VO₂ max doesn’t win races. It explains engines.
Every few months, VO₂ max goes viral again.
Someone posts a lab test…
And suddenly the internet decides this is the reason an athlete is great.
Recently, Christian Blummenfelt tested over 100 ml/kg/min — an extraordinary number by any standard. And immediately the takeaway became: VO₂ max is everything.
But that’s not how elite sport actually works.
Yes — great athletes often have high VO₂ max
There’s no denying the correlation.
Lance Armstrong tested over 90.
Many Olympic-level endurance athletes sit in the high 80s or 90s.
A very small number ever break 95 or 100.
A high VO₂ max tells us something important:
the size of the aerobic engine the ceiling of aerobic potential
But it does not tell us how well that engine is used.
VO₂ max is a metric, not a goal
Elite athletes don’t train to raise VO₂ max.
They test VO₂ max to:
- contextualize training load
- anchor other metrics
- track adaptation or stagnation
The goal of the training is not a higher lab value.
The goal is winning races.
If VO₂ max decided performance on its own, results would mirror lab rankings.
They never do.
Blummenfelt proves the opposite of the hype
At the World Championships, Blummenfelt finished second — beaten by a compatriot who almost certainly does not have a higher VO₂ max. Great athletes typically have high Vo2 scores because they have been training hard for years/decades. But like resting HR everyone has a genetic disposition for those data points to be higher or lower. If I run 4:00/km at 20 beats less per minute than a training partner it doesn’t mean I will beat him in a race. If he has a higher Vo2 max than I do it doesn’t mean I will win.
That doesn’t mean VO₂ max “doesn’t matter.”
It means it isn’t the deciding factor.
What matters instead?
- durability late in the race
- pacing/fueling execution
- fatigue resistance
- how much performance dropped — or didn’t — under stress
- running/swimming/biking economy (technique)
- training resilience
- mental toughness
- Lactate threshold (usually a more relavant performance metric than Vo2)
- …
The list goes on and on.. Vo2 max is one factor that plays into the grand scheme of competitive performance
Performance happens below VO₂ max
Almost all endurance competition happens at a percentage of VO₂ max sustained for a long time under accumulating fatigue.
So the key question isn’t:
“How high is your VO₂ max?”
More relevant questions are:
What fraction of it can you sustain?
For how long?
How efficiently do you move?
How well do you fuel and tolerate load?
How little do you slow down in the final third of the race?
Those qualities don’t trend on social media because they’re harder to measure — and harder to sell as shortcuts.
This is the same mistake we make with carbs per hour
Right now, “100–120 g carbs per hour” is having the same moment.
Elite athletes tolerate it.
People assume they should tolerate it.
Many get worse instead of better.
Elite numbers are outcomes, not instructions.
Just like VO₂ max.
So what should athletes actually focus on?
- VO₂ max is useful.
- Lactate testing is useful.
- Fueling strategies are useful.
- But they are tools, not targets.
Train to:
race well – hold pace longer – lose less speed late – execute when tired
Measure to understand the process — not to define your worth as an athlete.
Bottom line
VO₂ max doesn’t win races.
It tells you what kind of engine you’re working with.
How you train, pace, fuel, and hold it together under fatigue — that’s what decides performance.
That’s far less viral. But it’s far more important.
