Fat Burning Part 728.

blackhands

We must be careful we don't confuse "burning the maximum amout of fat" with" increasing our efficiency in burning fat" - which is what seems to have happened here.

The concept that you need to conserve glycogen stores to be able to sprint at the end of a RR is a bit theoretical as the amount needed to sprint 200m is miniscule and you must remember that you will never use up all your glycogen stores as your body will always conserve glycogen and needs it for some essential precesses.

One question - why would you need to develop a highly efficient fat burning system for racing? What you want to develop is an efficient system which can make best use of available glucose both from body stores and from replenishmant from food and drinks.

Finally, the concept of carbo loading i snow somewhat outdated especially with the availability of easily ingested drinks, gels etc.

SteveR_100Milers

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

And just to add, if your are limited to 60-90 minutes, the solid tempo (270 W) in the example rider above (37% fat as fuel):

270 W x 3600 sec / 23% * 37% = 1,564 kJ of energy from fat per hour

So if I only had an hour or so, then I would ride even harder to burn fat.

Make sense?

Total sense. This is exactly the approach I have had the last 12 months with limited time, only it hasnt resulted in the fat loss I was expecting. Now, you mention tempo riding, which Is what I mostly do, but what about TT pace? 25% from fat? What would be reallly interesting would be a graph or table of power output (as a % of max) against fat burn rate.

Alex_Simmons/RST

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

What would be reallly interesting would be a graph or table of power output (as a % of max) against fat burn rate.

I have one that shows this as a percentage of maximal oxygen uptake in an exercise physiology textbook but I am not aware of an online version I can point you to. I don't have a scanner handy either.

Just remember - the numbers are not precise and are dependent on a range of factors.

mankul

What if I want to lose both fats and muscle at the same time?

I'm 1.75 kg and 85 kg and most of my weight is on my thighs.

I have to wear a size XL bibs just so that the thigh bib gripper are not too tight on me.
I need to lose the fats AND muscle on my thighs.

So what's the work out for me? Train in zone 1 recovery for long hours all the way so that my muscles break down?

I know I will lose power in the legs over time but I need to reduce the size of my thighs before I start to train again.

Is doing recovery rides consistently 3 hrs per session, 3 times per week for a year will do me any good? I seriously want to lose about 15kg and some muscles on the thighs.

Please advice. Thanks.

t.m.h.n.e.t

Why would you wish to lose muscle when it isn't the problem?

P_Tucker

I love these threads. A question or a link, a load of utter bolleaux from people who have no idea what they're talking about, then Ric and Alex bundle in and deploy SCIENCE. Marvellous.

ric/rstsport

i'm scared that this thread is like a million years old.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

What would be reallly interesting would be a graph or table of power output (as a % of max) against fat burn rate.

I have one that shows this as a percentage of maximal oxygen uptake in an exercise physiology textbook but I am not aware of an online version I can point you to. I don't have a scanner handy either.

Just remember - the numbers are not precise and are dependent on a range of factors.

Even though it's likely a troll resurrecting an old thread on a perennial topic that usually provides responses to entertain us, I thought I might reference this post of mine from 2007 :shock: to add this chart:

P_Tucker

Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that, for a given level of intensity (which I'll define as a percentage of a riders FTP - or MAP if you prefer), is there significant variation in the proportion of fat burned by a group of riders and is it trainable? Or in other words, is there any way to make your body burn more fat at a given power output other than by increasing FTP?

Alex_Simmons/RST

P_Tucker wrote:

Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that, for a given level of intensity (which I'll define as a percentage of a riders FTP - or MAP if you prefer), is there significant variation in the proportion of fat burned by a group of riders and is it trainable? Or in other words, is there any way to make your body burn more fat at a given power output other than by increasing FTP?

The fitter you are, the greater the proportion of FFA use is at any given absolute sub maximal intensity. It is one of the positive desirable effects of improving one's aerobic fitness (e.g. FTP, MAP) and general aerobic "infrastructure". By lowering the CHO demand at any absolute power level, you spare valuable glycogen for use when it really matters.

But in terms of reduction of excess body fat, the fuel substrate mix used isn't a factor. It's total energy balance that matters. Of course when you are fitter, you can usually expend more energy when riding as you are capable of riding harder for longer.

keef66

I love the fact that this thread jumped from 2007 to 2012 without any explanation! And the arguments are just the same.

Bit spooky when I started reading it on P1 cos there's contribution from Gatsby, who's sadly no longer with us

ShutUpLegs

keef66 wrote:

I love the fact that this thread jumped from 2007 to 2012 without any explanation! And the arguments are just the same.

Bit spooky when I started reading it on P1 cos there's contribution from Gatsby, who's sadly no longer with us

I'm not sure they are argument, just science and fact. All good information here.

shockedsoshocked

keef66 wrote:

I love the fact that this thread jumped from 2007 to 2012 without any explanation! And the arguments are just the same.

Bit spooky when I started reading it on P1 cos there's contribution from Gatsby, who's sadly no longer with us

That's what I was about to say!

P_Tucker

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that, for a given level of intensity (which I'll define as a percentage of a riders FTP - or MAP if you prefer), is there significant variation in the proportion of fat burned by a group of riders and is it trainable? Or in other words, is there any way to make your body burn more fat at a given power output other than by increasing FTP?

The fitter you are, the greater the proportion of FFA use is at any given absolute sub maximal intensity. It is one of the positive desirable effects of improving one's aerobic fitness (e.g. FTP, MAP) and general aerobic "infrastructure". By lowering the CHO demand at any absolute power level, you spare valuable glycogen for use when it really matters.

But in terms of reduction of excess body fat, the fuel substrate mix used isn't a factor. It's total energy balance that matters. Of course when you are fitter, you can usually expend more energy when riding as you are capable of riding harder for longer.

Not quite what I asked. Completely understand that improving aerobic fitness means that riding at any given wattage uses less carbs - my question is "is there any other way of improving fat burning as a given wattage?". Specifically, do long slow rides (or even less likely - riding without eating) improve a riders' fat burning ability (or more accurately, carb-sparing ability) ooutside any effect that they might have on FTP?

jonomc4

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

There is a sliding scale for the utilisation of the two main fuels (free fatty acids and glycogen) but it is not linear nor uniform and is dependent on a number of factors including:

- Type of muscular exercise: continuous or intermittent; brief or prolonged; light or heavy relative to the maximal aerobic power (MAP) of the engaged muscle groups

- Whether you are untrained or well trained

- Diet: high or low in carbohydrates

- Health: certain conditions such as diabetes affect the bodies choice of fuel

As has been stated, with an increase in intensity, there is a greater share of energy produced from carbohydrates (glygogen).

I.

This interests me - any good links or info on the difference for diabetics - being one myself I am moving into more endurance rides this year and advice on how my (insulin dependent) body will act differently would be appreciated.

Ringo 68

An interesting thread that has left me more confused about fat burning that before I started reading it :oops:

I do have a question though.

If I was to go out on a morning ride of between 1 hour and 1 1/2 hours, would I be best not eating my usual porridge before I go and going out on an empty stomach?

Also, if I try this, what speed/effort should I ride at to maximise fat burn?

Thanks.

Alex_Simmons/RST

P_Tucker wrote:

Not quite what I asked. Completely understand that improving aerobic fitness means that riding at any given wattage uses less carbs - my question is "is there any other way of improving fat burning as a given wattage?". Specifically, do long slow rides (or even less likely - riding without eating) improve a riders' fat burning ability (or more accurately, carb-sparing ability) ooutside any effect that they might have on FTP?

Training in a manner that improves FTP will be the most beneficial for this, as they are intrinsically linked. Training with an inadequate fuel supply just lowers the quality of what you can do and slows progress.

Define long slow pace?

All training is a balance of intensity and duration. You need to stress the system in order to stimulate desirable physiological improvements. Too slow and you will not place adequate stress on the body.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Ringo 68 wrote:

An interesting thread that has left me more confused about fat burning that before I started reading it :oops:

I do have a question though.

If I was to go out on a morning ride of between 1 hour and 1 1/2 hours, would I be best not eating my usual porridge before I go and going out on an empty stomach?

Also, if I try this, what speed/effort should I ride at to maximise fat burn?

Thanks.

I can see your confusion. Let me make it simple for you.

- Forget about "fat burning" altogether. It's a myth.
- Focus on training to become more powerful/fitter (i.e. be able to ride faster for longer).
- Eat to get lean.
- Don't compromise training by being inadequately fueled.

P_Tucker

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Not quite what I asked. Completely understand that improving aerobic fitness means that riding at any given wattage uses less carbs - my question is "is there any other way of improving fat burning as a given wattage?". Specifically, do long slow rides (or even less likely - riding without eating) improve a riders' fat burning ability (or more accurately, carb-sparing ability) ooutside any effect that they might have on FTP?

Training in a manner that improves FTP will be the most beneficial for this, as they are intrinsically linked. Training with an inadequate fuel supply just lowers the quality of what you can do and slows progress.

Define long slow pace?

All training is a balance of intensity and duration. You need to stress the system in order to stimulate desirable physiological improvements. Too slow and you will not place adequate stress on the body.

Again not quite what I asked, but I'm not paying you and I suspect the problem is that I'm not being clear, so its my own fault. Thanks for trying!

Alex_Simmons/RST

P_Tucker wrote:

Again not quite what I asked, but I'm not paying you and I suspect the problem is that I'm not being clear, so its my own fault. Thanks for trying!

Then redefine the question.

ShutUpLegs

P_Tucker wrote:

Again not quite what I asked, but I'm not paying you and I suspect the problem is that I'm not being clear, so its my own fault. Thanks for trying!

SPELL IT OUT FFS

P_Tucker

ShutUpLegs wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Again not quite what I asked, but I'm not paying you and I suspect the problem is that I'm not being clear, so its my own fault. Thanks for trying!

SPELL IT OUT FFS

I don't know how to make it clearer FFS, if I did I'd have done it already

Okay - lets say we have 10 riders with an FTP of exactly 300w. Sorry - this is BR - an FTP of exactly 250w. Assume they're equally nourished/rested/hydrated etc. Get them all on turbos, and make them ride at 200w with a gun to their heads (so motivation isn't an issue) until they run out of carbs and can't hold said power. Will they all fail at exactly the same time? If not, what's different about the ones who can hold it for longer?

Alex_Simmons/RST

P_Tucker wrote:

ShutUpLegs wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Again not quite what I asked, but I'm not paying you and I suspect the problem is that I'm not being clear, so its my own fault. Thanks for trying!

SPELL IT OUT FFS

I don't know how to make it clearer FFS, if I did I'd have done it already

Okay - lets say we have 10 riders with an FTP of exactly 300w. Sorry - this is BR - an FTP of exactly 250w. Assume they're equally nourished/rested/hydrated etc. Get them all on turbos, and make them ride at 200w with a gun to their heads (so motivation isn't an issue) until they run out of carbs and can't hold said power. Will they all fail at exactly the same time? If not, what's different about the ones who can hold it for longer?

No.

There are many factors that can influence such things meaning individual differences do and will exist.

Different lean body mass alone would account for different levels initial muscle glycogen storage; riders may have different gross efficiency levels; riders will handle the environmental conditions differently (e.g. heat and sweat levels); some will freak rather than be motivated by a gun; stress levels (which may be due to things other than the gun) affect hormone production and this in turn affects glycogen utilisation rates; ingestion of other substances (e.g. caffeine) can have a sizeable impact; motivation alone is a large factor (despite the gun, the prospect of 6+ hours on turbo might cause some to fire it earlier); some may be relatively unfit, others very well trained (despite having same FTP) and this will clearly impact endurance ability; how the riders fuel/hydrate during such prolonged exercise; how much such intake they are capable of ingesting and making available to the exercising muscles; muscle fibre type ratios; VO2 utilisation at 66% of FTP relative to VO2max (can be quite different depending on a number of factors); electrolyte balance can be affected differently during prolonged exercise; ....

P_Tucker

And can any of those (relevant - not ability to deal with the stress of having a gun to the head) factors be trained relatively independently of FTP? The classic example would be the idea that long rides make you better at conserving carbs.

Alex_Simmons/RST

P_Tucker wrote:

And can any of those (relevant - not ability to deal with the stress of having a gun to the head) factors be trained relatively independently of FTP? The classic example would be the idea that long rides make you better at conserving carbs.

Not as much as training specifically to increase your FTP, certainly not on a benefit per hour of effort basis. Mind you, if the ride is long / hard enough, it will help towards that aim.