I just (2 days ago) upgraded from WKO+4 to WKO+5. Where do you find the WKO+5 modeling? I’ve done a gas exchange which ended up between the two methods you both posted. It doesn’t matter but, I’ve got all day and want to mess around and see what WKO comes up with…
edit: I see the estimate with the power metrics…Is this what you’re referring to?
The calculators are just guesstimates. Using power numbers to estimate o2 consumptions is making some big assumptions about the relationship between power and o2 uptake (efficiency and fitness has an impact). You need to go into a lab that can measure your o2 uptake if you want to know your actual vo2max.
I"ve done a couple lab tests in the last year and my v02max was essentially the same for both test, but my power was significantly higher during the 2nd test when I was more trained. A calculator would have given me a much higher vo2max estimate for the 2nd test even though it was actually about the same.
I’m still shooting higher than my age, but I"m only 51. If the OP got a lab result of 67 ml/min at the age of 61, that would definitely be on the pointy end of the curve.
Our university does the tests for $80. I did them mostly out of curiosity and to compare results when I’m in OK shape vs. good shape. As stated previously, my vo2max didn’t move much, but my ability to work at a high percentage of vo2max increased significantly. Good or bad, it showed that my FTP was reaching the “typical” upper limits as a percentage of vo2max. In theory, that means I should probably focus on more vo2max work to raise the roof more before I can raise my FTP ceiling further. I did a bunch of vo2max work heading into that test, so I’m not sure how much further my roof can go.
it should be there, I’ve customized mine a bit
Using this method on my numbers from a few months ago ASCM has me at 5.2L versus WKO5 which says 5L.
Once the Covid situation improves I’ll have to go get a proper test just for giggles.
Something a bit easier for the masses might be beat your age in minutes on a 40k TT.
I’m not quite old enough, and nowhere near fast enough to have a shot at it…but I’m sure there are some fast masters guys that could.
For someone like myself, a relatively newer athlete with an opportunity to grow aerobic capacity, I use it to:
you don’t need to go in a lab if you have a reasonable estimate. Basically you are looking at trends:
to see if/when aerobic capacity development is stalling out. That chart is from WKO5 starting Jan 1, 2020 and I annotated with training and testing info.
This was vintage bahzob, the guy who created the “Am I The Best Cyclist on Wattage” thread on the Google Wattage Group a few weeks back.
Look, if you’re under 60, you don’t want your VO2 max to be your age. If you’re over 60 and your VO2 is your age or better, great, you can thank your parents for most of that, and your training program for a little, little bit.
I still have the skills to ski my age in mph well into late 60s, let’s make that the goal 
You need the slope as well. A pair of SG skis can help (although GS will do just fine). And no crowds.
My favorite is to exit left off the Siberia Express chairlift at Squaw Valley. Then drop off the ledge just like the men did at the 1960 Olympic downhill. 
In WKO5 my VO2max is 63, and i’m 56. Don’t know how that would stand up to lab testing though
And there is also this article that hard start is also helpful with estimating power at vo2 max and correlates nicely with lab measured VO2 max (I know it is about power @vo2 max but can be interesting):
I agree that genetics is a big piece, but I’m not so sure about the training statement. I’m no expert, but Friel’s “Fast over 50” book is pretty adamant that Vo2max rate of decline as we age is highly dependent on training. If someone is pushing near 70 ml/min in their 60’s, they certainly have good genetics, but I’d bet that most of those years involved significant aerobic training.
According to this textbook:
VO2max decreases at a very similar - although not entirely identical - rate in both untrained and highly trained individuals (i.e., blue and purple lines almost parallel).
Now if Friel means that you have to keep at it to hold onto your hard-won gains, then he’s apparently right. (Note the more rapid rate of decrease in the runners who reduced their training intensity, or stopped running entirely.)
That sounds like one of the studies Friel referenced. All those runners starting at 70 had decent genetics, but the bottom drops out once you sit on the couch for a bit. Use it or lose it.
I did a gas exchange test a couple years ago. It was above what @bbarrera and WKO+5 methods and just below @stevemz method. From lowest to highest approximately 9 units. This seems to be such a passionate topic I’ll keep my opinion to myself as to the usefulness of testing or estimating relative VO2max. One thing having done an actual test if you want to attain a larger relative number…work on getting leaner.
its “free” in WKO5 and along with % ftp/vo2max can (sometimes) tell me something. But if vo2max wasn’t free then I wouldn’t go pay for a test. Its kinda like getting an IQ test, interesting number at a Mensa cocktail party but what do you really do with it?
old_but_not_dead_yet: actually if you look at thechanges in proportional terms, then training has a substantial effect – obviously in terms of having a high VO2max, but also holding on to it.
From the graph you cite, as a proportion of their age 20 VO2max, these people had by the age of 70 declined to: 86% [runner, high intensity], 76% [runner, reduced], 50% [runner, stopped], 76% [trained] and 64% [untrained]. Training not only raises VO2max; and keeping on training holds on to it more effectively.
And the rub is old guy/gal hearts.
You have to maintain a combination of volume and intensity to slow the decline, but our hearts handle maintaining that volume and intensity differently as we age, and then there is substantial individual variation on top of that. Training 12-15 hours a week and putting some zone 5 intensity on top of it might be great for maintaining VO2 max as we age, and it could also end up triggering Afib, SVTs, dialating one’s left ventricle, or other “permanent mods” that we’d like to avoid.
Some would say this is Chicken Little territory, but I’d argue that if you’re over 50 and you’re still doing high-octane training, you should really have an EKG and ECO every January or February, just to check in with how the engine room is doing.
Done as part of INSCYD test
