Fat loss - HR, & Pwr zones

[vladav]

Need help with fat loss. I want to start my first race season next year (rr & crits) and have a few more pounds to lose and have hit a plateau. (sprinter body type)

Need suggestions for making sure I'm in the right Fat burn zones and not into aerobic. I really don't want to lose it via Long slow rides (boring) and would prefer to incorporate fat burn on my active recovery days on the treadmill or outdoor walking. Scheduling on AR days should help avoid cutting into training schedule. Walking seems to be far more effective for me to lose weight even though I hate it just as much as LSD.

Q: Should I use:
Bike + HR?
Walking + HR?
Bike + Pwr?
If HR, then do I use different % of Max for Bike vs Walking?
If Pwr what zones?

Doing the following has already netted me 8lbs loss:
1) Not eating >2hr before bedtime
2) Restricting daily calories by activity level (Rarely drop it below ~BMR)
3) Recovery shake(s) after every light to hard workout
4) Taking anticatabolic supplements before bedtime
5) Eating regularly throughout the day (Not every day though)
6) Increasing % of whole foods & fruits


Stats:
29yrs
5'6" (167cm)
168-172lbs (76-78kg) Current weight
156-160 (71-72kg) Ideal race weight (Based on prior 146lbs lean mass @8% bf while bike commuting and horrible nutrition habits 10 years ago.)
Max HR?
192 = 0.14% of season (Or 12:51 min)
198 = 0.02% of season (Or 1:26 min)
203 absolute max (10sec)

It's difficult to keep my heart rate below 140 (68-72%) on the bike for very long which is probably why walking is more effective for me?


Anyways thanks for any assistance!
Dave

 

[Yojimbo_]

I think you should pack in the HR zones, and just try to generate a 500 calorie a day deficit. You can do this through a combination of watching what you eat, and getting some exercise.

If you are successful, you will lose 1 lb/wk.

 

[vladav]

just try to generate a 500 calorie a day deficit

Yohimbo you're absolutely correct - that is one way, but:

Going that route puts me into the "hunry all the time" mode which for me is dangerous because then I tend to lose 'connection' with my stomach and I lower calories/day too much - losing muscle, fitness, freshness.

It is easier for me to instinctively maintain a slightly over filled 'tank' than a slightly underfilled one, and focus my calorie deficit in connection with excersize just 1-2 days per week. I'm trying with everyone's help here to make sure I'm maximizing those days with the appropriate intensity levels

For me it's psychologically & organizationally too difficult to count calories every single day.

Thanks,
Dave

 

[Yojimbo_]

I have a hard time believing in fat burning zones to tell the truth. As I understand it (and I am no expert), at lower intensities a greater proportion of the total calorie expenditure comes from fat burning. At higher intensities, because your body can't supply enough energy from fat burning, other sources come into play.

That total amount of fat calories you burn is roughly the same in both cases.

And wrt counting calories, I don't think you need to. Just have some idea of what the caloric values of food are, so you know that when you put that tablespoon of mayo on your sandwich, you've just added a little more than 100 calories. For me, it's all about making informed choices - if you can do that, the lbs will come off.

 

[GinaNY]

imho - the "fat burning zone" can be useful, but obviously, you aren't staying there all the time. Basically, you need oxygen to burn fat, so if you can carry on a conversation, you're right on. If you're huffing and puffing, you're too far.

So try it out on a treadmill or something. Get up around 120 and start reciting some poetry or something (don't sing, that is something else) and see where you get to the point that you're breathing a little too hard to do this. That is right around your max for fat burning, or so I've been told.

It is a simple, not too sceintific way so take it for what it's worth.

I've lost a huge amount of weight using a combination of low intensity and interval training. You almost have to find your own balance and be careful that you eat enough! That will slow you down faster than anything. Your body won't let you starve.

Hope that isn't all rubbish.

 

[vladav]

Thanks for the perspective Yojimbo - I'll keep that in my repertoire

Gina - thanks, sounds like Ventilatory Threshold? I'll try that...
The poetry part is going to make it excuciating - so it will feel like a real workout

Dave

 

[surfinbernard]

Hi I'm new here.

I'm not that into zone training as it's so time consuming. Yes the ratio of fat vs other available energy changes once you start working harder, but the calories you burn per hour is significantly increased when pushing yourself, so you would have to exercise for considerably longer sessions to burn equal fat with your HR in the 'fat burn' zone dispite the ratio being in favour of fat loss.

It's so boring doing 'moderate' exercise, I would rather spend an hour in the spin room working my wotsits off than 4 hours walking any day. Of course overall health and fitness is about much more than just cardio, and a sensible diet is a necessary factor. Resistance training is good as the body uses more calories even whilst at rest with improved muscle tone, and improved strength and stamina is no bad thing either.

SB

 

[ric_stern/RST]

imho - the "fat burning zone" can be useful, but obviously, you aren't staying there all the time. Basically, you need oxygen to burn fat, so if you can carry on a conversation, you're right on. If you're huffing and puffing, you're too far.

So try it out on a treadmill or something. Get up around 120 and start reciting some poetry or something (don't sing, that is something else) and see where you get to the point that you're breathing a little too hard to do this. That is right around your max for fat burning, or so I've been told.

It is a simple, not too sceintific way so take it for what it's worth.

I've lost a huge amount of weight using a combination of low intensity and interval training. You almost have to find your own balance and be careful that you eat enough! That will slow you down faster than anything. Your body won't let you starve.

Hope that isn't all rubbish.

The fat burning zone is a myth. All that matters for weight loss is that you expend more energy than you take in.

By exercising ine the "fat burning zone" you're exercising at such a low intensity that it would take a lot longer to create an energy deficit (whatever the substrate use) than if you were to exercise at a higher intensity.

So, if all that matters is weight loss, you should exercise at the *HIGHEST* intensity that you can manage for the duration that you have available for training and be able to recover for the next exercise bout.

Ric

 

[vladav]

ArrrggggHHH! I'm looking for something to do on my RECOVERY days. Preferably off-the-bike to keep the intensity down. LOL!!!

The posts have been informative though, and I gather from the responses that my strategy is ****. Well that's good to know too, though less satisfying. I thought this was going to be easy.

But truly - Thanks!
Dave

<wanders off muttering something about calorie counting>
.

 

[Frigo's Luggage]

The fat burning zone is a myth. All that matters for weight loss is that you expend more energy than you take in.

By exercising ine the "fat burning zone" you're exercising at such a low intensity that it would take a lot longer to create an energy deficit (whatever the substrate use) than if you were to exercise at a higher intensity.

So, if all that matters is weight loss, you should exercise at the *HIGHEST* intensity that you can manage for the duration that you have available for training and be able to recover for the next exercise bout.

Ric

Thank you. I've been telling people this for years and can't convince people that higher intensity is better for burning calories.

I lost about 20 pounds when I decided to race. My suggestion is to ride alot and use portion control. Eat slow and enjoy the food. Don't gobble. Try to eat fruit or something light for between meal snacks.

 

[leestevens]

To let you know where i am coming from, i have just completed a Level 1 cycle coaching course here in Aus. We learnt that to burn fat you have to burn the carbs first. This is 60-90 mins of moderate to high intensity riding. So any thing after 90 mins you should be burning fat. The other option is to run and run hard for as long (almost) as possible. This is pretty much what Ric said any way. There is no other or easier way to do this. Why are you trying to do it on your rest days anyway? This should be incorporated into any and all exercise you do, not your rest days. Rest days are exactly that, not fat burning days.

 

[GinaNY]

ArrrggggHHH! I'm looking for something to do on my RECOVERY days. Preferably off-the-bike to keep the intensity down. LOL!!!

The posts have been informative though, and I gather from the responses that my strategy is ****. Well that's good to know too, though less satisfying. I thought this was going to be easy.

But truly - Thanks!
Dave

<wanders off muttering something about calorie counting>
.

Well - I guess it was rubbish, but it took 120 pounds off my butt, so whatever you want to call it, it seems to work for some people. And got me ready to bike pretty intensely.

I've been reading the Cyclists Training Bible - Friel - I'm sure you have that. Anyway, not very far into it, but there is a lot about recovery in there so maybe that will help? It can be frustrating with all the different "schools of thought" out there. In the end, a lot of it just depends upon your body, how it reacts, how many calories you need for your recovery, how much is too much on low intensity days etc.

More than anything, I would write everything down. What you eat, how long you workout, what your heart rate was etc. and see how you recover.

Or - find a coach you like. Thats what I did in the end.

 

[frenchyge]

ArrrggggHHH! I'm looking for something to do on my RECOVERY days. Preferably off-the-bike to keep the intensity down. LOL!!!

The posts have been informative though, and I gather from the responses that my strategy is ****. Well that's good to know too, though less satisfying. I thought this was going to be easy.

Similar to what's been said, I think you're barking up the wrong tree trying to concentrate your fat-burning into your recovery days because those workouts *by definition* are not going to be burning a lot of calories. You'll make much more progress by not over-eating after your training workouts, when you have the greatest opportunity to achieve a caloric deficit.

What's your training routine like, and how many AR workouts do you do per week?

 

[Urkiola2]

I believe that to the general public the messege about Calories (Kcalories, academically speakig) has been wrongly adressed/explained. I.e. You can burn 2.000Cals(Kcals) in atraining session. Both could be derivated from carbohydrate origin (Glycogenolysis, Glycolysis, Gluconeogenesis) or from Fatty Acids-Fat- (triglycerides and intramuscular vacuoles of triglycderides). However what regulates the fuel source you utilize is muscle fuel energy requirements for muscle contraction-That is, exercise mode-. In the above example of the 2000 Kcal burned they can be an 80% derived from fat and 20% from Carbohydrates whereas the opposite metabolic consequences for your fuel utilisation would be 20% derived from fat and 80% from CHO. So intensity mode is very important. By increasing intensity you will need a higher muscle fiber recruitment, Type IIa and IIb muscle fibers, which utilize more glycogen as well as your muscle fibers per se will need a more efficient fuel, CHO, in order to meet the metabolic demands of your muscles. So theorically speaking, high intensity exercises are not the best ones to loose weight. Another thing that helps though is that after high intensity exercise metabolic rate is higher than after low ntensity exercise so you will more Kcals during a longer period of time and many of those Kcal will be derived from fat. However you will burn less fat than by doing i.e. 5h on the bike on a "slower mode".

About highest intensity possible for the longest period of time, anless you are an alite cyclist you will not be able to sustain 5 h ride at a very high intensity..so if you can sustain 4-5h (even if you think you are going fast) that is because your muscle metabolic demands have reached a steady state level and are utilizing more fat than CHO. Muscle Glycogen storages at 75-80% of VO2 max will only last about 90 minutes, although probably more due to gluconeogenesis derived from lactate,...so if you do 5h...and not eating much there is no way you will do those hours utilizing more CHO over fat but the other way around, herefore loosing more weight.

About the diet, I agree with the a post above, and it has been scientifically studied, that a deficit of about 500Kcal/day is ideal to loose weight.
Usually by putting a 2-3 endurance days per week at a medium-low pace plus watching your diet a bit, I agree with who posted above that you could burn about 0.5-1Kg (1-2lbs) per week.

About your resting days I would try to restrict your cals as much as you can, since you will be burning less then give your body less.

I hope it helps,

Cheers.

 

[frenchyge]

In the above example of the 2000 Kcal burned they can be an 80% derived from fat and 20% from Carbohydrates whereas the opposite metabolic consequences for your fuel utilisation would be 20% derived from fat and 80% from CHO. So intensity mode is very important. By increasing intensity you will need a higher muscle fiber recruitment, Type IIa and IIb muscle fibers, which utilize more glycogen as well as your muscle fibers per se will need a more efficient fuel, CHO, in order to meet the metabolic demands of your muscles. So theorically speaking, high intensity exercises are not the best ones to loose weight.

Depsite the fact that it's not technically wrong, that's precisely the type of example that encourages the general public to focus on the 'fat-burning zone' rather than looking at caloric expenditure.

To clarify the above, it's true that a lower-intensity exercise burns a higher percentage of calories from fat during the exercise, however it also burns fewer total calories per hour. A brisk walk might burn 60% of its calories from fat, but it only burns 300 kcal/hr. By contrast, a hard bike ride burns 30% of calories from fat while burning 1100 kcal/hr. The ride is actually burning more fat calories per hour than the walk, despite being out of the 'fat-burning zone.' You'd have to walk nearly twice as long to burn the same fat calories during the exercise.

In addition, looking at the source of calories metabolized during the exercise is still only half of the picture. Fat continues to be metabolized long after high intensity exercise ends as the body seeks to replenish the glycogen stores in the depleted muscle tissues.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

Depsite the fact that it's not technically wrong, that's precisely the type of example that encourages the general public to focus on the 'fat-burning zone' rather than looking at caloric expenditure.

To clarify the above, it's true that a lower-intensity exercise burns a higher percentage of calories from fat during the exercise, however it also burns fewer total calories per hour. A brisk walk might burn 60% of its calories from fat, but it only burns 300 kcal/hr. By contrast, a hard bike ride burns 30% of calories from fat while burning 1100 kcal/hr. The ride is actually burning more fat calories per hour than the walk, despite being out of the 'fat-burning zone.' You'd have to walk nearly twice as long to burn the same fat calories during the exercise...

+ 1 frenchyge

It's basically the same as asking whether you'd rather have 80% of $100 or 60% of $200.....

There's a second benefit of working the higher end of your aerobic range, you get fitter faster and increase your sustainable power for the same perceived effort. IOW over time you put out more power for the same effort. More power held for the same time means more calories burned per hour. Or if all the power talk is confusing, look at any of the on line calories burned while cycling tables like this one: http://www.nutristrategy.com/fitness/cycling.htm the estimate for a 195 pound person riding 14-15.9 mph is 885 calories per hour. The same person riding 16-19 mph burns an estimated 1062 calories per hour. Get fitter, put out the same relative effort and burn more calories per hour by riding faster.

 

[vladav]

Look, let's get back to the original post. Prior to the OP I already comprehended/agreed with the "high intensity to lose pounds" approach and kind of expected it to be mentioned here. But I'm not open to using it right now, but should be ready by late December early Jan when the training focus goes up and I'm not off the bike more than 1 day per week.

The reality is that my company is going into a $1.5B merger and I'm stressed out of my gourd. So I don't always have enough left for high intensity anything except for my job, which I hope to keep. In spite of this, I'm determined not to give up on this upcoming season because work-stress kept me from completing my training plan last year and got so discouraged that I didn't enter a single race. I'm not going to repeat that!

So the reality is that while I do:
1) L3-4 2x20s 1-2 times per week
2) a long ride on the weekends 2.5-4h
3) L3 over rolling hills 2-4 times per week
4) I'm left with 2-3 days where I'm just hanging on for dear sanity with low motivation and need something at a lower intensity to increment me closer to my goal, work off stress, and not get sick or burnt out in the process.

I'll say it again: Going off past experience, calorie restriction right now is 'dangerous' for me. I'm very likely to get sick or lose muscle mass.

I really appreciate the advice from the perspective of finding the 'supreme' method for fat loss - but I'm content to stick with a lesser method for now.

Regards,
Dave

 

[daveryanwyoming]

...I'll say it again: Going off past experience, calorie restriction right now is 'dangerous' for me. I'm very likely to get sick or lose muscle mass.

I really appreciate the advice from the perspective of finding the 'supreme' method for fat loss - but I'm content to stick with a lesser method for now....

So you'd like to lose weight, but you don't want to restrict calories, can't increase workout time and don't want to increase intensity. Something's gotta give if you want to drop weight 'cause it all comes down to calories in vs. calories out and you don't seem to want to change either......

If your current rest days are totally off the bike then adding some low intensity spinning or walking at lunch or anything else that burns a few calories can help but don't expect much if it's a half hour of easy riding or a walk around the block. Not unless you want to match that by cutting a few calories here and there, but it seems you've already decided against that option.

Just remember it takes a 3500 calorie deficit to drop a pound, a half hour of rest day riding might burn 350 calories(assumes a 195 pound rider at ~ 12-14 mph). Don't change anything else in your weekly routine or your caloric intake and you'll drop a pound after 10 of those sessions. The math is pretty easy and it sounds like you've already decided what you will or won't change to accomplish your goal. You've just got to decide if your approach is fast enough to get you where you want to be.

Good luck,
Dave

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Look, let's get back to the original post. Prior to the OP I already comprehended/agreed with the "high intensity to lose pounds" approach and kind of expected it to be mentioned here. But I'm not open to using it right now, but should be ready by late December early Jan when the training focus goes up and I'm not off the bike more than 1 day per week.

The reality is that my company is going into a $1.5B merger and I'm stressed out of my gourd. So I don't always have enough left for high intensity anything except for my job, which I hope to keep. In spite of this, I'm determined not to give up on this upcoming season because work-stress kept me from completing my training plan last year and got so discouraged that I didn't enter a single race. I'm not going to repeat that!

So the reality is that while I do:
1) L3-4 2x20s 1-2 times per week
2) a long ride on the weekends 2.5-4h
3) L3 over rolling hills 2-4 times per week
4) I'm left with 2-3 days where I'm just hanging on for dear sanity with low motivation and need something at a lower intensity to increment me closer to my goal, work off stress, and not get sick or burnt out in the process.

I'll say it again: Going off past experience, calorie restriction right now is 'dangerous' for me. I'm very likely to get sick or lose muscle mass.

I really appreciate the advice from the perspective of finding the 'supreme' method for fat loss - but I'm content to stick with a lesser method for now.

Regards,
Dave

Dave,

It sounds like you have specific queries and circumstances that you want people to address, rather than general answers about the correct way forward.

So, while there maybe a more correct way forward (as several of us have been explaining), you also need the advice tailoring to you, your circumstances, and your goals. This is now stepping into the area of wanting specific coaching, which, of course some of the coaches (ourselves included) can provide for you.

Ric

 

[frenchyge]

So the reality is that while I do:
1) L3-4 2x20s 1-2 times per week
2) a long ride on the weekends 2.5-4h
3) L3 over rolling hills 2-4 times per week
4) I'm left with 2-3 days where I'm just hanging on for dear sanity with low motivation and need something at a lower intensity to increment me closer to my goal, work off stress, and not get sick or burnt out in the process.

I'll say it again: Going off past experience, calorie restriction right now is 'dangerous' for me. I'm very likely to get sick or lose muscle mass.

In that case I'd suggest not trying to put your sanity days into any kind of zone for optimal anything. Go for a stroll, jog, swim, ride around the park, shoot some hoops, work in the garden, whatever you do for fun. It doesn't look like your training is going to suffer for lack of active recovery on the bike.

As far as getting sick or losing muscle mass goes, I think focusing on nutrition will actually help prevent both of those while also encouraging weight loss. Good nutrition is especially important during periods of high physical or mental stress.

Hang in there and good luck with your season.