View Single Post
Old 06-21-11, 02:16 PM
  #7  
CraigB
Starting over
 
CraigB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 4,077

Bikes: 1990 Trek 1500; 2006 Gary Fisher Marlin; 2011 Cannondale Synapse Alloy 105; 2012 Catrike Trail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by pdlamb
Assuming you're discussing Weight Watchers, beware their exercise point estimates for cycling. Or better yet, ignore them completely. Eat your daily and weekly points, and ignore the exercise points -- they're just helping you lose weight faster. If you really want to count the points, use a better cycling calorie calculator, then figure 80 calories per point.
+1. I think they way overestimate activity points for cycling when your average goes over 12 MPH. Under 12 is probably fairly accurate, but over 12 and I mean they're way overestimated. I'd say if your average speed is closer to 17 or higher, then their numbers might make sense. But not at 12. According to them, my TdC ride got me 49 points. That's almost 150% of my regular daily budget, and more than many active people rack up in a week.
CraigB is offline