Question about calorie defecits and timing.
G-Wiz
Posts: 261
Trying to lose about 10kg over the next few months and have a question about managing the calorie defecit.
I'm on about 1700 cals/day to hit target, but on a weekend ride I can burn about 4,000 cals in one session. I'll probably get through under 800 cals in energy bars while doing it.
My question is, how should I approach the timing of replacing that defecit? Should I be trying to stock up before, eat more during, or replenish after, and over what period?
My aim at the moment is the weight loss rather than performance, I'm getting some quite good quality sessions during the week and feel pretty strong generally compared to previous years.
I'm on about 1700 cals/day to hit target, but on a weekend ride I can burn about 4,000 cals in one session. I'll probably get through under 800 cals in energy bars while doing it.
My question is, how should I approach the timing of replacing that defecit? Should I be trying to stock up before, eat more during, or replenish after, and over what period?
My aim at the moment is the weight loss rather than performance, I'm getting some quite good quality sessions during the week and feel pretty strong generally compared to previous years.
0
Comments
-
First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Timing wise - you'll need a good calorie base to do a ride like that so stock up before you go. Breakfast of choice for many is porridge as it is slow release and will serve you well for a few hours.
Replace a bit as you ride - you'll need the energy to keep going after a few hours. A lot of people will have something once a hour to keep topped up (like a banana or energy bar, etc).
Have something when you get back to help recovery (protein and carb-based).
And I believe that if you eat within an hour (or two?) of finishing your ride - your metabolism will be higher from the ride and you can burn it off a little faster.
Drink lots and lots of water - it will help make you feel full and will help with weight loss (and keeping you hydrated of course!).
1700 cals a day isn't much but it is manageable (I've worked on 1,000 a day before and done it!).
These are just MY observations - you'll get lots more ideas!0 -
That would be about a 6 hour ride round the surrey hills to do that amount, but the principle's the same for something shorter.
It just seems like an awful lot to make up in one day? Should I just not worry about it too much but make sure the net calorie intake is right over, say, a week?0 -
G-Wiz wrote:That would be about a 6 hour ride round the surrey hills to do that amount, but the principle's the same for something shorter.
It just seems like an awful lot to make up in one day? Should I just not worry about it too much but make sure the net calorie intake is right over, say, a week?
Personally - I take those really big training days where you expend a LOT of calories as an opportunity to lose a little extra weight. I don;t try and replace all 4,000 cals if I don't need to.
But it's important to make sure you DO replace enough calories to maintain your energy levels, otherwise your next ride will suffer. A lot.
I also try and maintain caloric intake on a day by day basis and not a weekly basis. I find it easier to keep things 'even' throughout the week.
Lastly - for a 6 hour hilly ride, 'only' taking on 800 calories during the ride may prove difficult, especially if you are on a reduced calorie diet. I'd surprised if you don't bonk by the end. Consider taking more on board during the ride (but you'll know how you feel).0 -
Burning 4000 cals in one go is quiet a lot, are you sure it's that amount. As Pokerface mentions this may be 5 hours at a hard (almost race) pace or upto 8 hours at a brisk gentle rolling hill pace.
You are never going to replenish that amount during a ride. So it's best to take bars and gels are regular intervals and hope your body copes. It's a bit hit and miss method. You really need a sports coach to advise to get the maximum benefit from food intake before, during and after. You can experiment by keeping a log.
Probably the best method for losing weight is to get up early and do a long ride without breakfast and rely on a few gels and water. This effectively trains your body in fuel deprecation mode. There's a few articles on here about it if you search. I tried this method on early Sunday mornings and after the first few weeks of almost bonking soon found I got used to it - still don't like it as i like my breakfast, but it works for me.CAAD9
Kona Jake the Snake
Merlin Malt 40 -
Buckled_Rims wrote:Burning 4000 cals in one go is quiet a lot, are you sure it's that amount. As Pokerface mentions this may be 5 hours at a hard (almost race) pace or upto 8 hours at a brisk gentle rolling hill pace.
You are never going to replenish that amount during a ride. So it's best to take bars and gels are regular intervals and hope your body copes. It's a bit hit and miss method. You really need a sports coach to advise to get the maximum benefit from food intake before, during and after. You can experiment by keeping a log.
Probably the best method for losing weight is to get up early and do a long ride without breakfast and rely on a few gels and water. This effectively trains your body in fuel deprecation mode. There's a few articles on here about it if you search. I tried this method on early Sunday mornings and after the first few weeks of almost bonking soon found I got used to it - still don't like it as i like my breakfast, but it works for me.
This is called "Fasted Lipolysis'. Best to eat something the night before if you've never done it.
Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Here's a quicky chart for someone who is trying to lose fat. Count up the miles and multiply them by the 65 kCals/mile. Then divide this by 10,000 to get the multiplication factor to use on the TOTAL kCals from the first sum.
eg. 50miles x 65 kCals = 3250. 3250/10,000 = 0.3250. 0.3250 x 3250 = 1056 kCals.
Hey presto, there's your 'carbo loading' quantity...
0 -
As has been mentioned 4,000 calories is alot for a 6 hours ride, my Garmin tells me when I do this sort of duration ride, I would be using about 2,500 calories, it doesn't change much depending on the maximum I could push for that duration.
800 calories should be enough if the intensity is not too hard, but if you really start suffering towards the end, then you may need a bit more.
When you finish the ride, have a recovery drink and eat a decent meal about 1 hour afterwards. This should stop the urge to eat everything in sight. If you haven't done the ride too hard, the body will have used quite a bit of fat as fuel, and you don't need to replace this
As Pokerface says, you need to try and ensure you fuel yourself enough for subsequent rides, this may take a little bit of trial and error.0 -
Chiggy wrote:[Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Yeah - pretty sure a wide variety of variables (terrain, wind conditions, weight of bike and rider, solo vs group ride, riding position, etc) play a big part in determining calories used.
If you're going uphill or into the wind, it will require more energy to complete a mile, compared to flat (or going downhill, with a tailwind, etc). A flat group ride of 50 miles will use much less cals than a 50 mile solo hilly ride. I'm starting to wonder if you actually ride a bike or just live in a lab!
Checking my Powertap logs (reasonably good estimate of cals used based on power), values range from 1500 to 2200 for 50 miles.
And the only time I have used over 4000 cals in a ride, was the 7.5 hour Cheshire Cat last year and that was 120 miles!0 -
Chiggy wrote:Buckled_Rims wrote:Burning 4000 cals in one go is quiet a lot, are you sure it's that amount. As Pokerface mentions this may be 5 hours at a hard (almost race) pace or upto 8 hours at a brisk gentle rolling hill pace.
You are never going to replenish that amount during a ride. So it's best to take bars and gels are regular intervals and hope your body copes. It's a bit hit and miss method. You really need a sports coach to advise to get the maximum benefit from food intake before, during and after. You can experiment by keeping a log.
Probably the best method for losing weight is to get up early and do a long ride without breakfast and rely on a few gels and water. This effectively trains your body in fuel deprecation mode. There's a few articles on here about it if you search. I tried this method on early Sunday mornings and after the first few weeks of almost bonking soon found I got used to it - still don't like it as i like my breakfast, but it works for me.
This is called "Fasted Lipolysis'. Best to eat something the night before if you've never done it.
Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Here's a quicky chart for someone who is trying to lose fat. Count up the miles and multiply them by the 65 kCals/mile. Then divide this by 10,000 to get the multiplication factor to use on the TOTAL kCals from the first sum.
eg. 50miles x 65 kCals = 3250. 3250/10,000 = 0.3250. 0.3250 x 3250 = 1056 kCals.
Hey presto, there's your 'carbo loading' quantity...
Their are easier ways to lose 10kg than that. This method also doesn't take into account the discipline needed when you come back not to overeat.0 -
Pokerface wrote:First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Why? I'm a mediocre 70kg 2nd cat and (assuming 25% efficiency) I burn 1000 calories per hour on my weekend rides.0 -
P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Why? I'm a mediocre 70kg 2nd cat and (assuming 25% efficiency) I burn 1000 calories per hour on my weekend rides.
Is that PM figures or a HRM figure, if a HRM figure I would take it with a huge pinch of salt.
When I did a 12 hr TT, I burnt a measly 4,500 calories according to my HRM, hence why I think HRM algorithms are a bit suspect. Obviously if it is from a PM it is pretty accurate, but I doubt I burn 1,000 calories an hour even when racing :?0 -
PowerTap - agree that HRM is effectively a magic 8-ball0
-
P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Why? I'm a mediocre 70kg 2nd cat and (assuming 25% efficiency) I burn 1000 calories per hour on my weekend rides.
Most people don't have an FTP over 350w and I don't know anyone who has burned 1000 caps per hour unless flat out racing. I've never managed 1000 cals an hour even in a 58 minute 25 mile TT! Of course my power is low compared to yours.
Certainly not a beginner who is 10kg overweight.0 -
Pokerface wrote:P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Why? I'm a mediocre 70kg 2nd cat and (assuming 25% efficiency) I burn 1000 calories per hour on my weekend rides.
Most people don't have an FTP over 350w and I don't know anyone who has burned 1000 caps per hour unless flat out racing. I've never managed 1000 cals an hour even in a 58 minute 25 mile TT! Of course my power is low compared to yours.
Certainly not a beginner who is 10kg overweight.
Furry muff. Although, surely you must have done >250w to get a sub 1hr 25?0 -
P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:First off - I'm dubious that you'll burn 4,000 cals on a ride. Unless you are doing 5-6 hour medium to high intensity rides! (To be safe - estimate 650 cals per hour for a medium intensity ride).
Why? I'm a mediocre 70kg 2nd cat and (assuming 25% efficiency) I burn 1000 calories per hour on my weekend rides.
Most people don't have an FTP over 350w and I don't know anyone who has burned 1000 caps per hour unless flat out racing. I've never managed 1000 cals an hour even in a 58 minute 25 mile TT! Of course my power is low compared to yours.
Certainly not a beginner who is 10kg overweight.
Furry muff. Although, surely you must have done >250w to get a sub 1hr 25?
Wind aided. Both ways. 8)
If you can burn through 1000 cals an hour on a training ride and only weigh 70kg, you must by seriously flying! Or have a broken Powertap.0 -
I doubt a broken PT is the problem - I've got two, both less than 2 months old and they read the same. We'll see how I'm going in March - no prizes for going well in December (winter series DO NOT COUNT)0
-
1000 cal/hr is roughly 280W. I reckon a 70kg second cat could do that for a couple of hours in training if they put their mind to it. 3hrs at that pace would be unlikely outside of a race but not impossible.
The OP mentioned 6hr rides to burn 4000 cals, which is about 185W. Again quite doable depending on fitness, but if he's estimating based on anything but a power meter, he's likely to be off.
Chiggy, this is cycling not walking! Power, and therefore work done (ie kJ and cals burned), does not scale linearly with speed. Therefore it can't scale linearly with distance covered.
In other words, 1 mile at 15mph will burn fewer calories than 1 mile at 30mph, all other things being equal.Jeff Jones
Product manager, Sports0 -
P_Tucker wrote:I doubt a broken PT is the problem - I've got two, both less than 2 months old and they read the same. We'll see how I'm going in March - no prizes for going well in December (winter series DO NOT COUNT)
Jeff sort of answered in the post above, but can you tell me what your 1000cals an hour looks like?
(Avg wattage, speed, ride duration, etc?) Would like to know how much harder I have to work!0 -
Pokerface wrote:P_Tucker wrote:I doubt a broken PT is the problem - I've got two, both less than 2 months old and they read the same. We'll see how I'm going in March - no prizes for going well in December (winter series DO NOT COUNT)
Jeff sort of answered in the post above, but can you tell me what your 1000cals an hour looks like?
(Avg wattage, speed, ride duration, etc?) Would like to know how much harder I have to work!
As stated, I was assuming 25% efficiency - av power is usually 245w - 255w, so my rough calcs could be a little off. Currently doing 3h 15m for my Saturday rides, speed fairly meaningless as it's so dependant on terrain etc - last Saturday was 27.8kph, but then this was around Cornwall where there is no flat road whatsoever. Today was 39kmh, but sadly only on the turbo.0 -
Even so, that's not to be sneezed at if you're keeping it steady at that speed for three hours! What turbo/resistance do you use?0
-
Must be a pretty crummy lab then, given the sort of rubbish being sprouted.Pokerface wrote:
I'm starting to wonder if you actually ride a bike or just live in a lab!Chiggy wrote:[Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Don't train fasted. It's bad for many reasons.
My last 6 hour ride (in October a Granfondo in California) was 4.2MJ of mechanical work done, which equates to roughly 4600 Cal metabolised.0 -
Zachariah wrote:Even so, that's not to be sneezed at if you're keeping it steady at that speed for three hours! What turbo/resistance do you use?
Its a really old Elite fluid trainer. No idea what model etc - a quick google reveals they don't currently make anything that vaguely resembles it. I can confirm that speed on this turbo has little relation to speed on the road, sadly.0 -
I think the 4K calories thing is a bit of a red herring, although thanks to people for giving some other ways of estimating it better. Being 100Kg, I imagine I'm burning a bit more per mile than a 70kg climber-type?
Anyway, thanks to Pokerface the penny has dropped. I don't need to replace all the calories because some of them come from fat, which is the whole point. As long as I top up the glycogen stores I should be OK. That also explains why I only seem to need to eat the same after an intense sufferfest hour as after an easy 3 hour ride, because they both do about the same to glycogen stocks.
So, the next logical question is:
Is there a way to estimate the % of calories coming from fat at a given intensity, and how do I know where the food eaten on the ride is going? Presumably even when you're completely drained, some of it goes back to fat?
Lastly has anyone read the "Racing Weight" book by Matt Fitzgerald. It looks like it might cover some of this. Is it any good?0 -
G-Wiz wrote:I think the 4K calories thing is a bit of a red herring, although thanks to people for giving some other ways of estimating it better. Being 100Kg, I imagine I'm burning a bit more per mile than a 70kg climber-type?
Anyway, thanks to Pokerface the penny has dropped. I don't need to replace all the calories because some of them come from fat, which is the whole point. As long as I top up the glycogen stores I should be OK. That also explains why I only seem to need to eat the same after an intense sufferfest hour as after an easy 3 hour ride, because they both do about the same to glycogen stocks.
So, the next logical question is:
Is there a way to estimate the % of calories coming from fat at a given intensity, and how do I know where the food eaten on the ride is going? Presumably even when you're completely drained, some of it goes back to fat?
Lastly has anyone read the "Racing Weight" book by Matt Fitzgerald. It looks like it might cover some of this. Is it any good?
I'm way out of my depth here, but maybe this will spark some other comments.
Your weight doesn't necessarily mean you'll burn more calories than a lighter person. It means it's harder to go uphill for you but depending on how you ride up that hill - you will burn the same as a lighter person. Essentially it's all about how much power you use (which is determined by how fast/hard you ride - and the terrain). The lighter guy might ride uphill twice as fast and use more energy than you, even though he is lighter.
Don't know that there is a way to determine fat burning percentages. Isn't the 'fat burning zone' a myth?
One thing I've learned is that it is important to re-stock your fuel with the right stuff. If you don't get enough protein, that weight loss will come at the expense of muscle. (Protein is good also because I think it 'fills you up" and makes you want to eat less.)
I would suggest a low fat diet (obviously!) with a good mix of protein and carbs. Or see a dietician.
Like I said - out of my depth on the science behind weight loss!0 -
Pokerface wrote:Chiggy wrote:[Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Yeah - pretty sure a wide variety of variables (terrain, wind conditions, weight of bike and rider, solo vs group ride, riding position, etc) play a big part in determining calories used.
If you're going uphill or into the wind, it will require more energy to complete a mile, compared to flat (or going downhill, with a tailwind, etc). A flat group ride of 50 miles will use much less cals than a 50 mile solo hilly ride. I'm starting to wonder if you actually ride a bike or just live in a lab!
Checking my Powertap logs (reasonably good estimate of cals used based on power), values range from 1500 to 2200 for 50 miles.
And the only time I have used over 4000 cals in a ride, was the 7.5 hour Cheshire Cat last year and that was 120 miles!
Having a Garmin helps. It does all the inclines and descents for you.
I used 15000 kCals on the 'Everyone rides to Skeggy' 300 a few years back... Wow, was it 12 years ago, how time flies. Didn't have the Garmin then, nor a power meter. Just totalled up the miles and did the simple sums.
Didn't eat that much tho, lost two pounds of fat.
6000 is about the burn for a Rando 200. 3600 eaten 'carbo loading'. Many, many of these done.
For a 300km Midland Mesh, I'd prob eat about 7500 kCals, and lose over a pound of fat ( 0.75% off my Bodyfat percentage ).0 -
The Garmin overestimates calorie expenditure by about 30% in my experience...0
-
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Must be a pretty crummy lab then, given the sort of rubbish being sprouted.Pokerface wrote:
I'm starting to wonder if you actually ride a bike or just live in a lab!Chiggy wrote:[Calorific expenditure is easier to count up by the mile. About 65 - 70 kCals per mile, and the speed at which you cover that mile doesn't make much difference.
Don't train fasted. It's bad for many reasons.
My last 6 hour ride (in October a Granfondo in California) was 4.2MJ of mechanical work done, which equates to roughly 4600 Cal metabolised.
If you're quoting 'mechanical work', I presume you are talking about the results of a PowerTap recording??
This, I beg to suggest is the 'work' you did to move the bike forward and up the hills.
Did you get an estimation of your heat losses? How many calories did you use keeping your skin at the temperature your brain wanted it to be?
As we've already ascertained, the human can be 33% efficient at the best climatic conditions, so multiply your MECHANICAL result by 3 to get a realistic figure for calories used.
How does 13800 grab you?0 -
-
NapoleonD wrote:The Garmin overestimates calorie expenditure by about 30% in my experience...
Garmin employs a 'generic' power curve which it trims by using the weight values you input.
Garmin's kCals calcs assume the air temperature is 20 Deg C and the rider is wearing race kit, thereby suffering windchill by a pre determined amount.
My Garmin is less than 5% in error.
To co-relate the Garmin result, it is neccesary to have a good estimation of the calories expelled through every manner of riding a bike. Then use 20 C, the area of exposed naked skin and the area of damp lycra being subjected to windchill.
I'm happy with my Garmin.
To get a closer value of kCals, you need to input the weather conditions on your spreadsheet and a better estimation of clothing exposure to windchill.
There comes a point where at 10 C, where I put on long trousers, gloves and an extra long sleeve jersey. The kCals used REDUCES due to less energy wasted keeping skin warm.0 -
Fat utilisation percentages?
As soon as you start moving with a low HR, you'll be using glycogen. If the movement persists and the blood CO2 concentration increases, the heart will beat faster and lungs will breath deeper.
When the HR is appropriate to the movement intensity, the system will start using fatty acids as fuel, to a 'pro rata' scale.
My understanding is the 50/50 fat/CHO point is at about 70% MHR.
Any HR below 70% is deemed 'fat burning' because when HR has stabilised, more fat than CHO is used for fuel.0
