify potential new riders from outside the sport by recruiting athletes from other sports who had exceptionally high VO2 Max scores. Race results were disappointing.

I wanna say speed skating is the only dependably crossover sport so far? Not just from the Heidens 40 years ago, lots of other examples here: https://www.google.com/search?q=speed+skating+cycling

I'm from a small place in Norway, known for its speed skaters. And my impression is they actually bike a lot as part of their off season training.

Re: How ‘Trainable’ Is VO2 Max Really? – A Case Study (2019)

#40

Post by matsemann »

asdfge4drg wrote: post #36

"is the total amount of oxygen that your muscles can extract from your blood per minute" genuine question, but wouldn't this also correlate with muscle mass? you can put on a LOT of muscle, so doesn't more muscle mean more oxygen being extracted from your blood?

Yes. But the unit is ml/kg/min, so increasing your mass with muscles increases the ml extracted, but also the division by kg.
Post reply on HN