Body composition

[kmavm]

I've made a lot of gains over the last six months or so by losing about twenty pounds. I'm now down in the 132-134 lb range, depending on hydration, at about 5'8" (60-61kg at 173cm for my metric friends). I've cut my times on local hill benchmarks by a roughly proportionate amount, plus a little extra, due to some improvements to my training program. So, I'm pretty happy with what this weight has achieved for me.

While I haven't had reliable body composition testing done (skinfolds, etc.), I'm pretty darned lean at this weight. E.g., I have visible veins on my lower abdominal muscles.

However, I find I'm getting a bit mentally exhausted with the discipline required to hold this weight. Even eating clean (whole foods, stuff I've prepared myself at home, etc.) I need to restrict calories and go to bed a tad hungry to stay down here. Part of me thinks I need to take a break from the strict regimen and not worry about gaining back a few pounds. I'm in the northern hemisphere, so there aren't too many races to do for the next few months.

Then again, there's a local hill climb race that I have a chance of doing pretty well in on January 1st. (If I can maintain my current weight and power output, I should beat the winning time for my category from last year). I've never come close to winning a race before, and it would be life-changingly awesome to start off 2006 with a decent result.

What do you all think? Should I let a couple pounds creep on, then try to lose them before January 1st? Just let them creep on and not worry about them until spring? Keep the weight off? I'm sure a few of you born climbers will chime in telling me to lose some more weight.

I guess I also have a theoretical question, which is: where does all this body weight optimization end? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I don't care about my health at all, and only care about cycling performance: should I really lose as much weight as possible? That's hard for me to imagine. The pros look skinny, but not marathon-runner skinny (unless they're pure climbers). Lance's tour weight (something like 158lbs, if I recall correctly) is really not that small for his 5'10" frame. So, unless Lance is getting it all wrong, some lean tissue is helpful for cycling performance. How much lean tissue? What role does event selection play? Genetics? Etc.

 

[frenchyge]

However, I find I'm getting a bit mentally exhausted with the discipline required to hold this weight. Even eating clean (whole foods, stuff I've prepared myself at home, etc.) I need to restrict calories and go to bed a tad hungry to stay down here. Part of me thinks I need to take a break from the strict regimen and not worry about gaining back a few pounds. I'm in the northern hemisphere, so there aren't too many races to do for the next few months.

I was thinking about this the other day. It seems like we get fixated on eating lots of healthy carbs, but if everything we eat is rich in carbs then we cannot eat enough bulk to satisfy our hunger without overdoing our calorie intake. Are you eating a good mix of fiber (bulk) along with the carbs, proteins, etc? Can you mix in some foods that don't have as many calories per pound, so that you can eat more without greatly increasing your calorie intake? I'm as bad as they come in regards to diet, so I don't know the answer to those questions.

 

[kmavm]

I was thinking about this the other day. It seems like we get fixated on eating lots of healthy carbs, but if everything we eat is rich in carbs then we cannot eat enough bulk to satisfy our hunger without overdoing our calorie intake. Are you eating a good mix of fiber (bulk) along with the carbs, proteins, etc? Can you mix in some foods that don't have as many calories per pound, so that you can eat more without greatly increasing your calorie intake? I'm as bad as they come in regards to diet, so I don't know the answer to those questions.

I'm eating a very fiber-rich diet already. My morning meal is usually a half-cup of oatmeal (measured dry), and a whole fruite (apple, pear, asian pear, plum) all of which should be pretty fiber-rich. My lunch is a dry salad with either cottage cheese or 3 oz. of grilled chicken, i.e., a big ball of fiber. Dinner is a small protein portion (3-4oz.) plus 100kcals of starch (e.g., 1 small potato) and as many veggies (where carrots and peas and other starchy things don't count as veggies) as I feel like, so it often ends up a big ball of fiber, too. If I snack in the AM or PM, it's a whole fruit.

So, I'm pretty much ignoring the conventional wisdom that cyclists need to live on pasta and bread and bagels and powerbars. The exception here is if I'm on the bike for 90 minutes or more, I'll eat "power food" (gels, bars, etc.) at a rate of up to 60g of carbs per hour. I'm currently training in the vicinity of 10-15 hours per week, depending, so these do add up to a significant chunk of my food intake for the week. But, I figure they should be more than compensated for by the on-bike expenditure.

 

[Pureshot78]

I'm eating a very fiber-rich diet already. My morning meal is usually a half-cup of oatmeal (measured dry), and a whole fruite (apple, pear, asian pear, plum) all of which should be pretty fiber-rich. My lunch is a dry salad with either cottage cheese or 3 oz. of grilled chicken, i.e., a big ball of fiber. Dinner is a small protein portion (3-4oz.) plus 100kcals of starch (e.g., 1 small potato) and as many veggies (where carrots and peas and other starchy things don't count as veggies) as I feel like, so it often ends up a big ball of fiber, too. If I snack in the AM or PM, it's a whole fruit.

So, I'm pretty much ignoring the conventional wisdom that cyclists need to live on pasta and bread and bagels and powerbars. The exception here is if I'm on the bike for 90 minutes or more, I'll eat "power food" (gels, bars, etc.) at a rate of up to 60g of carbs per hour. I'm currently training in the vicinity of 10-15 hours per week, depending, so these do add up to a significant chunk of my food intake for the week. But, I figure they should be more than compensated for by the on-bike expenditure.

Have you considered using a software program to track your calories and nutrition? One i used would track calories from Carbs / Protein / Fats and you could set variable goals for %s. Also was able to use the USDA guidlines as well as many of the 'fad' diets or a custom template.

 

[kmavm]

Have you considered using a software program to track your calories and nutrition? One i used would track calories from Carbs / Protein / Fats and you could set variable goals for %s. Also was able to use the USDA guidlines as well as many of the 'fad' diets or a custom template.

I'm not sure how this would help. I don't particularly care about macronutrient breakdown, since whatever I'md doing seems to be working well enough. To recap: I'm more than happy with my current weight. I also know what I have to do to maintain it, since I've been doing it for three months now. I'm just exhausted from trying to maintain it, and am wondering whether it's wise to try to hold this new, much ligher weight year-round from both short-, medium-, and long-term perspectives.

 

[Felt_Rider]

Just my opinion, but I believe it is much safer to cycle your bodyweight and conditioning.

You can set an upper limit for off season bodyweight / composition that is below the average male or female composition and yet give yourself a mental and physical break from the stress of maintaining a low bodyfat composition.

For my body type I could not physically hold down around >5% for more than a few weeks without risking viral infections and injuries from the stress of training and restricted calories. However, this can vary from person to person based on individual genetics.

If you are struggling now I would suggest not trying to hold the condition long term.

By the way good job on getting down to a low bodyfat level.

 

[robkit]

they say that if your body fat is much lower than 6-8% it can be unhealthy, notably it can lead to more frequent illness, so the optimal case (in terms of power:weight) of no fat is clearly undesirable.

i beleive that even pro's concede that maintaining "tour" weight is mentally taxing, and isnt something they do all year.

perhaps the best strategy is to stay within about 3 kilos of optimal weight - thats not an unmanageable amount to lose when the time comes.


thing is, if you struggle to maintain weight X, is it going to be any easier to maintain X + 3 kilos?! once youve gained the weight, you would still need to manage the same calorie balance every day to maintain the new weight i think?

 

[frenchyge]

I'm eating a very fiber-rich diet already. My morning meal is usually a half-cup of oatmeal (measured dry), and a whole fruite (apple, pear, asian pear, plum) all of which should be pretty fiber-rich. My lunch is a dry salad with either cottage cheese or 3 oz. of grilled chicken, i.e., a big ball of fiber. Dinner is a small protein portion (3-4oz.) plus 100kcals of starch (e.g., 1 small potato) and as many veggies (where carrots and peas and other starchy things don't count as veggies) as I feel like, so it often ends up a big ball of fiber, too. If I snack in the AM or PM, it's a whole fruit.

So, I'm pretty much ignoring the conventional wisdom that cyclists need to live on pasta and bread and bagels and powerbars. The exception here is if I'm on the bike for 90 minutes or more, I'll eat "power food" (gels, bars, etc.) at a rate of up to 60g of carbs per hour. I'm currently training in the vicinity of 10-15 hours per week, depending, so these do add up to a significant chunk of my food intake for the week. But, I figure they should be more than compensated for by the on-bike expenditure.

Dang! I don't know how that diet even gives you enough calories to sustain 10-15 hrs/wk on the bike. Maybe eating several helpings of celery or cardboard a day would help increase your dietary "bulk."

Normally I would say to ride at a stable weight, but I remember reading how hard you've worked to get to this level, and it's tough to let it go when you're finally getting the results you want. Still, it sounds like your body fat is extremely low, so your body might be fighting you a bit by trying to put some fat back on for a rainy day. Maybe trying to add a few more lean muscle pounds (which increases your basal metabolism) would let you increase your body fat slightly without hurting your bike performace, and by increasing your metabolism might let you eat a little more while keeping your weight stable? Just a thought. Hopefully someone who knows better will comment on whether that makes sense.

 

[kmavm]

Dang! I don't know how that diet even gives you enough calories to sustain 10-15 hrs/wk on the bike.

I'm sure there's stuff I'm missing in there, and remember, I do eat when I'm actually riding the bike. I'm guessing my BMR is somewhere around 1600 kcals/day, and I'm definitely getting that from this diet (haven't lost weight in a while).

 

[kmavm]

Maybe trying to add a few more lean muscle pounds (which increases your basal metabolism) would let you increase your body fat slightly without hurting your bike performace, and by increasing your metabolism might let you eat a little more while keeping your weight stable?

Oops, hit reply a little early. Yeah, I'm curious about the role of lean mass as well. As I've mentioned above, even the pros, while they're undoubtedly super-lean, don't look super-skinny. I.e., they appear to have some substantial muscle mass to them, and the weights for Ullrich and Armstrong are not teeny-tiny.

I know the "gods" on this site are quick to remind us that cycling is an endurance sport, that it doesn't take much force to drive a pedal down, etc. And yet, some of the monsters of the sport seem to be carrying around a non-trivial amount of muscle mass. E.g., letour.fr lists Armstrong's weight as 78kg (!!!), and Ullrich's as 73kg. Obviously these guys are about as lean as they come, so there must be a lot of muscle on their frame. Do they just have such huge aerobic engines that they can actually power all those muscles aerobically? I know my own genetic endowment is very modest; does the amount of lean muscle mass you can carry scale with "engine size" (VO2max, power at your favorite definition of "threshold" or what have you, etc.)?

 

[robkit]

Oops, hit reply a little early. Yeah, I'm curious about the role of lean mass as well. As I've mentioned above, even the pros, while they're undoubtedly super-lean, don't look super-skinny. I.e., they appear to have some substantial muscle mass to them, and the weights for Ullrich and Armstrong are not teeny-tiny.

I know the "gods" on this site are quick to remind us that cycling is an endurance sport, that it doesn't take much force to drive a pedal down, etc. And yet, some of the monsters of the sport seem to be carrying around a non-trivial amount of muscle mass. E.g., letour.fr lists Armstrong's weight as 78kg (!!!), and Ullrich's as 73kg. Obviously these guys are about as lean as they come, so there must be a lot of muscle on their frame. Do they just have such huge aerobic engines that they can actually power all those muscles aerobically? I know my own genetic endowment is very modest; does the amount of lean muscle mass you can carry scale with "engine size" (VO2max, power at your favorite definition of "threshold" or what have you, etc.)?

well armstrong has a big head. and ulrich has always had a huge weight on his shoulders called trying to beat lance. both of thse things sound fairly heavy!

 

[Dini77]

well armstrong has a big head. and ulrich has always had a huge weight on his shoulders called trying to beat lance. both of thse things sound fairly heavy!

LOL - that's funny mate

on a serious side, I find it very difficult to hold diet type intakes year round, rather i just do this on the lead up to key races for me. I think one of the earlier posts talked about upper and lower limits - that's pretty much my approach. I think Chris Carmichael has a good book out about eating right for cyclists, haven't read it though.

 

[Equus123]

my question for you is how long do you plan on staying at this weight? it seems like your body doesn't naturally want to be there.

i suggest periodizing your training throughout the year to peak during your season. but do this with your food too. i would suggest keeping your lowest daily caloric intake to go absolutely no lower than what you're already at. throughout the year as you increase training intensity, positively adjust your calorie intake to compensate. i think your body will balance out to be where it wants to be as long as your training and nutrition/diet comply with one another.

 

[kmavm]

my question for you is how long do you plan on staying at this weight? it seems like your body doesn't naturally want to be there.

That's what I'm learning. After the last month or so of really struggling to stay down around 135, I decided it was taking too much mental and physical energy. My training and recovery were suffering. I felt completely overtrained on 8-10 hours without that much intensity, where my usual volume is in the 10-14 hour range. My sex drive had disappeared, and I was constantly preoccupied with calories and food.

Once these realities became clear enough, I decided I needed to eat like a somewhat normal person for a while, and if I gain some weight, so be it. Amazingly, my body went up to 140 in about three days. I don't think I can have run that big a caloric surplus in just three days, but who knows. Those five pounds all came from fruits, whole grains and lean meat, believe it or not!

Long story short, I feel much, much better after spending a week or so at 140. Mental and physical energy are both way up. I have a hill climb on January 1st, which is why I'd been trying to stay strict with the diet. But, ultimately, nobody's paying me to ride the bike, so my health and happiness have to come first.

 

[bigbevans]

That's what I'm learning. After the last month or so of really struggling to stay down around 135, I decided it was taking too much mental and physical energy. My training and recovery were suffering. I felt completely overtrained on 8-10 hours without that much intensity, where my usual volume is in the 10-14 hour range. My sex drive had disappeared, and I was constantly preoccupied with calories and food.

Once these realities became clear enough, I decided I needed to eat like a somewhat normal person for a while, and if I gain some weight, so be it. Amazingly, my body went up to 140 in about three days. I don't think I can have run that big a caloric surplus in just three days, but who knows. Those five pounds all came from fruits, whole grains and lean meat, believe it or not!

Long story short, I feel much, much better after spending a week or so at 140. Mental and physical energy are both way up. I have a hill climb on January 1st, which is why I'd been trying to stay strict with the diet. But, ultimately, nobody's paying me to ride the bike, so my health and happiness have to come first.

Can I ask what your objective is being this light at this time of year? Are you racing? What sort of racing will you be doing? Will it have massive hills? Alpe d'Huez?

I don't think you get enough protein in your diet. Just my opinion. I am 5'6" got down to 158lbs at the begining of the season and moved back up to 165lb as the season progressed. I think you may be over obsessed with how reduced weight is going to benefit you.

 

[Lonnie Utah]

Just a comparison, for what it's worth. I'm just about the same height as you 5'7.5" and "in season", my weight is around 136-138 (depending on hydration.) I don't have to do anything special to get there, that's just were everything balances out. In the off season, I'm up to about 142-143. I'm pretty comfortable with that (I'm not a racer). Personally, I'd say add a few more calories and make you mind happier. It's 1/2 the equation and the weight will most likely come back off in the spring with mileage starts to go back up....

 

[kmavm]

Can I ask what your objective is being this light at this time of year?

The San Bruno Mountain Hill Climb. Northern California's race season starts very early; in this case, a little bit after dawn on New Year's Day .

 

[kmavm]

Just a comparison, for what it's worth. I'm just about the same height as you 5'7.5" and "in season", my weight is around 136-138 (depending on hydration.) I don't have to do anything special to get there, that's just were everything balances out. In the off season, I'm up to about 142-143. I'm pretty comfortable with that (I'm not a racer). Personally, I'd say add a few more calories and make you mind happier. It's 1/2 the equation and the weight will most likely come back off in the spring with mileage starts to go back up....

That hasn't been my experience previously. I've been in the 153-155 range, in-season and out-, for the last ten years or so, the last three of which have included some real volume (by my standards, at least; 7500-8000 miles / year). Once I started paying closer attention to my diet, I rapidly and painlessly went down to around 140 or so, and saw some dramatic improvements in performance.

At the time I started this thread, I had just pushed things even further, at one point into the low 130's. That's just the kind of stupid idiot I am:
"Oh! I climb better when I'm light! Maybe when I'm WAY WAY TOO LIGHT and I can't think or talk because of low blood sugar for hours a day, I'll win the freaking Tour!"

Too much of a good thing, I think. My body and mind seem MUCH happier around 140-ish. Trying to hold on to my lowest possible weight for too long has definitely compromised my training, and that's letting the tail wag the dog. It's funny: I can't be my lightest AND my strongest at the same time. I guess the bodybuilders are onto something...

 

[Lonnie Utah]

Too much of a good thing, I think. My body and mind seem MUCH happier around 140-ish. Trying to hold on to my lowest possible weight for too long has definitely compromised my training, and that's letting the tail wag the dog. It's funny: I can't be my lightest AND my strongest at the same time. I guess the bodybuilders are onto something...

That's been my experience too. I felt just fine at 138, but I don't have a lot of muscle mass either. So, this thread piqued my interest in my own situation. The previous summer (my first on a bike) I was about where I am now weight wise. I slowly dropped (without too much change in my eating routine) to the 137 lbs I was at when I started tracking it Last Jan. It went up to about 140 in May (I took about 3 weeks off) and back down to the mid 130's in June/July/August and back up in Sept/Oct/Nov. Those numbers correlate well with mileage values for those months as well. I also ski a fair amount in the winter so that makes the numbers from winter a bit fuzzy (I burn a lot of calories trying to keep warm). So I also looked at my "overall feeling" numbers as well. Those peaked in late April when I was in the high 130's/low 140's. Based on the workout I was doing then, I'm sure there was some muscle building during that time. Bottom line, I felt the strongest at high 130's/low 140's.

Edit: All of my weights are post ride and include the effects of hydration loss....

 

[mises]

That hasn't been my experience previously. I've been in the 153-155 range, in-season and out-, for the last ten years or so, the last three of which have included some real volume (by my standards, at least; 7500-8000 miles / year). Once I started paying closer attention to my diet, I rapidly and painlessly went down to around 140 or so, and saw some dramatic improvements in performance.

At the time I started this thread, I had just pushed things even further, at one point into the low 130's. That's just the kind of stupid idiot I am:
"Oh! I climb better when I'm light! Maybe when I'm WAY WAY TOO LIGHT and I can't think or talk because of low blood sugar for hours a day, I'll win the freaking Tour!"

Too much of a good thing, I think. My body and mind seem MUCH happier around 140-ish. Trying to hold on to my lowest possible weight for too long has definitely compromised my training, and that's letting the tail wag the dog. It's funny: I can't be my lightest AND my strongest at the same time. I guess the bodybuilders are onto something...

I think with some dietary modification you could be just as comfortable at a somewhat lower weight. From what was posted you weren't getting enough fat in your diet and that will cause you to be hungry all the time, nutritional problems with fat soluble vitamins, and some hormonal disturbances that could cause a number of the other effects you mentioned.

Also think most people eat too much during exercise while training and impair improvement in fat metabolism. I think it's better to eat more off the bike and less on the bike. Calculate calories in and out on a weekly basis and eat pretty much the same amount every day whether training or not - recovery is better on the off days and you can feel like you are pigging out those days even though overall you are in balance.

If you have a good estimate of your fat free mass in kg this formula works well for estimating resting caloric requirements: 370+ 21.6*(fat free mass kg). I recently got an indirect calorimeter than uses O2 consumption to calculate RCR and was within 10 kcal a day with the formula.

Unless you ate an extra 15,000 calories in 3 days your rapid weight gain following easing up on your diet was all water from increased carbs. Every gram of carbs puts on about 2g of fluid (that's why people think Atkins is so great when they start it).

Be thankful you don't have strong spare tire genes too! I have looked like Rasmussen before but still had a small spare tire around my middle (at 174cm tall and 58kg). I finally decided I would have to be six feet under to get rid of it. Thanks Dad!