I’m good, thanks. Was off the bike for four days after anyway. Just some scratches and smashed my jaw pretty good. Feeling fine now, just finishing up making the bike road worthy again.
I’m ready for a break myself. Taking two weeks after State this weekend.
You say you increased training but what does it look like ? A 3-4 week block of Vo2 max interval workouts can probably bring it above 60 again. Though based off of what you’ve described I’m skeptical of the first number being correct.
Vo2 isn’t all that relevant really. Mine is all over the place. Was up to 70 this spring when I was doing intervals but was forced to take 2 months off the bike and I was down in the 50s again. (57) and I can hold 300 watts for 5 mins.
Looks like you need more work in the 275-325 range.
I’ve done lab and my Garmin has matched it each time. I think Garmin Vo2 fluctuates more with running than cycling in my exp.
So I’m not sure if this was mentioned but vo2 is measured both absolute and relative. The 2 digit number in your case 57 is actually 57 mL/kg/min aka relative value. Kg here being very important.
You said you gained some weight which means it’s possible your absolute vo2max stayed the same (which is most likely the case since it’s not that easy to train this, it’s mainly genetic that sets it but there is ways you can improve it.) And because you gained some weight your relative vo2 dropped.
This doesn’t mean you’re slower or worse than before, your ftp went up which means you’re getting more efficient and ate able to hold higher % of vo2 max.
Think of vo2max as a ceiling you can never reach but you can work on getting as close to it as possible. Oh and focus on absolute value and compare those between the tests, the relative value is imo useless.
That’s probably because you have a massive absolute vo2max… I like your YouTube channel 
same lab tech, same machine, same calibration?
equal fueling, hydration, rest, and motivation with the two tests?
you can see some variance between tests due to a lot of things. I’ve seen 65 in one lab and 70 in another at the same body weight, with similar FTP, and similar 5-min power in the field
What the PM is telling you over a training block and season is more important than what the lab test tells you on a single day, or on two.
Very interesting! I must admit the more I looked at your history the more I suspect a janky test! 
Weeks leading into the first test…TR training stress…206, 209, 379. Weeks leading into the 2nd test: 483, 373, 381. Your FTP at the 2nd test is 8.7% higher. Plus, look at your ride feed before the 1st test. In spite of having a lower FTP you struggled at some workouts (darwin -4, bear creek -4, gould +2). Meanwhile, leading into the 2nd test you were breaking through workouts at a higher FTP (McDuffie).
Plus, you were doing workouts that I’d expect to target VO2 improvement. ‘Kinda Tabata’, grassy ridge, apple orchard (love those floats!). So something sounds fishy to me about those test results! I’m not sure I’d believe whatever marketing hype that supplement eventually promotes.
Yeah im starting to think that something with the testing must be up. I’ll chat again to the performance guy - but it was a reputable place that does a lot of performance coaching with triathletes/racing peeps etc.
Re: marketing hype - yeah but i went down a step or two! I must have knocked a few % of their stock price
I don’t know, maybe the extra work (and extra vo2max work) before the second test created a bit of lingering fatigue?