Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Training & Nutrition
Reload this Page >

How Many Calories/Carbs Do I Really Need?

Notices
Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

How Many Calories/Carbs Do I Really Need?

Old 01-22-21, 09:38 AM
  #51  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
Seriously? You’re quoting a 54yr old paper as your basis for research.
Last time I checked the human body and its need for nutrition hasn't changed since 1967. If you find any info in the research paper that is no longer "proven science" please let us know!

Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity in 1687. His research is still considered proven science to this day! Just as correlation is not causation, "old" does not autmatically mean "outdated".

Last edited by Cyclist0100; 01-22-21 at 09:42 AM.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:11 AM
  #52  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
Last time I checked the human body and its need for nutrition hasn't changed since 1967. If you find any info in the research paper that is no longer "proven science" please let us know!

Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity in 1687. His research is still considered proven science to this day! Just as correlation is not causation, "old" does not autmatically mean "outdated".
You should tell all the people who've been studying physiology and nutrition for the last 50 yrs they've been wasting their time as this guy had it all figured out back then.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:20 AM
  #53  
hubcyclist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,199

Bikes: 2017 Raleigh RX 1.0, 2018 Specialized Allez

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked 631 Times in 336 Posts
OP, you're really not doing yourself any favors with the contentiousness you're bringing to all your responses. Again, people above were trying to understand what your agenda was to begin with and also offering the best advice they can. The fact is no one paper or source is going to be able to tell you exactly what you should do for your own riding. 60-90g isn't even about what the body needs, that's a measure of how many grams the human body can process per hour, 60 on the low end of glucose and then others carbs can come from fructose to get to 90-100g. Anything over that and the body has some adverse gastric reactions. So the idea of having 60-90g for performance cycling is that people might go through more carbs than that per hour, and so we should try and do our best to keep a supply of carbs on board so we don't bonk. I think you're looking for absolute facts via science that don't necessarily exist (I'm guessing any research you'll find relates more to higher end efforts than just average joes riding at z2 or below). As I said above, you can get a more specific idea of what your body does by getting yourself to lab for metabolic testing, otherwise we have ballpark figures and experience to guide us.
hubcyclist is offline  
Likes For hubcyclist:
Old 01-22-21, 10:23 AM
  #54  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
You should tell all the people who've been studying physiology and nutrition for the last 50 yrs they've been wasting their time as this guy had it all figured out back then.
Such willingness to engage in negativity and to attack the study without a single bit of effort spent commenting on the content of the actual study.

And people wonder why America (and the developed world) is in decline. People can no longer engage in productive conversation/debate without getting ugly. Critical thinking skills are few and far between. Tribal thinking and "sheepism" has permeated virtually every aspect of modern culture in the public sphere.

We can't even seem to have an intelligent reasonable civil informative conversation about nutritional needs for rides of varying intensity and duration. What a sad state of affairs.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:31 AM
  #55  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by hubcyclist
OP, you're really not doing yourself any favors with the contentiousness you're bringing to all your responses. Again, people above were trying to understand what your agenda was to begin with and also offering the best advice they can. The fact is no one paper or source is going to be able to tell you exactly what you should do for your own riding. 60-90g isn't even about what the body needs, that's a measure of how many grams the human body can process per hour, 60 on the low end of glucose and then others carbs can come from fructose to get to 90-100g. Anything over that and the body has some adverse gastric reactions. So the idea of having 60-90g for performance cycling is that people might go through more carbs than that per hour, and so we should try and do our best to keep a supply of carbs on board so we don't bonk. I think you're looking for absolute facts via science that don't necessarily exist (I'm guessing any research you'll find relates more to higher end efforts than just average joes riding at z2 or below). As I said above, you can get a more specific idea of what your body does by getting yourself to lab for metabolic testing, otherwise we have ballpark figures and experience to guide us.
At this point I'm not trying to do myself any favors. Some of the responses in the thread are just stupid, uninformed, counter-productive and obtuse! I've never claimed that any single article provides the complete answer to anything. I'm simply being transparent as to the sources of the info.

The point of the OP was to provide tools for your toolbox if you're interested in figuring things out on your own. The info in the links provided do just that. Relying on someone to tell me what I need to do without understanding the logic or the science behind the recommendation is not of interest to me. Ergo, telling me you do "X" and it works for you doesn't mean it'll work for me. Likewise, I will show others the same consideration. It makes no sense for me to shove my means and methods down anyone's throat. I'm looking to fill my toolbox with usable tools, and when I find good tools I think it's helpful to share those with others. Most people should have the brain capacity to figure out if that tool is useful to them or not. If so, great. If not, no worries. Attacking the person who is just trying to share helpful info with those who are looking for it is a head-scratcher.

If the info is not helpful to you, move on. I don't have any issue with that. If you have disagreement with the info or hold a different view that is backed up by facts, I welcome that. And if you're just here to throw stones and disrupt, don't expect me to coddle you, handle you with kid gloves or give you a hug.

Last edited by Cyclist0100; 01-22-21 at 10:41 AM.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:39 AM
  #56  
billridesbikes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Liked 418 Times in 250 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
Last time I checked the human body and its need for nutrition hasn't changed since 1967. If you find any info in the research paper that is no longer "proven science" please let us know!

Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity in 1687. His research is still considered proven science to this day! Just as correlation is not causation, "old" does not autmatically mean "outdated".
Here are some papers on 'carb-loading' and diet from this century.
"Effect of high-fat, high-carbohydrate, and high-protein meals on metabolism and performance during endurance cycling.", Rowlands et al, Int J of Sports med, Sept 2002 - The verdict: No clear effect on performance despite metabolism differences.

"What should I eat before Exercise? Pre-Exercise Nutrition and the Response to Endurance Exercise: Current Prospective and Future Directions", Rothschild et al. Nutrients, November 2020. The verdict: Slight improvement in endurance for carbo loading, but you had to eat a lot, no improvement for <70g extra carbs. No improvement for high intensity workouts, but not eating anything was not good.

"The use of carbohydrates during exercise as an ergogenic aid", Cermak, Sports Med, Nov 2013. Not a carbo-loading paper, but on eating stuff during an activity. Finds eating during activity helps even short term <2h performance and advises ~60g/hour (which is a little to much for me personally). This paper is currently the core of my 'eating on bike' strategy.

Like smoking on airplanes and jello salads carb loading is an idea from the 60s that should just go away. Carb loading at best only gives very minor performance benefits if done optimally, and no benefits if done incorrectly, It always made me feel not that good at a start of a big event in the 1980s-1990s when I subscribed to it. I think you gain weight before the start of event and maybe not feel well for a very small benefit at best. I'd rather feel good and not have the extra weight. You'll get a better result using an eating plan during the event as the last paper suggests.

Remember that Sir Issac Newton wasn't quite right (i.e. wrong) about gravity and it took De Broglie and Einstein to fix it and define the correct motion of particles.
billridesbikes is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:42 AM
  #57  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
The best way to answer this question would be to begin eating very slowly, letting your saliva break down your food and drink properly. Your body will be much more diligent in specifying how much macros you really need from that moment onwards.
Moisture is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:44 AM
  #58  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
If you are in rubiksoval 's camp and think science is just fluff, something to be ignored because your own life experiences have taught you all you need to know, then this thread is not for you.
Now you're just making stuff up.

That happens when your position has regressed to the point where even you don't really know what you're arguing about anymore.

Maybe your next thread attempt will be better received.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:45 AM
  #59  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
Such willingness to engage in negativity and to attack the study without a single bit of effort spent commenting on the content of the actual study.

And people wonder why America (and the developed world) is in decline. People can no longer engage in productive conversation/debate without getting ugly. Critical thinking skills are few and far between. Tribal thinking and "sheepism" has permeated virtually every aspect of modern culture in the public sphere.

We can't even seem to have an intelligent reasonable civil informative conversation about nutritional needs for rides of varying intensity and duration. What a sad state of affairs.

So essentially you're just trolling at this point.

Got it.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 10:56 AM
  #60  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
Such willingness to engage in negativity and to attack the study without a single bit of effort spent commenting on the content of the actual study.

And people wonder why America (and the developed world) is in decline. People can no longer engage in productive conversation/debate without getting ugly. Critical thinking skills are few and far between. Tribal thinking and "sheepism" has permeated virtually every aspect of modern culture in the public sphere.

We can't even seem to have an intelligent reasonable civil informative conversation about nutritional needs for rides of varying intensity and duration. What a sad state of affairs.
Those in glass houses...
gregf83 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 11:06 AM
  #61  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by billridesbikes
Here are some papers on 'carb-loading' and diet from this century.
"Effect of high-fat, high-carbohydrate, and high-protein meals on metabolism and performance during endurance cycling.", Rowlands et al, Int J of Sports med, Sept 2002 - The verdict: No clear effect on performance despite metabolism differences.

"What should I eat before Exercise? Pre-Exercise Nutrition and the Response to Endurance Exercise: Current Prospective and Future Directions", Rothschild et al. Nutrients, November 2020. The verdict: Slight improvement in endurance for carbo loading, but you had to eat a lot, no improvement for <70g extra carbs. No improvement for high intensity workouts, but not eating anything was not good.

"The use of carbohydrates during exercise as an ergogenic aid", Cermak, Sports Med, Nov 2013. Not a carbo-loading paper, but on eating stuff during an activity. Finds eating during activity helps even short term <2h performance and advises ~60g/hour (which is a little to much for me personally). This paper is currently the core of my 'eating on bike' strategy.

Like smoking on airplanes and jello salads carb loading is an idea from the 60s that should just go away. Carb loading at best only gives very minor performance benefits if done optimally, and no benefits if done incorrectly, It always made me feel not that good at a start of a big event in the 1980s-1990s when I subscribed to it. I think you gain weight before the start of event and maybe not feel well for a very small benefit at best. I'd rather feel good and not have the extra weight. You'll get a better result using an eating plan during the event as the last paper suggests.

Remember that Sir Issac Newton wasn't quite right (i.e. wrong) about gravity and it took De Broglie and Einstein to fix it and define the correct motion of particles.

Thanks for the info and the references. Very helpful! Most of it looks to be about carb-loading, which is of least interest to me (right now). However, it may be a topic that generates more personal interest later on.

Right now I'm primarily focused on developing basic working formulas for determining nutritional requirements for rides of varying lengths and intensity.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 11:07 AM
  #62  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,811

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6100 Post(s)
Liked 4,732 Times in 3,262 Posts
Cycletography You've made one half heated and vague attempt since my last post to steer your thread to what you want to discuss. But then you continue to bash other for statements they made without knowing what this thread was supposed to be about.

You need to cool off and quit assuming and extrapolating their very basic statements into some false philosophy and false agenda. You seem to be bending simple statements into something I'd be sure they weren't intended.

How can anyone discuss anything when you and you alone seem to be on the attack of anyone you've decided is adverse to whatever you are wanting discussed.

You, I and no one else will have an open mind if you keep blasting others, which actually I consider means that you are "off-topic"
Iride01 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 11:08 AM
  #63  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
Those in glass houses...
I couldn't have said it better myself. So why are people so quick to throw stones? I'm just trying to share information. However, if someone throws a stone in my direction I'm perfectly capable of throwing it back. Not my preferred way to interact, but sometimes it's what's required.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 11:17 AM
  #64  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
Cycletography You've made one half heated and vague attempt since my last post to steer your thread to what you want to discuss. But then you continue to bash other for statements they made without knowing what this thread was supposed to be about.

You need to cool off and quit assuming and extrapolating their very basic statements into some false philosophy and false agenda. You seem to be bending simple statements into something I'd be sure they weren't intended.

How can anyone discuss anything when you and you alone seem to be on the attack of anyone you've decided is adverse to whatever you are wanting discussed.

You, I and no one else will have an open mind if you keep blasting others, which actually I consider means that you are "off-topic"
I think I've made much more than a half-hearted attempt to clarify... I don't see much discussion about hydration & nutrition needs for rides of varying intensities <<<--- This is the purpose of the OP. To share some information and to discuss nutritional needs for rides of varying length and intensity. Pretty clear in my opinion, and the links absolutely speak to that specific issue. Folks have chosen for their own resons that I do not understand to simply be disruptive, combative, and to make untrue statements.

I don't go looking for trouble, but I can deal with it when it finds me. Sometimes I simply check out to avoid the inevitable conflict (these threads rarely get back on track) or I punch back. Folks shouldn't throw a punch in the first place, but if they do they should expect to be punched back.

I've gotten what I need out of the links even before I posted them. I'm simply sharing info that helped me, the logic being that it might help others looking to answer the same questions. For those people the links will remain. I wish everyone a good day and happy riding. There's really not much else to say. I've had mu fill of purposeless argument for one day.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 11:42 AM
  #65  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
However, if someone throws a stone in my direction I'm perfectly capable of throwing it back.

I don't go looking for trouble, but I can deal with it when it finds me.

Folks shouldn't throw a punch in the first place, but if they do they should expect to be punched back.


You're like the nutrition forum mafia.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 12:01 PM
  #66  
Cyclist0100
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times in 72 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval


You're like the nutrition forum mafia.
No, and not a 'job" I wish to have. You're the one trying to squash open dialog about facts and science, not me. I'm trying to encourage it.

You seem to employ the "trust me, just do what I say" approach, whereas I prefer the "here are some good tools to help yourself" approach. Imprisonment or empowerment? I'll take empowerment all day long. If anyone is trying to be the "nutrition mafia" it's definitely you.
Cyclist0100 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 12:09 PM
  #67  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
Cycletography rubiksoval ,

Stop.
Moisture is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 12:40 PM
  #68  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,501

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3873 Post(s)
Liked 1,920 Times in 1,369 Posts
Yeah, wow. The idea is simple but the practice is complicated. People want nirvana before they can say OM properly. It's a long road with no end. Everyone is different, every ride is different, even the same ride on different days, because you're different every day and the road is different every day.

When I was a kid, my father and I went to a turkey shoot for a charity. The idea was you stand about 50' or so from a smallish paper target and fire a shotgun at it. Each shot costs you money. The person with the most pellets in the target gets a prize. it seemed quite ingenious to me because shotgun pellet spreads are quite random. Accurate aim and fire didn't assure success. So with nutrition. We aim and fire as best we can, but perfection is elusive, partly because we can't even count the pellets in the target - we have few metrics for said perfection. It's a long way between bonking and a perfect performance, whatever that is.

When I was just starting out trying to do serious rides, I read everything there was about nutrition on the Hammer website. I even got their manual, and applied same, and what do your know, it worked. 20 years, later, it still works, and works even better now that I have a PM and can calculate burn, though only on my single. On our tandem I still have to go by rule of thumb.

The best thing I've learned since reading Hammer is watch your HR. On a ride if HR is over your usual for that effort, you're dehydrated. Drink and take an electrolyte. If it's lower than expected, you're low on carbs. Eat, and eat something that's super quick to absorb. Always eat carbs that are quick to absorb except at your regular meals, one of which one should never eat on a ride. Otherwise, eat when hungry, drink when thirsty and you will seldom see those HR variations. If you're doing it right, you never will. They're like guardrails.

So - OP, go read the manual and apply same. One doesn't need to use Hammer products, just the principles. I only use their Endurolytes, about a bottle/year. https://www.hammernutrition.com/media/downloads/SOS.pdf

The only way for a rider to learn the principles is to think they know what they're doing, then try to apply same and journal one's method and results.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 12:46 PM
  #69  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
No, and not a 'job" I wish to have. You're the one trying to squash open dialog about facts and science, not me. I'm trying to encourage it.

You seem to employ the "trust me, just do what I say" approach, whereas I prefer the "here are some good tools to help yourself" approach. Imprisonment or empowerment? I'll take empowerment all day long. If anyone is trying to be the "nutrition mafia" it's definitely you.
100% no, once again.

You're like the guy with a plate of cold food who stands in front of the microwave arguing how the componentry and electronics all work but being completely unable to actually warm up the food.

I'm the guy that just warms up his food and enjoys a hot meal. And then I go ride all properly fueled up!

Like a win/win type of thing.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 01:41 PM
  #70  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,811

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6100 Post(s)
Liked 4,732 Times in 3,262 Posts
Originally Posted by Cycletography
I think I've made much more than a half-hearted attempt to clarify... I don't see much discussion about hydration & nutrition needs for rides of varying intensities <<<--- This is the purpose of the OP. To share some information and to discuss nutritional needs for rides of varying length and intensity. Pretty clear in my opinion, and the links absolutely speak to that specific issue. Folks have chosen for their own resons that I do not understand to simply be disruptive, combative, and to make untrue statements.

I don't go looking for trouble, but I can deal with it when it finds me. Sometimes I simply check out to avoid the inevitable conflict (these threads rarely get back on track) or I punch back. Folks shouldn't throw a punch in the first place, but if they do they should expect to be punched back.

I've gotten what I need out of the links even before I posted them. I'm simply sharing info that helped me, the logic being that it might help others looking to answer the same questions. For those people the links will remain. I wish everyone a good day and happy riding. There's really not much else to say. I've had mu fill of purposeless argument for one day.
Well then to get back to what you ask, I don't feel you need to consume any carbs or other form of nutrition for rides no longer than 1-1/2 hours to 2 hours. Even longer if there is no desire for performance at zone 5 and 6 levels.

Carb loading probably has different meanings to some. To me it simply means consuming a very high amount of carbs in some four to six hour period shortly before the start of a ride. I have my doubts that carb loading is useful for those like me that simply ride for fitness and enjoyment. Even the site you linked said carb loading was only needed prior to a race. I currently am not sure it's even needed for a race, but I can't say anecdotally as I don't compete. But the high carb meals that we get shown as being what pro cyclist's eat are not so much carb loading as much as they are just trying to replace the Calories they burned on the previous ride. And much of the meals consumed are well before the next ride, not the four to six hour window shortly before. Certainly the high carb content helps replete the spent glycogen stores. While I wouldn't consider them carb-loading in strict terms, I guess others might feel that any replacement of carbs for glycogen production is carb-loading.

As for your railing against this post:
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
Frankly, if you're not bonking, you probably don't need any more calories. And if you are, you do.

If you're getting fatter, you don't. If you're losing a lot of weight (and don't want to), you do.
Why does it bother you. I personally don't think there is much wrong with it. In it's simplicity, it seem fairly sound for someone that might want to try and figure out whether they need carbs or not and don't put any special emphasis on performance at a certain level.

Or course there is a lot to add and build on. And there various branches to define as more stuff is brought into the discussion of it. Nothing in itself I take as being hooey.

Carb supplementation has a lot of if's and's and but's. There is no one size fit's all. You can't boil it down to a fixed amount every hour for anyone. At the minimum you have to know how long the entire ride is going to be. How much the person is going to exert themselves on the ride. And whether they will be satisfied with any performance measure, or whether they must do the best they can possibly do. Along with just personal preference because for whatever reason, it's what they want to do.

On my last 4 hour ride, I rode all of 28 minutes in Zone 2. About 2 hours in Zone 3 and a little over an hour in Zone 4. I consumed about 180 Calories of carbs per hour through my bottles and the few things I ate. Does everyone need that? I don't know. If they do rides like that and don't consume carbs, I'd recommend they try and see if they like it. Some may want more, some may want less. For rides of just fitness and enjoyment, it really becomes your personal preference if there is no overwhelming performance issue you have to solve.

Several times you've stated you've got your question figured out, yet still you don't care to share or discuss with us any specifics of what you've "figured out" for yourself. But since it seems you likely won't take kindly to others stating their view of what you may have figured out, I guess it's better you don't.

Don't think I've made any opinion of you personally. I tend to find that those I argue with the most are those I'd rather be with and drink a beer if I could be face to face. My only view about you here is that you seem to take too personally printed conversation in a forum that you can never know or immediately find out what the actual tone and intention was by the person that stated it before it gets distorted in ones own mind.

Last edited by Iride01; 01-22-21 at 01:50 PM.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 04:55 PM
  #71  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
30 minutes into my 90 minute ride today, I realized I needed to eat something. So I did. Because, you know, life experiences and all.

Good thing I didn't use some pre-determined plan or algorithm lest it would have told me I didn't need to eat anything since it was only a 90 minute ride. Damn, self-awareness is the bee's knees (said fully aware that this is a pointless, potentially inflammatory post. ).

This forum is hilarious. In one thread there's a guy touting the benefits of riding fasted on nearly every response he makes. On this thread it's... well, hell if I know anymore. Something about maybe carb-loading, maybe not, maybe 60-90 grams of carbs an hour, maybe not, maybe an enlightened OP, maybe not.

All in good fun. Unless you bonk. Then it's no fun at all. So take a cliff bar or a poptart just in case. And don't quote random blogs as definitive sources of anything.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 01-22-21, 07:31 PM
  #72  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,501

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3873 Post(s)
Liked 1,920 Times in 1,369 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
30 minutes into my 90 minute ride today, I realized I needed to eat something. So I did. Because, you know, life experiences and all.

Good thing I didn't use some pre-determined plan or algorithm lest it would have told me I didn't need to eat anything since it was only a 90 minute ride. Damn, self-awareness is the bee's knees (said fully aware that this is a pointless, potentially inflammatory post. ).

This forum is hilarious. In one thread there's a guy touting the benefits of riding fasted on nearly every response he makes. On this thread it's... well, hell if I know anymore. Something about maybe carb-loading, maybe not, maybe 60-90 grams of carbs an hour, maybe not, maybe an enlightened OP, maybe not.

All in good fun. Unless you bonk. Then it's no fun at all. So take a cliff bar or a poptart just in case. And don't quote random blogs as definitive sources of anything.
I would like your opinion on that carb loading business. Do elites really consume carbs on the order of 10g/kilo/day when tapering for a Classic or a National? I can see it in the context of a Grand Tour, when it might even be double that if one counts everything. 'Cause maybe that's been something I've been doing wrong - not carbing up enough before one of the few big rides a year I do. Maybe I worry too much about weight.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 01-23-21, 07:41 AM
  #73  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
I would like your opinion on that carb loading business. Do elites really consume carbs on the order of 10g/kilo/day when tapering for a Classic or a National? I can see it in the context of a Grand Tour, when it might even be double that if one counts everything. 'Cause maybe that's been something I've been doing wrong - not carbing up enough before one of the few big rides a year I do. Maybe I worry too much about weight.
I don't know what world tour pros do, but I highly doubt they carb-load either (there was an article about Sky having Froome lose a lb or two in the first week of a grand tour, so I'm sure they all monitor it to the nth degree). They're only so much your body can handle at one time, of course. There's also the issue of increased water retention when consuming additional carbs. You simply don't want to stuff yourself the day before and add multiple extra lbs of food and water weight. It'd just make you feel ugh.

What I've found, and what I imagine is applicable since we all pretty much work the same, is that heavy training and peak (valley?!) race weight generally results in some level of chronic glycogen depletion. This is something you get used to so you don't really pay much attention to it. However, when you pull back and taper and maintain current caloric levels, you not only get the recovery and repair, but you get fully topped up (without any need for over consumption, lest you start getting heavy and spoil all the hard-earned weight loss gains).

When you've been fairly chronically depleted and you top up, AND your legs are pretty fresh, it's like lightning. You can get some truly chainless days at times, and it's a wonderful feeling.

Anyway, I've never done over a 5 hour race, and the races I've done in the 4-5 hour range have all been significant races in which I at least tapered the week of. Due to that, I've never "carb-loaded" by eating significantly more the day before a race. I think that'd just make me feel like crap for that day and the next, based on over-consumption at other times. With longer races, I start eating or consuming carbs (in a drink) within 15 minutes. It's just something you have to be constantly doing multiple times an hour for the duration of the race.

Funnily enough, a few years back I had a goal of averaging 300w for 3 hours. That was something like 3300 MJ or near enough. The first two or three times I couldn't because I kept bonking after 2 hours. Finally, I loaded both bottles with sugar and took two clif bars and packs of poptarts and gels and starting drinking every five-10 minutes or so and eating every 20-30 minutes. At that point the 3 hours was no problem from a nutritional standpoint (the legs were properly destroyed, however). I imagine if I were physically capable of doing that more often, I'd get more efficient at it (and drive my FTP higher to the extent that I'm requiring less glycogen to do it) and require less calories.

World Tour pros averaging 300+ watts for 6 hours must not only be consuming the max calories they can at each hour, but also burning a significantly higher percentage of fat due to the effort being much less strenuous compared to their FTPs.

So anyway, all that to say, I personally think the notion of carb-loading is pretty ridiculous unless you've been chronically depleting yourself for whatever reason (in which case you'd simply be restoring a bit of balance). But who doesn't love an excuse to stuff themselves with extra sugar...
rubiksoval is offline  
Likes For rubiksoval:
Old 01-23-21, 12:01 PM
  #74  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,501

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3873 Post(s)
Liked 1,920 Times in 1,369 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
I don't know what world tour pros do, but I highly doubt they carb-load either (there was an article about Sky having Froome lose a lb or two in the first week of a grand tour, so I'm sure they all monitor it to the nth degree). They're only so much your body can handle at one time, of course. There's also the issue of increased water retention when consuming additional carbs. You simply don't want to stuff yourself the day before and add multiple extra lbs of food and water weight. It'd just make you feel ugh.
<snip>
So anyway, all that to say, I personally think the notion of carb-loading is pretty ridiculous unless you've been chronically depleting yourself for whatever reason (in which case you'd simply be restoring a bit of balance). But who doesn't love an excuse to stuff themselves with extra sugar...
Thanks! That's very helpful. My longest competitive rides are now only 9-10 hours. My experience is about what you're saying. It seems crazy to me to advocate putting on so much weight in the 3-4 days before an event. Although I remember Lance talking to some reporter about Tour prep and resting up. He said something like: We don't rest up. We're on the bike 6 hours a day until 3 days before the Prologue. So maybe if one has a burn rate of 4Mj/day, one needs to eat that much for 3 days to top back up?

Before a big ride, I taper slowly over 10 days, so I'm not in a big deficit. I have a slightly carbier dinner than usual, but don't stuff myself, then a 400 Cal. carb breakfast. I start taking in carbs after about 45' on the bike or as soon as the crowd thins out a bit and it gets light. Then about every 15' all day. I TT the course. As it is said, there's no slower speed than stopped, so I wear a Camelbak and carry enough liquid food to match the Camelbak's duration. There are food stops, but I just refill my stuff, pee, and head back out. I easily come out ahead time-wise on the extra weight of the liquid food and Camelbak.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 01-23-21, 02:52 PM
  #75  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,662

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10247 Post(s)
Liked 11,601 Times in 5,946 Posts
Originally Posted by grizzly59
I input all of the coefficients for the function variables, the answer was that I require a

Carl's Jr. ½ LB. Guacamole Bacon Thickburger

every ride:


Sure, if every ride is 5 hours of Tempo!
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.