VERONIQUE BILLAT

The funky Paris neighborhood just north of the Place de la Republique has been
known for its canals, crowded streets, excellent African restaurants, and
teeming marketplaces, but definitely not for its exercise research..
That's all changed now, because in a small neighbourhood laboratory just a short stroll
from the the Jacques Bonsergent Metro stop, a diminutive French scientist named
VERONIQUE BILLAT has carried out innovative research which will change the way you train
and compete. If you're a runner, chances are good that Billat's recommended training
programme will shave at least a minute from your IO-K clocking and several minutes from
your half-marathon PBs. Endurance cyclists and swimmers can expect similar benefits.
From her small lab at the 'Centre of Sports Medicine for Electricians and Gas Workers,'
located on the unexpectedly quiet Avenue Richerand, the amiable Veronique has emerged
as a rising star in the field of endurance-training research. A competitive athlete herself
with a 1:18 PB for the half-marathon, Veronique carries out research which identifies highquality workouts and optimal long-term training programmes. Above all else, Veronique's
work is always extremely practical: you can literally take her research and run with it. Or
cycle. Or swim.
In the past year, Veronique has published a blizzard of new studies on endurance training,
but for now we'll focus on her most recent effort. In that study, Veronique worked with a
group of accomplished male runners who were faring pretty well in competitions (running
half-marathons in PBs of 70-85 minutes) even though they had been training in a fairly
nonsystematic manner. Veronique's first task was to measure each athlete's running
velocity at V02max, which we'll call vV02max.
What exactly is it?
Knowing exactly what vV02max represents can be confusing to some runners, so let's
discuss it for a moment. When you run at your marathon pace, you use oxygen at roughly
80 per cent of your maximal possible rate (80% V02max). When you step up to 10-K
tempo, you use oxygen at about 90 per cent of your maximal possible rate (90% V02max).
At 5-K speed, you're at 95% V02max. As you accelerate above 5-K velocity, you soon reach
a speed at which you're using oxygen at your maximal possible rate (100% V02max). This
speed is your vV02max.
Despite what some runners think, vV02max is in fact not your top speed. To reach your
highest velocity during an effort which lasts more than a couple of minutes, you have to
use oxygen at your maximal possible rate and produce as much energy anaerobically as
you possibly can. This highest speed will be well above vV02max. vV02max is simply the
first running speed above 5-K pace which corresponds with your maximal rate of oxygen
use (V02max).
As we explained in the November issue of PEAK PERFORMANCE, V02max can be a pretty
lousy predictor of performance potential when you try to compare various runners.
However, vV02max is an outstanding predictor, mainly because it combines aerobic
capacity (the total amount of oxygen a runner can use) and running economy (how
efficiently oxygen is used). Looking at vV02max is rather like examining how big a runner's
'petrol tank' is and how efficiently he/she uses what's in the tank. vV02max doesn't apply
only to runners, however. There's also a cycling vV02max (the cycling speed at which a
cyclist reaches V02max), a swimming vV02max, a stair-machine vV02max, and so on.
If you're a runner, you can determine your own vV02max on your friendly neighborhood
track. In fact, you must work out your vV02max to train according to Veronique Billat's new
system. We provided full details on calculating your velocity at V02max in the November
issue; for a short summary of that technique, please see the accompanying box.
Calculating your TvV02max
The next step Veronique took in her research will be your next step, too. You must figure
out how long you can actually run at your vV02max. Don't do this on the same day that
you determine your vV02max, however. In fact, to get an accurate reading, you should rest

- training lightly or not at all - for a couple of days first. You must also obtain your doctor's
permission before trying the following test.
To find out how long you can actually run at vV02max, warm up by jogging easily on a
track for 10 minutes, and then begin running at your precise vV02max. If your vV02max
corresponds with six-minute per mile pace, for example, you should be running each 400metre lap in about 90 seconds. Have a friend call out splits to you every 100-200 metres or
so to make sure that you're at exactly the right tempo. Time yourself over your total effort
(not counting the warm-up), and keep running as long as you can. When you can no longer
continue running at vV02max, stop the watch and determine the total time you were able
to run at vV02max (be honest; you know you're not really running at vV02max any longer if
you're more than five-metres short on a 200-metre lap or 10-metres shy over 400 metres).
The total time you're able to run at vV02max is your TvVO2max.
In the old days, exercise physiologists used to say that your vV02max was the fastest pace
you could sustain continuously for about 11-12 minutes. In other words, TvVO2max was
considered to be an mlmutable 11-12 minutes, but Veronique's work has changed that
outdated thinking. The ingenious Billat has shown that in fact some runners, cyclists, and
swimmers can sizzle along at vV02max for no more than about three minutes or so, while
others have a TvVO2max of 13 minutes! It's an individual thing, but the bottom line is that
you must know both your vV02max and TvVO2max if you want to train according to the
principles of Billat's programme.
Here's the schedule to follow
Once you know your vV02max and TvVO2max, you're ready to begin Veronique's schedule.
Fortunately, it is easy to carry out, and it pays big dividends. Even though they were
already accomplished runners when they began to work with Veronique, individuals who
trained according to her system were able to trim their half-marathon times by 5-7 per cent
(four to six minutes) over a seven-month time period! Here's Veronique's actual schedule:
MONDAY Run for about one hour at 70% vV02max. What could be simpler? Let's say you've
discovered that your vV02max is six-minute per mile pace. That's a velocity of 1609 metres
per mile divided by six minutes per mile = 268 metres per minute. 70 per cent of that is
188 metres per minute. 1609/188 = 8.56 minutes per mile, or 8:34 tempo. You would run
for one hour at 8:34 per mile.
TUESDAY This is the only time in the week when things get slightly complex. Tuesday is
interval-training day, which in Veronique's scheme of things means that on the first week of
your training period you run your intervals at exactly vV02max. How long should these
work intervals last? 'Exactly half the amount of time you can actually run at vV02max,'
says Veronique. In other words, if your TvVO2max is eight minutes, your work intervals will
last for four minutes. You complete five of these work intervals per workout, and your
recoveries last the same amount of time as the work intervals, but your recovery speed will
be 60 per cent of your vV02max (see the description of Monday's workout to find how to
calculate 60% vV02max).
All right so far? Fine, because on the second Tuesday of the overall programme, you'll make
a slight adjustment. This time, you'll run your work intervals at only 95% vV02max, but
they'll each last for 60 per cent of TvVO2max (each interval is slightly longer). Again, carry
out five work intervals per workout, let your recoveries last exactly as long as your work
intervals, and run the recoveries at 60% vV02max.
On the third Tuesday, there's yet another wrinkle. This time, you uncork a bit of your real
leg speed which has been dormant for so long and sizzle through your work intervals at
105% vV02max. If your vV02max is 300 metres per minute for example, you would run
these 105%-vVO2max intervals 5-per cent faster - at 315 metres per minute,or
1609/315=5:06 per mile pace. Each work interval lasts for 40 per cent of your TvVO2max,
the recovery intervals are just as long, and your recovery speed is again 60% vV02max. Oh
yes - you must run a total of five work intervals during the workout.
On the fourth Tuesday, you get a bit of a break. After all, you've been working hard, so it's
time to recover a bit. Simply run easily for one hour at 65% vV02max. On the fifth Tuesday,
revert back to the first Tuesday of the overall schedule and complete that workout, on the
sixth Tuesday do the second Tuesday's session, and so on. The Tuesday workouts, like the
Thursday sessions, are on a four-week cycle.

WEDNESDAY Back to an unvarying routine: simply jog for about 75 minutes at 65%
vV02max.
THURSDAY Things get slightly more complicated again. On the first Thursday, complete
four 10-minute intervals at a new intensity - 80% vV02max, with five-minute jog recoveries
in between.
On the second Thursday, carry out three 15-minute intervals at 80% vV02max, again with
five-minute jog recoveries.
On the third Thursday, conduct two 20-minute intervals at 80% vV02max, with five minutes
of easy jogging in between.
On the fourth Thursday, you have it made: just rest (if 'rest' is a foreign word to you, it
means absolutely no running at all!). Obviously, the Thursday sessions (not counting the
fourth one) are Veronique's versions of traditional tempo workouts.
FRIDAY Take a rest day, and don't run at all. It's okay to do some stretching and a bit of
strength training if you want to, however.
SATURDAY Run for around 90 minutes at 70% vV02max.
SUNDAY Free running. Run for fun, and don't push the pace too much. The important thing
is to keep moving for two hours.
To summarize the overall training programme, you first figure your vV02max, then your
TvVO2max, and you then begin training a la Veronique, with the schedule outlined above. If
you respond to training as Veronique's runners did, your TvVO2max will improve
significantly after eight weeks, and your vV02max will be better after no more than 12-16
weeks. Within 8-12 weeks, you should be establishing better race times at distances from
5000 metres up to the half-marathon.
If you're a cyclist or swimmer, how do you estimate your vV02max? Easy! Just cycle or
swim as far as you possibly can in 15 minutes, then figure your actual pace in metres per
minute (or feet per minute if you're still in the old school of distance measurements).
Increase that pace by 5-6 per cent, and you should be very close to vV02max. You can then
use the intensities above to construct a training programme.
Evaluate thyself
Since you'll be improving as the programme proceeds, it's important to evaluate yourself
every eight weeks. The best way to do this is to reserve a Saturday at the end of each
eight-week period to re-calibrate your vV02max (do the vV02max test instead of your
normal Saturday workout). On the following Monday, compute your TvV02max instead of
the regular Monday workout. After you know your new vV02max and TvV02max, adjust
your workout speeds accordingly.
If you're a relatively new runner and can't yet run for one hour at a time, gradually increase
the frequency and distance of your training runs until you feel comfortable training six days
a week and can run for 7590 minutes in a single workout. Then, begin Veronique's
programme. Bear in mind that the overall schedule is not etched in stone; if you feel
fatigued on a particular day, it's okay to skip that day's workout. However, it's preferable if
the key workouts on Tuesdays and Thursdays are not missed.
Veronique's new training programme is straightforward and easy to carry out once you
become used to it. It's beautifully constructed, with special Tuesday sessions to heighten
vV02max and TvVO2max and Thursday efforts to boost lactate threshold running speed. In
line with current research, it also features a very good rest and recovery period every
fourth week.
'Carrying out excellent training is not hard to do,' says Veronique. 'You simply have to have
reliable reference points around which to structure your workouts.' Those dependable

points happen to be your vV02max and TvVO2max. Once you know them, you can train
systematically in a way that should trim large chunks of time from your current PBs.
Owen Anderson

Make sure you have your doctor's permission before carrying out the following
test.
On a 200-metre track, put traffic cones or chairs at the four 50-metre points on the inside

of the track. If no 200-metre track is available, use a 400-metre oval, with markers at each
100-metre point. Have a friend along to help you.
Once you're loose and ready, jog around the track at a tempo of 100 seconds per 200
metres (25 seconds per 50 metres on the 200-metre track or 50 seconds per 100 metres
on the 400-metre oval). To make sure you're at the right pace, have your friend call out
your splits as you reach each 50- or 100-metre point. Continue at this pace for two
minutes. After two minutes, start a new two-minute period in which you jog at a tempo of
85 seconds per 200 metres (about 21 seconds per 50 metres or 42 seconds per 100
metres). Once the two minutes in this stage are up, you must move on to the next stage.
In the third two-minute stage, you'll use a tempo of 74 seconds per 200 metres. And so it
goes: after each two-minute period, you increase your running tempo. The following is a
listing of all the stages and tempos (times per 200 metres). Since each stage must last for
only two minutes, you'll be running farther on each successive stage. For example, during
stage eight you will traverse about 522 metres in two minutes, but during stage 15 (if you
make it that far) you will zip through 762 metres in two minutes.
If you make it all the way through, the whole affair will take 30 minutes, but mow runners
can not complete all 15 stages. You will probably stop somewhere between the middle and
the end (you should stop whenever you feel you can't possibly complete two minutes of
running at the new stage tempo, or whenever you're about 10 metres or more behind
where you should be at the end of a two-minute stage).
At any rate, your V02max running velocity is your velocity over the last two-minute stage
which you complete successfully. For example, if that happens to be the eighth stage, then
your V02max tempo is 46 seconds per 200 metres, or 92 seconds per 400 metres and
about 6:08 per mile. Your calculated V02max tempo should be faster than your usual S-K
race velocity. If not, try the test again at a later date.

vVO2max and tlimvVO2max

Introduction
Veronique Billat, a professor of Sport Sciences at the University of Lille, has shown that in a
single training session it is possible to improve the lactate threshold, VO2max and
economy. To understand Billat's work we need to be aware of two new variables - vVO2max
and tlimvVO2max.
What are they?
vVO2max is the minimal running velocity which produces VO2max i.e. causes your
muscular system to utilise oxygen at its highest possible rate, and tlimvVO2max is the
amount of time you can exercise at vVO2max.
VO2max on its own is a poor predictor of performance but using the velocity (vVO2max)
and duration (tlimvVO2max) that an athlete can operate at their VO2max will provide a
better indication of performance.
Billat conduct a four week trail with a group of athletes. The athletes had 6 training
sessions a week - 4 easy sessions, one vVO2max session, and one lactate threshold
workout. At the end of the trial vVO2max increased by 3% and running economy increased
by 6%.
Why the big improvement in economy?
Running at vVO2max increases leg muscle strength and power, and enhanced strength
tends to improve economy (muscle cells are stronger, fewer needed to run at a particular
pace, thus the energy expenditure is lower). vVO2max effort boosts neuromuscular
responsiveness and coordination which reduces energy expenditure
How do you determine your vVO2max?
Take yourself down to the track, run as hard as you can for six minutes and record the
distance covered. Calculate your velocity in metres/second to determine your vVO2max.
Lets assume you manage 1800 metres then vVO2max is 1800 / 360 = 5 metres/second. It
is recommend that you repeat the test 48 hours later and use the highest velocity in your
training sessions.
Remember to repeat the six minute test every 4 to 6 weeks to determine your new
vVO2max.
The 30-30 work out
Billat has developed a new vVO2max session which comprises of:

30 seconds at 100% of vVO2max

30 seconds recover at 50% of vVO2max

This cycle is repeated for as long as the 30 seconds at 100% vVO2max can be sustained.
The 30 seconds at 100% vVO2max is important as this is the element from which the gains
in fitness will be achieved. The recoveries need to be run slowly and reasonably close to
50% vVO2 max.
Example
If you you complete 1800m in the 6 minute test then your vVO2max would be 300m/min
(1800 / 6).

The classic workout would be 5 * 900m in three minutes with 3 minutes recovery. The new
30-30 workout would comprise of 150m in 30 seconds followed by 75m in 30 seconds,
150m in the next 30 seconds and so on until you are unable to maintain the 150m in 30
seconds.
What sort of vVO2max sessions should you do?
Ballet recommends using the 30-30 session early in the season as an excellent, easily
tolerated way to kick start improvements in Vo2max, vVO2max, lactate threshold and
running economy.
In the 4 to 6 weeks before a major competition conduct one session a week of five three
minute repetitions at your calculated vVO2max speed with three minute recoveries
between each repetition.

vVo2max and tlimVo2max:

Practical Considerations for Triathletes
On a Quest for Speed
Gordo Note: These are elite training techniques - please use extreme caution in their application.
There is a real risk of overtraining and injury with high intensity sessions.

Francois Modave,
CompetitionZone,
francois@competitionzone.com

Introduction
In endurance sports, three variables are of prime importance to performance: Vo2max, which is largely genetically
determined, anaerobic threshold and economy. Although there is no real consensus on the definition of anaerobic
threshold, we will admit it is equivalent to the OBLA, the onset of blood lactate accumulation or the intensity of
exercise at which the production of lactate equals its clearance. Economy is generally determined as the
percentage of the Vo2max sustained at a particular submaximal intensity. For example, in running, economy could
be defined as the quantity of oxygen consumed per minute and per kg of body weight at 14km/h (or 16km/h for
more efficient runners).
Vo2max is slightly more complicated as Dr. Veronique Billat has shown. She is a French physiologist whose aim is
not to explain theoretically why such or such method of training is more efficient, but to design new methods from
theoretical results! She has applied her results to herself rather successfully with a 78' PB for a half marathon...
The main idea was to separate vo2max in two variables: vVo2max and tlimVo2max. vVo2max is defined as the
velocity at Vo2max, and tlimVo2max is the maximal time an athlete can sustain at vVo2max. But what is the point
if Vo2max is genetically determined?
Well, indeed it is, but vVO2max and tlimVo2max can be greatly improved! You can have a 65mlO2/min/kg Vo2max
and 19km/h as vVo2max when you first test, and a year later, with a Vo2max of 66, could be reaching 20km/h! So
basically forget these big numbers of Vo2max. What is really important are vVo2max and tlimVo2max and to find
these, you do not need to go to a lab and get hooked to some funny device! We will see further how to find these
values in swimming, cycling and running.
After that bit of theory, what you want to know is: how is that going to make me a better athlete? What do I need
to improve? Simple: everything! You need to improve your vVo2max, tlimVo2max, running economy and lactate
threshold (LT). Though, you may be thinking, that with three sports, and four variables to improve, plus for many a
heavy working and family schedule, you would not have the time to work on all these values.
Well, yes, if you can work on all of them in a single workout! What Billat has shown is that a specific work, at
specific intensity, for a specific time (understand INDIVIDUAL), you could improve simultaneously these four
variables. She has found improvements of 3% of vVo2max, tlimVo2max, LT, and 6% of (running economy) for subelite runners (with PB around 70' for half marathons)!!! These improvements are simply huge and therefore Billat's
work really needed some attention. Besides, this improvement was observed after a four-week period.
We will first describe how to determine vVo2max, tlimVo2max and also a short cut for very busy athletes, or
athletes who already have a pretty good idea of their vVo2max. These tests are easy to do and are field tests. You
will not have to go to a lab and spend some big bucks! Then, we will described the workouts you can design, and
eventually we will show how to integrate these sessions in your training phase depending on the sort of triathlon
you are competing in.

Determining vVo2max and tlimVo2max

We will explain the field test in running, and will then explain how to adjust it to cycling and swimming, as was
done by Billat. One important remark - you will have to test again to evaluate improvements. When doing field

tests, it is very important the tests are being done in similar conditions: do not test in a 50m pool, then in a 25m
pool, or on a tartan track, then a grass track, or test on a cycling track with heavy winds blowing that day. Test
always at the same location (when possible), at the same time, and keep the same warm-up, recovery, training day
before (easy) and if possible eat the same things the 24 hrs before. Okay, to the test now.

Go to the track, and have a good warm up, around 20'. You will then proceed with a step test.
Start at 10km/h to 12km/h depending on your running level. Assume you start at 10km/h
Run 2' at 10km/h, and increase the pace by 2km/h every 2' until you reach your estimated LT (your speed
for 10km/h to simplify), then increase by 1km/h every 1', until you can not accelerate anymore (it usually
means you have to slow down). This is your vVo2max, or at least an accurate estimate of it. Ideally, place
some cones on the track every 50m and for each 2' step or 1' step, calculate the corresponding time you
need to run for 50m. Then have a thorough recovery.
Have at least 48hrs to recover, then go back to the track and after a good warm-up, identical to your warm
up for the firsts step, place your cones every 50m, and run as long as you can at your vVo2max. Once you
can't reach a cone at the estimated time (let's say you are more than 10m far from it), you are done. This
will represent your tlimVo2max.

Remark: don't think you need some quality workouts this week. I can guarantee you, these two sessions will be
enough!
Now, you want to determine your vVo2max and tlimVo2max on the bike and in the water. First, let's see a good
way to estimate it in the pool.

Have a good warm-up again, then because, we do not care about the speed in km in the pool, you will
determine your vVo2max as a pace per 100m. Start between 2'20'' and 2'/100m then increase your pace
by swimming 10'' faster for every 100m until you have to slow down or you have to stop, or you can not go
any faster. This gives you a good estimate of your vVO2max. Then again, have a good recovery. At least 48
hrs later, you can determine your tlimVo2max by swimming as long as you can maintaining your vVo2max.
For the bike, it may be slightly more complicated as the weather may affect widely the results. Try to do
these tests when the conditions are as quiet as possible. Also, a track seems ideal for this, for obvious
security reasons. Another possibility is to test on a trainer that displays the power output such as a
computrainer, or a Tacx Grand Excel, or for the more wealthy, to test with SRM cranks that display the
power output when riding outside, as the power output is not (as much as the speed) modified by the
weather conditions.
Again, have good 20 to 30' warm up, and start at about 20km, hold it for 2', and increase your speed by
2km/h every 2' until you can not accelerate, or have to slow down. This will be your vVo2max. 48 hrs later,
you can go back to the track and determine your tlimVo2max (a flying start is allowed).

Adapting the tests for busy athletes (or athletes who already have a good idea of their vVo2max)
Okay, I know that these tests represent six training sessions (although, as said earlier, they are worthy!), and most
athletes do not like to spend too much time testing. An alternative to these tests is to do a Time Trial. Indeed, Billat
has shown that on average, runners would have a tlimVo2max of 6' or thereabout. Therefore the alternative you
have is to go to the track and perform a 6'TT.
Your vVo2max will be determined as the speed you have hold during this 6'TT (once again, after a good warm up,
and do not forget the recovery). Of course, your tlimVo2max will be assumed to be 6'.
Nonetheless, we believe, it would definitely not be waste of time to test at least once both vVo2max and
tlimVo2max, specially knowing that tlimVo2max is linked to your lactate threshold (see further). Once you have
tested both, you can perform a TT (at tlimVo2max) to determine improvement in vVo2max.
To make things slightly more complicated, Billat has tested the relation between tlimVo2max in different sports
(swimming, cycling, running and kayak). It appears, that generally swimmers and cyclists will not be able to hold
their vVo2max as long as runners or kayakers. The explanation is pretty complicated though (check the
references).
So, if you rely on a TT to determine your vVo2max in swimming, you should perform a 4'30'' TT which is the time
swimmers can hold their vVo2max on average. To be more convenient, a test of 300m for moderately good

swimmers to 400m for advanced swimmers would be better to get an estimate of your vVo2max.
In cycling, the time spent at vVo2max is also around 4' to 4'30" and therefore, a 4'TT would provide an accurate
estimate of your vVo2max.
Once again, although, this will provide reasonable estimates, we believe if not testing entirely at least once, you
would miss a very important point in Billat's work.
Now, you have six variables: vVo2max and tlimVo2max for swimming, cycling and running. So the next step is to
know what you should do with these figures. What training should you do to improve these numbers?

Improving your vVo2max and tlimVo2max (and other variables)

Training sessions at vVo2max have been "traditional" sessions among runners, cyclists or swimmers for years now.
Although initially, a whole bunch of athletes was doing the same session at the same pace, it did not took long
before coaches realized that in order to be individual, each athlete should train at a different at Vo2max.
However, this was the only change. No one ever questioned seriously if everyone should do the same distance or
time at vVo2max. This is mainly because no one ever wondered how long could someone sustain vVo2max,
essentially because there was not one single answer as tlimVo2max is as individual as vVo2max.
Billat has found that even among elite runners (with vVO2max between 22 and 24.5km/h) where we would have
expected some homogeneity, the difference in tlimVo2max was important, going from 4'30" to slightly more than
10'. A difference of nearly 130%! The natural question to come was whether tlim and vVo2max were related or not.
Well, generally, someone with a very high vVo2max, for example a 5000m track runner, as a 5000m is run at about
98% of vVo2max, would have a lower tlimVo2max, than let say a half marathon runner, who runs very close to his
anaerobic threshold.
And funnily, this is the link. The variable tlimVo2max is positively correlated to the anaerobic threshold or lactate
threshold of a runner (or swimmer, or rider etc...) that is the higher the LT, the higher tlimVo2max. Therefore
improving your tlimVo2max will also improve your LT. This is (slightly simplified) why, the sort of sessions designed
by Veronique Billat, can simultaneously improve your vVo2max, tlimVo2max, LT and running economy!
The typical 30-30 session in running:
This session has been very popular in Europe for several decades, although there was no real strategy as to what
pace, how long, when the session was to be done. It was a traditional session in the early phases of training, to do
"some speed work", but forgotten further in the season as believed to be "too easy". Though, Billat's findings
contradict this belief. The gains mentioned above among runners who followed the training designed by Billat were
done using this 30-30 training session. So what is it?
On a one hour session run at around 70% of your vVo2max, you should include repeats of 30" of effort at 100% of
vVo2max with 30" of recovery at 50% of vVo2max, the total time recovery included being between 2x tlimVo2max,
for beginners to intermediate and advanced in the early season, to 2.5x tlimVo2max for advanced in an intense
phase of their training or elite athletes.
So let us consider runner A, with a vVo2max of 18km/h (40" per 200m) and tlimVo2max of 8' and runner B with a
vVo2max of 20km/h (200m in 36") and tlimVo2max of 5'. Both are supposed to be advanced runners in the early
season. A and B will both run one hour (or slightly more or less) and will do the following:
A: 16' alternating 150m in 30" and 75m in 30" (this can be done on track with cones to visualize the distance to
run or on a measured course)
B: 10' alternating 180m in 30" and 90m in 30"
In this case, you realized how important it is for the pace and the time of effort to be individual. If A was to do B's
session, it would end up being more of a lactate tolerance or power workout, and B doing A's session would do
something that looks like a LT session where the time of effort is not long enough!

Adapting this session to swimming and cycling:

In the water, the session is easier to do as a set of 50m repeats (or 25m for beginners). This session could be
included in a 4k-swim set with some aerobic work. Though, because it is important to maintain a very good
technique in swimming (not that this is not the case in running and cycling, but it is perceived as harder to do in
swimming due to the "non-friendly" medium!), the set would be better if split in two, with some aerobic active
recovery in between the sets.
Consider a swimmer with a vVo2max of 80" per 100m or 40" per 50m and who can sustain his vVo2max for a
300m (4'). He could choose between active recovery or complete rest between the efforts.
S1: 6x(50m in 40" with 25m very easy) leaving on 1'20" - 300m easy aerobic - 6x(50m in 40" with 25m easy) on
1'20" or
S2: 6x50m in 40" leaving on 1'20" - 300m easy aerobic - 6x50m in 40" leaving on 1'20".
For cyclists, the session is a bit harder to organize. First of all, do not attempt this sort of effort unless you are sure
your training area is safe and you are sure your training session will not finish in the door of a car! If you do this
session outside, try to do it where you have tested to make sure, the time and speed you have to hold are reliable.
A cycle track is ideal.
You can do it on a trainer with power output, or on a regular trainer (on which you can shift the resistance from the
handlebars) if you have a bike computer on your back wheel, but a computrainer or Excel would definitely be a
plus.
So, consider cyclist C, with a vVo2max of 40km/h. In 30" he will do 330m (the length of long cycle track, so it would
be very handy!), and tlimVo2max of 5'. His session will be 1h30' (or more if you have time to include it in a longer
ride) with:
C: 330m in 30" and half the track in 30" recovery during 10'.
An alternative to this, if you know a road with rolling hills, with short enough, it takes about 30'' to climb them,
then just do 10' surging up the hill (in this case, you will have to trust your sensations, unless you have SRM
cranks) and recover gently downhill before surging again up the next hill. Although this type of session is fun, it will
not be as accurate as a cycle track or a flat road where you really have some speed indication (unless you can go
as fast uphill!)
Other Sessions
The other classical session designed by Billat, in the case of runners is a set of 1000m. Consider runners A and B
mentioned above. On a 1hr session, they will perform the following:
A: 5x1000m in 3'20" with 500m in 3'20" recovery while B will perform
B: 3x1000m in 3' with 500m recovery in 3'
If you have been careful, we will have noticed that, here each runner's set is longer than 2x tlimVo2max (including
recovery). Actually here, each runner's set is 2xtlimVo2max, without including recovery! Why such a difference?
When Billat did these tests, she had access to K2s (portable gas exchange analyzer) that a runner or cyclist can
use while training and therefore she could know the exact percentage of Vo2max being used by the runner. She
then realized that when doing a set of 1000m, the runners Vo2max would drop very quickly after stopping and
when starting their next 1000m, they were at low values of Vo2max (around or under 60%), and what is important
is the time actually spent at Vo2max. Then, when doing those supposedly much easier sessions of 30-30, she
realized that after the 5th repeats, all runners (elite or not) were at 100% of their Vo2max, even at the end of the
30" recovery! This gives a new advantage to using these sorts of sessions (compared with the traditional 1000m
repeats and so on) as you will spend as much time at your Vo2max but will actually run less at a high speed, and
therefore, will risk less injuries.
Anyway, repeating the same sessions week in and week out can be boring, and using other sessions may
sometimes be useful.
In cycling, you could perform repeats of 2k-effort at your vVo2max for example with a 1k recovery. In practice, this
sort of session will probably be easier to organize than the previous 30-30.
For swimming, we believe that unless you are a very experienced swimmer (maybe able to swim 16'30" or 17' for
1500m which would be a limit), it is not wise to schedule similar sessions in swimming (like sets of 250m at
vVo2max) as it is very likely that you will not be able to hold the technique, and this is crucial. Therefore, sets of

50m would probably be a better strategy to improve vVo2max etc., in swimming.

Scheduling these sessions in the season for short course and long course triathletes
We will go rather quickly on this part, as there may be a lot of different alternatives to organize these sessions in
the season. Therefore, we will only list some possibilities.
Short course triathletes
For these athletes, contrary to long course triathletes, being able to tolerate high lactate contents (also something
you are working on with Vo2max workouts) is very important, especially for athletes racing draft legal races. This is
true for every leg, to close a gap when having a bad start in the swim leg, to break away from stronger runners on
the bike, to surge on the run. Therefore these athletes could use these sessions on a weekly basis:

One Vo2max session per sport in the week or when trying to work on one discipline specifically. For
example, someone working on his running could have,
One 30-30 session and one 1k repeat session in running.

In this case, we believe, adding two extra Vo2max sessions (one for cycling, one for swimming) would be too much
stress and the athlete depending on his phase of training would have to decide for which he/she would go. Though,
Billat has shown that the gain from adding a second Vo2max session were not very significant and therefore
should be considered only by elite athletes looking for the little extra that could make the difference.
Long course triathletes
For long course triathletes, the interest of these sessions is essentially improving economy, strength or LT. Many
athletes perceive the 30-30 workout as much easier than a traditional LT workout such as 3x3k with 3' rest which
can be pretty stressful, and therefore, Vo2max workout would be a safe and less stressful alternative.

One Vo2max session per sport in the week of the last 12 to eight weeks of the building up to a long
distance triathlon or an Ironman, depending on how well you tolerate speed workouts,
One Vo2max session in running per week for the last 12 weeks leading up to an event, and 1 in cycling and
swimming only for the last five weeks. As four weeks was enough to generate significant improvement,
and because of the non-impact aspect of swimming and cycling, it would not be a problem to have seven
weeks with specific LT workouts, or tempo workouts (LT-5 to 10 bpm), followed by four weeks of Vo2max
work (and a last recovery week before the event).

In any case, you will have to find out what works for you! There are many ways to organize your training schedule
and to include these sessions, so experiment, carefully monitor your sensations, and make up your mind about
what is working for you!

References
Reproducibility of running time to exhaustion at Vo2max in subelite runners - Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 1994. Billat et al. This paper shows that 1' or 2' steps do not influence the values found for vVo2max and
tlimVo2max.
Time to exhaustion at Vo2max and lactate steady state velocity in sub elite long distance runners - Archives
Internationales de Physiologie, Biochimie et de Biophysique, 1994, N102. Billat et al. Shows that tlimVo2max and
lactate threshold are positively correlated and improving tlimVo2max would improve LT.
A comparison of time to exhaustion at Vo2max in elite cyclists, kayak paddlers, swimmers and runners Ergonomics, 1996, Vol. 39, N2. Billat et al. Shows the difference of average time spent at Vo2max in different

endurance sports.
Anaerobic contribution to the time to exhaustion at the minimal exercise intensity at which maximal oxygen
uptake occurs in elite cyclists, kayakers and runners - European Journal of Applied Physio, 1997, N76. Billat et al.
Similar to the previous paper but includes the %age of anaerobic contribution in each sport.
Biomechanical events in the time to exhaustion at maximum aerobic speed - Archives of Physiology and
Biochemistry, 1997, vol 105, N6. Gazeau et al. Shows that runners who are able to hold stable running styles were
able to hold longer their vVo2max, tlimVo2max and economy are positively correlated.
The Vo2 slow component for severe exercise depends on type of exercise and is not correlated with time to fatigue
- The American Physiology Society, 1998. Billat et al. Explains why the tlimVo2max differs between running and
cycling (from a biomechanical perspective).
Interval training at Vo2max: effects on aerobic performance and overtraining markers - Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, Dec 1997. Billat et al. Shows the improvement one can expect with vo2max workouts in
vVo2max, tlimVo2max, LT, economy, and the less stressful aspects of these sessions compared to LT workouts, as
well as the need of individual design for these sessions.
The role of cadence on the Vo2 slow component in cycling and running in triathletes - International Journal of Sport
Medicine, Vol. 20, 1999. Billat et al. Shows that most runners will choose the most economical stride length but in
cycling the most economical cadence is not the best to choose as it does increase muscular fatigue. From a Vo2
point of view, the most economical cadence (the one leading to the lowest oxygen uptake) is around 60rpm, but
this cadence is increasing muscular fatigue. These cadences coincide in running.
Influence of light additional arm cranking exercise on the kinetics of Vo2 in severe exercise cycling - International
Journal of Sport Medicine, 2000. Billat et al. Title is explicit.

High Level Runners Are Able to Maintain a VO2 Steady-State Below VO2MAX in an All-Out Run
Over Their Critical Velocity
Veronique Billat1, Valrie Binsse1, Bernard Petit2 and Jean Koralsztein 2
1
Laboratoire des Sciences du Sport, Universit Paris V, France
2
Centre de Medecine du Sport C.C.A.S., Paris, France
During prolonged and intense running exercises beyond the critical power level, a VO 2 slow
component elevates VO2 above predicted VO2-work rates calculated from exercise
performed at intensities below the lactate threshold. In such cases, the actual VO 2 value
will increase over time until it reaches VO2max. The aims of the present study were to
examine whether the VO2 slow component is a major determinant of VO2 over time when
running at a speed beyond critical velocity, and whether the exhaustion latency period at
such intensity correlates with the magnitude of the VO2 slow component.
Fourteen highly trained long-distance runners performed four exhaustive runs, each
separated by one week of light training. VO2 and the velocity at VO2max (vVO2max) were
determined for each by a graded treadmill exercise. The critical velocity (86.1
1.5%vVO2max) of each runner was calculated from exhaustive treadmill runs at 90, 100 and
105% of vVO2max. During supra-critical velocity runs at 90% of vVO2max, there was no
significant rise in VO2max (20.9 2.1 ml min-1 kg-1 between the third and last min of tlim 90),
such that the runners reached a VO2 steady-state, but did not reach their vVO2max level over
time (69.5 5.0 vs 74.9 3.0 ml min-1 kg-1). Thus, subjects' time to exhaustion at 90% of
vVO2max was not correlated with the VO2max slow component (r = 0.11, P = 0.69), but
significantly correlated with the lactate threshold (r = 0.54, P = 0.04) and the critical
velocity (% vVO2max; r = 0.65, P = 0.01).
In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that for highly trained long-distance runners
performing exhaustive, supra-critical velocity runs at 90% of vVO2max, there was not a VO2
slow component tardily completing the rise of VO2. Instead, runners will maintain a VO2
steady-state below VO2max, such that the time to exhaustion at 90% of vVO2max for these
runners is positively correlated with the critical velocity expressed as % of vVO 2max.
Keywords: Critical velocity, endurance trained athletes, intense running exercise, VO2
slow component

The V˙O2 slow component in swimming

Sabrina Demarie (1), Franco Sardella (2), Veronique Billat (3)(4), Walter Magini (1), Marcello
Faina (2)
(1) Rome University Institute of Motor Sciences, Piazza Lauro de Bosis 15, 00194 Foro
Italico Rome, Italy e-mail: s.demarie@libero.it Fax: +39-06-36733598
(2) Institute of Sport Science, Italian National Olympic Committee, Via dei Campi Sportivi
46, 00194 Rome, Italy
(3) Lille 2 University, 9 rue de l'Universit, 59790 Ronchin, France
(4) CCAS, Laboratory in Sport Sciences, 2 avenue Richerand, 75010 Paris, France

Accepted: 10 October 2000

Abstract All studies on the oxygen uptake (V˙O2) slow component have been carried
out for the sporting disciplines of cycling or running, but never for swimming. Considering
that front crawl swimming is a sport discipline that is fundamentally different from both
running and cycling, the aim of this study was to verify whether this slow component also
appears in swimming. Six elite pentathletes were tested in a swimming flume while front
crawl swimming to exhaustion. Swimming velocity for the slow component test was
determined as v50<Delta>=CV+[(vV&dot;O2peak-CV)/2], where CV is the critical velocity
and vV&dot;O2peak the lowest velocity at which peak V&dot;O2 occurred. To set the subject's
CV, expressed as the slope of a straight line that describes the correlation between
swimming distance and time, the record times over three swimming distances were
recorded in a 50 m swimming pool. The vV&dot;O2peak was measured by means of an
incremental test in the swimming flume. Gas exchange was measured by means of a
telemetric metabolimeter (K4 RQ, Cosmed, Italy) that was connected to a snorkel. The slow
component was found in all subjects, with a mean (SD) value of 239 (194) mlO 2 min-1.
Therefore, although front crawl swimming is fundamentally different from both running and
cycling, it appears that it also incurs a V&dot;O2 slow component. The origin of this
phenomenon, however, is even more uncertain than for the other sport disciplines.

Decrease of O2 deficit is potential factor in increased time to exhaustion after

specific endurance training. Demarle, Alexandre P., Jean J. Slawinski, Laurent P. Laffite,
Valery G. Bocquet, Jean P. Koralsztein, and Veronique L. Billat. 1Laboratoire d'Etude de la
Motricit Humaine, Facult des Sciences du Sport, Universit de Lille 2, 59790 Ronchin;
2Laboratoire de Statistiques Mdicales, Universit de Paris 5, 75006; and 3Centre de
Mdecine du Sport Caisse Centrale des Activits Sociales, 75010 Paris, France
APStracts 7:0598A, 2000.
The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of an 8-wk severe interval
training program on the parameters of oxygen uptake kinetics, such as the oxygen deficit
and the slow component, and their potential consequences on the time until exhaustion in
a severe run performed at the same absolute velocity before and after training. Six
endurance-trained runners performed, on a 400-m synthetic track, an incremental test and
an all-out test, at 93% of the velocity at maximal oxygen consumption, to assess the time
until exhaustion. These tests were carried out before and after 8 wk of a severe interval
training program, which was composed of two sessions of interval training, at 93% of the
velocity at maximal oxygen consumption and three recovery sessions of continuous
training at 60-70% of the velocity at maximal oxygen consumption per wk. Neither the
oxygen deficit nor the slow component were correlated with the time until exhaustion (r =
minus0.300, P = 0.24, n = 18 vs. r = minus0.420, P = 0.09, n = 18, respectively).
After training, the oxygen deficit significantly decreased (P = 0.02), and the slow
component did not change (P = 0.44). Only three subjects greatly improved their time until
exhaustion (by 10, 24, and 101%). The changes of oxygen deficit were significantly
correlated with the changes of time until exhaustion (r = minus0.911, P = 0.01, n = 6). It
was concluded that the decrease of oxygen deficit was a potential factor for the increase of
time until exhaustion in a severe run performed after a specific endurance- training
program.

Vo2 slow component for a severe exercise depends on type of exercise and is
not correlated with time to fatigue.. Billat, Veronique L., Ruddy Richard, Valerie M.
Binsse, Jean P. Koralsztein and Philippe Haouzi. 1Laboratoire Science du Sport,
Universit[acute]e Paris 5, 75015 Paris, Institut Coeur Effort Sant[acute]e 75005 Paris ;
Centre de M[acute]edecine du Sport CCAS 75010 Paris, 2Laboratoire de Physiologie,
Facult[acute]e de M[acute]edecine de Nancy, 54505, Vandoeuvre-l[grave]es-Nancy, France.
APStracts 5:0336A, 1998.
The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of the type of exercise (running
versus cycling) on the VO2 slow component. Ten triathletes performed exhaustive exercise
on a treadmill and on a cycloergometer at a work rate corresponding to 90% of VO2 max
(90% Wr VO2 max). The duration of the tests before exhaustion was superimposable for

both type of exercises (10 min 37 s +/- 4 min 11 s versus 10 min 54 s +/- 4 min 47 s for
running and cycling respectively). VO2 slow component (difference between VO2 at the
last and the 3rd min of the exercise) was significantly lower during running compared to
cycling (20.9 +/- 2 ml/min versus 268.8 +/- 24 ml/min). Consequently, there was no
relationship between the magnitude of VO2 slow component and the time to fatigue.
Finally, since blood lactate levels at the end of the tests were similar both for running (7.2
+/- 1.9 mmol/l) and cycling (7.3 +/- 2.4 mmol/l), there was a clear dissociation between
blood lactate and VO2 slow component during running. These data demonstrate that a)
VO2 slow component depends on the type of exercise in a group of triathletes, b) the time
to fatigue is independant of the magnitude of VO2 slow component and blood lactate
concentration. It is speculated that the difference in muscular contraction regimen
between running and cycling could account for the difference in VO2 slow component.
AN OPTIMAL LEVEL OF SPECIFIC INTENSIFIED TRAINING GIVES BEST RESULTS
Billat, V. L., Petit, B., Koralsztein, J. P., & Fletcher, B. (1997). Overload training at vVO2max
does not alter performance at vVO2max. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 29(5), Supplement abstract 1389.

This study assessed the value of increasing specific training volume on performance. The
influence of a defined increase in training volume (threefold) at the velocity associated with
VO2max on performance and heart rate was examined.
Ss (N = 8) participated in four weeks of normal training with one session per week at
vVO2max. The specific training session consisted of five sets of repetitions alternating
running at vVO2max and 60%vVO2max (a fast-slow alternation). Intensified training
consisted of running the alternating sets program three sessions per week.
It was found that normal training increased the velocity associated with VO2max as a result
of improved running economy. VO2max, lactate threshold, time to exhaustion at VO2max,
or distance run at VO2max did not change. Heart rate decreased significantly. The
intensified training produced no new changes. The increased overload was of no benefit to
performance or physiological function.
Implication. There is a certain level of stimulation caused by specific training stimuli that
produce adaptations. Increasing the volume of that stimulation past an optimal point will
not result in any further performance or physiological gains. This finding is in conflict with
common practices of increasing training volumes of any intensity, almost without limit, in
the belief that extra benefits will accrue. This produces a difficult challenge for coaches, to
hold back on the number of specific intense training sessions that are required of athletes
rather than subjecting them to excessive unproductive training.

ANAEROBIC THRESHOLD - A RELATIVELY USELESS CONCEPT FOR COACHING

Billat, L. V. (1996). Use of blood lactate measurements for prediction of exercise
performance and for control of training: Recommendations for long-distance running.
Sports Medicine, 22, 157-175.

This article contains a very concise summary of the concept of anaerobic threshold and
how it is depicted in the literature. The implications of each individual statement are
particularly important given the pre-occupation of many coaches with this concept. The
major points of the article are discussed below. Further features are introduced in the
"Implications" section.
The concept of anaerobic threshold itself is not universally consistent. Long dynamic
exercise that is predominantly aerobic ranges between two extremes of physiological
dynamics resulting in very different blood lactate levels.

At the lowest level, an exercise can be sustained for a very long time. After 2-5 min
a state of overall oxidative energy supply is established where lactate production is
balanced by lactate elimination at a low level. Fat (lipid) metabolism is the primary
source of fuel. Exercise limits are mainly associated with eventual increases in
internal temperature. Potential dehydration can be prevented by supplementation
of water and substrate (carbohydrate and electrolytes) during performance. (p.
158)

At the highest extreme, the workload requires an additional formation and

accumulation of lactate to maintain power output. Exhaustion results through the
disturbance of the internal biochemical environment of the working muscles and
whole body caused by a high or maximal acidosis. Generally, accumulation of
lactate limits performance to periods from 30 sec to 15 min. For example, the
average time to exhaustion at the minimal velocity that elicits VO2max is 6:30 and
is not correlated with the blood lactate level developed during the task. (p. 159)

Between these two extremes are transition stages, several of which are labeled similarly as
"anaerobic threshold" or "lactate threshold." Thus, the same label is used for different
concepts and their assessment protocols which lead to different values and training
implications. Billat displays the various implications of this confusing situation. According to
a variety of "authorities," changes in blood lactate accumulation are termed and defined
differently as well as being associated with different levels and characteristics of
accumulated lactate. They are also differentiated by the protocols used to measure them.
Some examples are listed below.

"Onset of plasma lactate accumulation" is established as being exercise induced

levels which are 1 mM/l above baseline lactate values. [Farrel, P. E., Wilmore, J. H.,
Coyle, E. F., et al. (1979). Plasma lactate accumulation and distance running
performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 11, 338-344.]
"Maximal steady-state" is displayed when oxygen, heart rate, and/or treadmill
velocity produce a lactate level that is 2.2 mM/l. [Londeree, B. R., & Ames, A.
(1975). Maximal steady state versus state of conditioning. European Journal of
Applied Physiology, 34, 269-278.]
"Onset of blood lactate accumulation" (OBLA) occurs when continuous incremental
exercise produces a lactate level of 4 mM/l. [Sjodin, B., & Jacobs, I. (1981). Onset of
blood lactate accumulation and marathon running performance. International
Journal of Sports Medicine, 2, 23-26.]

"Individual anaerobic threshold" is the state where the increase of blood lactate is
maximal and equal to the rate of diffusion of lactate from the exercising muscle.
Values range from 2-7 mM/l. [Stegemann. H., & Kindermann, W. (1982).
Comparison of prolonged exercise tests at the individual anaerobic threshold and
the fixed anaerobic threshold of 4 mM/l. International Journal of Sports
Medicine, 3, 105-110.]
"Lactate threshold" is the starting point of an accelerated lactate accumulation and
is usually around 4 mM/l and is expressed as %VO2max. [Aunola, S., & Rusko, H.
(1984). Reproducibility of aerobic and anaerobic thresholds in 20-25 year old men.
European Journal of Applied Physiology, 69, 196-202.
"Maximal steady-state of blood lactate level" is the exercise intensity that produces
the maximal steady-state of blood lactate level and ranges from 2.2-6.8 mM/l.
[Billat, V., Dalmay, F., Antonini, M. T., et al. (1994). A method for determining the
maximal steady state of blood lactate concentration from two levels of submaximal
exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 69, 196-202.

Many scientists and coaches use the label "anaerobic threshold" interchangeably with
these concepts confusing what is supposed to be a scientific coaching principle. Just
because the same label is used does not mean analogous concepts are being discussed.
Since there would be different coaching and performance implications from each of the
above concepts, the blanket use of this term will foster many erroneous coaching
prescriptions and procedures.
Lactate accumulation indicates a shift from solely oxidative to an additional glycolytic
energy supply. Lactic acid production is due to the activation of glycolysis that is more
rapid than activation of oxidative phosphorylation. This is indicated by a steep non-linear
increase of blood lactate in relation to power output and time. That accumulation can be
attributed to disparities in the rate of lactate production and removal, even for work
intensities under those which elicit VO2max. Lactate production is not related to oxygen
deficit but rather to the increase of the glycolysis flux. (p. 159)
Lactate is produced constantly, not just during hard exercise. It may be the most dynamic
metabolite produced during exercise since its appearance exceeds that of any other
metabolite studied. The constancy of the blood lactate level means that entry into and
removal of lactate from the blood are in balance.
The turnover of lactic acid during exercise is several times greater for a given blood lactate
level than at rest. For a given blood lactate level, lactate removal is several times greater
in trained than in untrained persons.
Several factors are responsible for the lactate inflection point during graded exercise.

Contraction stimulates glycogenolysis and lactate production.

Hormone recruitment affects both glycogenolysis and glycolysis.

Recruitment of glycolytic fast-twitch fibers increases lactate production.

Blood-flow redistribution from lactate-removing gluconeogenic tissues to lactateproducing glycolytic tissues causes lactate levels to rise as exercise requires
continually increasing power output.

Lactate values differ according to several variables: the activity being performed, the site
from where the blood sample is taken, the environment itself (both physical and its effect
on the athlete's psychology), and the state of glycogen stores prior to testing. Unless these
variables and others, such as day-to-day cycles in general physiology, as well as variations
in test administration and athlete performance of each test segment, can be controlled and
made consistent between test administrations it is likely that score differences will be
unreliable. The practice of attributing any observed lactate-test differences, no matter how
small, to training effects or as revealing the trained state is extremely dubious at best.
Practical Implications

When scientists cannot agree upon a concept's definition, let alone the appropriate label to
use, as well as the appropriate method/protocol of assessment, then the practical use of
the "general implications" of the concept is foundationally prohibited. Until this situation is
clarified and discrepancies removed, field testing for "lactate-threshold" should be avoided.
There are more profitable and useful activities for athletes and coaches to be engaged in.
Of significance to coaching is the concept itself. The common misunderstanding that the
anaerobic threshold is the state where aerobic activity is dominant and maximal and
anaerobic activity constant but "insignificant" is very prevalent. There are few competitive
activities or events where such a circumstance is desirable.
Most activities do not require all body parts to be involved in an activity at the same
intensity level. A cyclist will work the legs extremely hard but, by comparison, the rest of
the body will function comfortably in an aerobic zone of metabolic activity. A swimmer
pounding out stroke after stroke in a 1500 m race works the arms at an intensity that
employs a high level of anaerobic energy supply but the rest of the body is "relaxed" and
functioning at quite a basic aerobic level. Even in running, in a marathon the legs work
hard while the arms and upper body "save energy." In these activities, lactate is produced
by the primary working muscles and resynthesized by the muscles engaged in mild
supportive activity. Those muscles cleanse or "sponge" out lactate so that the blood supply
to the hard working muscles is quite low in acidity when returned to those muscles. Thus,
any lactate measure is a measure of the "general functioning" of the body, not the actual
work performed by the primary sporting muscles. Differences in technique most probably
would account for a significant portion of many inter-individual differences in lactate
assessments than work levels or movement economy.
In many "aerobic" sports the actual prime mover muscle groups work at an anaerobic level
rather than aerobically as is inferred from anaerobic threshold testing. The common
perception of anaerobic threshold does not give any information or understanding of what
actually is happening in important aspects of a performance. Even the slightest
improvement in movement economy (technique) in the "anaerobic prime movers" could
make a significant difference to performance.
Of all the concepts of anaerobic-type thresholds or measures that are proposed perhaps
the maximum lactate steady-state (MLSS) is the one that is most applicable to the field of
sports. In cycling events of one hour, athletes have been measured to "tolerate" and
demonstrate sustained lactate levels in the region of 7 mM/l. In most events where "effort"
is required as part of the competitive strategy, lactate levels will be sustained in a
competitive performance in excess of the anaerobic threshold (if one can be
demonstrated). There is a much greater proportion of many competitive performances that
is more anaerobic than is generally acknowledged. If appropriate and sane anaerobic
training is ignored then an athlete will not be trained optimally and a theoretically "best"
performance will not be possible.
How can one test for maximum lactate steady state? Simply ask trained, experienced
athletes to perform a task equal to the duration of their competitive event and they are
likely to produce a performance that is close to demonstrating the MLSS. To be sure of this,
if performance intensities, usually velocities, are performed at an increment above and
below the first trial, verification should be forthcoming. Repeating many trials usually is not
necessary. Is this too simple of a concept for complicated science? In practical
circumstances it works. But since this could be a procedure that is implemented by
coaches would it be endorsed by scientists which would seemingly remove a coach's
dependence on them?
But a central perplexing question still remains: what does one get from measures of lactate
and performance? What do they tell more than is already known? If lactate values are
specific to the task/testing-protocol/event there can be no inference beyond the
observations themselves.
When two athletes with the same physiological capacities perform the same activity, one
using arms only the other using arms and legs, the performance results are often different,
particularly when energy supply is an important aspect of the task demands. In this case, it
is not the "anaerobic threshold" that differentiates the two but the movement economies,
one using more muscle mass to produce a performance outcome. An attempt to shift the

anaerobic threshold by further training of a particular type in an hypothesized metabolic

zone with appropriate heart rates is clearly the wrong approach to solving the less-efficient
athlete's problem. A skill element change to reduce unnecessary movements would result
in greater movement economy and would shift the velocity that supports the MLSS to the
right.
It is dubious to attribute shifts in anaerobic threshold values to physical training. Given that
so many variables render field tests of this phenomenon practically unreliable, what is
attributed to score differences obtained between two tests is more of a guess than an
informed judgment.
Sport scientists can produce graphs of swimmers, runners, rowers, etc. showing an
"inflection point" that occurs in a region of performance velocity. Equally, other athletes
tested with the same protocol do not show any inflection or exhibit measures which cannot
be interpreted in terms of a traditional anaerobic threshold. A few selected demonstrations
do not prove the existence of a phenomenon that can be applied universally. The trend in
field testing is rather one of more people not demonstrating a clear "anaerobic threshold"
than doing so. Complicate that further with deciding upon which threshold protocol fits the
sport from the existing array of definitions and confusion results rather than a clearly
usable training tool.
Anaerobic threshold results must be reliable, that is, capable of replication. When a
particular protocol is used for a series of periodic assessments, as is commonly followed in
"sport science testing" programs, if that protocol is altered, the previous results cannot be
used for comparison purposes. A protocol change will produce unrelated results, often
different response phenomena, and above all different implications and interpretations. The
definitions and discrepancies listed above all originate from different testing protocols.
Thus, results from one protocol to the next, no matter how small the change is explained to
be, should not be compared. Essentially, a new database is developed.
An unavoidable dilemma. Sport scientists are ethically bound to represent the worth of
lactate testing and the inferences that are commonly proposed. This is what is known.
1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Lactate concepts and measures are limited/specific to each testing protocol.

Results from one protocol cannot be used to generalize or infer values to other
testing protocols.
If one cannot infer from one lactate testing protocol to another then it is illogical to
generalize lactate testing results to a competitive performance.
It is a greater stretch of the imagination to leap conceptually from an inferentiallylimited measure under controlled conditions to the dynamic circumstances of a
competitive or practice setting.
At most, lactate and lactate threshold measurements reveal changes but have
limited to possibly non-existent inferential capacities about future performances
(even training performances let alone competitive performances).
Lactate and lactate threshold measurements can reveal that they have changed as
a result of training, but if those changes are unrelated to competitive performances
what is their value?
There are no national or international competitive events that reward medals for
lactate threshold changes, levels, or testing protocols.

A story. During the spring of 1996, this writer attended the ARCO Training Center in Chula
Vista, California. One day a USOC testing group had completed lactate threshold and
aerobic parameter testing sessions on the US men's heavyweight rowing eight that was to
compete later that year at the Atlanta Olympic Games.
The eight had just completed a European tour and performed worse than at any time in the
previous three years. Based on comparative racing performances, it was a boat in trouble.
The head USOC scientist related that the members of the eight were still improving in
fitness as the measures that were taken were better than previous test results.
Despite improved "fitness measures" the eight recorded a performance that was worse
than any in the previous four Olympic Games, and compared to the boats that it had raced

during the recent European tour, it had also degraded in racing capability. The fitness
measures indicated that training was progressing satisfactorily. Unfortunately, racing
performances were declining. Training improvements in physiological indices were
negatively correlated with racing achievements. In 1994, the eight were world champions,
in 1995 world bronze medalists, and in 1996, when they had the best testing results, were
fifth out of six at the Olympic Games.
Just what is the value of lactate and lactate threshold/MLSS testing for making coaching
decisions that relate to competitive performances?
Sports Med 1986 Sep;3(5):346-356

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

The interactions of intensity, frequency and duration of exercise training

in altering cardiorespiratory fitness.
Wenger HA, Bell GJ.
This review has grouped many studies on different populations with different
protocols to show the interactive effects of intensity, frequency and duration of
training as well as the effects of initial fitness levels and programme length on
cardiorespiratory fitness as reflected by aerobic power (VO2max). Within each
level of exercise duration, frequency, programme length or initial fitness level, the
greatest improvements in aerobic power occur when the greatest challenge to
aerobic power occurs i.e., when intensity is from 90 to 100% of VO2max. The
pattern of improvement where different intensities are compared with different
durations suggests that when exercise exceeds 35 minutes, a lower intensity of
training results in the same effect as those achieved at higher intensities for
shorter durations. Frequencies of as low as 2 per week can result in improvements
in less fit subjects but when aerobic power exceeds 50 ml/kg/min, exercise
frequency of at least 3 times per week is required. As the levels of initial fitness
improve, the changes in aerobic power decreases regardless of the intensity,
frequency or duration of exercise. Although these pooled data suggest that
maximal gains in aerobic power are elicited with intensities between 90 to 100%
VO2max, 4 times per week with exercise durations of 35 to 45 minutes, it is
important to note that lower intensities still produce effective changes and reduce
the risks of injury in non-athletic groups.

Int J Sports Med 2001 Apr;22(3):201-208

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

Very short (15s-15s) interval-training around the critical velocity allows

middle-aged runners to maintain VO2 max for 14 minutes.
Billat VL, Slawinksi J, Bocquet V, Chassaing P, Demarle A, Koralsztein JP.
Laboratoire d'etude de la motricite humaine, Universite de Lille II, Faculte des
Sciences du Sport, Ronchin, France. veronique.billat@wanadoo.fr
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three very short
interval training sessions (15-15 s of hard and easier runs) run at an average
velocity equal to the critical velocity to elicit VO2 max for more than 10 minutes.
We hypothesized that the interval with the smallest amplitude (defined as the ratio
between the difference in velocity between the hard and the easy run divided by
the average velocity and multiplied by 100) would be the most efficient to elicit
VO2 max for the longer time. The subjects were middle-aged runners (52 +/- 5 yr,
VO2 max of 52.1 +/- 6 mL x min(-1) x kg(-1), vVO2 max of 15.9 +/- 1.8 km x h(-1),
critical velocity of 85.6 +/- 1.2% vVO2 max) who were used to long slow distancetraining rather than interval training. They performed three interval-training (IT)
sessions on a synthetic track (400 m) whilst breathing through the COSMED K4b2
portable metabolic analyser. These three IT sessions were: A) 90-80% vVO2 max
(for hard bouts and active recovery periods, respectively), the amplitude= (9080/85) 100=11%, B) 100-70% vVO2 max amplitude=35%, and C) 60 x 110% vVO2
max amplitude = 59%. Interval training A and B allowed the athlete to spend twice
the time at VO2 max (14 min vs. 7 min) compared to interval training C. Moreover,
at the end of interval training A and B the runners had a lower blood lactate than
after the procedure C (9 vs. 11 mmol x l(-1)). In conclusion, short interval-training
of 15s-15s at 90-80 and 100-70% of vVO2 max proved to be the most efficient in
stimulating the oxygen consumption to its highest level in healthy middle-aged
long-distance runners used to doing only long slow distance-training.
PMID: 11354523 [PubMed - in process]

Relationship between run times to exhaustion at 90, 100, 120, and 140% of
vVO2max and velocity expressed relatively to critical velocity and maximal
velocity.
Blondel N, Berthoin S, Billat V, Lensel G.
Laboratoire d'Etudes de la Motricite Humaine, Faculte des Sciences du Sport et de
l'Education Physique, Universite de Lille 2, France.

The aim of the present study was to explain the inter-individual variability in running time
to exhaustion (tlim) when running speed was expressed as a percentage of the velocity,
associated with maximal oxygen uptake (vVO2max). Indeed for the same percentage of
vVO2max the anaerobic contribution to energy supply is different and could be dependent
on the critical velocity (Cv) and also on the maximal running velocity (vmax). Ten subjects
ran four tlim at 90, 100, 120, and 140% of vVO2max; mean and standard deviation for tlim
were 839 +/- 236 s, 357 +/- 110 s, 122 +/- 27 s, and 65 +/- 17s, respectively. Each velocity
was then expressed 1) as a percentage of the difference between vVO2max and Cv
(%AeSR); 2) as a percentage of the difference between vmax and Cv (%MSR); 3) as a
percentage of the difference between vmax and vVO2max (%AnSR). Highest correlations
were found between tlim90 and tlim100 and velocity expressed as %MSR (r = -0.82, p <
0.01 and r = -0.75, p < 0.01), and between tlim120 and tlim140 and velocity expressed as
%AnSR (r = -0.83, p < 0.01 and r = -0.94, p < 0.001). These results show that the same
intensity relative to aerobic contribution did not represent the same absolute intensity for
all and could partly explain variability in tlim. Therefore expressing intensity as a
percentage of MSR for sub-maximal and maximal velocities and as a percentage of AnSR
for supra-maximal velocities allows individual differences in anaerobic work capacity to be
taken into account and running times to exhaustion to be predicted accurately.

Interval training for performance: a scientific and empirical practice. Special

recommendations for middle- and long-distance running. Part I: aerobic interval
training.
Billat LV.
Faculty of Sport Science, University Lille, France. veronique.billat@wanadoo.fr
This article traces the history of scientific and empirical interval training. Scientific
research has shed some light on the choice of intensity, work duration and rest periods in
so-called 'interval training'. Interval training involves repeated short to long bouts of rather
high intensity exercise (equal or superior to maximal lactate steady-state velocity)
interspersed with recovery periods (light exercise or rest). Interval training was first
described by Reindell and Roskamm and was popularised in the 1950s by the Olympic
champion, Emil Zatopek. Since then middle- and long- distance runners have used this
technique to train at velocities close to their own specific competition velocity. In fact,
trainers have used specific velocities from 800 to 5000m to calibrate interval training
without taking into account physiological markers. However, outside of the competition
season it seems better to refer to the velocities associated with particular physiological
responses in the range from maximal lactate steady state to the absolute maximal
velocity. The range of velocities used in a race must be taken into consideration, since
even world records are not run at a constant pace.
Interval training for performance: a scientific and empirical practice. Special
recommendations for middle- and long-distance running. Part II: anaerobic
interval training.
Billat LV.
Faculty of Sport Science, University Lille 2, France.
Studies of anaerobic interval training can be divided into 2 categories. The first category
(the older studies) examined interval training at a fixed work-rate. They measured the time
limit or the number of repetitions the individual was able to sustain for different pause
durations. The intensities used in these studies were not maximal but were at about 130 to
160% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). Moreover, they used work periods of 10 to 15
seconds interrupted by short rest intervals (15 to 40 seconds). The second category (the
more recent studies) asked the participants to repeat maximal bouts with different pause

durations (30 seconds to 4 to 5 minutes). These studies examined the changes in maximal
dynamic power during successive exercise periods and characterised the associated
metabolic changes in muscle. Using short-interval training, it seems to be very difficult to
elicit exclusively anaerobic metabolism. However, these studies have clearly demonstrated
that the contribution of glycogenolysis to the total energy demand was considerably less
than that if work of a similar intensity was performed continuously. However, the latter
studies used exercise intensities that cannot be described as maximal. This is the main
characteristic of the second category of interval training performed above the minimal
velocity associated with VO2max determined in an incremental test (vVO2max). Many
studies on the long term physiological effect of supramaximal intermittent exercise have
demonstrated an improvement in VO2max or running economy.

Sports Med Phys Fitness 2000 Sep;40(3):185-194

Related Articles, Books

Effect of a prior intermittent run at vVO2max on oxygen kinetics during

an all-out severe run in humans.
Billat VL, Bocquet V, Slawinski J, Laffite L, Demarle A, Chassaing P,
Koralsztein JP.
Laboratoire d'Etude de la Motricite Humaine, Universite de Lille II, Faculte des
Sciences du Sport, Ronchin, France. veronique.billat@wanadoo.fr
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of prior
intermittent running at VO2max on oxygen kinetics during a continuous severe
intensity run and the time spent at VO2max. METHODS: Eight long-distance
runners performed three maximal tests on a synthetic track (400 m) whilst
breathing through the COSMED K4 portable telemetric metabolic analyser: i) an
incremental test which determined velocity at the lactate threshold (vLT), VO2max
and velocity associated with VO2max (vVO2max), ii) a continuous severe intensity
run at vLT+50% (vdelta50) of the difference between vLT and vVO2max (91.3+/1.6% VO2max)preceded by a light continuous 20 minute run at 50% of vVO2max
(light warm-up), iii) the same continuous severe intensity run at vdelta50 with a
prior interval training exercise (hard warm-up) of repeated hard running bouts
performed at 100% of vVO2max and light running at 50% of vVO2max (of 30
seconds each) performed until exhaustion (on average 19+/-5 min with 19+/-5
interval repetitions). This hard warm-up speeded the VO2 kinetics: the time
constant was reduced by 45% (28+/-7 sec vs 51+/-37 sec) and the slow
component of VO2 (deltaVO2 6-3 min) was deleted (-143+/-271 ml x min(-1) vs
291+/-153 ml x min(-1)). In conclusion, despite a significantly lower total run time
at vdelta50 (6 min 19+/-0) min 17 vs 8 min 20+/-1 min 45, p=0.02) after the
intermittent warm-up at VO2max, the time spent specifically at VO2max in the
severe continuous run at vdelta50 was not significantly different.

Time limit and time at VO2max' during a continuous and an intermittent run.
Demarie S, Koralsztein JP, Billat V.
Laboratoire d'etude de la motricite humaine, Universite Lille 2. demarie@mail.nexus.it
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to verify, by track field tests, whether subelite runners (n=15) could (i) reach their VO2max while running at v50%delta, i.e. midway
between the speed associated with lactate threshold (vLAT) and that associated with
maximal aerobic power (vVO2max), and (ii) if an intermittent exercise provokes a maximal
and/or supra maximal oxygen consumption longer than a continuous one. METHODS:
Within three days, subjects underwent a multistage incremental test during which their
vVO2max and vLAT were determined; they then performed two additional testing sessions,
where continuous and intermittent running exercises at v50%delta were performed up to
exhaustion. Subject's gas exchange and heart rate were continuously recorded by means
of a telemetric apparatus. Blood samples were taken from fingertip and analysed for blood
lactate concentration. RESULTS: In the continuous and the intermittent tests peak VO2
exceeded VO2max values, as determined during the incremental test. However in the
intermittent exercise, peak VO2, time to exhaustion and time at VO2max reached
significantly higher values, while blood lactate accumulation showed significantly lower
values than in the continuous one. CONCLUSIONS: The v50%delta is sufficient to stimulate
VO2max in both intermittent and continuous running. The intermittent exercise results
better than the continuous one in increasing maximal aerobic power, allowing longer time
at VO2max and obtaining higher peak VO2 with lower lactate accumulation.

Calculation of times to exhaustion at 100 and 120% maximal aerobic speed.

Renoux JC, Petit B, Billat V, Koralsztein JP.
Faubourg Scaravaglie, Corte, France. renoux@lotus.univ-corse.fr
The aim was to compare physiologic responses during exhaustive runs performed on a
treadmill at 100 and 120% maximal aerobic speed (MAS: the minimum speed that elicits
VO2max). Fourteen subelite male runners (mean +/- SD; age = 27+/-5 years; VO2max =
68.9+/-4.6 ml/kg(-1)/min(-1); MAS = 21.5+/-1 km/h(-1)) participated. Mean time to
exhaustion tlim100% at 100% MAS (269+/- 77s) was similar to those reported in other
studies. However, there was large variability in individual tlim100% MAS (CV = 29%). MAS
was positively correlated with VO2max (r = 0.66, p<0.05) but not with tlim100%) MAS (r =
-0.50, p<0.05). tlim100% MAS was correlated with t(lim) at 120% MAS (r = 0.52, p < 0.05)
and to blood pH following the rest at 120% MAS (r = -0.68, p<0.05). The data suggest that
running time to exhaustion at MAS in subelite male runners is related to time limit at 120%
(tlim120%) MAS. Moreover, anaerobic capacity determined by the exercise to exhaustion
at 120% MAS can be defined as the variable 'a' in the model of Monod and Scherrer (1954).

Intermittent runs at the velocity associated with maximal oxygen uptake enables
subjects to remain at maximal oxygen uptake for a longer time than intense but
submaximal runs.
Billat VL, Slawinski J, Bocquet V, Demarle A, Lafitte L, Chassaing P, Koralsztein JP.
Laboratoire d'etude de la motricite humaine, Universite de Lille II, Faculte des Sciences du
Sport 9, Ronchin, France. veronique.billat@wanadoo.fr
Interval training consisting of brief high intensity repetitive runs (30 s) alternating with
periods of complete rest (30 s) has been reported to be efficient in improving maximal
oxygen uptake (VO2max) and to be tolerated well even by untrained persons. However,
these studies have not investigated the effects of the time spent at VO2max which could
be an indicator of the benefit of training. It has been reported that periods of continuous
running at a velocity intermediate between that of the lactate threshold (vLT) and that
associated with VO2max (vVO2max) can allow subjects to reach VO2max due to an
additional slow component of oxygen uptake. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
compare the times spent at VO2max during an interval training programme and during
continuous strenuous runs. Eight long-distance runners took part in three maximal tests on
a synthetic track (400 m) whilst breathing through a portable, telemetric metabolic
analyser: they comprised firstly, an incremental test which determined vLT, VO2max [59.8
(SD 5.4) ml.min-1; kg-1], vVO2max [18.5 (SD 1.2) km.h-1], secondly, an interval training
protocol consisting of alternately running at 100% and at 50% of vVO2max (30 s each);
and thirdly, a continuous high intensity run at vLT + 50% of the difference between vLT
and vVO2max [i.e. v delta 50: 16.9 (SD 1.00) km.h-1 and 91.3 (SD 1.6)% vVO2max]. The
first and third tests were performed in random order and at 2-day intervals. In each case
the subjects warmed-up for 15 min at 50% of vVO2max. The results showed that in more
than half of the cases the v delta 50 run allowed the subjects to reach VO2max, but the
time spent specifically at VO2max was much less than that during the alternating low/high
intensity exercise protocol [2 min 42 s (SD 3 min 09 s) for v delta 50 run vs 7 min 51 s (SD
6 min 38 s) in 19 (SD 5) interval runs]. The blood lactate responses were less pronounced
in the interval runs than for the v delta 50 runs, but not significantly so [6.8 (SD 2.2)
mmol.l-1 vs 7.5 (SD 2.1) mmol.l-1]. These results do not allow us to speculate as to the
chronic effects of these two types of training at VO2max.

The role of cadence on the VO2 slow component in cycling and running in
triathletes.
Billat VL, Mille-Hamard L, Petit B, Koralsztein JP.
Faculte des Sciences de Sport, Universite Lille 2, Centre de Medecine du Sport CCAS, Paris,
France. Veronique.Billat@Wanadoo.fr
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of two different types of cyclic severe
exercise (running and cycling) on the VO2 slow component. Moreover we examined the
influence of cadence of exercise (freely chosen [FF] vs. low frequency [LF]) on the
hypothesis that: 1) a stride frequency lower than optimal and 2) a pedalling frequency
lower than FF one could induce a larger and/or lower VO2 slow component. Eight
triathletes ran and cycled to exhaustion at a work-rate corresponding to the lactate
threshold + 50% of the difference between the work-rate associated with VO2max and the

lactate threshold (delta 50) at a freely chosen (FF) and low frequency (LF: - 10 % of FF).
The time to exhaustion was not significantly different for both types of exercises and both
cadences (13 min 39 s, 15 min 43 s, 13 min 32 s, 15 min 05 s for running at FF and LF and
cycling at FF and LF, respectively). The amplitude of the VO2 slow component (i.e.
difference between VO2 at the last and the 3rd min of the exercise) was significantly
smaller during running compared with cycling, but there was no effect of cadence.
Consequently, there was no relationship between the magnitude of the VO2 slow
component and the time to fatigue for a severe exercise (r = 0.20, p = 0.27). However,
time to fatigue was inversely correlated with the blood lactate concentration for both
modes of exercise and both cadences (r = - 0.42, p = 0.01). In summary, these data
demonstrate that: 1) in subjects well trained for both cycling and running, the amplitude of
the VO2 slow component at fatigue was larger in cycling and that it was not significantly
influenced by cadence; 2) the VO2 slow component was not correlated with the time to
fatigue. If the nature of the linkage between the VO2 slow component and the fatigue
process remains unclear, the type of contraction regimen depending on exercise
biomechanic characteristics seems to be determinant in the VO2 slow component
phenomenon for a same level of training.

Interval training at VO2max: effects on aerobic performance and overtraining

markers.
Billat VL, Flechet B, Petit B, Muriaux G, Koralsztein JP.
Sport Science Laboratory, Universite Lille 2, Centre de Medicine du Sport C.C.A.S., Paris,
France.
PURPOSE: Between inefficient training and overtraining, an appropriate training stimulus
(in terms of intensity and duration) has to be determined in accordance with individual
capacities. Interval training at the minimal velocity associated with VO2max (vVO2max)
allows an athlete to run for as long as possible at VO2max. Nevertheless, we don't know
the influence of a defined increase in training volume at vVO2max on aerobic performance,
noradrenaline, and heart rate. METHODS: Eight subjects performed 4 wk of normal training
(NT) with one session per week at vVO2max, i.e., five repetitions run at 50% of the time
limit at vVO2max, with recovery of the same duration at 60% vVO2max. They then
performed 4 wk of overload training (OT) with three interval training sessions at vVO2max.
RESULTS: Normal training significantly improved their velocity associated with VO2max
(20.5+/-0.7 vs 21.1+/-0.8 km x h(-1), P = 0.02). As a result of improved running economy
(50.6+/-3.5 vs 47.5+/-2.4 mL x min(-1) x kg(-1), P = 0.02), VO2max was not significantly
different (71.6+/-4.8 vs 72.7+/-4.8 mL x min(-1) x kg(-1)). Time to exhaustion at vVO2max
was not significantly different (301+/-56 vs 283+/-41 s) as was performance (i.e., distance
limit run at vVO2max: 2052.2+/-331 vs 1986.2+/-252.9 m). Heart rate at 14 km x h(-1)
decreased significantly after NT (162+/-16 vs 155+/-18 bpm, P < 0.01). Lactate threshold
remained the same after normal training (84.1+/-4.8% vVO2max). Overload training
changed neither the performance nor the factors concerning performance. However, the
submaximal heart rate measured at 14 km x h(-1) decreased after overload training
(155+/-18 vs 150+/-15 bpm). The maximal heart rate was not significantly different after
NT and OT (199+/-9.5, 198+/-11, 194+/-10.4, P = 0.1). Resting plasma norepinephrine
(veinous blood sample measured by high pressure liquid chromatography), was unchanged
(2.6 vs 2.4 nm x L(-1), P = 0.8). However, plasma norepinephrine measured at the end of
the vVO2max test increased significantly (11.1 vs 26.0 nm x L(-1), P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Performance and aerobic factors associated with the performance were not
altered by the 4 wk of intensive training at vVO2max despite the increase of plasma
noradrenaline.

Arch Physiol Biochem 1997 Oct;105(6):583-590

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

Biomechanical events in the time to exhaustion at maximum aerobic

speed.
Gazeau F, Koralsztein JP, Billat V.
Laboratoire S.T.A.P.S. Universite Paris V, France.
Recent studies reported good intra-individual reproducibility, but great interindividual variation in a sample of elite athletes, in time to exhaustion (tlim) at the
maximal aerobic speed (MAS: the lowest speed that elicits VO2max in an
incremental treadmill test). The purpose of the present study was, on the one
hand, to detect modifications of kinematic variables at the end of the tlim of the
VO2max test and, on the other hand, to evaluate the possibility that such
modifications were factors responsible for the inter-individual variability in tlim.
Eleven sub-elite male runners (Age = 24 +/- 6 years; VO2max = 69.2 +/- 6.8 ml
kg-1 min-1; MAS = 19.2 +/- 1.45 km h-1; tlim = 301.9 +/- 82.7 s) performed two
exercise tests on a treadmill (0% slope): an incremental test to determine VO2max
and MAS, and an exhaustive constant velocity test to determine tlim at MAS.
Statistically significant modifications were noted in several kinematic variables.
The maximal angular velocity of knee during flexion was the only variable that was
both modified through the tlim test and influenced the exercise duration. A
multiple correlation analysis showed that tlim was predicted by the modifications
of four variables (R = 0.995, P < 0.01). These variables are directly or indirectly in
relation with the energic cost of running. It was concluded that runners who
demonstrated stable running styles were able to run longer during MAS test
because of optimal motor efficiency.

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1997;76(1):13-20

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

Anaerobic contribution to the time to exhaustion at the minimal exercise

intensity at which maximal oxygen uptake occurs in elite cyclists,
kayakists and swimmers.
Faina M, Billat V, Squadrone R, De Angelis M, Koralsztein JP, Dal Monte A.
Institute of Sport Science, Italian National Olympic Committee, Rome, Italy.
Using 23 elite male athletes (8 cyclists, 7 kayakists, and 8 swimmers), the
contribution of the anaerobic energy system to the time to exhaustion (t(lim)) at
the minimal exercise intensity (speed or power) at which maximal oxygen uptake
(VO2max) occurs (IVO2max) was assessed by analysing the relationship between
the t(lim) and the accumulated oxygen deficit (AOD). After 10-min warming up at
60% of VO2max, the exercise intensity was increased so that each subject reached
his IVO2max in 30 s and then continued at that level until he was exhausted. Pretests included a continuous incremental test with 2 min steps for determining the
IVO2max and a series of 5-min submaximal intensities to collect the data that
would allow the estimation of the energy expenditure at IVO2max. The AOD for the
t(lim) exercise was calculated as the difference between the above estimation and
the accumulated oxygen uptake. The mean percentage value of energy
expenditure covered by anaerobic metabolism was 15.2 [(SD 6)%, range 8.9-24.1]
with significant differences between swimmers and kayakists (16.8% vs 11.5%, P <
or = 0.05) and cyclists and kayakists (16.4% vs 11.5%, P < or = 0.05). Absolute
AOD values ranged from 26.4 ml.kg-1 to 83.6 ml.kg-1 with a mean value of 45.9
(SD 18) ml.kg-1. Considering all the subjects, the t(lim) was found to have a
positive and significant correlation with AOD (r = 0.62, P < or = 0.05), and a
negative and significant correlation with VO2max (r = -0.46, P < or = 0.05). The
data would suggest that the contribution of anaerobic processes during exercise
performed at IVO2max should not be ignored when t(lim) is used as a
supplementary parameter to evaluate specific adaptation of athletes.

Sports Med 1996 Aug;22(2):90-108

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

Significance of the velocity at VO2max and time to exhaustion at this

velocity.
Billat LV, Koralsztein JP.
Laboratoire STAPS, University of Paris 12, Creteil, France.
In 1923, Hill and Lupton pointed out that for Hill himself, 'the rate of oxygen intake
due to exercise increases as speed increases, reaching a maximum for the speeds
beyond about 256 m/min. At this particular speed, for which no further increases in
O2 intake can occur, the heart, lungs, circulation, and the diffusion of oxygen to
the active muscle-fibres have attained their maximum activity. At higher speeds
the requirement of the body for oxygen is far higher but cannot be satisfied, and
the oxygen debt continuously increases'. In 1975, this minimal velocity which
elicits maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) was called 'critical speed' and was used
to measure the maximal aerobic capacity (max Eox), i.e. the total oxygen
consumed at VO2max. This should not be confused with the term 'critical power'
which is closes to the power output at the 'lactate threshold'. In 1984, the term
'velocity at VO2max' and the abbreviation 'vVO2max' was introduced. It was
reported that vVO2max is a useful variable that combines VO2max and economy
into a single factor which can identify aerobic differences between various runners
or categories of runners. vVO2max explained individual differences in performance
that VO2max or running economy alone did not. Following that, the concept of a
maximal aerobic running velocity (Vamax in m/sec) was formulated. This was a
running velocity at which VO2max occurred and was calculated as the ratio
between VO2max (ml/kg/min) minus oxygen consumption at rest, and the energy
cost of running (ml/kg/sec). There are many ways to determine the velocity
associated with VO2max making it difficult to compare maintenance times. In fact,
the time to exhaustion (tlim) at vVO2max is reproducible in an individual, however,
there is a great variability among individuals with a low coefficient of variation for
vVO2max. For an average value of about 6 minutes, the coefficient of variation is
about 25%. It seems that the lactate threshold which is correlated with the tlim at
vVO2max can explain this difference among individuals, the role of the anaerobic
contribution being significant. An inverse relationship has been found between tlim
at vVO2max and VO2max, and a positive one between vVO2max and the velocity
at the lactate threshold expressed as a fraction of vVO2max. These results are
similar for different sports (e.g. running, cycling, kayaking, swimming). It seems
that the real time spent at VO2max is significantly different from an exhaustive run
at a velocity close to vVO2max (105% vVO2max). However, the minimal velocity
which elicits VO2max, and the tlim at this velocity appear to convey valuable
information when analysing a runner's performance over 1500m to a marathon.

Ergonomics 1996 Feb;39(2):267-277

Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

A comparison of time to exhaustion at VO2 max in elite cyclists, kayak

paddlers, swimmers and runners.
Billat V, Faina M, Sardella F, Marini C, Fanton F, Lupo S, Faccini P, de
Angelis M, Koralsztein JP, Dalmonte A.
Laboratoire STAPS, Universite Paris XII, Creteil, France.

A recent study has shown the reproducibility of time to exhaustion (time limit: tlim)
at the lowest velocity that elicits the maximal oxygen consumption (vVO2 max).
The same study found an inverse relationship between this time to exhaustion at
vVO2 max and vVO2 max among 38 elite long-distance runners (Billat et al.
1994b). The purpose of the present study was to compare the time to exhaustion
at the power output (or velocity) at VO2 max for different values of VO2 max,
depending on the type of exercise and not only on the aerobic capacity. The time
of exhaustion at vVO2 max (tlim) has been measured among 41 elite (national
level) sportsmen: 9 cyclists, 9 kayak paddlers, 9 swimmers and 14 runners using
specific ergometers. Velocity or power at VO2 max (vVO2 max) was determined by
continuous incremental testing. This protocol had steps of 2 min and increments of
50 W, 30 W, 0.05 m s-1 and 2 km-1 for cyclists, kayak paddlers, swimmers and
runners, respectively. One week later, tlim was determined under the same
conditions. After a warm-up of 10 min at 60% of their vVO2 max, subjects were
concluded (in less than 45 s) to their vVO2 max and then had to sustain it as long
as possible until exhaustion. Mean values of vVO2 max and tlim were respectively
equal to 419 +/- 49 W (tlim = 222 +/- 91 s), 239 +/- 56 W (tlim = 376 +/- 134 s),
1.46 +/- 0.09 m s-1 (tlim = 287 +/- 160 s) and 22.4 +/- 0.8 km h-1 (tlim = 321 +/84 s), for cyclists, kayak paddlers, swimmers and runners. Time to exhaustion at
vVO2 max was only significantly different between cycling and kayaking (ANOVA
test, p < 0.05). Otherwise, VO2 max (expressed in ml min-1 kg-1) was significantly
different between all sports except between cycling and running (p < 0.05). In this
study, time to exhaustion at vVO2 max was also inversely related to VO2 max for
the entire group of elite sportsmen (r = -0.320, p < 0.05, n = 41). The inverse
relationship between VO2 max and tlim at vVO2 max has to be explained, it seems
that tlim depends on VO2 max regardless of the type of exercise undertaken.

Med Sci Sports Exerc 1994 Feb;26(2):254-257

Related Articles, Books

Reproducibility of running time to exhaustion at VO2max in subelite

runners.
Billat V, Renoux JC, Pinoteau J, Petit B, Koralsztein JP.
Laboratoire S.T.A.P.S., Universite Paris XII, Creteil, France.
The purpose of this study was to assess the reproducibility of running time to
exhaustion (Tlim) at maximal aerobic speed (MAS: the minimum speed that elicits
VO2max), on eight subelite male long distance runners (29 +/- 3-yr-old; VO2max =
69.5 +/- 4.2 ml.kg-1.min-1; MAS = 21.25 +/- 1.1 km.h-1). No significant differences
were observed between Tlim measured on a treadmill at a 1-wk interval (404 +/101 s vs 402 +/- 113 s; r = 0.864); however, observation of individual data
indicates a wide within-subjects variability (CV = 25%). In a small and homogenous
sample of runners studied, exercise time to exhaustion at MAS was not related to
VO2max (r = 0.138), MAS (r = 0.241), running economy (mlO2.kg-1.min-1 at 16
km.h-1) (r = 0.024), or running performance achieved for 3000 m (km.h-1)(r =
0.667). However, Tlim at MAS was significantly related to the lactate threshold
determined by the distinctive acceleration point detected in the lactate curve
around 3-5 mmol.l-1 expresses in %VO2max (r = 0.745) and to the speed over a
21.1-km race (km.h-1) (r = 0.719). These data demonstrate that running time to
exhaustion at MAS in subelite male long distance runners is related to long
distance performance and lactate threshold but not to VO2max or MAS.