How the frig' do I count calories and ride stronger???? Impossible?
05-30-11, 06:49 AM
#26
Dirt-riding heretic
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 17,413
Bikes: Lynskey R230/Red, Blue Triad SL/Red, Cannondale Scalpel 3/X9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Another thing to remember is that timing matters when it comes to what you eat. Most of your day should consist of low-fat, high-protein meals except around ride time, where you eat a higher-carb meal a couple hours before your ride, keep using energy gel/sports drink during, and a recovery drink after (Orange Pineapple GU Recovery Brew is my new favorite). This way you'll be consuming the high-carbohydrate stuff when you actually need it. Eat too much carbohydrate when you're resting and it just turns into fat.
Also, if you really want to burn calories efficiently, add running into the mix. I rode for years and got into decent shape, but the weight that melted off when I became a triathlete and added a lot of running to the mix was impressive. Triathlon also has the added benefit of forcing you to work on some upper body strengthening as well. And if you're afraid of swimming, there's always duathlon.
But aham is right--always low-ball the calorie expenditures and round up with all the food.
__________________
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
05-30-11, 07:20 AM
#27
.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Rocket City, No'ala
Posts: 12,763
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 5.2, 1985 Pinarello Treviso, 1990 Gardin Shred, 2006 Bianchi San Jose
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 28 Times
in
13 Posts
Make sure your carbs are quality carbs; stay away from sugar and processed foods.
Don't starve yourself; your body needs fuel to operate and to burn fat.
Riding the bike will only get you so far on your weight loss; most of it will come from dietary changes that you make for a lifetime, like giving up soda and potato chips.
Dr. Gardner from Stanford's comparison of four popular diets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo
Modified Atkins gave the best results and the best blood profiles. Surprised Gardner, who is a vegetarian.
DrPete suggested running; if you don't like that, how about weight training or crossfit or P90x or swimming or rowing or dancing or whatever catches your interest. Time spent exercising is time spent away from the couch or the internet. Chase your kids around the yard.
Don't starve yourself; your body needs fuel to operate and to burn fat.
Riding the bike will only get you so far on your weight loss; most of it will come from dietary changes that you make for a lifetime, like giving up soda and potato chips.
Dr. Gardner from Stanford's comparison of four popular diets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo
Modified Atkins gave the best results and the best blood profiles. Surprised Gardner, who is a vegetarian.
DrPete suggested running; if you don't like that, how about weight training or crossfit or P90x or swimming or rowing or dancing or whatever catches your interest. Time spent exercising is time spent away from the couch or the internet. Chase your kids around the yard.
05-30-11, 07:34 AM
#28
OMC
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 6,960
Bikes: Specialized Allez Sprint, Look 585, Specialized Allez Comp Race
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked 116 Times
in
49 Posts
Not to single you out, but this is a prime example of how we over eat big time and try to find every excuse for it. Unless you have some extraordinary physiological and unusual needs (99% of us don't have them but 99% think they are especial/different and do), for the ride you described above you don't need to eat. It is that simple. Are you going to be a bit hungry? Maybe, but you are cutting calories and it is a side effect: HUNGER!!!
The simple fact remains we all eat too much. Start tracking calories accurately and you'll realize you easily eat 1000+ more calories/day than you think you do.
The simple fact remains we all eat too much. Start tracking calories accurately and you'll realize you easily eat 1000+ more calories/day than you think you do.
__________________
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
05-30-11, 07:42 AM
#29
Dirt-riding heretic
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 17,413
Bikes: Lynskey R230/Red, Blue Triad SL/Red, Cannondale Scalpel 3/X9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Make sure your carbs are quality carbs; stay away from sugar and processed foods.
Don't starve yourself; your body needs fuel to operate and to burn fat.
Riding the bike will only get you so far on your weight loss; most of it will come from dietary changes that you make for a lifetime, like giving up soda and potato chips.
Dr. Gardner from Stanford's comparison of four popular diets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo
Modified Atkins gave the best results and the best blood profiles. Surprised Gardner, who is a vegetarian.
DrPete suggested running; if you don't like that, how about weight training or crossfit or P90x or swimming or rowing or dancing or whatever catches your interest. Time spent exercising is time spent away from the couch or the internet. Chase your kids around the yard.
Don't starve yourself; your body needs fuel to operate and to burn fat.
Riding the bike will only get you so far on your weight loss; most of it will come from dietary changes that you make for a lifetime, like giving up soda and potato chips.
Dr. Gardner from Stanford's comparison of four popular diets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo
Modified Atkins gave the best results and the best blood profiles. Surprised Gardner, who is a vegetarian.
DrPete suggested running; if you don't like that, how about weight training or crossfit or P90x or swimming or rowing or dancing or whatever catches your interest. Time spent exercising is time spent away from the couch or the internet. Chase your kids around the yard.
__________________
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
05-30-11, 07:45 AM
#30
Mr. Dopolina
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,217
Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times
in
41 Posts
The amount of calories burned during exercise is not the most important number. Riding raises your resting metabolic rate and you end up burning more calories for the rest of the day even if you are sitting at a desk. This process stops once you sleep that is why it is most effective to train in the morning in terms of weight loss.
You need to eat in the morning before you ride not so much for fuel (unless riding more than 90 minutes) but to prevent your body from saving every last calory it gets once you do eat later in the day.
Last edited by Bob Dopolina; 05-30-11 at 07:49 AM.
05-30-11, 07:46 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 8,676
Bikes: Paletti,Pinarello Monviso,Duell Vienna,Giordana XL Super,Lemond Maillot Juane.& custom,PDG Paramount,Fuji Opus III,Davidson Impulse,Pashley Guv'nor,Evans,Fishlips,Y-Foil,Softride, Tetra Pro, CAAD8 Optimo,
Mentioned: 156 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2326 Post(s)
Liked 4,993 Times
in
1,778 Posts
I've sort of had the same problem for the past year or so. I'm your age and started riding last year due to bad knees and back and quite a bit of weight gain. Started at 238 lbs and am now sitting right at 170 with probably another 10 lbs or so to go. Most of last year my diet was 1 cup of lowfat yogurt with a sliced up banana and 1/4 fiber one for breakfast, banana or apple snack, Progresso light soup for lunch, another apple or banana snack, and then a sensible dinner. No eating after dinner unless a piece of fruit. I rode 20 miles 6 days a week drinking only water. After about 6 months I started some longer weekend rides and added a bit of carbs to my diet before the long rides.
Now that I am close to my goals I am still eating pretty much the same diet as above but eat more on the longer rides. My weekday rides are now in the 20 - 30 mile range and weekend rides are from 50 to 75 miles with longer rides every now and then. I'm also working on climbing and usually see two days a week climbing at least 9 miles at around an 8% grade. On these long days with lots of climbing I'm burning a couple of thousand calories easily and basically eat what I want yet the pounds keep coming off.
So, I guess my point is keep faithful to your riding, eat a sensible diet, and the pounds will come off. If you get your nutrition right on the rides you will meet your ride needs yet still be able to lose weight at a sensible rate.
Now that I am close to my goals I am still eating pretty much the same diet as above but eat more on the longer rides. My weekday rides are now in the 20 - 30 mile range and weekend rides are from 50 to 75 miles with longer rides every now and then. I'm also working on climbing and usually see two days a week climbing at least 9 miles at around an 8% grade. On these long days with lots of climbing I'm burning a couple of thousand calories easily and basically eat what I want yet the pounds keep coming off.
So, I guess my point is keep faithful to your riding, eat a sensible diet, and the pounds will come off. If you get your nutrition right on the rides you will meet your ride needs yet still be able to lose weight at a sensible rate.
__________________
Steel is real...and comfy.
Steel is real...and comfy.
05-30-11, 07:59 AM
#32
Gluteus Enormus
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,245
Bikes: Yes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I won't say anything about your weight loss goals and approach except for this: People tracking/counting calories while excercising tend to go overboard on restrictions and do more harm than good.
Now the rest. Calorie estimators are crap, they are not accurate. You are better off ignoring it and using one of the online distance/time/power based calculators. Those are still off but better than HRM or other methods.
Ease up on the bike, a lot. You will be able to extend your rides by slowing down and the benefit will be twofold. You will be able to ride farther and spend more time in the saddle while getting the rest of your body ready for even longer rides. Don't attack the hills on your endurance rides. Chill out, drop a few gears, and ride up the hills at a moderate effort. You will build endurance that will come in handy when you do want to go out and push the pace.
Stop eating and drinking junk on your rides. If you are riding for an hour or two you need nothing more than water. If you are concerned about the heat then take an electrolyte based drink, not an energy drink.
Keep riding. Your riding goals should come first unless you're desperate to get into a June wedding or bridesmaid's dress.
(ok, I said more than one thing about the weight)
Now the rest. Calorie estimators are crap, they are not accurate. You are better off ignoring it and using one of the online distance/time/power based calculators. Those are still off but better than HRM or other methods.
Ease up on the bike, a lot. You will be able to extend your rides by slowing down and the benefit will be twofold. You will be able to ride farther and spend more time in the saddle while getting the rest of your body ready for even longer rides. Don't attack the hills on your endurance rides. Chill out, drop a few gears, and ride up the hills at a moderate effort. You will build endurance that will come in handy when you do want to go out and push the pace.
Stop eating and drinking junk on your rides. If you are riding for an hour or two you need nothing more than water. If you are concerned about the heat then take an electrolyte based drink, not an energy drink.
Keep riding. Your riding goals should come first unless you're desperate to get into a June wedding or bridesmaid's dress.
(ok, I said more than one thing about the weight)
05-30-11, 08:04 AM
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thanks for all the great advice folks. As far as spinning or ramping down the intensity, that's hard to do where I live. I have to climb if I want to get back home. As far as other sports activities, running on asphalt or a track is tough, I'm fighting a long term patellar tendonitis and it's aggravating as all hell. I do, however, so some muscular endurance weight lifting and I play soccer which is the most brutal form of cardiovascular workout I've ever done. That 120 yard long field gets longer every year... Thanks again for all the advice.
05-30-11, 08:04 AM
#34
well hello there
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Point Loma, CA
Posts: 15,430
Bikes: Bill Holland (Road-Ti), Fuji Roubaix Pro (back-up), Bike Friday (folder), Co-Motion (tandem) & Trek 750 (hybrid)
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 503 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times
in
206 Posts
For me, calorie counting was helpful for about a week or two. It just reinforces sensibility in eating habits.
__________________
.
.
Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.
.
.
Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.
05-30-11, 08:08 AM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 6,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
+1 for everything mmmdonuts said above.
You don't need calories during rides under 1.5 - 2.5 hours IF you are properly fueled before the ride. (In my experience, the fitter you get the longer you can go before you need to eat)
To go for longer rides, get lower gearing. That way you can go at an easier pace on the climbs and save some energy for later.
You don't need calories during rides under 1.5 - 2.5 hours IF you are properly fueled before the ride. (In my experience, the fitter you get the longer you can go before you need to eat)
To go for longer rides, get lower gearing. That way you can go at an easier pace on the climbs and save some energy for later.
05-30-11, 08:23 AM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
He's got a power meter. That directly measures energy output and therefore calories burned.
And Garmin is not a disinterested party when the accuracy of their devices is the question.
And guesstimating calories burned from how fast your heart is beating doesn't add to the accuracy, either.
And every bit of complexity adds to the inaccuracy.
I can find lots of rides in my history with nearly identical kJ but that have wildly different heart rates. Some days my HR won't go over 150 unless I really push and drops rapidly when I back off. Some days its up over 165 with no real effort and stays there forever. Some days it takes a while to get up there, but stays up.
Why would estimating calories burned from HR be any more accurate than using "220 - age" to specify someone's max heart rate?
That graph was sourced directly from Garmin.
You can see there are other types of HRM/Device setups which allow for a larger variation. This is the reason why everyone has different experiences with calorie measurement and Garmin devices. And also why there seems to be a deviation between Garmin devices and other manufacturers.
It's not as simple as you are painting it.
I can find lots of rides in my history with nearly identical kJ but that have wildly different heart rates. Some days my HR won't go over 150 unless I really push and drops rapidly when I back off. Some days its up over 165 with no real effort and stays there forever. Some days it takes a while to get up there, but stays up.
Why would estimating calories burned from HR be any more accurate than using "220 - age" to specify someone's max heart rate?
05-30-11, 08:46 AM
#37
Riding
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: Motobecane Fantom Cross Pro; Motobecane Nemesis Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I can find lots of rides in my history with nearly identical kJ but that have wildly different heart rates. Some days my HR won't go over 150 unless I really push and drops rapidly when I back off. Some days its up over 165 with no real effort and stays there forever. Some days it takes a while to get up there, but stays up.
Why would estimating calories burned from HR be any more accurate than using "220 - age" to specify someone's max heart rate?
Why would estimating calories burned from HR be any more accurate than using "220 - age" to specify someone's max heart rate?
The only thing posted to refute this is anecdotal evidence based on experience. I'll take Garmin's scientific analysis over anecdotal evidence any day. Regardless of how vested they are in the matter, their deviations are reported up to almost 40% depending on the hardware setup. Kind of weird if they were trying to "deceive" us - as ridiculous of a claim that is. And I'm sure, again, you have nothing to substantiate it.
05-30-11, 08:54 AM
#38
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
If you are so adamant about proving that Garmin+proper HR monitor = horribly inaccurate why don't you actually post some definitive information about it? I have, and it has shown that the two different heart rate monitors Garmin manufactures produce different results with deviations of 10% on the newest premium HRM and up to 35% on the older HRM.
There's no doubt that the Garmin 500 has an improved calorie estimate and it works reasonably well for some people but it is not within 10% accuracy for the everyone and produces fairly large errors for some people.
05-30-11, 09:35 AM
#39
Beer >> Sanity
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
05-30-11, 09:38 AM
#40
Riding
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: Motobecane Fantom Cross Pro; Motobecane Nemesis Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
To be clear, you posted a chart written by Firstbeat (the company providing the algorithms for calculating energy expenditure). It is an older chart and the row you highlighted refers to beat by beat HR recording. Garmin heart straps don't support this as far as I know they just supply the HR level once every second.
There's no doubt that the Garmin 500 has an improved calorie estimate and it works reasonably well for some people but it is not within 10% accuracy for the everyone and produces fairly large errors for some people.
There's no doubt that the Garmin 500 has an improved calorie estimate and it works reasonably well for some people but it is not within 10% accuracy for the everyone and produces fairly large errors for some people.
Firstbeat Algorithm (Current – 2nd Generation): The Firstbeat algorithm is the most accurate Garmin device calorie measurement that can be done without external testing. But it’s actually not developed natively by Garmin. It’s developed by a Finish company (Firstbeat Technologies) that has its roots in calculations around Olympic athletes, specifically Nordic skiing. Their calculation uses user inputted variables including gender, height, weight and fitness class. It then combines this data with heart rate information from the ANT+ heart rate strap. Specifically, it evaluates the time between heart beats (beat to beat) to determine estimated MET (Metabolic Equivalent), which in turn is used determine actual work expenditure.
This makes the system one of the more accurate non-invasive options (read: doesn’t require a laboratory), within about 10% accuracy. Firstbeat has published a fascinating white paper detailing the technology and accuracy rates. This little snippet below though helps to show where the technology lies accuracy-wise – with it being right in the upper-middle compared to full-board lab operations on one end, and ‘distance/time’ calculations on the other end (click below to expand picture).
Finally, this metric also ‘learns’ you as an athlete on a given device. Meaning, over time it has a weighted algorithm to note changes in your fitness level and adjust calorie burn accordingly. I asked how ‘friends and family’ using a device might impact this. They noted that a single one-time use wasn’t weighted heavily enough to make a difference, but that obviously a couple sharing a single device would see less accurate results (both due to the profile information being incorrect 50% of the time, as well as the ‘learning’ aspect being off). It also should be noted that the second-generation of the Firstbeat algorithm is only applicable to running currently, and isn’t used in the cycling products yet.
This makes the system one of the more accurate non-invasive options (read: doesn’t require a laboratory), within about 10% accuracy. Firstbeat has published a fascinating white paper detailing the technology and accuracy rates. This little snippet below though helps to show where the technology lies accuracy-wise – with it being right in the upper-middle compared to full-board lab operations on one end, and ‘distance/time’ calculations on the other end (click below to expand picture).
Finally, this metric also ‘learns’ you as an athlete on a given device. Meaning, over time it has a weighted algorithm to note changes in your fitness level and adjust calorie burn accordingly. I asked how ‘friends and family’ using a device might impact this. They noted that a single one-time use wasn’t weighted heavily enough to make a difference, but that obviously a couple sharing a single device would see less accurate results (both due to the profile information being incorrect 50% of the time, as well as the ‘learning’ aspect being off). It also should be noted that the second-generation of the Firstbeat algorithm is only applicable to running currently, and isn’t used in the cycling products yet.
Not all Garmin devices are capable of using the Firstbeat Algorithm, but the newer Edge 500 and 800 both are.
05-30-11, 09:50 AM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There are body conditions besides weight, sex, age, and exertion that affect heart rate. Hydration is a big one, as are fitness and fatigue. If you're not fully hydrated, your heart rate will climb. Get dehydrated enough, and your heart rate can go to threshold effort levels at recovery level power outputs (I've done this myself). If your fitness for a duration is being stressed, your heart rate will rise as you fatigue. None of it means you are burning more calories, just that your heart rate is a response to much more than exertion.
I only trust the kJ totals from my power meter as a reasonably accurate measure of calorie burn from my exertions.
I only trust the kJ totals from my power meter as a reasonably accurate measure of calorie burn from my exertions.
Last edited by svtmike; 05-30-11 at 09:56 AM.
05-30-11, 09:52 AM
#42
Beer >> Sanity
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Here is data from my last 15 rides (ignore the 5 minute one) using a new Edge 500 and premium heart rate monitor. I haven't done the math on all of them, but the calorie information is fairly consistent on a per mile basis with somewhat higher numbers on rides with more climbing. I have a few routes that I do repeatedly so if the unit isn't accurate I would expect hugely fluctuating numbers and I don't see that. The first two, for example, are the same fairly flat route and numbers 3 and 5 are the same route with some hills. Number 4 is the same as 3 & 5 except I added some flatish miles to make it longer. Most of the other rides with the same or similar miles are the same routes.
05-30-11, 09:54 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What does that prove besides that the algorithm produces consistent results?
05-30-11, 09:59 AM
#44
Beer >> Sanity
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Precisely. Some are arguing it has widely fluctuating data and I don't see that. It's fairly consistent. It's also not reporting numbers that are outside the range of reasonable as some people are arguing. The Firstbeat algorithm is suppose to be accurate to about 10% and those numbers seem to support that (less than or around that 10% variation comparing relatively similar rides). Also, 23-28 cal/mile on average isn't unreasonable.
05-30-11, 10:04 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Precisely. Some are arguing it has widely fluctuating data and I don't see that. It's fairly consistent. It's also not reporting numbers that are outside the range of reasonable as some people are arguing. The Firstbeat algorithm is suppose to be accurate to about 10% and those numbers seem to support that (less than or around that 10% variation comparing relatively similar rides). Also, 23-28 cal/mile on average isn't unreasonable.
05-30-11, 10:17 AM
#46
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,699 Times
in
2,519 Posts
cycling is an eating disorder on wheels. Took me a long time to realize that.
Top cyclists burn an incredible number of calories per day. If you can ramp up the intensity of your workouts, then you probably will have a hard time eating enough. The problem I have always had was that I continue to eat that way even when my workout intensity/length goes away. The main issue I face is staying away from high calorie foods when off the bike. On the bike you probably need high calorie foods just to keep up. There used to be a philosophy of starving yourself on the bike to build muscle glycogen. I see no point to this, seems counterproductive. I tried this a little last year, and it did seem to stretch out the amount of miles before I really needed to eat. But the counterproductive part of this is that on longer rides it just allowed me to put myself into a bigger hole. Not ideal.
Top cyclists burn an incredible number of calories per day. If you can ramp up the intensity of your workouts, then you probably will have a hard time eating enough. The problem I have always had was that I continue to eat that way even when my workout intensity/length goes away. The main issue I face is staying away from high calorie foods when off the bike. On the bike you probably need high calorie foods just to keep up. There used to be a philosophy of starving yourself on the bike to build muscle glycogen. I see no point to this, seems counterproductive. I tried this a little last year, and it did seem to stretch out the amount of miles before I really needed to eat. But the counterproductive part of this is that on longer rides it just allowed me to put myself into a bigger hole. Not ideal.
05-30-11, 10:28 AM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,875
Bikes: Cannondale CAAD 9, Specialized Transition, Specialized Fate, Specialized Crux
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
8 Posts
I won't say anything about your weight loss goals and approach except for this: People tracking/counting calories while excercising tend to go overboard on restrictions and do more harm than good.
Now the rest. Calorie estimators are crap, they are not accurate. You are better off ignoring it and using one of the online distance/time/power based calculators. Those are still off but better than HRM or other methods.
Ease up on the bike, a lot. You will be able to extend your rides by slowing down and the benefit will be twofold. You will be able to ride farther and spend more time in the saddle while getting the rest of your body ready for even longer rides. Don't attack the hills on your endurance rides. Chill out, drop a few gears, and ride up the hills at a moderate effort. You will build endurance that will come in handy when you do want to go out and push the pace.
Stop eating and drinking junk on your rides. If you are riding for an hour or two you need nothing more than water. If you are concerned about the heat then take an electrolyte based drink, not an energy drink.
Keep riding. Your riding goals should come first unless you're desperate to get into a June wedding or bridesmaid's dress.
(ok, I said more than one thing about the weight)
Now the rest. Calorie estimators are crap, they are not accurate. You are better off ignoring it and using one of the online distance/time/power based calculators. Those are still off but better than HRM or other methods.
Ease up on the bike, a lot. You will be able to extend your rides by slowing down and the benefit will be twofold. You will be able to ride farther and spend more time in the saddle while getting the rest of your body ready for even longer rides. Don't attack the hills on your endurance rides. Chill out, drop a few gears, and ride up the hills at a moderate effort. You will build endurance that will come in handy when you do want to go out and push the pace.
Stop eating and drinking junk on your rides. If you are riding for an hour or two you need nothing more than water. If you are concerned about the heat then take an electrolyte based drink, not an energy drink.
Keep riding. Your riding goals should come first unless you're desperate to get into a June wedding or bridesmaid's dress.
(ok, I said more than one thing about the weight)
yup
yup
yup
05-30-11, 10:30 AM
#49
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
Here is data from my last 15 rides (ignore the 5 minute one) using a new Edge 500 and premium heart rate monitor. I haven't done the math on all of them, but the calorie information is fairly consistent on a per mile basis with somewhat higher numbers on rides with more climbing.
You're not riding terribly fast, but that seems really low unless you are very light. Based on the calories, all your rides look like recovery rides, yet your HR seems fairly high. I wouldn't trust any of those estimates.
05-30-11, 10:38 AM
#50
Beer >> Sanity
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Consistency is required for accuracy, and the research done by Firstbeat supports that is also fairly accurate. If it lacked consistency I would be hesitant to accept any claims of accuracy but it has shown itself, in my experience, to be consistent and reasonable. No one is saying the Garmin is perfectly accurate. Only that it offers a reasonable assessment. If it's consistent, and the numbers are not hugely off base, then what's the issue? Is it as accurate as a power meter? Probably not. But it's a heck of a lot cheaper and if consistent and reasonable then it's useful.