VO₂max testing has long been viewed as the premier measure of endurance performance. You’ll find it in every sports science lab, fitness publication, and research paper. But in real-world coaching — especially with runners — VO₂max often tells us far less about training needs than people think (Midgley et al., 2007).
In contrast, blood lactate testing, especially when performed on the track, gives runners precise, personalised training zones directly linked to performance (Bentley et al., 2007; Faude et al., 2009).
This article breaks down the key differences, the strengths and weaknesses of each test, and why science and coaching practice increasingly favour lactate threshold testing for runners.
What Is VO₂max Testing?
VO₂max measures the maximum volume of oxygen your body can use during exercise. It’s usually performed:
- In a lab
- On a treadmill or cycle ergometer
- Using expired gas analysis
- With a ramp protocol until exhaustion
It’s a valuable physiological marker — but it’s not as predictive of running performance as many believe (Jones & Carter, 2000).
Advantages of VO₂max Testing
1. Standardised and widely researched
Scientists have used VO₂max for decades, making data very comparable.
2. Helpful for general endurance profiling
It offers a snapshot of aerobic potential — basically your “engine size.”
3. Useful in clinical or medical settings
VO₂max can indicate cardiovascular function, health risk, and disease prognosis.
Limitations of VO₂max Testing for Runners
1. VO₂max doesn’t predict race performance well
Elite and recreational runners can have similar VO₂max values but vastly different race times (Noakes, 2000).
2. VO₂max barely changes with training
You can become a much better runner without any meaningful increase in VO₂max (Midgley et al., 2007).
3. It doesn’t provide usable training zones
VO₂max gives a ceiling but not the “speed limits” needed for daily training.
4. Treadmills distort biomechanics
Research consistently shows that treadmill running alters mechanics, pacing, and muscle recruitment compared to overground (Miller et al., 2019).
What Is Blood Lactate Testing?
Blood lactate testing measures how your body produces and clears lactate at different intensities. During a step test — often done on a track — you take small blood samples to determine:
- LT1 (aerobic threshold)
- LT2 (anaerobic threshold)
- Lactate turnpoint (maximal metabolic steady state)
- Your individual lactate curve
- Precise pace or speed where fatigue begins to accumulate
These thresholds correlate directly with endurance performance (Faude et al., 2009).
Advantages of Blood Lactate Testing for Runners
1. Gives highly accurate training zones
You get personalised pace/speed zones for various intensities.
2. Better predictor of race performance
Threshold markers (like LT2) align strongly with race times from 5K to marathon (Bentley et al., 2007).
3. Highly responsive to training
Unlike VO₂max, thresholds shift noticeably with proper training.
4. Valid in real-world settings
Testing on the track reflects true biomechanics, pacing strategies, and environmental demands.
5. Measures the body’s metabolic response, not just capacity
This matters because endurance performance relies more on efficiency and thresholds than maximum oxygen uptake.
Limitations of Blood Lactate Testing
1. Requires a trained tester
Proper protocols matter for accuracy.
2. Environmental factors need controlling
Track surface, wind, and temperature can influence pacing — though these are real-world stresses.
3. Not ideal for athletes uncomfortable with blood sampling
Minimal, but worth noting.
Why Lactate Testing Is More Useful Than VO₂max for Runners
1. VO₂max Defines Potential — Lactate Defines Performance
A high VO₂max doesn’t guarantee fast running.
But thresholds determine:
- How long you can hold pace
- Your ability to resist fatigue
- Which race paces you can sustain
- Your true metabolic “zones”
This is why world-class marathoners often have similar VO₂max values but very different lactate thresholds (Noakes, 2000).
2. Lactate Threshold Predicts Race Times
Studies repeatedly show LT2 (or MLSS — maximal lactate steady state) is the best single predictor of endurance performance (Faude et al., 2009).
VO₂max is too broad to distinguish athletes with similar aerobic capacity.
3. Lactate Testing Improves Training Precision
Runners don’t need to know their maximum oxygen uptake.
They need to know specific paces — and lactate gives those.
4. Lactate Testing Works Better on the Track
Doing the test on a real running surface:
- Preserves natural mechanics
- Produces more valid speeds
- Reduces treadmill artifacts
- Helps athletes pace more naturally
Biomechanics alone can make a treadmill VO₂max test up to 10% different from real-world effort (Miller et al., 2019).
VO₂max vs Blood Lactate: Which Should Runners Choose?
Choose VO₂max testing if:
- You’re part of a research study
- You want general fitness profiling
- You’re monitoring clinical or cardiac function
- You’re not primarily a runner
Choose blood lactate testing if:
- You’re a runner
- You want accurate pace-based training zones
- You want to predict race performance
- You want actionable coaching insights
- You’re training for 5K → ultramarathon
- You want real-world validity by testing on a track
For most runners, lactate testing is the superior tool for improving performance.
Final Thoughts
VO₂max is scientifically interesting, but lactate thresholds are practically transformative.
If the goal is to run faster — not just understand physiology — blood lactate testing provides the most relevant, actionable, and accurate data for runners.
Combined with field-based protocols on a track, lactate testing becomes one of the most powerful tools for endurance training.
Book Your Track-Based Lactate Test
Ready to Train With Data That Actually Makes You Faster?
At Performance Physique, our track-based blood lactate testing gives you the most accurate training zones available — no guesswork, no outdated formulas, no treadmill distortions.
👉 Book Your Lactate Testing Session
Harvard Reference List
Bentley, D.J., Newell, J. & Bishop, D., 2007. Incremental tests design and analysis: Implications for performance diagnostics in endurance athletes. Sports Medicine, 37(7), pp.575–586.
Faude, O., Kindermann, W. & Meyer, T., 2009. Lactate threshold concepts: How valid are they? Sports Medicine, 39(6), pp.469–490.
Jones, A.M. & Carter, H., 2000. The effect of endurance training on parameters of aerobic fitness. Sports Medicine, 29(6), pp.373–386.
Midgley, A.W., McNaughton, L.R. & Jones, A.M., 2007. Training to enhance the physiological determinants of long-distance running performance. Sports Medicine, 37(10), pp.857–880.
Miller, R.H., Meardon, S.A. & Derrick, T.R., 2019. Is motorized treadmill running biomechanically comparable to overground running? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 37(17), pp.2022–2036.
Noakes, T., 2000. Lore of Running. 4th ed. Human Kinetics.
