Why not just hand the title over to the person with the highest Vo2 max?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 11, 2009
2,250
0
0
jackhammer111 said:
[sarcasm on] of course this doesn't prove that he might have the talent go on to win multiple tours. [sarcasm off]
[irony on]

Freire (3 time winner), also Boonen, Bettini too, and Musseuw, and even the great Cipo himself = great potential for the GC in GTs

[irony off].

Enjoy! ;)
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Parrot23 said:
[irony on]

Freire (3 time winner), also Boonen, Bettini too, and Musseuw, and even the great Cipo himself = great potential for the GC in GTs

[irony off].

Enjoy! ;)
Yeah... When something like this:
Lance never raced against Indurain or Lemond.
Is brought to light it shows who your dealing with.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BigBoat said:
A little blast from the past... 1994 TDF, DNF.



1995...36th

Ok... i stepped in it pretty bad there.

brain faded on the early lance tdfs.
Still, he did beat miguel in the worlds.
 
BigBoat said:
Power at threshold per kilo wins Grand Tours and road races no doubt, but V02 max is the ceiling for threshold. ;) Once everybody knows how to pedal, and they have been training properly for some time...V02 max is pretty much it. Not saying somebody with a 90 Vo2 max couldnt be beat by a dude with an 88. But Somebody with an 81 V02 max will have no chance in hell at the pro level against somebody with a 92, unless the 92 man was a genius and had no team.
You are still ignoring the impact of efficiency. There is evidence that efficiency and VO2 Max in professional cyclists is inversely related. IOW riders with a lower VO2 Max often make up for that by being naturally more efficient.
 
nobody said:
But could we find world athletes in endurance sport with a 22% thermal efficiency?
I would believe they are all closer of the best thermal efficiency!
Gross efficiency of riders is typically in the range of ~ 19-24%. By that I mean power to the cranks as a ratio of the body's total energy conversion / unit time.

e.g. take a rider who is 20% efficient, in order to ride at 300 watts for an hour, the total energy metabolised by the body = 300 watts x 3600 seconds / 20% = 5,400kJ. Of that total energy, 20% (1,080kJ) goes to driving the bike forward, the balance is mostly dissipated as heat.

And, on average, Pro riders are no more or less efficient than ordinary cyclists.
 
Alex Simmons/RST said:
You are still ignoring the impact of efficiency. There is evidence that efficiency and VO2 Max in professional cyclists is inversely related. IOW riders with a lower VO2 Max often make up for that by being naturally more efficient.
Stick around. He's obsessed with doping, he ignores many things.
 
Alex Simmons/RST said:
You are still ignoring the impact of efficiency. There is evidence that efficiency and VO2 Max in professional cyclists is inversely related. IOW riders with a lower VO2 Max often make up for that by being naturally more efficient.
I hope these studies did not include the notorious Coyle study...

I find this really interesting, especially since the range of 19 - 24% is very large. The top end of the range is 26% more efficient that the bottom end. That it is inversely related is even more interesting.

Let's say it is inversely related. Does that mean a drug like EPO would then give a mid range rider a double advantage? His VO2Max would be artificially increased but at the same time he would have a higher efficiency than the riders with whom he now has a comparable VO2Max.
 
BroDeal said:
I hope these studies did not include the notorious Coyle study...
Which one is notorious, he is cited in many, many papers?

But here is an example, not by Coyle:

Lucia, A., J. Hoyos, M. Perez, A. Santalla, and J.L. Chicharro.
Inverse relationship between VO2max and economy/efficiency in world-class cyclists. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 34(12):2079-84, December 2002.

Conclusion: A high CE/GE seems to compensate for a relatively low VO2max in professional cyclists.
 
hfer07 said:
let's see..
Lemond- with the highest Vo2 max(92) was trashed by Indurain (88) under his reign, but then in 96 Indurain was beaten by Riis (mister 60%) & a couple years later LA just demolished everybody with a mere 83.5 Vo2 max
Any Questions?;););)
Uh, no... Will Walker's Vo2 Max is higher that Lemond's. He broke Cadel's record at the AIS. Mid 90's.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Lances unjacked efficiency has been calculated at 23.7%. Pretty Norm...+-22-26% for Lance's category.

Having great efficieny will give you a few % over average..But not much. I think I'm very close about Lances un-jacked FTP of about 350-370 watts. Its about 20 watts less than watts humanly possible at that weight of his (160 lb) but its still pretty damn good...Try to hold 370 for an hour. LOL, you gotta be jacked to beat that. :)
 
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Which one is notorious, he is cited in many, many papers?

But here is an example, not by Coyle:

Lucia, A., J. Hoyos, M. Perez, A. Santalla, and J.L. Chicharro.
Inverse relationship between VO2max and economy/efficiency in world-class cyclists. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 34(12):2079-84, December 2002.

Conclusion: A high CE/GE seems to compensate for a relatively low VO2max in professional cyclists.
The Coyle study I was referring to is obviously the one that involves Armstrong's supposed magical efficiency transformation.

Is there anything available on the web? I find this stuff pretty fascinating. I would like to look at experiement methodology since some of what you said seems counterintuitive.
 
Ferrari wrote an article on V02 max..pretty much ripped it to shreds..



Ferrari on VO2 Max---




How useful are VO2max values to athletes? Is it a determining factor in the competitive results of a cyclist? Some observations...

The very first time I got my VO2max measured I was 18 years old: they put a mask with a tube on my face and mouth, tied it to the nape of my neck while having me run on a treadmill, increasing speed and gradient every 3 minutes, until I reached my absolute maximum effort (or so they thought).

The result of my maximum oxygen consumption was 4.528 L/min, equal to 72.8 ml/kg/min (my weight was 62.2 kg).

I was told it was a good result, but my impressions back then were that running that test was totally another thing from running in the track or on the road.

Indeed the gesture of running on a treadmill is really different, and in any case it requires a lot of specific training in order to be able to use exactly 100% of the muscles just like with the natural gesture.
The mask (or mouthpiece) is always very annoying and hinders the respiratory flow, seriously stressing those muscles involved in respiration.
Furthermore, the mask is not always perfectly airtight, it hinders movements and stiffens up neck and shoulder muscles.

In years of experience in measuring the VO2max, I obtained results that differed a lot from each other quite often; discordances that consisted in different effort protocols, but mainly in measuring instruments of diverse concept and accuracy.

How useful is the VO2max for the athlete?

Surely this test gives a valuation on the maximum power of the aerobic engine of the subject, but it is a value not always decisive in competitive results.

Derek Clayton, marathon world record holder at the end of the 60’s, had a lower VO2max value than mine, about 69 ml/kg/min, but he could run the marathon in 2h09’, approximately 20 minutes faster than my best performance ever.

This simply because he was able to run at an intensity of 90-92% of his VO2max without accumulating relevant concentrations of lactic acid: less than 2.5 mM/L!
At the same percentage of my VO2max value, my lactate concentration exceeded 8 mM/l.

In cycling the measuring of VO2max has about the same meaning as in running: it is useful and indicative of the potentiality of the athlete, but once again its correlation with competitive results is not so tight.
Lance Armstrong for instance was measured a VO2max of 82 ml/kg/min, which is an excellent value, but common to many other professional athletes that obtained far inferior results in their careers.

Maybe Lance was not on his top form when taking the test, or maybe he could not give 100% out: surely he also finds the mask or mouthpiece very annoying, but, most importantly, pedaling on a cyclo-ergometer or stationary bike is much different than pedaling on the road.
 
BroDeal said:
The Coyle study I was referring to is obviously the one that involves Armstrong's supposed magical efficiency transformation.

Is there anything available on the web? I find this stuff pretty fascinating. I would like to look at experiement methodology since some of what you said seems counterintuitive.
Ah, OK, well here's a new one by Dave Martin et al which I posted in another thread at Bike Radar:
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=15428390#15428390
 
BigBoat said:
Lances unjacked efficiency has been calculated at 23.7%. Pretty Norm...+-22-26% for Lance's category.

Having great efficieny will give you a few % over average..But not much. I think I'm very close about Lances un-jacked FTP of about 350-370 watts. Its about 20 watts less than watts humanly possible at that weight of his (160 lb) but its still pretty damn good...Try to hold 370 for an hour. LOL, you gotta be jacked to beat that. :)
Non sequitur.

Just because someone can produce more power than you, it does not automatically imply they are a doper.

370 watts at 160lbs for 1 hour is a little under 5.1 W/kg (even an additional 20W makes that < 5.4 W/kg). Sure that's really good power but hardly earth shattering. I coach a masters athlete who does 5.0 W/kg for an hour.
 
Apr 9, 2009
976
0
0
Juan Pelota said:
Ferrari wrote an article on V02 max..pretty much ripped it to shreds..

* * *

In cycling the measuring of VO2max has about the same meaning as in running: it is useful and indicative of the potentiality of the athlete, but once again its correlation with competitive results is not so tight.
Lance Armstrong for instance was measured a VO2max of 82 ml/kg/min, which is an excellent value, but common to many other professional athletes that obtained far inferior results in their careers.


Not exactly "ripping it to shreds," since that's pretty much what every exercise physiologist in the world thinks too.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
To answer the OP's question: VO2 max is not the best indicator of performance in cycling. The best predictor of performance is sustainable threshold power per Kilo of body weight AKA sustainable power to weight ratio.

Still, just a good power output at threshold does not take into account bike handling skills, tactical decisions, cornering skills, descending skills, mental toughness, etc. All fun things to watch in a bike race, not to mention crazy luck, weather, and other intangibles that make the race such a cool drama that cannot be recreated in a lab.
 
Kennf1 said:
Not exactly "ripping it to shreds," since that's pretty much what every exercise physiologist in the world thinks too.
Have to love how he uses Armstrong to support his point. He might has well use Marco Pantani.

Then he talks about his marathon times. Does anyone believe that Dr. Ferrari would not dope himself? He was caught helping his daughter cheat in a marathon or triathlon. I forget the details but it was something like driving her in a car part for part of the course. Cheating is in this guy's blood.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY