Sean Skahan - August 13, 2013
The Vo2 max test is and probably always will be the most scrutinized fitness test for hockey.
Yet, since hockey has started to embrace physical testing many years ago, it is probably the most popular test administered at all levels of hockey. It is a test that is used by several NHL teams for their preseason fitness testing, and is also one of the tests that are administered at the NHL's annual pre-draft scouting combine. On the flip side, there are also some teams that do not use it and several strength and conditioning coaches who don't support the test in all levels of hockey.
Where do I stand? I'm actually a supporter of it. However, I've only recently begun to see the benefits of it. What I am not a supporter of is the perceived methods to improve the results of the test. I hope to explain why the best I possibly can.
It is clear that there are supporters and non-supporters of this test. From my perspective, the people who support the VO2 max test in hockey are the people who have probably performed a VO2 test before. More than likely these people are former professional players who did a VO2 max test every preseason when they were competitive players back in the 1980's and 1990's. This is the method that they were tested in when they were playing, so when they became involved in hockey as a coach or in management, their teams were going to do the same. The non-supporters are the folks who look at hockey through a more practical process. They may support other testing methods of conditioning such as skating or running tests that test the ability to recover from repeated high-end anaerobic work. These tests would include on-ice shuttles. 300-yard shuttles, repeat 110's, beep tests, etc. These coaches would say "Why do hockey players who play for 30-45 seconds and then sit down for a few minutes and then repeat over and over again have to be tested for how long they can ride a stationary bike?" Or "Why evaluate aerobic capacity in an anaerobic sport?” To me, these are certainly valid questions.
I am the first to admit that I am definitely not the best exercise physiologist. However, after training, administering programs, and testing our players in our organization for the past 11 seasons, I can offer my opinions and thoughts. I have analyzed tons of data obtained from VO2 max tests that we have done over that time.
When I was first told by our newly hired coach back in 2005 that he wanted VO2 tests done, I admit that I wasn't enthusiastic about it. At the time, I have done too much research, have been mentored by strength and conditioning coaches who entirely disagree with the test, and have talked to enough coaches to realize that hockey is in fact an anaerobic sport. Testing for aerobic capacity didn't make any sense to me. I was scared because I didn't want our players to train for the VO2 test. “Train Slow, Be Slow” was something I wanted to avoid at all costs. However, our coach is an established coach who played the game at the NHL level for several years. He wasn't new to testing. Of course, when he played, he did VO2 testing every training camp (see above). In his mind, this was the best way to test hockey conditioning.
With any tests administered in training camp, players will prepare to do the best job that they possibly can for each one. Honestly, if I was a player who is on the bubble of being an NHL player versus a minor league player, I would want to do the best job that I could possibly do on the tests and I would probably practice to make sure that I scored as high as I could. The result could be the difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars for an individual. In a traditional sense, in trying to improve VO2 max scores, most players would likely include long distance, steady state work on the stationary bicycle throughout the entire off-season. They might do 2-3 60-90 minute steady rides per week at a heart rate in the 65-75% of max heart rate range. Why? - This was the only known way to prepare for a test that measures aerobic capacity. It is also what hockey players would have done for any conditioning work prior to reporting for training camp back when there was no such thing as strength and conditioning for hockey. Obviously, strength and conditioning methods have evolved to where other qualities such as power, strength, and speed are being developed. However, I think that there are a small number of players who are still implementing steady state aerobic work as their only conditioning method during the off-season.
At the start of our off-season, we will include an "Aerobic Base" phase for our conditioning during the first 3 weeks. We will prescribe some long distance running and some steady state "cardio” 2 days per week during this phase for conditioning. We do this because most of our payers are coming off of a 2-4 week period of active rest from the conclusion of when our previous season ended. When you look at a 52 week yearly plan, a 3 week period of doing 6 30-60 minute sessions with their heart rates in the 120-140 beat per minute range will not be enough to have negative effects on strength and power athletes especially when you are working on those qualities concurrently. Recently, I have been reading the writings of professionals such as Joel Jamieson, who is a Strength and Conditioning coach who works with MMA athletes and David Tenney who is the Strength and Fitness Coach of the Seattle Sounders FC. They talk about the roles of cardiac output, left ventricle hypertrophy, and resting heart rate and the aerobic energy system. While I am not as well read on this subject as those guys, I am smart enough to know that they are probably right. Our players could probably use the work in the 120-150 bpm range for longer periods of time especially at the start of the off-season when they have been primarily less active for 2-4 weeks. Again, when hockey players are interval training both on and off the ice for about 42-45 weeks out of the year, I have a hard time believing that 6-steady state sessions done on days when we do our usual strength and power work will have a negative effect on our strength and power gains. However, if we can possibly increase our cardiac output and decrease our resting heart rate, I am all for it.
What about our players getting slower? That was probably my main concern when we started testing VO2 max. Honestly, we don't have weak, skinny-fat guys on our team. I would say that is probably true for all teams in the NHL now. In fact, most of our stronger, more explosive, and faster skaters actually have above average to excellent VO2 scores. Also, by looking at vertical jump and Wingate scores for the last 5 years, there has been no decline of the average of those scores. We put a priority on developing our players' explosive power and strength throughout the off-season.
From a conditioning standpoint, for the rest of the off-season, we will perform tempo runs, shuttle runs, and slide board intervals. There is zero biking in the conditioning component of our off-season program up until the pre-season phase when our interval training shifts to the bike and more skating.
Why would we do an aerobic test in the pre-season if we are interval training for the last 9-12 weeks of the off-season? When I first implemented the VO2 test, I just added the test to our pre-season battery of tests. It was also around that time when I would read and review articles and research that show positive results with interval training. Studies such as the ones performed by Gibala (1) and Tabata (2) showed that the same kind of results that were obtained from traditional aerobic training could be attained in much less time with interval training.
What I like about the VO2 max test is that towards the end of the test, players are achieving heart rates in the 160-200 bpm range. What I have seen is that the players who have been interval training with heart rates in the 85% plus range during their sessions, are able to get to higher levels on the VO2 max test. They are conditioned to working above their anaerobic threshold. So, they are more prepared to work at that higher stage on the VO2 max test. Interval training will help develop leg strength and power while also getting an a aerobic effect as the athletes' heart rate will not drop low enough in the 1-2 minutes of rest between the intervals. Players who report to camp without following an interval training program will not be able to get to the higher levels because they will not be conditioned to working at that level.
What I also like from the results obtained from the VO2 max test is that we can analyze other components including max heart rate, anaerobic threshold, and how fast they recover after reaching their peak. This is valuable information to use when designing future training protocols for each individual player.
The point of this article is to explain why I don't think testing for VO2 max isn't a bad test for hockey- if you don't train for it in the traditional manner. Interval training is the method that we will continue to use and I think others may see the benefit of interval training on VO2 max. If interval training has been shown to increase VO2 max, then why don't we test VO2max to see who has been interval training?
The most important thing for me as a Strength and Conditioning coach is to make sure that our players follow the conditioning aspect of our off- season program. In reality, if our players come into training camp with average scores on the VO2 max test and improvements in strength and power, I am very happy. What I don't agree with is players having below average scores on the VO2 and above average scores in strength and power. These are the guys who are clearly not in proper condition at training camp. To me, that is as real-world as it gets right there.
I actually wrote this almost 2 years ago. It is important to note that we no longer perform VO2 max testing. We now perform on-ice testing. However, my opinions of the subject matter remains the same.
