2600 miles later, I weigh the same
- Thread starter neilkod
- Start date
winston_the_cat said:
Funny that you would say that. I am, at 6'3" 240lb, considered obese by medical definition. I like to remind myself of that every time I hunt down and pass other cyclists.
I've given consideration to dropping my gear down and bringing my cadence up a bit and see what impact, if any, this has on my riding. I've worked hard to become, what I consider, a strong rider and dont want to compromise it.
A little off-topic, but would any other 'big' cyclist like to give me any pointers on getting started with a HRM? I have one but dont really use it-I dont have too many 'perfectly flat' rides around here (Bountiful, Utah). I think I vary my HR enough with the climbing that I do-I'd like to hear others' experiences.
And thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread; I think its a worthwhile discussion.
neilkod said:
Well I've noticed that I "maintain" my weight despite the fact that I ride about 120 miles each week when a) I don't do a particularly tough ride b) I don't go to my kick ass (usually mine) martial arts class. If I do a and/or b then that's about 2-3 lbs lost there.
That being said the fact that you're leaner must mean that you're turning fat into muscle. Over the last 6 months I've lost about 30 lbs (I'm 5'7 and 150) and I am getting to a point where (even with a&b) I can't seem to lose more weight although my waist is stil getting smaller. I'm thinking a more thought out diet is needed and maybe a few more intensive rides during the week but that being said, if you see the effect on your body, vs on a weighing scale then you should still be happy, no?
Sorry, but I have to object. One does not turn fat into muscle or vice versa. The two are completely separate organ tissues with specific purposes. One builds up skeletal muscle tissue as an adaptive response to specific physical stresses placed on the body. Fat can no more turn into muscle than skin can turn into lung tissue. Just can't happen.jslopez93 said:
Doctor Morbius said:
Well assuming that you monicker isn't just for fun (and probably since you've read up more than this than I ever have/will) I will cede this point to you. That being said, I've heard the the phrase fat to muscle all the time at gyms. Is it a misnomer?
I had the same effect I lost about 5 pounds initially then stayed there. I think even the pros with the amount of mileage they put in really have to watch their diet.neilkod said:
As far as health goes it sounds like you are fine. When I got back to cycling my blood pressure dropped 20 points and my resting heart rate dropped more than 10 beats even though I was pretty much the same weight.
If you have a heart rate monitor and want to burn fat, go on really long rides and keep your heart rate around 70% of your max. At this effort the body uses fat for fuel, if you go above this the body uses glycogen reserves.
My experience has shown that there is a very simple explanation. You probably ride after you eat. When you do this you are burning the food you have in your stomach. Then you probably come home and eat some more. On the other hand if you want to drop pounds like I recently started doing successfully, ride first thing in the morning on an empty stomach (actually I have a little cup of coffee to jump start the metabolism). Whatever traces of food are in there from last night get used first but are quickly gone and 'voila' you start burning the fat much quicker. Thus you can do fairly short rides (30-45min) and still get leaner. Initially you may feel like **** but soon you feel very good doing this.
An extreme example is the typical NFL lineman. He actually has pretty decent cardio, but usually carries a lot of fat simply because they do there cardio after eating typically. (I know my buddy was one for several years.)
So if you want to drop weight ride on an empty stomach at a leisurely heart rate. 65 percent or so. You should still have enough energy for hard rides (with food in the tank) if you do this as well.
Good luck.
An extreme example is the typical NFL lineman. He actually has pretty decent cardio, but usually carries a lot of fat simply because they do there cardio after eating typically. (I know my buddy was one for several years.)
So if you want to drop weight ride on an empty stomach at a leisurely heart rate. 65 percent or so. You should still have enough energy for hard rides (with food in the tank) if you do this as well.
Good luck.
Simple formula:
Intake more calories than you burn = gain weight
Intake same calories you burn = stable weight
Intake less calories than you burn = lose weight
Make sure to measure your body weight in the morning before any activity on an EMPTY STOMACH and EMPTY BLADDER
ALL of the complex "diet" plans out there are really just a means for achieving the above formula.
Intake more calories than you burn = gain weight
Intake same calories you burn = stable weight
Intake less calories than you burn = lose weight
Make sure to measure your body weight in the morning before any activity on an EMPTY STOMACH and EMPTY BLADDER
ALL of the complex "diet" plans out there are really just a means for achieving the above formula.
Most of these replies are near the mark. But its a little more complicated than the energy in/energy out argument. Most of all, if you're trying to loose excess fat, consider:
1. Level and duration of exertion.
2. What you eat, and when you eat it.
Your body will tend to rely on fat for aerobic fuel at moderate exertion levels. For me at a Max HR of 190, this is 130-145 BPM. Aim for the 130s and you'll be in range. Go much above 150 and your body will largely switch to gycogen power, and you will burn less fat, and what is more, you'll have to stop riding sooner than at a lower effort, as you'll run out of energy ! - and deplete your glycogen stores.
Also, you do need to fuel your fat metabolism. You will burn no fat at all if you have no energy to exercise. 'Fat burns in the carbohydate fire' as they say, and it burns best at moderate intensity. Take an energy drink with you. You'll ride for longer, and burn even more fat.
About dieting for fat loss. - Its not about calorie restriction. Your total energy intake can stay the same, but those calories must be complex carbohydates, not refined sugars. The only safe time to take on refined sugars is DURING EXERCISE, if you're trying to lose fat. Think of it like this - sugar is toxic. It damages your body. Your metabolism is arranged to keep sugar levels controlled. The only thing your resting body can do to drop your blood sugar is to convert it quickly to fat, by producing insulin. Foods which do this are called 'high glycaemic index'. Complex carbohydates are 'low glycaemic index'. They produce a much less immediate insulin response. Your body has a chance to use these calories gradually, rather than convert them all to fat.
Finally, in my experience, you can't combine quality training (for speed) with a fat burning program. You can't lose weight and get faster at the same time (except by virtue of being lighter of course), the dietary requirements differ too much.
1. Level and duration of exertion.
2. What you eat, and when you eat it.
Your body will tend to rely on fat for aerobic fuel at moderate exertion levels. For me at a Max HR of 190, this is 130-145 BPM. Aim for the 130s and you'll be in range. Go much above 150 and your body will largely switch to gycogen power, and you will burn less fat, and what is more, you'll have to stop riding sooner than at a lower effort, as you'll run out of energy ! - and deplete your glycogen stores.
Also, you do need to fuel your fat metabolism. You will burn no fat at all if you have no energy to exercise. 'Fat burns in the carbohydate fire' as they say, and it burns best at moderate intensity. Take an energy drink with you. You'll ride for longer, and burn even more fat.
About dieting for fat loss. - Its not about calorie restriction. Your total energy intake can stay the same, but those calories must be complex carbohydates, not refined sugars. The only safe time to take on refined sugars is DURING EXERCISE, if you're trying to lose fat. Think of it like this - sugar is toxic. It damages your body. Your metabolism is arranged to keep sugar levels controlled. The only thing your resting body can do to drop your blood sugar is to convert it quickly to fat, by producing insulin. Foods which do this are called 'high glycaemic index'. Complex carbohydates are 'low glycaemic index'. They produce a much less immediate insulin response. Your body has a chance to use these calories gradually, rather than convert them all to fat.
Finally, in my experience, you can't combine quality training (for speed) with a fat burning program. You can't lose weight and get faster at the same time (except by virtue of being lighter of course), the dietary requirements differ too much.
Don't worry too much about losing weight. If you feel good and fit you're OK. I would definately not recommend eating less. I did so a few years ago, I had to be a certain weight for my rowing team (light women 4, which roughly means you have to be under 58 kg). I started to train more, esp. cycling to lose some some pounds and at the same time eat less (and fat free). I can tell you I have never felt weaker in my life... training and dieting do not go together. Eat normal, healthy food, train a bit more but do not diet (under 1400 kcals) at the same time!!!!
I reckon it's better to be a bit heavier and feel healthy then lose a few pounds and feel awful.
Besides, imo fatpercentage is a better parameter if you want to know if you're training methods/ eating habits are OK.
I reckon it's better to be a bit heavier and feel healthy then lose a few pounds and feel awful.
Besides, imo fatpercentage is a better parameter if you want to know if you're training methods/ eating habits are OK.
Eating/drinking to maximize energy utilization is a different subject.
I'm assuming that you are looking to shed some pounds. If after 2600 miles you still weight the same and you would like to lose more weight than over time you need to burn more calories than you intake.
Thats the fundamental truth to weight gain and loss. It really is that simple.
I'm assuming that you are looking to shed some pounds. If after 2600 miles you still weight the same and you would like to lose more weight than over time you need to burn more calories than you intake.
Thats the fundamental truth to weight gain and loss. It really is that simple.
kjeb said:
No its not that simple ! - I tried 6 winters of trying to loose weight by eating less and failed. I then ate more, rode longer and less vigourously, and finally shed near 2 stone in 6 months, and have never felt better, and never once felt hungry.
I then ate more, rode longer and less vigourously, and finally shed near 2 stone in 6 months.....
DavidM...I think your'e right, but the simple formula probably did apply here also. Over the 6 month period you probably had a net loss in calories...you burned more than you consumed even though you consumed more than usual.
DavidM...I think your'e right, but the simple formula probably did apply here also. Over the 6 month period you probably had a net loss in calories...you burned more than you consumed even though you consumed more than usual.
Similar threads
