Lactate testing or Vo2 max

[Lucasd48]

Hi,

Has anyone got any thoughts on which of the above is more
beneficial when training on the erg.

I can’t afford both (!) so wanted to choose the one that gives me the most bang for my buck.

Thanks ,
Paul

[Dangerscouse]

I'm not 100% sure, but you should go for lactate testing. That will inform your steady state, so the main bulk, of your training and that will subsequently help your faster sessions.

I'm never sure what benefit V02 max gives other than possible bragging rights? Even if you get told your max is 99 it means nothing if you don't do something with it. I'll be happy to be educated if I'm off the mark on this.

[nick rockliff]

Lactate profile for sure, tells you so much more than vo2max.

Usually they do both at the same time. If you are doing it for rowing, make sure they test you whilst rowing.

[Tsnor]

Lactate testing or Vo2 max...

How were you planning to use the results of Lactate Testing or VO2 max?

As said above Lactate will give you a mapping to HR which will let you do zone training, especially pyramid and polarized. That's what I would choose.

Not sure what a single VO2 max data point tells you. Change in VO2max is interesting, not sure how to use the absolute value of VO2max. But if you do the VO2 max test please let us know how close it comes to the C2 2K time predicted VO2MAX. https://www.concept2.com/training/vo2ma ... 7kQAvD_BwE

[Mike Caviston]

Has anyone got any thoughts on which of the above is more beneficial when training on the erg.

Neither is beneficial when training on the erg. They only loosely correlate with performance, and change quicker than you might think during the training process and not necessarily in the direction you might expect. More than pretty much any other activity, the erg gives you instant and accurate feedback on the work you are performing. You can use that feedback to tailor your training better than vague and unstable proxies like lactate threshold or VO2 max and get better results.

[H2O]

I have never taken a lactate test but naively would assume that the result is heart rate bands for your workouts. The problem is: heart rate is not only influenced by exertion level. Nutritional status and temperature also play a role. That effects both ends: your condition at the test (where the bands are established) and your condition at subsequent workouts.

To get the most out of this you likely have to buy a lactate meter which runs about 500 EUR and test all the time during training.

It's likely no worth it. Naively I believe that the main application of this is to prevent overtraining and you can ask yourself: is this your problem?
I have found that the C2 training guide gives you very reasonable guidelines to choose the paces for the various workouts based on 2K performance.

[nick rockliff]

Has anyone got any thoughts on which of the above is more beneficial when training on the erg.

Neither is beneficial when training on the erg. They only loosely correlate with performance, and change quicker than you might think during the training process and not necessarily in the direction you might expect. More than pretty much any other activity, the erg gives you instant and accurate feedback on the work you are performing. You can use that feedback to tailor your training better than vague and unstable proxies like lactate threshold or VO2 max and get better results.

Really? I used blood lactate profile to set my training zones over a six year period. Worked quite well for me.

[Mike Caviston]

Really? I used blood lactate profile to set my training zones over a six year period. Worked quite well for me.

Is that a strong argument? I've never used lactate (or HR) to set my training zones, and it's worked quite well for me. Checkmate!

[nick rockliff]

Really? I used blood lactate profile to set my training zones over a six year period. Worked quite well for me.

Is that a strong argument? I've never used lactate (or HR) to set my training zones, and it's worked quite well for me. Checkmate!

So, if you've never used lactate profile or HR, how can you say it's not beneficial when training on the erg?

Not getting into verbals here, you do what works for you and I'll do the same.

[Mike Caviston]

So, if you've never used lactate profile or HR, how can you say it's not beneficial when training on the erg?

You know, I don't post nearly as often as some people but I have been posting here for 25 years, and my history is available. On the erg I have won championships across five age groups from 20s-60s, and held world records in two of them. Not to mention simultaneously achieving success in a number of other endurance sports. In recent weeks I won the US Indoor Rowing championship, made it to the podium in several road races, and just yesterday placed high in a stairclimb race in Minneapolis that involved multiple climbs of a 52-story building despite being significantly older than the other competitors. What additional benefits should I be looking for with lactate- or HR-based training?

I know the research literature on lactate threshold very well (unlike some people who consider themselves experts because they watched a video or did a Google search and read a few abstracts). I was a physiologist working at a major university and performed physiological assessments that included lactate threshold on elite athletes from many endurance sports. My students included swimmers whose coaches had utilized lactate-based training extensively and by communicating with them and their coaches I gained a lot of insight into the pros and cons. As a rowing coach, I had access to athletes who spent time training with the US or Canadian national teams and got their perspective on lactate training. I am very highly qualified to have an opinion on it's benefits or lack thereof.

[nick rockliff]

So, if you've never used lactate profile or HR, how can you say it's not beneficial when training on the erg?

You know, I don't post nearly as often as some people but I have been posting here for 25 years, and my history is available. On the erg I have won championships across five age groups from 20s-60s, and held world records in two of them. Not to mention simultaneously achieving success in a number of other endurance sports. In recent weeks I won the US Indoor Rowing championship, made it to the podium in several road races, and just yesterday placed high in a stairclimb race in Minneapolis that involved multiple climbs of a 52-story building despite being significantly older than the other competitors. What additional benefits should I be looking for with lactate- or HR-based training?

I know the research literature on lactate threshold very well (unlike some people who consider themselves experts because they watched a video or did a Google search and read a few abstracts). I was a physiologist working at a major university and performed physiological assessments that included lactate threshold on elite athletes from many endurance sports. My students included swimmers whose coaches had utilized lactate-based training extensively and by communicating with them and their coaches I gained a lot of insight into the pros and cons. As a rowing coach, I had access to athletes who spent time training with the US or Canadian national teams and got their perspective on lactate training. I am very highly qualified to have an opinion on it's benefits or lack thereof.

Good for you, well done.

[contradictus]

Hey guys,

I think this topic is too exciting - especially a typical amateur like - to let it fizzle out!

@ mike: what manageable method do you recommend as an alternative to the lactate-testing or spiroergometry to determine the "right" zones? or do you recommend something like the way round: choose your training and adjust your performance over time (e.g. take the average from the previous intervals as a starting point for the next training session)?

[gvcormac]

I know the research literature on lactate threshold very well (unlike some people who consider themselves experts because they watched a video or did a Google search and read a few abstracts). I was a physiologist working at a major university and performed physiological assessments that included lactate threshold on elite athletes from many endurance sports. My students included swimmers whose coaches had utilized lactate-based training extensively and by communicating with them and their coaches I gained a lot of insight into the pros and cons. As a rowing coach, I had access to athletes who spent time training with the US or Canadian national teams and got their perspective on lactate training. I am very highly qualified to have an opinion on it's benefits or lack thereof.

Most of the literature considers college or elite athletes with tens of hours to spend training each week. It is not clear to me to what extent the results apply to me, who spends 6-10 hours per week running/rowing/cycling.

Seiler-- Mr. Polarized training -- is a lot less dogmatic about lactate, ventilatory, and heart rate thresholds than many of its devotees. He mentions stress and strain, and he also mentions 80% of heart-rate-reserve as a threshold, while emphasizing that there really isn't a bright line. It seems the main drawback of exceeding threshold is excess strain, resulting in overtraining. This can be tracked with sleep patterns, morning HR and general sense of well-being. [I dabbled with HRV -- yet another new shiny object -- but found it not particularly illuminating.]

Most advocates of "run slow to get faster" advocate much lower trainng paces. I have no controlled study, but I find that if I run slower than about Seiling's threshold, my gait is way off, and I really don't feel like I'm getting a workout. Furthermore, I experience cardiac drift at the same pace and perceived effort. I haven't seen any convincing evidence that you should slow down to counteract cardiac drift.

Of course, this is an Erg board, but I have similar impressions rowing, biking, or ski(ERG)ing.

I'd be happy to see hard evidence on what's best for somebody like me. I'm not sure of the label. Competitive non-athlete? Non-competitive athlete? Active non-athlete?

HM68. Recent PB 10k rowing 41; running 51. Lifetime PB 10k rowing 36; running 40. Marathon 3:40.

[nick rockliff]

I know the research literature on lactate threshold very well (unlike some people who consider themselves experts because they watched a video or did a Google search and read a few abstracts). I was a physiologist working at a major university and performed physiological assessments that included lactate threshold on elite athletes from many endurance sports. My students included swimmers whose coaches had utilized lactate-based training extensively and by communicating with them and their coaches I gained a lot of insight into the pros and cons. As a rowing coach, I had access to athletes who spent time training with the US or Canadian national teams and got their perspective on lactate training. I am very highly qualified to have an opinion on it's benefits or lack thereof.

Most of the literature considers college or elite athletes with tens of hours to spend training each week. It is not clear to me to what extent the results apply to me, who spends 6-10 hours per week running/rowing/cycling.

Seiler-- Mr. Polarized training -- is a lot less dogmatic about lactate, ventilatory, and heart rate thresholds than many of its devotees. He mentions stress and strain, and he also mentions 80% of heart-rate-reserve as a threshold, while emphasizing that there really isn't a bright line. It seems the main drawback of exceeding threshold is excess strain, resulting in overtraining. This can be tracked with sleep patterns, morning HR and general sense of well-being. [I dabbled with HRV -- yet another new shiny object -- but found it not particularly illuminating.]

Most advocates of "run slow to get faster" advocate much lower trainng paces. I have no controlled study, but I find that if I run slower than about Seiling's threshold, my gait is way off, and I really don't feel like I'm getting a workout. Furthermore, I experience cardiac drift at the same pace and perceived effort. I haven't seen any convincing evidence that you should slow down to counteract cardiac drift.

Of course, this is an Erg board, but I have similar impressions rowing, biking, or ski(ERG)ing.

I'd be happy to see hard evidence on what's best for somebody like me. I'm not sure of the label. Competitive non-athlete? Non-competitive athlete? Active non-athlete?

HM68. Recent PB 10k rowing 41; running 51. Lifetime PB 10k rowing 36; running 40. Marathon 3:40.

Wrong person quoted.

[gvcormac]

Wrong person quoted.

Oops. Thanks!

Now I can't seem to find an "edit" button on my post. I could've sworn that was possible.

[Edit: Doubly weird. I can edit this post but not the one with the incorrect citation. Maybe post is locked once somebody quotes it. I'm not entirely opposed to that behaviour, as moving targets are annoying.]