When losing weight means losing power

SPOC

When does weight loss start to affect power? I'm down to 138lbs and upped my 20min power to 274w last week from a previous test a month ago at 266w and 142lbs, so I'm losing weight at the moment and still managing to increase power.

But at what point does losing weight become counter productive? Is there a general rule of thumb or is it like most things dependent on the training you are doing and individual make up? I've read quite a few opinions on this but am none the wiser, perhaps I am just being thick.

Also, I am training on a calorie controlled diet and still making fitness gains, in a couple of weeks 135lb is where I want to maintain, can I expect it easier to improve when eating more 'normally?'. I'm generally going around 500-600 under my net calorie needs for the day when also taking into account exercise. I'm not sure whether only eating 500 calories less net in the aim for a 1lb a week weight loss would impact on training greatly.

My training is a mix of HIT, long ride at weekends, commuting 25 miles a day with 1-2 rides in the evening a week on top of my commute. Usually between 10-13 hours on the bike.

Anyway, any advice/opinions would be appreciated.

Cheers.

BrandonA

I think for us mortals the weight lose as long as it is via fat will not really affect our power. I found that as I lost weight it was because I was getting fitter. This meant that my power increased.

I suspect if I were to dedicate myself to cycling full time with a personal trainer then I would discover that I'm nowhere near my potential FTP value.

For a more seasoned cyclist who is at the peak of their performance then weight control is likely to have a bigger impact on power output.

Also remember, an FTP value is just that a value. A more important value is FTP/KG. The higher this value the better as it means you can move your weight more effectively. It is therefore possible to drop weight, see a reduction in your FTPyet become a faster rider as this ratio improves.

teiti93

I wouldn't recommend doing a calorie restricted diet. Eat enough calories, carbs and do your training, and you will naturally drop weight, without fucking up your metabolism.

nick-gti

teiti93 wrote:

I wouldn't recommend doing a calorie restricted diet. Eat enough calories, carbs and do your training, and you will naturally drop weight, without ******* up your metabolism.

Reading that though he is eating 500 calls under his maintenance and effectively eating back to calories he has burned cycling correct?
I can't see a problem with that, eventually your weight loss will stop as your new -500 calories figure will become your maintenance figure at your new weight

SPOC

nick-gti wrote:

teiti93 wrote:

I wouldn't recommend doing a calorie restricted diet. Eat enough calories, carbs and do your training, and you will naturally drop weight, without ******* up your metabolism.

Reading that though he is eating 500 calls under his maintenance and effectively eating back to calories he has burned cycling correct?
I can't see a problem with that, eventually your weight loss will stop as your new -500 calories figure will become your maintenance figure at your new weight

Yes, I'm only ever going 500 under net my daily needs. So I might be eating some days 3500 calories, but net wise that would still be 500 under what I would require given my daily needs + exercise. I was hoping this figure wouldn't really lead to much drastic loss in training potential or power whilst trying to shift a few pounds.

BrandonA wrote:

I think for us mortals the weight lose as long as it is via fat will not really affect our power. I found that as I lost weight it was because I was getting fitter. This meant that my power increased.

I suspect if I were to dedicate myself to cycling full time with a personal trainer then I would discover that I'm nowhere near my potential FTP value.

For a more seasoned cyclist who is at the peak of their performance then weight control is likely to have a bigger impact on power output.

Also remember, an FTP value is just that a value. A more important value is FTP/KG. The higher this value the better as it means you can move your weight more effectively. It is therefore possible to drop weight, see a reduction in your FTPyet become a faster rider as this ratio improves.

Thanks mate, interesting to read your experience. Yeah I realise the importance of w/kg as well, although ideally I'd prefer to improve my w/kg without having to lose a few watts off my FTP but make up for it by losing weight.

nick-gti

If your doing it right which it seem's you are, you're weight lose should be fat loss and not muscle loss. So in theory you're power outputs should go up as body weight goes down as there is less of you to power. In very basic term at least anyway.

3500 cals is a good figure, can't really go wrong if its good nutrition dense food

SPOC

nick-gti wrote:

If your doing it right which it seem's you are, you're weight lose should be fat loss and not muscle loss. So in theory you're power outputs should go up as body weight goes down as there is less of you to power. In very basic term at least anyway.

3500 cals is a good figure, can't really go wrong if its good nutrition dense food

It might not always be 3500 cals, but generally I'm burning a minimum of 1050 a day cycling on a commute, on those days I'll eat give or take +-100 2700 cals. I have a power meter so I know it's a pretty accurate burn rate. Like I say, based on my daily calorific needs I'll leave myself 500 under a day aiming for 1lb a week weight loss.

Thanks anyway, nice to know I seem to be vaguely going down the right road, being relatively new to cycling itself as well as training with power.

SPOC

madasahattersley wrote:

From my experience if I want to lose any weight then I have to eat way less than 3500 calories per day, even with training full time, and I'm a lot bigger than you.

Another thing I found is that when I got down to 72kg I went slower uphill (and much slower on the flat) than when I was 75/76kg. Not always best for everyone to be stick thin.

I'm losing the weight no problem at all, steady and constant even on days where I eat 3500+ calories, as long as you count correctly and know what your body needs to intake it's a pure numbers and science game really. Like I say, I go under 500 calories net a day, so it's pretty much spot on a pound a week for the last 2 months so far in terms of weight loss.

I've never found it that difficult to calorie count and train, I used to do this all the time when trying to lose weight in a previous life as a runner and could balance the need quite well, basically the lighter I could get the faster I could get.

My main concern was just whether or not it got to the point it was being counter productive, I think that part has been answered well.

Interesting that you found a point though where the weight loss was counter productive. I don't think I am there yet though but I'm sure my body will let me know when that time comes around and I lose power.

Thanks for all the useful replies guys.

philbar72

my story is similar to Madashattersly.

my lowest weight this last 6 months was 73kg, and i was weak uphills and couldn't push a big gear at all.

I sit best at 75-77 kg where i can monster a big gear and get up the climbs reasonably. I just have to realise that i'm not going to be a skinny climber.

I also find that mixing your training up is definitely good. some people focus on their strengths, ( for me thats long sprints and short hills where you need a good burst of power thats sustainable). I now focus on longer hills and shorter sprints and its helped me become a bit better all round. not much mind...