Weight loss

Jaguar.

I'm planning on shifting a bit of weight as I'm hoping to do a few climbs in the summer, the thing I'm struggling with is how should I lose?

I'm roughly middle of my BMI range for and could probably trim myself down to the bottom of that range but popular opinion is BMI isn't that reliable.

I obviously don't want to go too low as I dont' want to affect performance or reducing muscle but how low is that and how do I determine it?

I simply want to set a sensible goal, might not be able to get there of course but it seems like a good idea to have something to aim for.

Apologies if this has been done before but if it has I can't find it!

Edwin

Weight isn't necessarily the best thing to measure, you might be better off looking at bodyfat percentage instead. BMI in particular is a but useless for sportspeople, for example most body builders would be technically overweight on that scale. Why not aim to reduce bodyfat by one or two percent?
As for how, reduce your overall calorie consumption by 10-15%.
Hmm, sounds easy written like that.....

Jaguar.

Yes but... How do I measure bodyfat percentage reliably and what do I aim for?

Leaping on a set of scales is easy...

I know how to lose weight, that's not the issue, the problem is how much!

Edwin

You can either get scales from Boots/Argo etc that measure via electrical resistance, (although these aren't particularly accurate) or you can use calipers, which is a bit trickier.
I can't tell you how much to lose though, that depends how much bodyfat or spare pounds you have to begin with!
What's your weight/height ?

Mike Willcox

Jaguar

Most people know how to lose weight, which is to basically to eat less caloiries than you are burning, but when you are training it's not as simple as that. When you want to strike a balance between getting fit and getting lean and mean to be an efficient bike athlete, then you should forget all notions of a diet.

Also your question of how much does not have an exact answer.

When you start training your body may not lose weight initially unless it's water (keep hydrated). But regular exercise will put on muscle and replace fat and overtime your body weight will adjust automatically as long as you don't OVER indulge and consume the wrong things like alcohol.

You need to eat to be able to train properly and improve. Forget about the scales and focus on the training and the eating healthily.

alzeb

anyone experienced doing more miles,higher intensity and eating less yet not being able to lose weight,its doing my head in! unless im being too impatient,started this regime a week ago and the weight isnt shifting.

ut_och_cykla

alzeb wrote:

anyone experienced doing more miles,higher intensity and eating less yet not being able to lose weight,its doing my head in! unless im being too impatient,started this regime a week ago and the weight isnt shifting.

Only a week - give yorslf7body time!

It is all too easy to overestimate how much you are burning with the extra miles, and underestimate what yo are eating. keeping an accurate honest diary of food and training for a week or two might give you some pointers.

And with regard to te original question. If you lose fat/replace with muscle you will notice it quite quickly with how your clothes fit. Similarly you could use a tape measure - thigh, waist, chest, upper arm. Eat slightly less , aim for no more than 1 kg per week, 250-500 kcal deficit per day. Reschedule eating patterns so you can top up after hard sessions without eating extra.

Jaguar.

OK, I think that kind of answers my question. I think I'll stick with this -

"Forget about the scales and focus on the training and the eating healthily."

Makes sense to me.

I did get a pair of those scales (Argos as it happens) that do body fat% and a load of other stuff, whilst having read up on how they work, I suspect the value might not be accurate, it's probably a good indication, fwiw, I came out at 8.4% which is pretty much what I was expecting.

Oh and Alzeb, in my experience, a week is nothing in this game, things can go up as well as down!

Edwin

Anything below 10% is pretty good so it sounds like you don't need to lose weight.
I was just under 13% last time I checked but it's not the time of year to try and lose weight, getting the miles in and staying healthy is the main ambition at the moment.

alzeb

im 10.3% and im female which seems ok i guess,i gained 1 kg over the year and everyone seems to have noticed it which is doing my head in.ate nothing but fruit yesterday in a vain attempt to shift it,all that happened is i felt faint,maybe ought to accept it and hope i can lose the weight naturally,there again has been mentioned im expecting too much too soon,bit like all training!

ut_och_cykla

Not a doc but 10% for a non-pro girly sounds rather low. Low body fat in females has all kinds of hormone issues attached, complete with unwanted facial hair, lost periods etc.

Don't starve yourself thin, only your body and cycling will suffer in the long run.

And if your doing long miles do 'em steady and well within your envelope. Eat on/after ride within your daily requirements. and let weight loss- if you really need it - take time!

Mettan

I've lost roughly 1.25 stone in 5 months - no training plan as such, just eating smaller portions and riding more - does make me smirk a bit when seeing regular "weight loss" and "diet" programmes/articles in the media with little or no mention of ...........exercise :roll: - there are often people showcased in these articles/programmes that could physically "walk 2 miles" or do some other light/moderate exercise (stationary bike) ....... but still, often, little or no mention of actually doing any exercise - just carping on about not losing weight from diet alone.

AntLockyer

Oh my I'm at 21% body fat, I guess I've got a lot to lose then

orv

OVER indulge and consume the wrong things like alcohol.

crazy talk.

Mike Willcox

orv wrote:

OVER indulge and consume the wrong things like alcohol.

crazy talk.

What I actually said was

"But regular exercise will put on muscle and replace fat and overtime your body weight will adjust automatically as long as you don't OVER indulge and consume the wrong things like alcohol."

What's orv short for? Orville the green puppet? Nah he's got more sense than you have.

TechnoBuddhist

AntLockyer - unless you know you are definitely overweight ignore what the scales are telling you! 22% means 1 fifth of your body is fat. There are always exceptions, but you can visually see if you have 1/5 body fat.

I've got 2 sets of scales that measure body fat and the first one I got said I was 22-24% fat and there is no way on this earth that 1/4 of my body is fat.

My fiance got me a new set of scales for christmas and these ones say I'm 9-11% and they also measure water at 63-66%.

This makes me wonder how accurate these darned things are, but I'm more inclined to believe the 9-11% readings knowing what my body looks like and what I eat. 22-24% was way wrong!

fwiw 'Salter' is the make that gives 20%+ readings and 'Hanson' gives me 10%(and water as well).

A question now for somebody...
If my body weight is 77kg and I've got 10% body fat then I'm carrying 7.7kg of fat. 1% being equal to 0.77kg.
If my target weight is 75kg and I want it all to be fat then my body fat would go down to 7%. This I believe is sustainable as long as it doesn't go much below 7%. 7% body fat being 'healthy', less than 7% should be a temporary thing.

My question then is; to remain 'healthy' my weight will not be able to drop below 75kg unless I catabolise muscle, which is not really what I want to do(I like my body shape and proportions), 75kg is my optimal weight?

ut_och_cykla

Optimal for what - normal life, swimming in cold water, riding up Alp slopes as a pro, surviving in antarctica, optimal for a Sumo wrestler.
If you feel good and can live the life your'e happy with, without getting ill, disturbing your homone balance then its optimal, if not then 75 is perhaps too low.

TechnoBuddhist

optimal for cycling! At least I thought this forum was for cycling! There isn't a website called sumoradar.com

Maybe I should have made the question a bit more explicit. Can I drop my weight further without getting too low a body fat? Presumably, to lose some weight I either lose fat, fluid or muscle, there isn't anything else to lose.

I think maybe I need to get a full medical check(I'm 40 this year) and see if they can give me a better body fat reading so I will know more accurately.

Then I can get to 7%BF and see how I feel. If I'm suffering or always ill or always cold then I can look forward to plenty of coffee and cake

Jeff Jones

It's not a simple question to answer, because everyone has a different body type. And in focusing on weight, you can miss the point because you actually want to be a faster cyclist. So you ignore warning signs during training and end up riding yourself slowly into the ground in pursuit of weight loss.

I've been guilty of this in the past, although the initial weight loss came about because I took part in a dietary study where they controlled our calories. They didn't realise how much you burn when riding 600-700km/week :-) I ended up 5kg lighter than I am now and held that weight for years. But after putting it back on, I climb better now than I ever did then! The extra power is more important than weight.

That said, 7% bodyfat is probably achievable if you're careful not to starve yourself. But I'd argue that it's a bit early in the year to be doing that. I actually prefer to have a bit extra fat for winter because a) I can lose it easily via racing when it's warmer and b) I get sick more easily otherwise.

In summary, concentrate on making yourself faster, not lighter. The weight will sort itself out.

[goes back to find more chocolate]

AntLockyer

TechnoBuddhist wrote:

AntLockyer - unless you know you are definitely overweight ignore what the scales are telling you! 22% means 1 fifth of your body is fat. There are always exceptions, but you can visually see if you have 1/5 body fat.

that is an interesting way of looking at it. I'm 10 pounds heavier than what I feel is my correct weight where I am lean but not skinny. My friend who tested on his home scales for 6 months thought he was at 17% the doctor told him it was 6% and to start eating more. So I'm not too worried.

NJK

Jeff Jones wrote:

It's not a simple question to answer, because everyone has a different body type. And in focusing on weight, you can miss the point because you actually want to be a faster cyclist. So you ignore warning signs during training and end up riding yourself slowly into the ground in pursuit of weight loss.

I've been guilty of this in the past, although the initial weight loss came about because I took part in a dietary study where they controlled our calories. They didn't realise how much you burn when riding 600-700km/week :-) I ended up 5kg lighter than I am now and held that weight for years. But after putting it back on, I climb better now than I ever did then! The extra power is more important than weight.

That said, 7% bodyfat is probably achievable if you're careful not to starve yourself. But I'd argue that it's a bit early in the year to be doing that. I actually prefer to have a bit extra fat for winter because a) I can lose it easily via racing when it's warmer and b) I get sick more easily otherwise.

In summary, concentrate on making yourself faster, not lighter. The weight will sort itself out.

[goes back to find more chocolate]

What was your bodyfat when you did the study compared to what it is now? Didn't your performance deteriorate because you just wern't eating enough calories. It just confuses me when people say they race or perform better when they put the weight back on, if it is fat and above say 10-12% then it won't improve anything.
Personally i think it better if you lose weight in the winter or non racing period because when racing you don't want to be thinking about calorie deficit, this coud lead to not consuming adequate carbs and decrease in performance

Jeff Jones

NJK wrote:

Jeff Jones wrote:

I've been guilty of this in the past, although the initial weight loss came about because I took part in a dietary study where they controlled our calories. They didn't realise how much you burn when riding 600-700km/week :-) I ended up 5kg lighter than I am now and held that weight for years. But after putting it back on, I climb better now than I ever did then! The extra power is more important than weight.

That said, 7% bodyfat is probably achievable if you're careful not to starve yourself. But I'd argue that it's a bit early in the year to be doing that. I actually prefer to have a bit extra fat for winter because a) I can lose it easily via racing when it's warmer and b) I get sick more easily otherwise.

What was your bodyfat when you did the study compared to what it is now? Didn't your performance deteriorate because you just wern't eating enough calories. It just confuses me when people say they race or perform better when they put the weight back on, if it is fat and above say 10-12% then it won't improve anything.
Personally i think it better if you lose weight in the winter or non racing period because when racing you don't want to be thinking about calorie deficit, this coud lead to not consuming adequate carbs and decrease in performance

My bodyfat was pretty similar: about 7%, so I definitely have more lean mass now than I did then. But I didn't lose (or gain) much muscle on my legs, it was mostly upper body and arms. Roadies don't need that ;-)

I'm being a bit misleadiing attributing the extra (lean) weight as being the cause of my better climbing ability now. More important is the engine.

I remember I had one really good race during the study and I attributed it solely to the weight loss. So I kept that same weight for the next five years (definitely not calorie deprived then), assuming if the weight was right then the performance would follow. I'm convinced now that it's the other way around.

In my last year at that weight, I trained a bit smarter and did a lot better. Ironically I was only doing flat, windy races. I then stopped racing for a few years and put on 10kg (still riding too!), losing half of that when I started racing again. I did even better, especially when it was hilly.

I think if you've got 10-15kg to lose over winter, then fine - that can be part of your training goals. But if it's only a couple of kg then you might want to leave it and concentrate on your fitness.

Racing burns a hell of a lot of calories because of the high power outputs involved, so a little reserve of fat is handy at the start of the season. During the season, I agree it's essential to keep up a high intake of carbs and protein, and fat for that matter.

It's different if you want to be flying for the first event you do - then you want to have everything right in the lead up. I'd still not change my strategy: fitness over weight loss, which will sort itself out. Both are related, of course. I just believe it's a more sensible way of thinking about your training.

NJK

Jeff Jones wrote:

NJK wrote:

Jeff Jones wrote:

I've been guilty of this in the past, although the initial weight loss came about because I took part in a dietary study where they controlled our calories. They didn't realise how much you burn when riding 600-700km/week :-) I ended up 5kg lighter than I am now and held that weight for years. But after putting it back on, I climb better now than I ever did then! The extra power is more important than weight.

That said, 7% bodyfat is probably achievable if you're careful not to starve yourself. But I'd argue that it's a bit early in the year to be doing that. I actually prefer to have a bit extra fat for winter because a) I can lose it easily via racing when it's warmer and b) I get sick more easily otherwise.

What was your bodyfat when you did the study compared to what it is now? Didn't your performance deteriorate because you just wern't eating enough calories. It just confuses me when people say they race or perform better when they put the weight back on, if it is fat and above say 10-12% then it won't improve anything.
Personally i think it better if you lose weight in the winter or non racing period because when racing you don't want to be thinking about calorie deficit, this coud lead to not consuming adequate carbs and decrease in performance

My bodyfat was pretty similar: about 7%, so I definitely have more lean mass now than I did then. But I didn't lose (or gain) much muscle on my legs, it was mostly upper body and arms. Roadies don't need that ;-)

I'm being a bit misleadiing attributing the extra (lean) weight as being the cause of my better climbing ability now. More important is the engine.

I remember I had one really good race during the study and I attributed it solely to the weight loss. So I kept that same weight for the next five years (definitely not calorie deprived then), assuming if the weight was right then the performance would follow. I'm convinced now that it's the other way around.

In my last year at that weight, I trained a bit smarter and did a lot better. Ironically I was only doing flat, windy races. I then stopped racing for a few years and put on 10kg (still riding too!), losing half of that when I started racing again. I did even better, especially when it was hilly.

I think if you've got 10-15kg to lose over winter, then fine - that can be part of your training goals. But if it's only a couple of kg then you might want to leave it and concentrate on your fitness.

Racing burns a hell of a lot of calories because of the high power outputs involved, so a little reserve of fat is handy at the start of the season. During the season, I agree it's essential to keep up a high intake of carbs and protein, and fat for that matter.

It's different if you want to be flying for the first event you do - then you want to have everything right in the lead up. I'd still not change my strategy: fitness over weight loss, which will sort itself out. Both are related, of course. I just believe it's a more sensible way of thinking about your training.

I can see your point. I've just lost about 2kg and i'm only 1-2kg of what i think is optimal. This will hopefully come off naturally over the next few months. At the same time my FTP and MAP tests are on the up so its all good A change of training plan over the winter from previous yrs as helped. Not many immune system depressing long rides have meant less colds and flu type symptoms, this has meant far greater quality.

TechnoBuddhist

Jeff Jones wrote:

I think if you've got 10-15kg to lose over winter, then fine - that can be part of your training goals. But if it's only a couple of kg then you might want to leave it and concentrate on your fitness.

That makes a good deal of sense. I shouldn't be bothered by 2kg! I'm sure improving my engine will compensate for 2kg. If it were more then weight loss would be a bit more of an issue. I was just trying to get every ounce of performance I can, but by increasing the engine. the weight should sort itself out. Thx.

AntLockyer - glad you're not too worried. Using scales as an indicator to see if the fat is dropping, rather than take the % as an absolute figure could be the way to go.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Jeff Jones wrote:

In summary, concentrate on making yourself faster, not lighter. The weight will sort itself out.
...

I think if you've got 10-15kg to lose over winter, then fine - that can be part of your training goals. But if it's only a couple of kg then you might want to leave it and concentrate on your fitness.

+1 on both posts

Unless obese/seriously overweight, then training to improve sustainable power is the best approach.

Eat the right things, train well and the weight will look after itself.

If you do want to maintain a measure of sorts:

- Those home scales with "body fat measures" are a gimmick and notoriously wrong.

- Easiest method is to have an experienced person (e.g. a coach or a sports dietician) use good calipers for a pinch test over a sizeable number of body sites and measure the change over time.

- Weight loss should be a gradual and sustainable secondary outcome of the training & diet.

ut_och_cykla

Fiddling about on web based W/speed calculators shows thet on a flat 16 km TT course, 2 kgs (75 vs 77kgs) makes about 6 seconds difference and is equivalent oof less than 5 W improvement. While I'm not an expert I think the less than five watts would be worth finding first rather than chasing a somewhat elusive 2 kilos. Clearly in the real world these figures are probably not correct but they give an indication of what people are talking about. 2 kilos should make less difference than all the other variables in your life I would have thought. I'm with Jeff and Alex on this one. focus on training, resting and eating properly and the weight will come off if it needs to!

NJK

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Jeff Jones wrote:

In summary, concentrate on making yourself faster, not lighter. The weight will sort itself out.
...

I think if you've got 10-15kg to lose over winter, then fine - that can be part of your training goals. But if it's only a couple of kg then you might want to leave it and concentrate on your fitness.

+1 on both posts

Unless obese/seriously overweight, then training to improve sustainable power is the best approach.

Eat the right things, train well and the weight will look after itself.

If you do want to maintain a measure of sorts:

- Those home scales with "body fat measures" are a gimmick and notoriously wrong.

- Easiest method is to have an experienced person (e.g. a coach or a sports dietician) use good calipers for a pinch test over a sizeable number of body sites and measure the change over time.

- Weight loss should be a gradual and sustainable secondary outcome of the training & diet.

When getting BF measured using calipers it is best to use just the total of mm for all the sites due to the fact that most charts and equations are age related.

Mike Willcox

Paradox

The more you think about your weight the more you think about food and the more you eat = the least weight loss

The less you think about weight the less you think about food and the less you eat = the most weight loss.

Concentrate on training, fuelling up adequately and the weight will look after itself as will the fitness. Also if you drink water with meals instead of alcohol then after a couple of days you'll feel the benefit.

I think that this idea of a glass of red wine a day is good for you (antioxidant and all that)is a slippery slope and you're best off abstaining altogether.

Kléber

ut_och_cykla wrote:

Fiddling about on web based W/speed calculators shows thet on a flat 16 km TT course, 2 kgs (75 vs 77kgs) makes about 6 seconds difference and is equivalent oof less than 5 W improvement. While I'm not an expert I think the less than five watts would be worth finding first rather than chasing a somewhat elusive 2 kilos. Clearly in the real world these figures are probably not correct but they give an indication of what people are talking about. 2 kilos should make less difference than all the other variables in your life I would have thought. I'm with Jeff and Alex on this one. focus on training, resting and eating properly and the weight will come off if it needs to!

No race is flat and 2kg of lard has to be kept alive with blood and oxygen, which the muscles would no doubt prefer. So beyond the physics and into physiology, I would guess greater gains in the real world.

But don't stress about weight, especially now. Any weight loss should be gradual. Dieting when you train hard can just punish your body.

ut_och_cykla

I take your point Kleber but the whole poinyt about 'lard' is that is doesn't place great demands on the CV system directly. Naturally it has some blood supply but minimal compared to active muscle. My point is that a kilo here or there is not worth worrying about (altho' many do worry - even obsess - about it) adn that weight will only begin to really count when going up hill and wanting to do it fast.

But I thinkwe agree on teh general idea - training hard plus dieting= problems waiting to happen.

TechnoBuddhist

Thanks for all the info. 5W for 2kg is nothing and I agree building the engine is much better way to go to compensate for that 5W. On my long rides I tend to carry 2l of fluids giving a further 2kg, but I don't mind pulling that weight around cos it's necessary.

I weigh myself daily and just monitor progress, if I get above 78kg for a consecutive couple of days, I need to take action. Twice over the past week, my weight has hit 75.5kg and I'm not calorie counting so the LSD rides are working . I'm doing about 9-10hrs per week, 3hrs is my longest ride on a Saturday, all up until yesterday were LSD rides, with a few 10% hills now and again.

I say up til yesterday, cos yesterday was the start of my power training, twice a week, and the other 3 days are gonna be continuing my LSD rides. So I should be increasing my power output and maintaining the aerobic conditioning which will help keep the weight steady.

---

The thing that amazes me about weight loss, particularly amongst non active people, is that they take years to get to be a certain size and then they want a quick fix, liposuction, pills, cabbage diets, apple diets, you name it. It took years to get there, it'll take months/years to get rid of and it'll be slow to come off.

On Supersize vs Superskinny last night there were these 2 bimbo models and for a change they were working out in the gym to maintain their shape and weight!! WooHoo, good honest exercise that's the badger! But to help them make sure they got the most out of their exercise they were taking ephedrine.

The ephedrine was making them exercise at an accelerated rate and making them all hyper. They were popping 2-3 of these tablets a day. The ephedrine amongst loads of side effects and problems could lead to heart attack! :roll: