Thanks for sharing this article.
I find this to be an issue in his reasoning:
“ In fact, when I model the average response to training across the entire group that I have VO2 and long-term training data for, I see an average shift from 54 to 67 ml/kg/min (a change of 24%) when a long-term, high-volume training plan is undertaken.
Conversely, when a short-term, high-intensity training plan is undertaken, the model shows a maximal increase (in 4-6 weeks) to only 63 ml/kg/min (16%).”
You cannot make meaningful comparisons to gains in a month and a half to gains after several years.
His figure 4 bar chart (with no labels) doesn’t sum to 100% if it is supposed to be percentages (which would be the correct way to depict the point) but also just showed the athlete did relatively the same intensity and added much more zone two work (if it is in hours per week).
I would not take him too seriously as a researcher. However, I agree that high volume plans can lead to increases in vo2max. However, the more volume you do, the larger than percent of work will be at zone1-2 by default, you cannot just simply pile on more intensity (tho you could do much more tempo riding - I don’t classify that as ‘intensity work’ tho)