How does my VO2 compare to pro cyclists?

[acoggan]

I never said Coyle's figures were wrong, I only stated people have debated the accuracy of the readings.

Right - but again, I don't recall anyone ever disputing the VO2max data (which were remarkable only in their unremarkability).

 

[acoggan]

Top 1% is good, not prodigious.

Okay, if you say so. Either way, I'd say that it is clear that Armstrong had an unusually high VO2max even in a detrained, cancer-recuperating state. How that came to be, of course, cannot be determined from such data.

 

[Le breton]

Okay, if you say so. Either way, I'd say that it is clear that Armstrong had an unusually high VO2max even in a detrained, cancer-recuperating state. How that came to be, of course, cannot be determined from such data.

unusually high VO2max even in ........ cancer-recuperating state

I couldn't agree more!

Sorry to bring in a somewhat unrelated subject :

You bought an hypoxico tent around 2003, but I never saw any study of its effectiveness (but then you write so much, I could have missed it).

Just discovered yesterday your great blog with Hunter Allen(?). Lots of really good stuff. You are so ubiquitous, is there more than one Andy Coggan? I really liked the piece about the spheres attached to the front wheel axle. Waiting for you to suggest making that type of experiment on Usain Bolt

I am now reading carefully your "Validation of a mathematical model ..." article to use against criticisms you have leveled at some of my previous posts.

 

[acoggan]

Sorry to bring in a somewhat unrelated subject :

You bought an hypoxico tent around 2003, but I never saw any study of its effectiveness (but then you write so much, I could have missed it).

I've mentioned my experience in various forums, but not in any place particularly accessible/noticable. To make a long story short, though, I did not observe any increase in hematocrit or improvement in aerobic performance even after sleeping in it for >1 y. OTOH, I did find that it seemed to improve my anaerobic work capacity (AWC). I therefore subsequently collaborated with Steve McGregor and Ian Ratz at Eastern Michigan University in a still-unpublished study examining this issue. Contrary to my experience/hypothesis/expectations, however, Ian's thesis found that sleeping in a tent (albeit for only 1 wk) had no effect on AWC.

is there more than one Andy Coggan?

Yes, but not posting to cycling forums such as this one.

I am now reading carefully your "Validation of a mathematical model ..." article to use against criticisms you have leveled at some of my previous posts.

I wouldn't call them criticisms, it's just that I don't always agree with your starting assumptions. Of course, we're all largely flying blind here, so it's hard to say who is right and who is wrong.

 

[Le breton]

After reading your post I realized that Galic Ho was talking about LeMond the racer, not "Le Monde" the newspaper

Anyway, the original calculations that made so much noise were from Frédéric Portoleau and can be found here

http://www.cyclismag.com/article.php?sid=5184
There is no mistake due to normalization to a 70 kg rider. Portoleau did calculate 99.5 ml/mn.kg for those 20 minutes55s.

CONTADOR PLUS FORT QUE BASSO ET ARMSTRONG À LA MONGIE

Contador réalise une performance exceptionnelle avec 490 watts de moyenne en « puissance étalon » pendant 20min55s. Il développe 445 watts en puissance réelle avec 62 kg de poids de corps soit un rapport poids puissance de 7,2 W/kg. Sans aucun doute, son plus bel exploit en montagne. Pour des ascensions relativement courtes entre 20 et 30 minutes sur le Tour de France, nous n'avons pas relevé plus de 460 watts (Basso et Armstrong à La Mongie en 2004) mais ce type de final n'est pas si fréquent sur le Tour. Nous avons plus souvent des escalades comprises entre 30 et 45 minutes. Le « record du monde » appartient à Bjarne Riis avec 480 watts pendant 34 minutes à Hautacam en 1996. La performance de Contador apparaît inférieure.

He calculates a real power (not normalized) of 445 watts for 62kg, ie 7.2 watts/kg.

Since many people were shocked, as soon as Sorensen SRM data became available
http://www.srm.de/index.php? option...09&catid=112:le-france-09-blog&Itemid=260〈=us
he used them to verify his earlier calculation, but contrary to what i may have written elswhere this did not change his estimate.
You can find here his later assessment.
http://www.cyclismag.com/article.php?sid=5207

Not only does he give the Sorensen data, he gives à 1/25000 map with partial times of Contador on the climb, arrows showing the direction of the wind, in fact everything one could possibly want to prove him wrong, but nobody has done that and certainly not the sportscientist source that you provide.
However, as far as I am concerned he overestimates the result by 2.5% since he makes a 2.5% transmission loss correction which should not be there as Sorensen was using a SRM device that measures the power at the crank, before losses occur.

So his result should in fact read 97 ml/mn.kg for those 21 mn or so.

Had he not made that 2.5% correction, he would have been spot on in his estimate of Sorensen power!

However, as far as I am concerned he overestimates the result by 2.5% since he makes a 2.5% transmission loss correction which should not be there as Sorensen was using a SRM device that measures the power at the crank, before losses occur.



OK class, are you sleeping or what? Nobody picked up my mistake!
Of course Portoleau was right to make that 2.5% correction for transmission losses since he is estimating what Sorensen should read on his display, ie the power exerted by Sorensen at the crank. That power reading includes the transmission losses

 

[Le breton]

Hypoxico

.............. I did not observe any increase in hematocrit or improvement in aerobic performance even after sleeping in it for >1 y. ...........Ian's thesis found that sleeping in a tent (albeit for only 1 wk) had no effect on AWC.

Thanks for the reply. Maybe your don't sleep long enough hours

AWC : 1 week!!! Too funny.

 

[acoggan]

AWC : 1 week!!! Too funny.

It helps to know the literature:

"The changes to MMPO(4min), .VO(2max) and MAOD in response to LHTL altitude exposure were not significantly different for the 5-, 10- and 15-day treatment periods. For the pooled data from all three treatment periods, there were significant increases in MMPO(4min) [mean (SD) 5.15 (0.83) W kg(-1) vs 5.34 (0.78) W kg(-1)] and MAOD [50.1 (14.2) ml kg(-1) vs 54.9 (13.1) ml kg(-1)] in the LHTL athletes between pre- and post-altitude exposure."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12527968

 

[Escarabajo]

However, as far as I am concerned he overestimates the result by 2.5% since he makes a 2.5% transmission loss correction which should not be there as Sorensen was using a SRM device that measures the power at the crank, before losses occur.



OK class, are you sleeping or what? Nobody picked up my mistake!
Of course Portoleau was right to make that 2.5% correction for transmission losses since he is estimating what Sorensen should read on his display, ie the power exerted by Sorensen at the crank. That power reading includes the transmission losses

Not sleeping, but I missed it completely. Need again to review the match. I have gone now 3 times to make the correction. I am going to blame it on you.