Improve VO2Max
tsazani
Posts: 816 Member
Blue = low intensity (65% MaxHR). Green = moderate intensity (75% MaxHR). Yellow = hard intensity (85% MaxHR).
I exercise in zones. 30 min per day. 2 days in yellow (resistance), 2 days in green (cardio), and 3 days in blue (yoga).
My VO2Max is 32. As a 61 year old male this is considered "moderate". I'd like to get to 41 which is "elite" for my age and sex.
Will the above exericise program get me there?
I exercise in zones. 30 min per day. 2 days in yellow (resistance), 2 days in green (cardio), and 3 days in blue (yoga).
My VO2Max is 32. As a 61 year old male this is considered "moderate". I'd like to get to 41 which is "elite" for my age and sex.
Will the above exericise program get me there?
0
Replies
-
60 minutes a week of aerobic activity is not likely to improve your VO2 max much. 150 minutes a week is recommended for basic good health. It would take a lot more than that to get to elite status.6
-
How are you measuring? Have you done an actual test (in a lab)? Did you ever measure you actual max and min heart rates?2
-
No I wouldn't think just 2 x 30 minutes of moderate intensity cardio a week will achieve your goal. That's a minimal amount and not of sufficient intensity for your goal. Where is the high intensity cardio in your plan?
Do you think yoga is going to contribute to VO2 max improvement?
If any contribution from resistance training at all I would imagine be completely trivial. That your HR rises during resistance training isn't a sign of aerobic effort.
BTW -
Your zones are likely inaccurate unless you have customised them based on actual testing. Probably not really important as you don't seem to be using different zones for cardio training anyway.
Your VO2 max is likely inaccurate unless tested properly.
e.g. my Garmin has a stab at estimating my VO2 max when I'm training on a stationary bike trainer with a power meter. After a moderate workout it drops to 40'ish, after a high intensity session it rises to 42'ish. Obviously my actual VO2 max isn't changing daily and the number itself may well be inaccurate.1 -
I think the rule of thumb is...
minimum of 20 minutes in the cardio zone non stop, and a minimum of 3 times per week, will give you a minimum training effect. A training effect is what improves your fitness level.
If you want better than minimum results, you can increase the time, intensity, and number of times per week.
How are you measuring your VO2max?
Do you know what your true max heart rate is?
Do you know what your resting heart rate is?
These are important questions, because they will give you a true starting point on which to gauge your progress and properly train.1 -
Blue = low intensity (65% MaxHR). Green = moderate intensity (75% MaxHR). Yellow = hard intensity (85% MaxHR).
I exercise in zones. 30 min per day. 2 days in yellow (resistance), 2 days in green (cardio), and 3 days in blue (yoga).
My VO2Max is 32. As a 61 year old male this is considered "moderate". I'd like to get to 41 which is "elite" for my age and sex.
Will the above exericise program get me there?
Two questions. How are you measuring that and what's your reason for improvement?
It's entirely possible to improve it, but it's not easy and it doesn't last long. That work is the kind of thing to do just before a goal race, as the improvements won't stick for much more than eight weeks or so, then it'll subside again.
1 -
I'm female, 30, training for a marathon. I am between 39 and 42 VO2 as measured by a Garmin GPS running watch. I probably log 180-210 intensity minutes per week. I would guess you need to add some serious cardio, building up over time. I consider myself an athlete but am nowhere near "elite", as measured by VO2.2
-
I do harder cardio 6 plus hours a week and although I have an "excellent" rating for my age on VO2 Max, I'm still not "elite" by any means.
If you're elite on VO2 Max, it's not by mistake or starting to workout or train for it later in life. It's likely a lifetime of hard work. I've actually gotten fairly competitive at a niche sport, Indoor Rowing. By rowing standards, I'm decent (very good for my age). But when I compare myself to a lot of friends in my training club, I pale in comparison.
I took off three decades from hard working out. The guys that are far superior to me have been working hard throughout their lives. Though I likely workout as hard as they do now, the years of not taking care of my body can't be overcome at my age. Don't get me wrong, I started training hard in my mid 40s and at 54, I'd put most 20 year olds to shame on cardio (I did actually the one OTF class I attended). Many of these guys that I know that have truly elite VO2 Max numbers have been working out 6 to 10 hours a week for their entire lives!
I'd just focus on improvement, not some number that might be impossible to hit.5 -
I can only tell what I am doing:
Mondays 3 mile run easy,
Tuesday 5x400 with 1 mile warm up and cool down, I run these at 8.5 mph on the treadmill,
Wednesday upper body work
Thursday 30 minute tempo run, warm up 10 minutes then build to 9 mph then 10 min cool down
Friday upper body work
Saturday 4 miles at 10k pace or faster
Sunday 60 minutes real slow.
I've been on this plan for 6 weeks and according to my Garmin 235 watch my V02 max is up to 45.
The Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday runs where I push myself is where you will get the V02 gain.
Hope this helps
Tom1 -
During the race season according to my garmin my vo2 will be around 65. But I can't keep it there currently I'm at 57 at 42 I do about 8 to 12 hours training a week2
-
VO2Max is a measure of cardio capacity. Your yoga and resistance training won't move the needle too much. They're still good, just not for this purpose.
In order to increase your VO2Max, you need to focus on your cardio. You shouldn't need to do a ton to improve from where you are today but you will probably need to drastically increase your volume once you get towards the top end of the range. Given your goal to get to 'elite' status, you might want to consider building up to a half marathon or marathon training plan which will involve running 4-5 times per week and upwards of 30+ miles per week. Start slow with a couch to 5K program and build from there.3 -
Blue = low intensity (65% MaxHR). Green = moderate intensity (75% MaxHR). Yellow = hard intensity (85% MaxHR).
I exercise in zones. 30 min per day. 2 days in yellow (resistance), 2 days in green (cardio), and 3 days in blue (yoga).
My VO2Max is 32. As a 61 year old male this is considered "moderate". I'd like to get to 41 which is "elite" for my age and sex.
Will the above exericise program get me there?
OP, I am 61 years old as well. As others have pointed out, I"m not sure how you are measuring and what your goals are (beyond simply obtaining a higher VO2 number) but it will take a significant volume of cardio work over a long time period to reach the highest levels. For example, I looked at my VO2 numbers occasionally during last summer's training build for several long course triathlon events. During this time, I was training 7 days/week with a volume of 9-14 hrs of cardio work weekly. According to my Garmin, my VO2 was in the "superior" range then. (Garmin's term, not mine, lol!) As an additional bit of background, I have been training consistently for the last 7-8 years.
With that said, I'm not very concerned about VO2 in and of itself, and so I don't focus my training on it.3 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
My recreational goal is to increase my VO2Max number without injuring myself. Most of the medical authorities advise 150 min per week of moderate (green zone) exercise or 75 min per week of intense exercise (yellow zone) zones.
I do 210 min per week. 60 min are intense (yellow zone). So I'm meeting the Drs' goal.
For guys my age we are told to lift weights at least 2X per week. Also we should do intense (yellow zone) two times per week. So my 2 day / week weight lifting checks both boxes.
I'm VERY content with my diet and exercise program. It maintains my MAIN goals of normal weight (I'm up 10 lb because I recently "veganized" my LCHF diet) and normal blood sugars (up a bit for same reason). I'm a type 2 diabetic.
I stick my fingers several times a day to measure my blood sugar levels. I use MFP to measure food and "Polar Beat" to measure exercise. It has a nifty VO2Max add-on to the app which gives me my 32 number. For MaxHR I use the old 220-age formula.
I understand that ALL these measurements can be inaccurate and have their margins of error. But when used RELATIVELY and OFTEN they are very valuable.
I'm going to do this for a month and see if there's any improvement. If not I'll probably add singles tennis. It's fun, not likely to injure, and very "HIIT-like" for me.
So if you are going to ignore the answers, why ask the question?
Resistance training and/or interval training won't really do much for VO2 max. You really need long sustained, easy effort cardio. The general recommendation to get 150/75 minutes of exercise per week is only to maintain a reasonable level of general health. It will not suffice to bring your cardio conditioning up to 'athletic' levels.
For reference, my fitness tracker claims my VO2 max to be 'excellent' for my age group. On average, it takes about 4-5 hours of intense (yellow zone) exercise per week for me to maintain that level, more to improve.4 -
My recreational goal is to increase my VO2Max number without injuring myself. Most of the medical authorities advise 150 min per week of moderate (green zone) exercise or 75 min per week of intense exercise (yellow zone) zones.
I do 210 min per week. 60 min are intense (yellow zone). So I'm meeting the Drs' goal.
For guys my age we are told to lift weights at least 2X per week. Also we should do intense (yellow zone) two times per week. So my 2 day / week weight lifting checks both boxes.
I'm VERY content with my diet and exercise program. It maintains my MAIN goals of normal weight (I'm up 10 lb because I recently "veganized" my LCHF diet) and normal blood sugars (up a bit for same reason). I'm a type 2 diabetic.
I stick my fingers several times a day to measure my blood sugar levels. I use MFP to measure food and "Polar Beat" to measure exercise. It has a nifty VO2Max add-on to the app which gives me my 32 number. For MaxHR I use the old 220-age formula.
I understand that ALL these measurements can be inaccurate and have their margins of error. But when used RELATIVELY and OFTEN they are very valuable.
I'm going to do this for a month and see if there's any improvement. If not I'll probably add singles tennis. It's fun, not likely to injure, and very "HIIT-like" for me.
That 150min per week is the minimum for general health - it is nothing like enough to get to the high fitness level you say you aspire to. Just wanting to improve your fitness is not what your OP said.
If you don't understand the really very consistent responses given by people who do actually have high fitness levels and have put in the effort to get there then ask for clarification. Just dismissing the advice given means it's been a waste of time for everyone involved but mostly for you.
Your training doesn't match your stated goal - at all.8 -
My recreational goal is to increase my VO2Max number without injuring myself. Most of the medical authorities advise 150 min per week of moderate (green zone) exercise or 75 min per week of intense exercise (yellow zone) zones.
I do 210 min per week. 60 min are intense (yellow zone). So I'm meeting the Drs' goal.
For guys my age we are told to lift weights at least 2X per week. Also we should do intense (yellow zone) two times per week. So my 2 day / week weight lifting checks both boxes.
I'm VERY content with my diet and exercise program. It maintains my MAIN goals of normal weight (I'm up 10 lb because I recently "veganized" my LCHF diet) and normal blood sugars (up a bit for same reason). I'm a type 2 diabetic.
I stick my fingers several times a day to measure my blood sugar levels. I use MFP to measure food and "Polar Beat" to measure exercise. It has a nifty VO2Max add-on to the app which gives me my 32 number. For MaxHR I use the old 220-age formula.
I understand that ALL these measurements can be inaccurate and have their margins of error. But when used RELATIVELY and OFTEN they are very valuable.
I'm going to do this for a month and see if there's any improvement. If not I'll probably add singles tennis. It's fun, not likely to injure, and very "HIIT-like" for me.
The folks above are right. And I don't think you took what they were saying on board.
Frankly, unless you're a competing athlete (in certain sports at that), a high VO2max and $6 will buy you a fancy latte.
But if it's a motivating goal for you, that's fine. It sounds like you're doing great overall, at health improvement. Good show!
But if you want a higher VO2max, you need more volume, and its intensity ideally needs to be figured somewhat accurately. That volume needs to be true cardiovascular exercise, not things (like strength training, most yoga) that raise heart rate for reasons largely unrelated to CV improvement. If simply raising your heart rate was enough, then people who watch lots of scary movies, or heat their homes to excessive temperatures, or routinely get dehydrated, would have better CV fitness than similar others who don't do those things, because all of those raise heart rate.
Normal strength training is a wonderful, useful, important thing. Definitely keep doing it. I wouldn't suggest that anyone drop strength training in pursuit of VO2max. But to the extent strength training materially raises heart rate, it has to do with strain, not CV improvement. Most forms of yoga (slow ones) are the same. There are lots of kinds of cardio, if you want to increase cardio volume; it doesn't have to be all one thing.
The 220-age heart rate max formula is too inaccurate for too many people, in order to trust it as a guide, if you're serious about training. I'm not a lifelong athlete (started being routinely active at about 46), but if I used 220-age to train, I'd severely undertrain. I'd think all those pretty-colored zones started 10 or so bpm lower than they really do. (My HRmax is about 180bpm; age-estimated would be 157bpm. In reality, 157bpm is a HR I visit regularly (not daily, but fairly often) - it's somewhere around anaerobic threshold, NBD.)
There are self-tests you can use to estimate HRmax, once you have some base fitness, if you don't want to go to a sports clinic for testing. (Medical stress test won't necessarily do it: They stopped mine before I got to even age-estimate HR max, even though I still had enough breath left to argue with them about it.
).
Using HR ranges based on a lowball HRmax is going to result in undertraining (less effect, inefficient) even if used consistently and often. If max is overestimated, you'll risk overtraining/burning out.
Most people can productively use RPE (rate of perceived exertion) instead of heart rate, even though it's not data-driven. Heart rate isn't essential, but if you're using heart rate, using it correctly is more productive.
Look, I'm 63, and female. My Garmin says my VO2max is 37, which they say is "excellent", their top category. I don't believe it for a minute (and don't much care, because I'm active for fun and general health these days, not for competition anymore). I average just under 200 active minutes per week (the 1 x moderate minutes + 2 x vigorous minutes formula Garmin uses to emulate the government recommendation). I sometimes hit 400-500 in a week.
If you want to increase your VO2max within a reasonable time horizon, you're going to need more cardiovascular exercise volume. If you want to use HR to guide that effort, it would be beneficial to work on getting a better-founded estimate of HRmax.
Those are well-founded opinions - arguably facts, even - that many of us are offering, to help you achieve your stated goals. Many/most of the people commenting are serious exercisers, recreational athletes, even competitive athletes.
Again, congratulations on the great work you're already doing toward fitness and health improvement - thrive on!7 -
My recreational goal is to increase my VO2Max number without injuring myself. Most of the medical authorities advise 150 min per week of moderate (green zone) exercise or 75 min per week of intense exercise (yellow zone) zones.
I do 210 min per week. 60 min are intense (yellow zone). So I'm meeting the Drs' goal.
For guys my age we are told to lift weights at least 2X per week. Also we should do intense (yellow zone) two times per week. So my 2 day / week weight lifting checks both boxes.
I'm VERY content with my diet and exercise program. It maintains my MAIN goals of normal weight (I'm up 10 lb because I recently "veganized" my LCHF diet) and normal blood sugars (up a bit for same reason). I'm a type 2 diabetic.
I stick my fingers several times a day to measure my blood sugar levels. I use MFP to measure food and "Polar Beat" to measure exercise. It has a nifty VO2Max add-on to the app which gives me my 32 number. For MaxHR I use the old 220-age formula.
I understand that ALL these measurements can be inaccurate and have their margins of error. But when used RELATIVELY and OFTEN they are very valuable.
I'm going to do this for a month and see if there's any improvement. If not I'll probably add singles tennis. It's fun, not likely to injure, and very "HIIT-like" for me.
That 150 minutes per week is only minimum to maintain general health. If you want to really improve your fitness you should at least double (if not triple) that.
And if you don't know your true max heart rate, all those zones that you are working in are inaccurate, because they are based off of a percentage of that max heart rate.
According to the 220-age formula, my MHR should be 159 (I'm 61 years old). Sunday I did a 5k and hit 170 towards the end of that run. I stayed in the 160's for quite a while, and even when I hit 170, I felt like I could have pushed it just a little more. I have my MHR set at 174 which is probably pretty close to my true MHR. If I would have been using the 220-age formula all this time, I would have been under training, and wondering why I was not improving.
If you want to do heart rate training, you need a good starting point, and knowing you true MHR is a very important one.2 -
My recreational goal is to increase my VO2Max number.
That's fine. But why? In the grand scheme of things VO2Max is pretty meaningless as a metric. If yoou focus on Resting Heart Rate reduction you'll see more value.
fwiw if you're wanting to improve your VO2Max I'd start with perhaps 5 CV sessions per week, aiming for all of them to get to 60 minutes of steady state effort. Once you've done that start to add in tempo sessions, once per week, vice one of the steady state. Once you've done that for about six months then add in a High Intensity Session once per week. After six weeks of that you should have improved your VO2Max.
You'll want to book in half a dozen lab sessions in there, to actually measure your MHR, LTHR, Aerobic threshold and VO2Max.4 -
I have an elite VO2 max (as measured in a lab). I log a year-round average of 800 minutes of cardio a week. You will need to increase your volume a lot to bump yours up. And sure, the elite number stroked my ego, but other than that, I've yet to benefit from it. Everyone still passes me on the bike.6
-
Also keep in mind that about 80% of your cardio fitness is hereditary, so you can only develop about 20% of it. That is still a good improvement though.1
-
I've been following this because I just bought a Garmin Vivosport (trying to dial in my efforts) and I screwed up when I set it up and it gives me a VO2 max of 26, comparable to a 79 year old woman (I'm 65).
I hike several times a week and log 12 hours avg per week. My elevation gain is 1500 to 1700 feet in just under 2 miles. I've been doing this for over 3 years regularly so I feel I'm in pretty good shape. Supposedly the watch updates my VO2 max every time I log a timed cardio activity. So now I'm just confused and think I wasted my money. (I got it mainly to monitor my heart rate which I was doing perfectly fine the old fashioned way). 1 -
I can give you 2 ways to instantly improve your VO2max. First, find your ACTUAL min and max HR. 220-age is not the way to do it. Second, dump the watch HR and use a HR strap. Your watch is probably lying to you. Get your numbers accurate and you'll have a better idea of what your VO2max really is.
FWIW - Doing cardio in the gym probably won't do much for your goals. Run, swim, ride, or row. And do it more than 150 minutes per week.1 -
OP, if we understand and accept your recreational goal of wanting to increase VO2, I think the main point for you to consider is as @sijomial said, "Your training doesn't match your goal".
If you read the responses, the common theme is that your cardio work needs to go up quite a bit for an extended period of time. Here's what I mean: Your stated 210 min/week, or 3.5hrs, puts you at about 25-35% of the volume that many are putting in weekly. (e.g. @amandaeve's 800min/week = 13hrs&20 min of cardio weekly) And this is just the true workout time without any overhead for travel, etc.
So my point is simply: The time commitment to achieve "elite level" VO2 capacity may be more than you are willing to give to reach this recreational goal.7 -
I've been following this because I just bought a Garmin Vivosport (trying to dial in my efforts) and I screwed up when I set it up and it gives me a VO2 max of 26, comparable to a 79 year old woman (I'm 65). I hike several times a week and log 12 hours avg per week. My elevation gain is 1500 to 1700 feet in just under 2 miles. I've been doing this for over 3 years regularly so I feel I'm in pretty good shape. Supposedly the watch updates my VO2 max every time I log a timed cardio activity. So now I'm just confused and think I wasted my money. (I got it mainly to monitor my heart rate which I was doing perfectly fine the old fashioned way).
@Rocknut53
VO2 max is just one of many measurements of cardio fitness/performance and for hiking it's a pretty irrelevant one.
You aren't needing maximal rates of oxygen uptake when hiking so no real point in putting any significance on it for you and your activity.
Lowered resting pulse, faster recovery to normal, reduced exercise HR are probably better indicators of fitness improvements for you.
It's not really that relevant for me either as someone who primarily does long distance cycling, just a slightly interesting but probably not particularly accurate estimate of an ability I use rarely. For me increasing my power at a sustainable HR is my main focus.
3 -
I've been following this because I just bought a Garmin Vivosport (trying to dial in my efforts) and I screwed up when I set it up and it gives me a VO2 max of 26, comparable to a 79 year old woman (I'm 65). I hike several times a week and log 12 hours avg per week. My elevation gain is 1500 to 1700 feet in just under 2 miles. I've been doing this for over 3 years regularly so I feel I'm in pretty good shape. Supposedly the watch updates my VO2 max every time I log a timed cardio activity. So now I'm just confused and think I wasted my money. (I got it mainly to monitor my heart rate which I was doing perfectly fine the old fashioned way).
@Rocknut53
VO2 max is just one of many measurements of cardio fitness/performance and for hiking it's a pretty irrelevant one.
You aren't needing maximal rates of oxygen uptake when hiking so no real point in putting any significance on it for you and your activity.
Lowered resting pulse, faster recovery to normal, reduced exercise HR are probably better indicators of fitness improvements for you.
It's not really that relevant for me either as someone who primarily does long distance cycling, just a slightly interesting but probably not particularly accurate estimate of an ability I use rarely. For me increasing my power at a sustainable HR is my main focus.
Thanks. My resting heart rate is in the mid 50's, I do almost reach MHR at points during the first mile and a half because my path is steep, a 30-45 degree slope. I'm not worried about fitness level, I was just curious more than anything. I'm certain I don't have the "poor" fitness level of a 79 year old woman. It was just a little disconcerting to see that number 26 after years of good fitness. I scoffed at people's dependence on Fitbits, I may still do that! If a piece of gear can't give you accurate numbers then it's pretty irrelevant. @tsazani , sorry for hijacking your post.
0 -
I've been following this because I just bought a Garmin Vivosport (trying to dial in my efforts) and I screwed up when I set it up and it gives me a VO2 max of 26, comparable to a 79 year old woman (I'm 65). I hike several times a week and log 12 hours avg per week. My elevation gain is 1500 to 1700 feet in just under 2 miles. I've been doing this for over 3 years regularly so I feel I'm in pretty good shape. Supposedly the watch updates my VO2 max every time I log a timed cardio activity. So now I'm just confused and think I wasted my money. (I got it mainly to monitor my heart rate which I was doing perfectly fine the old fashioned way).
@Rocknut53
VO2 max is just one of many measurements of cardio fitness/performance and for hiking it's a pretty irrelevant one.
You aren't needing maximal rates of oxygen uptake when hiking so no real point in putting any significance on it for you and your activity.
Lowered resting pulse, faster recovery to normal, reduced exercise HR are probably better indicators of fitness improvements for you.
It's not really that relevant for me either as someone who primarily does long distance cycling, just a slightly interesting but probably not particularly accurate estimate of an ability I use rarely. For me increasing my power at a sustainable HR is my main focus.
Thanks. My resting heart rate is in the mid 50's, I do almost reach MHR at points during the first mile and a half because my path is steep, a 30-45 degree slope. I'm not worried about fitness level, I was just curious more than anything. I'm certain I don't have the "poor" fitness level of a 79 year old woman. It was just a little disconcerting to see that number 26 after years of good fitness. I scoffed at people's dependence on Fitbits, I may still do that! If a piece of gear can't give you accurate numbers then it's pretty irrelevant. @tsazani , sorry for hijacking your post.
Real max heart rate (on the point of collapse) or calculated max heart rate?
My older brother could hit 200+ in his early 60's when he "should" have had a MHR of around 160.
If you felt you couldn't take another step and had to stop to recover then that might be your MHR.
No watch I've ever heard of can actually measure oxygen uptake.
I did my MHR and VO2 max test in a sports science lab wearing a mask to actually measure my gas exchange. Took 3 days to recover from the test - that's what I would call a true max HR although the ASCM criteria are a bit more technical than that....
If you did a higher intensity exercise than hiking your watch would give you a very different number, probably still not accurate and still irrelevant to what you are doing.
0 -
Thanks. My resting heart rate is in the mid 50's, I do almost reach MHR at points during the first mile and a half because my path is steep, a 30-45 degree slope. I'm not worried about fitness level, I was just curious more than anything. I'm certain I don't have the "poor" fitness level of a 79 year old woman. It was just a little disconcerting to see that number 26 after years of good fitness. I scoffed at people's dependence on Fitbits, I may still do that! If a piece of gear can't give you accurate numbers then it's pretty irrelevant. @tsazani , sorry for hijacking your post.
I don't know the exact science, but I think the watch uses a combination of HR and speed to estimate VO2 max. The only problem is that unless you're constantly at the envelope of performance/HR, or unless your workouts regularly consist of a fairly intense effort over an extended period of time (e.g., a 3 mile run at 80% max) it has a really hard time figuring anything out.
That said, it's fun to play with but isn't the best info in the world. My garmin says my VO2Max improves in a tailwind but gets worse in a headwind...3 -
I think VO2max is pretty important because it is an indicator of you overall cardio fitness level, but I don't think it's as important to know the exact number, as it is just to know your in a good range.
If you really want to know the exact number then you should have a lab test done, but even doing that, it will improve or decline depending on your workout schedule.
Some devices will give a fair ballpark, but only under perfect conditions (treadmill, track, no hills, etc...). For example, fitbit always gives me an elite level, but garmin always gives me poor/fair/good levels.
I think one good way to determine if your fitness level is improving is by monitoring your resting heart rate over time. 4 years ago my resting heart rate was in the high 80's. Now it's in the high 50's, so I know my heart is pumping more blood per beat than it was 4 years ago.
0 -
Not to pile on here, but strength training is great, yoga is great, but neither will improve VO2max. VO2max is improved by stressing your system by pushing into VO2max heart rate for a while and then recovering. (This applies to anaerobic threshold training as well.) Your individual mileage may vary. Very high VO2max is largely genetic.1
-
OldAssDude wrote: »I think VO2max is pretty important because it is an indicator of you overall cardio fitness level, but I don't think it's as important to know the exact number, as it is just to know your in a good range.
If you really want to know the exact number then you should have a lab test done, but even doing that, it will improve or decline depending on your workout schedule.
Some devices will give a fair ballpark, but only under perfect conditions (treadmill, track, no hills, etc...). For example, fitbit always gives me an elite level, but garmin always gives me poor/fair/good levels.
I think one good way to determine if your fitness level is improving is by monitoring your resting heart rate over time. 4 years ago my resting heart rate was in the high 80's. Now it's in the high 50's, so I know my heart is pumping more blood per beat than it was 4 years ago.
I did break down and get on the dreadmill for the Garmin recommended 15 minute run, still no VO2max diff on the Vivosport.
My resting heart rate pre-weight loss was in the low 70's, now for the past 2.5 years it's in the mid 50's so I'm very satisfied with my results.
@sijnomial my MHR is only a calculated rate based on age. Haven't done a true test to find out the actual. I'm sure it's somewhat higher. I want to reiterate, none of my hiking is on the level. I have mountains behind my house so elevation gain is a good steady uphill for 2 miles. It's winter so I have the uphill in addition to dealing with deep snow at times. Probably not optimum conditions for determining much besides the fact I sweat a lot and get my heart rate up for the requisite number of minutes per workout and have good recovery once I level out. From what I've read about the Garmin in forums, one of these days it will give me a VO2 max reading more in line with actual. Maybe not, maybe I am a 79 year old woman in the real world. 2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions