What is cardio/lung capacity/vo2 fitness?

[jsmoke]

What does it actually mean in physical terms. Obviously you're can run, or whatever sport, longer or faster but what's actually happening under the hood?

Definition of lung.

Their function in the respiratory system is to extract oxygen from the atmosphere and transfer it into the bloodstream, and to release carbon dioxide from the bloodstream into the atmosphere

.

Is the lung just a muscle like the bicep that has to be strengthened, or is it actually to do with how fast the heart can pump blood around the body or what?

At the moment for example I'm gasping for breath after one third of a mile running(mild smoker for years also).

If I trained and trained that gasping would reduce and reduce so am I making the lung bigger.

If I were to take say oxygen from a tank before running would it help?

 

[manic111]

I think it's the volume of oxygen that your body can process while exercising. So the higher your VO2 max, the more oxygen you can use to respire, and the better your aerobic endurance will be.

Edit; so no, inhaling more oxygen would not help if your body is ill equipped to process it

 

[tom_nieto]

The lung is not a muscle. Next question.

 

[jsmoke]

Well why does breathing get easier the more you train?

 

[garnett]

Well why does breathing get easier the more you train?

Your lung capacity increases, and your body gets better at getting energy from the oxygen in the air your lungs take in.

 

[jsmoke]

So you lung physically expands like a stomach expands?

 

[garnett]

So you lung physically expands like a stomach expands?

Yup. Competitive swimmers, cyclists, rowers etc all have massive lungs.

 

[SoliD]

All willy waving if you've got no power behind it. Well in cycling anyway. Ie my 80ml/kg/min is useless unless you train bloody hard and then suspect at my age I won't ever be able to achieve as much as my lungs could take.

 

[D.P.]

All willy waving if you've got no power behind it. Well in cycling anyway. Ie my 80ml/kg/min is useless unless you train bloody hard and then suspect at my age I won't ever be able to achieve as much as my lungs could take.

You do not have a Vo2Max of 80, that would put you among the worlds most elite athletes. Only the absolutes highest values of the worlds fittest endurance sportsman have a value of 80 or above. A typical marathon winner of one of the world majors will be in the 80-85 range, Tour De France winners in the 82-86 range.A Vo2max of 80 is physically impossible to reach for most of the population even with dedicated training, and if you are winning the genetic lottery you would need to train 20 hours a week minimum to see that.

 

[SoliD]

I was lying it was 79.4.

 

[Berger]

Michael Hutchinson has a huge vo2 max iirc but can’t convert that as efficiently as other pro cyclists.

So while he’s been an excellent time trialist he hasn’t been world class.

 

[NickK]

Your lung capacity increases, and your body gets better at getting energy from the oxygen in the air your lungs take in.

I think there's more to VO2:
* Lung capacity and efficiency of moving air in and out.
* Lung capability of removing waste gases and replacing with oxygen.
* Blood capacity to transport O2 and CO2.
* Body's capability to utilise O2 available and the efficiency of the body parts to perform their duties with the given O2, this changes with fitness.
* Heart's capacity to move blood at the require rate given the above and the demand.

The biggest point of all of the above is your genetic make up.. being fit is one thing, born with something that puts you above anyone else in the any of the above is likely to give you a far better reading.

I have a VO2 thing on my watch, although not amazingly accurate it's a gauge and you will need a decent 20+ minute run for it to work.

 

[robj20]

My watch has VO2 max, says its 45. All i know is higher is better.

 

[MrWhippy]

...
The biggest point of all of the above is your genetic make up.. being fit is one thing, born with something that puts you above anyone else in the any of the above is likely to give you a far better reading...

The majority of sports ban, investigate and penalise drug use on the grounds of unfair competitive advantage, but they entirely ignore the fact that it is not a level playing field anyway due to genetics.

Win the race because you took drugs which gave you an advantage = cheat.
Win the race because you had better genetics which gave you an advantage = sporting hero.

Though I am playing devil's advocate to a certain extent, can't help but feel there should be a place for some sporting events where the aim is to establish the absolute maximum performance of the human race.

You know, a bit like cycling

 

[garnett]

The majority of sports ban, investigate and penalise drug use on the grounds of unfair competitive advantage, but they entirely ignore the fact that it is not a level playing field anyway due to genetics.

Win the race because you took drugs which gave you an advantage = cheat.
Win the race because you had better genetics which gave you an advantage = sporting hero.

Though I am playing devil's advocate to a certain extent, can't help but feel there should be a place for some sporting events where the aim is to establish the absolute maximum performance of the human race.

You know, a bit like cycling

I wonder how far off the Russians are from genetic doping...

 

[MrWhippy]

or the Americans for that matter?

 

[booyaka]

I was 52.3ml/kg/min VO2 max when I was training hard for cycling about 18 months ago. Properly tested over a few sessions

 

[D.P.]

I have hit 59 as measured by my Garmin using a proper chest ECG HRM. that is definitely higher than my true VO2max.
However, going by some race results I have hit 57.9 VDOT https://runsmartproject.com/calculator/
a Vo2max of 58 does align with my performance when I am in peak training for a race.

To get my Vo2max that high does require up to 15 hours training a week

 

[D.P.]

The majority of sports ban, investigate and penalise drug use on the grounds of unfair competitive advantage, but they entirely ignore the fact that it is not a level playing field anyway due to genetics.

Win the race because you took drugs which gave you an advantage = cheat.
Win the race because you had better genetics which gave you an advantage = sporting hero.

Though I am playing devil's advocate to a certain extent, can't help but feel there should be a place for some sporting events where the aim is to establish the absolute maximum performance of the human race.

You know, a bit like cycling

But that is basically the point of performance sporting events, find people with the combination fo the best genetics and the best training. However, there is a selection bias and people with genetics better for certain events tend to gravitate towards those events. E.g., people with good running genetics did well running x-country at school or found good results when training for a fun half marathon etc. Those who are stronger naturally get more drawn to weight lifting or strength based sports. Someone might have good CV fitness response and start running but is prone to injury due to bone issues etc., so takes up cycling. Once you get to the pro level everyone genetics are highly optimal for that event and differences reflect training more than in the amateur side


For me, I don;t have the genetics for running, at leats not short distance, but I train hard and this makes me perform better than people who have better genetics but don;t put in the training time.

This is also why I am prefering ultramarathon now, because time is meaningless. When I am doing road marathons I know I am now getting close to genetic limits and so every minute gets very hard to eek out.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Had mine accurately measured at 69.3 at a point where I was doing only 7 hours training a week. There's a massive genetic factor to it and it means very little unless you put it to use with endurance events which I despise. If I run or do any fairly strenuous cardio for too long I also go into SVT so for me it's wasted.