Are Weight Loss and Performance Training mutually exclusive goals?
05-15-12, 10:25 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 2,401
Bikes: 2012 Surly LHT, 1995 GT Outpost Trail
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Are Weight Loss and Performance Training mutually exclusive goals?
I've been doing a lot of introspective thinking lately. Nearly 2 years ago I started my weight loss journey, starting at nearly 470 pounds, dropping to 360 last year, and bouncing back up to 400 again before finally dropping to my current 390.
So what happened? When I started I was very successful, losing nearly 3 pounds a week. I was using an indoor recumbent exercise bike, 40 minutes a day, and lowered my diet drastically. I was able to sustain that for months. Last year in May that all stopped. My weight loss tapered to a virtually flat line at around 370 pounds. That's when I picked up a real bicycle and started cycling in earnest. From May to November my weight had dropped another 10 pounds to reach my low of 360, but then winter rolled around, my cycling mileage dropped, and I quickly regained 40 pounds over December, January, and February.
The conclusion I can arrive to from this is that my diet and my cycling had reached an equilibrium of sorts; everything I was cycling off, I was consuming, leading to a stalemate. Why was I consuming so much? Because my body craved it. Cycling 40+ miles a day at my peak in October, I was ravenous at all times, and no matter how I ate, I was still starving. If I did not load up on carbs, my performance would drop like a rock and cycling was no longer fun. I consumed many bottles of gatorade, granola bars, and energy gels on my long rides because if I did not, I would bonk hard.
I was exercising far more than I was before, but not losing any weight. Finally, I decided to really research it, and figure out how to start losing weight again. As my data supports, doctors recommend lower-intensity exercise, with a complete lack of "fueling". Before a ride, do not eat any carbs whatsoever, and that will force your body to burn fat for energy. This went completely against what I was doing- namely eating lots of carbs before my rides.
The only problem is, if I don't have them before a ride, I lose a lot of speed. So this brings me to the question in the title of the thread: are weight loss and performance training mutually exclusive goals? I want to be faster. I want to weigh a lot less. Clearly, the weight loss is a more important goal for my health, but I'm sick of plodding along at 13-14mph. But am I going to have to give up on my goal of gaining any speed in order to simply lose weight? Should I just be happy losing the weight and seeing some minor speed improvements from lacking extra pounds? Or am I missing something, and there's a magical way to train for performance and lose weight at the same time?
So what happened? When I started I was very successful, losing nearly 3 pounds a week. I was using an indoor recumbent exercise bike, 40 minutes a day, and lowered my diet drastically. I was able to sustain that for months. Last year in May that all stopped. My weight loss tapered to a virtually flat line at around 370 pounds. That's when I picked up a real bicycle and started cycling in earnest. From May to November my weight had dropped another 10 pounds to reach my low of 360, but then winter rolled around, my cycling mileage dropped, and I quickly regained 40 pounds over December, January, and February.
The conclusion I can arrive to from this is that my diet and my cycling had reached an equilibrium of sorts; everything I was cycling off, I was consuming, leading to a stalemate. Why was I consuming so much? Because my body craved it. Cycling 40+ miles a day at my peak in October, I was ravenous at all times, and no matter how I ate, I was still starving. If I did not load up on carbs, my performance would drop like a rock and cycling was no longer fun. I consumed many bottles of gatorade, granola bars, and energy gels on my long rides because if I did not, I would bonk hard.
I was exercising far more than I was before, but not losing any weight. Finally, I decided to really research it, and figure out how to start losing weight again. As my data supports, doctors recommend lower-intensity exercise, with a complete lack of "fueling". Before a ride, do not eat any carbs whatsoever, and that will force your body to burn fat for energy. This went completely against what I was doing- namely eating lots of carbs before my rides.
The only problem is, if I don't have them before a ride, I lose a lot of speed. So this brings me to the question in the title of the thread: are weight loss and performance training mutually exclusive goals? I want to be faster. I want to weigh a lot less. Clearly, the weight loss is a more important goal for my health, but I'm sick of plodding along at 13-14mph. But am I going to have to give up on my goal of gaining any speed in order to simply lose weight? Should I just be happy losing the weight and seeing some minor speed improvements from lacking extra pounds? Or am I missing something, and there's a magical way to train for performance and lose weight at the same time?
05-15-12, 10:36 AM
#2
Watching and waiting.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mattoon,Ill
Posts: 2,023
Bikes: Trek 7300 Trek Madone 4.5 Surly Cross Check
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I think there is some truth to this. I'm not saying it can't be done just that the it becomes very difficult. I got down to 214 but I was weak at that weight. @230 I'm able to build some speed. I'd like to think that there is some way to get back down there without sacrificing one for the other, but I haven't found it yet.
05-15-12, 10:43 AM
#3
Banned.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
If you want to get faster, you must concentrate on the weight loss. It doesn't matter how hard you train, you will not boost your power to weight ratio by increasing your wattage as much as you will by losing the weight. And the more weight you lose, the more your average speed will rise because while you won't immediately get much faster on the flat, you will see disproportionate benefits on even slight gradients.
Stick to the low-intensity rides and don't do the carb-loading. You may not be any faster while you train, but it's the weight-loss that will make you faster in the long run.
EDIT Jethro, unless you are extraordinarily tall it is very unlikely that you can't maintain your power output at 210, and considerably below. You might not be able to while you are losing the weight, because you're in energy deficit some of the time. But once you are down there, you can work exclusively on the power and eat enough to maintain your new weight and fuel your training. We have a member in the 50+ forum who races at 6'5" and about 185 lbs, i believe. His power figures are very impressive.
Stick to the low-intensity rides and don't do the carb-loading. You may not be any faster while you train, but it's the weight-loss that will make you faster in the long run.
EDIT Jethro, unless you are extraordinarily tall it is very unlikely that you can't maintain your power output at 210, and considerably below. You might not be able to while you are losing the weight, because you're in energy deficit some of the time. But once you are down there, you can work exclusively on the power and eat enough to maintain your new weight and fuel your training. We have a member in the 50+ forum who races at 6'5" and about 185 lbs, i believe. His power figures are very impressive.
Last edited by chasm54; 05-15-12 at 10:48 AM.
05-15-12, 10:52 AM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 2,401
Bikes: 2012 Surly LHT, 1995 GT Outpost Trail
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
If you want to get faster, you must concentrate on the weight loss. It doesn't matter how hard you train, you will not boost your power to weight ratio by increasing your wattage as much as you will by losing the weight. And the more weight you lose, the more your average speed will rise because while you won't immediately get much faster on the flat, you will see disproportionate benefits on even slight gradients.
Stick to the low-intensity rides and don't do the carb-loading. You may not be any faster while you train, but it's the weight-loss that will make you faster in the long run.
Stick to the low-intensity rides and don't do the carb-loading. You may not be any faster while you train, but it's the weight-loss that will make you faster in the long run.
However it brings up another question: Is there room for long-distance rides in a weight-loss regimen? One of the most exciting parts of cycling is being able to ride metrics and imperial centuries, and this summer I had hoped to get into well-enough shape to be able to do a double metric. But will those rides, and the training required to be able to attain them, help with weight loss in any way?
05-15-12, 11:28 AM
#5
Senior Member
YMMV, of course, but...
I rarely eat before I ride. If I do, I try to eat at least 4 hours prior.
That said, I routinely race in criteriums & take part in training rides with fellow racers (aka: races). In these, we average 26mph+ for an hour or more. I have ridden a century (imperial) in 4 hours 5 minutes, average speed of 24.5mph.
Alone, my comfortable "cruising" speed is right about 20-21mph (average is less due to stop lights & signs).
I find that when I do drop some weight (10 pounds or more), my riding noticeably improves. Especially the climbing.
I tell you this to show that you can have speed while trying to lose weight. Make sure you're not losing muscle mass, as opposed to fat stores.
The proverb around these parts is:
"Diet for weight loss.
Riding for health."
I rarely eat before I ride. If I do, I try to eat at least 4 hours prior.
That said, I routinely race in criteriums & take part in training rides with fellow racers (aka: races). In these, we average 26mph+ for an hour or more. I have ridden a century (imperial) in 4 hours 5 minutes, average speed of 24.5mph.
Alone, my comfortable "cruising" speed is right about 20-21mph (average is less due to stop lights & signs).
I find that when I do drop some weight (10 pounds or more), my riding noticeably improves. Especially the climbing.
I tell you this to show that you can have speed while trying to lose weight. Make sure you're not losing muscle mass, as opposed to fat stores.
The proverb around these parts is:
"Diet for weight loss.
Riding for health."
05-15-12, 11:40 AM
#6
SuperGimp
Mithrandir, I have the same issues you do with hunger but I think you need to get over the assumption that you need to eat as much as you are on those longer rides. You've put in a ton of miles, so I presume you know what works for you but obviously, you're eating enough to sustain your weight at your current activity level. Don't over think it. Rebounding 40 pounds when your activity tailed off is also an indication that you're probably eating more than you should.
It's probably important to note that you've still managed to lose 80 pounds! Short term rebounds happen to everybody but you're obviously still focused on your long-term success - good!
I tend ride shorter rides during the week - say, 2-3 one or one and a half hour rides because that's all I can find time for with my over-involved kids needing carting everywhere (I don't want them to end up fat like me!). I'll try to go long on the weekends, or hard, or long and hard and frankly - if I do 60+ miles I'm ravenous all day and I'll eat anything not nailed down. I do make an effort to not over eat while riding (two clif bars for 60 miles, and two bottles of that low sugar gatorade) and drink tons of water - that seems to settle my stomach down a little bit, and then it just comes down to restraint for food after the ride.
You may want to investigate eating real food rather than prepared energy food. Stick a turkey sammich in your jersey and try that, it's likely to stick with you longer than those gel packs. Another idea would be to find a nutritionist in your area that you can work with to analyze your nutritional needs and how to best get the calories you need to sustain your cycling.
It's probably important to note that you've still managed to lose 80 pounds! Short term rebounds happen to everybody but you're obviously still focused on your long-term success - good!
I tend ride shorter rides during the week - say, 2-3 one or one and a half hour rides because that's all I can find time for with my over-involved kids needing carting everywhere (I don't want them to end up fat like me!). I'll try to go long on the weekends, or hard, or long and hard and frankly - if I do 60+ miles I'm ravenous all day and I'll eat anything not nailed down. I do make an effort to not over eat while riding (two clif bars for 60 miles, and two bottles of that low sugar gatorade) and drink tons of water - that seems to settle my stomach down a little bit, and then it just comes down to restraint for food after the ride.
You may want to investigate eating real food rather than prepared energy food. Stick a turkey sammich in your jersey and try that, it's likely to stick with you longer than those gel packs. Another idea would be to find a nutritionist in your area that you can work with to analyze your nutritional needs and how to best get the calories you need to sustain your cycling.
05-15-12, 12:02 PM
#7
Banned.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
This makes a lot of sense.
However it brings up another question: Is there room for long-distance rides in a weight-loss regimen? One of the most exciting parts of cycling is being able to ride metrics and imperial centuries, and this summer I had hoped to get into well-enough shape to be able to do a double metric. But will those rides, and the training required to be able to attain them, help with weight loss in any way?
However it brings up another question: Is there room for long-distance rides in a weight-loss regimen? One of the most exciting parts of cycling is being able to ride metrics and imperial centuries, and this summer I had hoped to get into well-enough shape to be able to do a double metric. But will those rides, and the training required to be able to attain them, help with weight loss in any way?
In my opinion, which is based on personal experience (though, to be fair, I have never been anywhere near your weight) there most certainly is room for long distance rides in a weight-loss regimen. In fact, I think long, steady distance is much more likely to be helpful than shorter, more intense efforts that burn similar amounts of calories. This is controversial, and lots of people will doubtless jump in to disagree. However, my experience is that I found my appetite much easier to manage when doing the extensive, as opposed to intensive, rides. I burned as many calories (albeit with longer ride times) but wasn't as ravenous when I'd finished.
My speculation about why this was so is that while riding at moderate intensity I was burning mainly fat and did not ccompletely deplete my glycogen stores. And it seems to me that it is that depletion that creates the need to compensate immediately by hoovering down the carbs.
Having said that, it does require taking a sensible approach to eating while on the bike. One cannot ride indefinitely without food or one will simply bonk, and respond by stuffing oneself. But in my opinion, most people overeat while riding long distances. At your weight, even at moderate pace, you are going to be burning well over 500kcal per hour. But eating that much while riding would be counterproductive, because you can't absorb much more than 60 grams of carbs - 240kcal - per hour. So it is worth taking care to figure out how much that is, and to eat that much but no more. In that way you will postpone the bonk almost indefinitely at moderate pace, and avoid being unnecessarily ravenous afterwards, without taking on board more calories than you need for the ride.
That's what has worked for me, anyway. I hope it helps? Incidentally, I passed through Buffalo last year on my way back to Toronto at the end of a mega-tour. The Pearl Street Grill and Brewery proved a nice watering-hole toward the end of a very long ride.
05-15-12, 12:11 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Northeastern NJ - NYC Metro Area
Posts: 795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I won't try to performance train and lose weight at the same time. I prefer to lose the weight first, primarily by diet and moderate exercise, then, once I'm there, decide what to do about building performance while constantly monitoring my weight.
I'll echo what Chasm54 said: losing weight, without performance training, has helped my climbing a great deal, and I expect has also improved my average speed everywhere. I don't keep track of it - I've even taken the bike computers off all my bikes for now. Maybe for good. They don't really add to the fun of riding for me.
I'll echo what Chasm54 said: losing weight, without performance training, has helped my climbing a great deal, and I expect has also improved my average speed everywhere. I don't keep track of it - I've even taken the bike computers off all my bikes for now. Maybe for good. They don't really add to the fun of riding for me.
05-15-12, 12:29 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 11,375
Bikes: '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2015 Trek Domane 6.2 disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
This makes a lot of sense.
However it brings up another question: Is there room for long-distance rides in a weight-loss regimen? One of the most exciting parts of cycling is being able to ride metrics and imperial centuries, and this summer I had hoped to get into well-enough shape to be able to do a double metric. But will those rides, and the training required to be able to attain them, help with weight loss in any way?
However it brings up another question: Is there room for long-distance rides in a weight-loss regimen? One of the most exciting parts of cycling is being able to ride metrics and imperial centuries, and this summer I had hoped to get into well-enough shape to be able to do a double metric. But will those rides, and the training required to be able to attain them, help with weight loss in any way?
I was able to maintain consistent weight loss even when I was riding back to back weekends of 300k brevets with a week of commuting in between. Things I had to concentrate on were making sure that I was consuming "good" calories during my ride and weekday meals, and didn't do any post-ride gorging, which was my real downfall prior to working on weight loss. In the day and a half after a long brevet, I'd slam down *way* more food than I burned off; totally negating any effects of the ride.
__________________
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
05-15-12, 06:46 PM
#10
Climbers Apprentice
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I completely disagree. My personal experience has been the opposite. I have lost 30 lbs since thanksgiving (not all that much really on a week by week basis) but I have done it by constant training, and eating sensibly for my training level.
I have cut out sugar or sugar products (added sugars ) completely. I have switched to almost all my foods being fresh and home cooked so I can control the salts and fats.
I have added a ton of veggies, but gave up on trying to cut out carbs and train.
I don't believe the average person will ever get to training if there is a mandated x weight loss prior to training beginning.
I would estimate you consumed WAY more calories than you think you did while doing all the riding. If much of that was sugar based (you listed tons of Gatorade) that also contributed to the perceived hunger.
I have cut out sugar or sugar products (added sugars ) completely. I have switched to almost all my foods being fresh and home cooked so I can control the salts and fats.
I have added a ton of veggies, but gave up on trying to cut out carbs and train.
I don't believe the average person will ever get to training if there is a mandated x weight loss prior to training beginning.
I would estimate you consumed WAY more calories than you think you did while doing all the riding. If much of that was sugar based (you listed tons of Gatorade) that also contributed to the perceived hunger.
05-15-12, 10:16 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Incheon, South Korea
Posts: 2,835
Bikes: Nothing amazing... cheap old 21 speed mtb
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I can cut down on the carbs and calories and ride, but the cost is slower average speeds and less endurance. If I ride fully fueled I can ride twice as hard for much longer and still feel good at the end of 100km. Its not impossible to go faster and lose weight at the same time but the balance is delicate. I compromise by riding before breakfast for 30-40km every day and then eating breakfast, lunch, and a very small amount at night. On a day I want to go 100km+ I'll load up the night before, eat breakfast, and carry extra food with me. You really do need the extra on long rides.
The trade off is that you are unlikely to lose weight as you get so hungry you're bound to eat more than you used. Thats not so bad as I know that I use more energy than I take in 5 days out of 7 so it balances nicely and I lose 1-2kg every month. Any faster and I lose muscle as well. This is a bad thing... you end up with a skin 2 sized too big.
The trade off is that you are unlikely to lose weight as you get so hungry you're bound to eat more than you used. Thats not so bad as I know that I use more energy than I take in 5 days out of 7 so it balances nicely and I lose 1-2kg every month. Any faster and I lose muscle as well. This is a bad thing... you end up with a skin 2 sized too big.
05-16-12, 09:17 AM
#12
Senior Member
I've never been as heavy as the OP; at my peak I was pushing 220lbs. Still, I lost 50+ pounds by doing the following:
1) Keeping a food diary of every calorie that goes into my mouth. If I don't know how many calories something has, I don't eat it
2) Exercising 5-6 days a week for 45-60 minutes. For me, this typically means riding during my lunch hour. It kills two birds with one stone: not only am I burning calories on the bike, but I'm also not consuming a 1000+ calorie restaurant lunch. When I'm on the bike, I ride hard! It's just the way I'm wired: I can't go slow; my HR is always in the "aerobic zone" and I'm always trying to increase my average speed or beat my fastest time on a given route
3) Recording calories burned due to exercise. I have a PowerTap power meter that provides a relatively accurate estimate of calories burned while riding. Most of the HR monitors, websites, and apps that I've seen over-estimate calories burned while biking by 1.5-2X compared to what my power meter reports. The PT typically tells me I'm burning 500-550 calories/hr at an average pace of 16-18mph.
4) Eating more on days when I exercise. If my daily calorie budget is, say, 1500 calories and I burn 500 calories riding I'll eat an extra 350-400 calories (1500 - 500 + 400 = ~1400 calories "net"). If I feel super-hungry after a particular ride I might eat a little more. I don't worry if I'm a few hundred calories over my daily budget
5) Riding longer on weekends; typically 2-4 hours. These longer rides seem to be the ones that really accelerate weight loss for me. I slow my pace a bit for these longer rides (14-15mph rather than 16-18mph), but they're still pretty brisk. On rides that are 2+ hours in length, I consume 200-250 calories/hr. This food/drink gets recorded in my food log and deducted from my calorie budget
Keeping a food diary and trying to count calories has the side-effect of helping me make better food choices: fruits and veggies have fewer calories as compared to processed and packaged foods, which means you can eat a lot more of them and still stay within your calorie budget. My experience suggests that excess carbs are easily turned into fat, so I try to hit the 40/30/30 ratio of carbs/fat/protein, but I don't obsess about it.
The main target of this regimen is weight loss, but I find that it's still possible to build muscle, ride further, and climb longer while following it. I'm not going to suggest that your performance will increase as much as if you were eating more calories, merely that the two goals (weight loss, improved performance) aren't mutually exclusive.
1) Keeping a food diary of every calorie that goes into my mouth. If I don't know how many calories something has, I don't eat it
2) Exercising 5-6 days a week for 45-60 minutes. For me, this typically means riding during my lunch hour. It kills two birds with one stone: not only am I burning calories on the bike, but I'm also not consuming a 1000+ calorie restaurant lunch. When I'm on the bike, I ride hard! It's just the way I'm wired: I can't go slow; my HR is always in the "aerobic zone" and I'm always trying to increase my average speed or beat my fastest time on a given route
3) Recording calories burned due to exercise. I have a PowerTap power meter that provides a relatively accurate estimate of calories burned while riding. Most of the HR monitors, websites, and apps that I've seen over-estimate calories burned while biking by 1.5-2X compared to what my power meter reports. The PT typically tells me I'm burning 500-550 calories/hr at an average pace of 16-18mph.
4) Eating more on days when I exercise. If my daily calorie budget is, say, 1500 calories and I burn 500 calories riding I'll eat an extra 350-400 calories (1500 - 500 + 400 = ~1400 calories "net"). If I feel super-hungry after a particular ride I might eat a little more. I don't worry if I'm a few hundred calories over my daily budget
5) Riding longer on weekends; typically 2-4 hours. These longer rides seem to be the ones that really accelerate weight loss for me. I slow my pace a bit for these longer rides (14-15mph rather than 16-18mph), but they're still pretty brisk. On rides that are 2+ hours in length, I consume 200-250 calories/hr. This food/drink gets recorded in my food log and deducted from my calorie budget
Keeping a food diary and trying to count calories has the side-effect of helping me make better food choices: fruits and veggies have fewer calories as compared to processed and packaged foods, which means you can eat a lot more of them and still stay within your calorie budget. My experience suggests that excess carbs are easily turned into fat, so I try to hit the 40/30/30 ratio of carbs/fat/protein, but I don't obsess about it.
The main target of this regimen is weight loss, but I find that it's still possible to build muscle, ride further, and climb longer while following it. I'm not going to suggest that your performance will increase as much as if you were eating more calories, merely that the two goals (weight loss, improved performance) aren't mutually exclusive.
05-16-12, 09:22 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 597
Bikes: Kvale, Peugeot, Cervelo, Bridgestone
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
...Still, I lost 50+ pounds by doing the following:
1) Keeping a food diary of every calorie that goes into my mouth. If I don't know how many calories something has, I don't eat it
2) Exercising 5-6 days a week for 45-60 minutes...
3) Recording calories burned due to exercise. I have a PowerTap power meter that provides a relatively accurate estimate of calories burned while riding. Most of the HR monitors, websites, and apps that I've seen over-estimate calories burned while biking by 1.5-2X compared to what my power meter reports. The PT typically tells me I'm burning 500-550 calories/hr at an average pace of 16-18mph.
4) Eating more on days when I exercise. If my daily calorie budget is, say, 1500 calories and I burn 500 calories riding I'll eat an extra 350-400 calories (1500 - 500 + 400 = ~1400 calories "net"). If I feel super-hungry after a particular ride I might eat a little more. I don't worry if I'm a few hundred calories over my daily budget
5) Riding longer on weekends; typically 2-4 hours. These longer rides seem to be the ones that really accelerate weight loss for me. I slow my pace a bit for these longer rides (14-15mph rather than 16-18mph), but they're still pretty brisk. On rides that are 2+ hours in length, I consume 200-250 calories/hr. This food/drink gets recorded in my food log and deducted from my calorie budget
Keeping a food diary and trying to count calories has the side-effect of helping me make better food choices: fruits and veggies have fewer calories as compared to processed and packaged foods, which means you can eat a lot more of them and still stay within your calorie budget. My experience suggests that excess carbs are easily turned into fat, so I try to hit the 40/30/30 ratio of carbs/fat/protein, but I don't obsess about it.
The main target of this regimen is weight loss, but I find that it's still possible to build muscle, ride further, and climb longer while following it. I'm not going to suggest that your performance will increase as much as if you were eating more calories, merely that the two goals (weight loss, improved performance) aren't mutually exclusive.
1) Keeping a food diary of every calorie that goes into my mouth. If I don't know how many calories something has, I don't eat it
2) Exercising 5-6 days a week for 45-60 minutes...
3) Recording calories burned due to exercise. I have a PowerTap power meter that provides a relatively accurate estimate of calories burned while riding. Most of the HR monitors, websites, and apps that I've seen over-estimate calories burned while biking by 1.5-2X compared to what my power meter reports. The PT typically tells me I'm burning 500-550 calories/hr at an average pace of 16-18mph.
4) Eating more on days when I exercise. If my daily calorie budget is, say, 1500 calories and I burn 500 calories riding I'll eat an extra 350-400 calories (1500 - 500 + 400 = ~1400 calories "net"). If I feel super-hungry after a particular ride I might eat a little more. I don't worry if I'm a few hundred calories over my daily budget
5) Riding longer on weekends; typically 2-4 hours. These longer rides seem to be the ones that really accelerate weight loss for me. I slow my pace a bit for these longer rides (14-15mph rather than 16-18mph), but they're still pretty brisk. On rides that are 2+ hours in length, I consume 200-250 calories/hr. This food/drink gets recorded in my food log and deducted from my calorie budget
Keeping a food diary and trying to count calories has the side-effect of helping me make better food choices: fruits and veggies have fewer calories as compared to processed and packaged foods, which means you can eat a lot more of them and still stay within your calorie budget. My experience suggests that excess carbs are easily turned into fat, so I try to hit the 40/30/30 ratio of carbs/fat/protein, but I don't obsess about it.
The main target of this regimen is weight loss, but I find that it's still possible to build muscle, ride further, and climb longer while following it. I'm not going to suggest that your performance will increase as much as if you were eating more calories, merely that the two goals (weight loss, improved performance) aren't mutually exclusive.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
steve-in-kville
Training & Nutrition
14
07-28-17 03:19 PM
Parson
Road Cycling
10
11-15-12 02:42 PM
