In reality, actual VO2max doesn’t fluctuate this much or this quickly. It’s an algorithm. Garmin, WKO5, etc., aren’t great decision tools for VO2max. It’s just kind of a fun thing to look at season over season. I peaked at 65 last year according to WKO5, so let’s see if I can get that up to 67 or so this year? Sitting at 61 before my focused block, so maybe? Will all depend on what kind of power I can throw down about eight weeks from now.
I’d submit using 75% of FTP for VT1, 85% of 5 min power for VT2 for decent, easy-to-use proxies.
2 Likes
Ok; 75% of FTP. That’s more like it.
Doesn’t it read 75% of VO2max for VT1? So a misprint/typo?
(85% VO2max for VT2 
)
When you can’t measure vo2max, convert to HR estimate
- HR@75%vo2 = HRrest + (HRmax - HRrest) x %vo2
and then convert that HR to power using your PWR-to-HR data.
1 Like
I get it. What I’m saying is that it’s either a typo or world tour pro cyclists don’t have 275W LT1 values.
Source:
272.9 ± 20W at 1.3 mmol/L - ISM metabolic flexibility paper.
You’re probably not putting out 275 at 75% VO2max by the calculation he’s suggesting.
Eg:
My 5 min MMP is around 340 right now. FTP is about 285. About 84% of “VO2max” by HR and power, VT2 is aligned.
Max HR is around 184.
Resting is 45.
75% VO2max HR = 45+ (184-45)*.75
Which is 149bpm. Equivalent power for me there is around 220W or so. (Not 255W which is 75% of “MAP”)
So, goals would be to move VT1 to 220W.
Move VT2 to 285W.
Then push VO2max out.
I surmised that 75% of FTP would be a decent proxy for the VT1 point… for me that is 215W, so pretty close.
I don’t think the 75% is a typo… it’s just not convenient, so I suggested just using 75% of FTP as a decent goal for VT1.
3 Likes
Why not just 184 * 0.75? What’s the point of adding and subtracting the same #?
That number is substantially lower (138 for my case) and translates to mid-zone 2 HR.
45 + (0.75 * 139)
vs.
0.75 * 184
3 Likes
My mistake. Thanks. Do you know the source of that formula?
1 Like
I don’t understand the concept of VO2max HR.
If you are above ftp, HR just keeps rising with duration.
What formula/proxy do you use to get a VO2max HR ?
have a read of his thread on Twitter - it doesnt give all the answers but expands on some details
Ultimately I think he’s slightly click baiting with the original post but goes on to make these points. Remember he’s very much of the school of focusing on building the biggest aerobic capacity
I guess its worth remembering he’s talking about lab tested vt1 and vt2 etc, so not sure how that would compare with the way we are measuring LT1 with DFA-1a etc?
My LT1 power measured by DFA-1a is already about 82% of ftp, and my FTP is about 81% of my 5 min power, and I’m hardly top of the class. I’ve done a LOT of work on it and am certainly someone with good endurance etc, but thats it.
2 Likes
Aren’t you using percentage of heart rate reserve , so percentage of Vo2 max reserve, rather than percentage of VO2max?
When riding at 275W would you say you are still in easy conversation mode?
When riding at 275W would you say you are still in easy conversation mode?
Most definitely not. Lol. But tadej pogacar might be. 275 is high tempo/SweetSpot for me.
Ok thanks so much for the clarification on the VT1 @ojtCycling @Bigpikle @WindWarrior and @kurt.braeckel. Makes sense now
2 Likes
Similar numbers here with same methods and metrics
What they are using is heart rate reserve (HRR). To oversimplify, how many beats (constant stroke volume is given since cannot be measured) do I have to get from rest (eg 48 bpm) to max (eg 180). I have the difference between those two numbers. If I use ALL the beats in that range (in this case 132) I’ve used up all the volume of blood I have to deliver O2. If you’re not going to max VO2 you don’t use it all. You take that percentage. After that you must factor in the fact that you have a certain amount of O2 delivery in the blood at rest (48 bpm). So finally add that number.
It’s sort of a swag but in many cases gets you close enough. To convert to power use your power plotted against HR (e.g. in intervals.icu)
Alternatively for a quick swag use 5 min MMP (e.g. in TrainingPeaks)
Before power in cycling and in sports like running using HRR is common, albeit not a gold standard by any stretch (as noted in pubmed citation above).
3 Likes
Couple of threads discussing the Alan C tweet now but this one seems to be the most relevant so will post here. Did some update on the maths with all the various bits and bobs highlighted across the conversations…FWIW here they are:
I think LT1/VT1 PWR are a little high but meh. Either way, fun exercise and I think its a good set of progress markers to check in on when making some training decisions…
2 Likes
As Couzens said in that Twitter feed, without constant lab testing, they’re all SWAGs to an extent. Even the DFA a1 testing is still based on an estimate that might not directly apply to each individual. Close enough is close enough.
But for most people, not all, 75% of FTP, 75% of VO2max by HRR, .75 DFA a1, etc., are all going to come out in a narrow range of power… and it’s easy enough to use a talk test or have a simple understanding of crossing VT1 to get close enough to that close enough without going to the lab twice a week.
Same thing applies with 85%… if you got good feel for MLSS, and you’ve got a recent 5-min MMP test, or you just trust WKO to do the calculation for you, you can get a good idea of where your FTP is relative to VO2max/MAP/whatever.
As has been discussed by many people over the course of time, the curse of data is believing that all decisions come must directly from the numbers… without recognizing that the numbers themselves are still estimates and subject to some measure of change on a daily basis.
1 Like
And I would add as a second curse:
“ok you know your numbers, now how do you make them move? and which ones?” 
The answer–at least in part–rhymes with roach and starts with a C. But you knew that. 
1 Like
yup, and without lab data there is a fair bit of WAGing going on in this thread. I was going to toss in my WKO relative eVO2max last night but closed my computer and watched a movie.
And on the WAG topic I have no clue about VT1 and VT2. But the intent of that tweet is clear, to me, and its just a fun game to see how some swags line up.
1 Like