Interesting thread but there are quite a few interpretations of Vo2max intervals that seem to miss the point. The following quote is taken from a factsheet provided free on the Flamme Rouge website. I've provided the link for those of you that are interested.

'The fact that it takes between 60-180 seconds to physiologically reach your VO2max means the interval could be over before you've actually achieved any VO2max development!'

http://www.flammerouge.je/content/3_fac ... maxdev.htm

n=1

The highest FTP I ever got to was after a winter of racing at an indoor velodrome.
Did very little other riding due to work commitments. Many weeks my only riding was the racing.

That's true, but there are ways of working around that technically speaking. A properly done 30/30 workout as discussed will significantly elevate your heart rate to around vo2 max power quickly and even though the power is variable it actually stays there quite long. Studies on the protocol (IIRC and I can't seem to find them) demonstrated significant oxygen debt and oxidative activity that bore the same physiological burden as traditional intervals done at or closely around vo2 max.

Development is a loose term. You don't develop from one interval, or even an interval session itself. Its a compound of everything you have done and will do and where it falls in the sequence of things. I notice almost nothing from sessions during a training block until I have properly recovered and my TSB has zeroed a bit. Tests have always shown, however, that power at those durations has risen even when I have done an entire block of the said protocol that supposedly will not influence MAP power.

Do you need to reach VO2max to develop VO2max? If every 30/40 sec at VO2max-power, your body signals that there is need for maximum oxygen, wouldn't that trigger development of VO2max?

No. If vo2 max is limited by, for example, red blood cell count, it can be changed by low intensity aerobic training - an adaptation of which is increased red blood cell count (along with many other adaptations).
Thoughts welcome btw- happy to hear what other's theories are.
I

I'm not the expert and I'm only repeating (poorly probably) what I've read elsewhere on the matter. Shorter intervals e.g 30 secs or so are used to develop anaerobic ability, lactate tolerance and improve recovery from such efforts, e.g as in road races. The short recovery periods will eventually create a situation where Vo2max is being developed but it's a secondary result rather than the focus of the workout.

One's approach to these workouts is (ought to be) quite different. Anaerobic efforts of 30 seconds duration are attacked to bring on the oxygen debt whereas longer Vo2max efforts are more focused on strong, steady state for a significantly longer duration, (as in a breakaway after an attack or a hill climb) thereby making the body really work hard (thereby improving) transporting oxygen to the working muscles over an extended period of time.

As I see it they are quite different and for a reason.

Brian

The papers i have read that studied various kinds of 30s efforts seem to show, that moderately or untrained subjects can improve VO2max by doing these kinds of efforts - whereas highly trained subjects can maintain an already high VO2max while improving anaerobic capacity, e.g. repeated sprint ability.

If you do 10x30s efforts with 30s off, then you don't spend nearly as much time at VO2max than with the "normal" VO2max-building protocol of 4x4min. So i find it quite interesting that VO2max seems to be maintained with the shorter efforts.