Archive for justcycling.myfastforum.org Just Cycling
 


       justcycling.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Dr.Fuentes Consulting Room
smarauder68

Stationary Bike Work

been riding for 30 to 35 minutes after jogging to continue the cardio...what will have the best fat-burning effect?

I've found that riding at Level 10 to 12 around 85 to 90rpm gets my heart going about 150 to 155...is that a safe zone to train in for 30 min?
chasm

Re: Stationary Bike Work

smarauder68 wrote:
been riding for 30 to 35 minutes after jogging to continue the cardio...what will have the best fat-burning effect?

I've found that riding at Level 10 to 12 around 85 to 90rpm gets my heart going about 150 to 155...is that a safe zone to train in for 30 min?


Yes it's perfectly safe, unless you have a cardiac condition. It's probably fine for fat-burning, too. At lower intensities you'd get a higher percentage of your fuel direct from fat stores, but you'd burn fewer calories overall. Here's a link that explains it. (A good website fot lots of training hints, by the way).http://www.brianmac.co.uk/fatburn.htm
Bartali

Tex - My understanding is that riding at about 70% of max HR will be best for fat burning.
Also perfectly safe - subject to heart problems.  I regularly train 165-170 bpm for over an hour.

I think you are about the same age as me so I'm guessing your max HR wil be in the order of 175 - 180bpm.  So at 155bpm you are perhaps a tad too high for max fat burning.
thunderthighs

boring !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ciao
CapeRoadie

The best fat burning effect is interval training.  Weightlifting (anaerobic) will burn more fat than cardio, unless your cardio is interval training where you go anaerobic (i.e., out of breath).
smarauder68

Bartali wrote:
Tex - My understanding is that riding at about 70% of max HR will be best for fat burning.
Also perfectly safe - subject to heart problems.  I regularly train 165-170 bpm for over an hour.

I think you are about the same age as me so I'm guessing your max HR wil be in the order of 175 - 180bpm.  So at 155bpm you are perhaps a tad too high for max fat burning.


Sometimes when I push the level up to 12 to 14, I get my heart rate up and over 160...but I'm aware that higher heart rates dont neccessarily burn the most calories and fat.....I just want something that improves my cardio endurance while also burning calories and fat...I only have about 35 minutes for the bike work and usually start slow for the first 10 minutes and build up to a more frenetic pace over the last 15 min....does this sound like a smart way to attack it?
cyclingtv

smarauder68 wrote:
Sometimes when I push the level up to 12 to 14, I get my heart rate up and over 160...but I'm aware that higher heart rates dont neccessarily burn the most calories and fat.....I just want something that improves my cardio endurance while also burning calories and fat...I only have about 35 minutes for the bike work and usually start slow for the first 10 minutes and build up to a more frenetic pace over the last 15 min....does this sound like a smart way to attack it?
imo
if you are doing this very day all that jogging will improve your cardio plenty enough..

true.. the higher your heart rate the faster you burn calories..  
but those calories will not be coming from fat stores first..
at higher cardio rates you'll burn from sugar stores first..
once depleted your body will start to burn protein too..
as an energy source by breaking down muscle also ..
you see your fat stores break down at a slower rate..
losing fat is a slower process and takes more time..

as bartali says.. take 220 less your age times 70%.. keep your heart rate around there.. it may take longer to lose that weight but it will be moreso fat rather than muscle..  be patient.. as a bonus.. you'll find that when you workout at the lower HR you won't feel as ravenous after..
CapeRoadie

smarauder68 wrote:
Bartali wrote:
Tex - My understanding is that riding at about 70% of max HR will be best for fat burning.
Also perfectly safe - subject to heart problems.  I regularly train 165-170 bpm for over an hour.

I think you are about the same age as me so I'm guessing your max HR wil be in the order of 175 - 180bpm.  So at 155bpm you are perhaps a tad too high for max fat burning.


Sometimes when I push the level up to 12 to 14, I get my heart rate up and over 160...but I'm aware that higher heart rates dont neccessarily burn the most calories and fat.....I just want something that improves my cardio endurance while also burning calories and fat...I only have about 35 minutes for the bike work and usually start slow for the first 10 minutes and build up to a more frenetic pace over the last 15 min....does this sound like a smart way to attack it?


No, not smart at all.  Your peak energy expenditure should be in the middle of the workout, not at either end!

And wrong!  A higher heart rate always burns more calories!

Try this:

Go hard for 30 seconds then rest or very easy 15 seconds, then repeat for 20-30 minutes.  You'll burn more calories than if you just go easy for 30 minutes.  Warm-up and cool down for 5 minutes each.

This is a proven and well-researched method for fat-burning.  Going slow will teach your body how to conserve fat, not burn it.
CapeRoadie

cyclingtv wrote:
...true.. the higher your heart rate the faster you burn calories..  
but those calories will not be coming from fat stores first..
at higher cardio rates you'll burn from sugar stores first..
once depleted your body will start to burn protein too..
as an energy source by breaking down muscle also ..
you see your fat stores break down at a slower rate..
losing fat is a slower process and takes more time...


Much of what you're saying is myth and nonsense.  Yes, if you go anaerobic you'll burn calories from glycogen stores and circulating sugars, however, during the period of oxygen debt you will burn more calories overall and burn more fat.  Further, when you go aerobic again after catching your breath, you'll be burning more calories aerobically than with an easier ride/jog because the HR will usually be higher.  smarauder won't be working out hard enough or long enough to ever worry about burning muscle tissues, so that point is absolutely irrelevant.  You're talking about exercise duration of two hours or more to burn muscle tissue, as in ultra-endurance events such as the marathon.  You'd have to go through ALL of your fat and glycogen stores to start worrying about burning muscle tissues.  Ain't gonna happen in 35 minutes NO WAY.  Losing fat does not have to be a slow process whatsoever; but to be healthy, a person should lose no more than 1-2 lbs. per week.
CapeRoadie

Bartali wrote:
Tex - My understanding is that riding at about 70% of max HR will be best for fat burning.
Also perfectly safe - subject to heart problems.  I regularly train 165-170 bpm for over an hour.

I think you are about the same age as me so I'm guessing your max HR wil be in the order of 175 - 180bpm.  So at 155bpm you are perhaps a tad too high for max fat burning.


All wrong.  Fat burning is best with interval training.  Going anaerobic and recovering aerobically will simply burn more calories, and thus more fat in the end.  What you wrote is a common myth and the truth is poorly understood.  Going anaerobic will also build more muscle mass and that, in turn, will also make the body more efficient at burning fat.

Intervals are best for fat-burning, period.  If you had 35 minutes to burn fat, then the best way to do it would be weightlifting (which is interval training) or other interval training.  We're not talking cardiovascular health here, we're talking fat-burning, and they are two very different things.

The 220 minus age and other formuale are all completely unsatisfactory for figuring out HRmax.  Further, HRmax is different for different sports within the SAME person!  smarauder should use a HR monitor, usually built in to a stationary bike at a health club.  Do 20 minutes at max tempo you can hold steady for 20 minutes after a 10-minutes warm-up and that's roughly anaerobic threshold.  Spin as fast as you can and go as hard as you can for 60 seconds, and you'll find HRmax.  Easy.
cyclingtv

CapeRoadie wrote:
Much of what you're saying is myth and nonsense.  Yes, if you go anaerobic you'll burn calories from glycogen stores and circulating sugars, however, during the period of oxygen debt you will burn more calories overall and burn more fat.  Further, when you go aerobic again after catching your breath, you'll be burning more calories aerobically than with an easier ride/jog because the HR will usually be higher.  smarauder won't be working out hard enough or long enough to ever worry about burning muscle tissues, so that point is absolutely irrelevant.  You're talking about exercise duration of two hours or more to burn muscle tissue, as in ultra-endurance events such as the marathon.  You'd have to go through ALL of your fat and glycogen stores to start worrying about burning muscle tissues.  Ain't gonna happen in 35 minutes NO WAY.  Losing fat does not have to be a slow process whatsoever; but to be healthy, a person should lose no more than 1-2 lbs. per week.
can't dispute much of your analysis.. the length of the workout is a big factor but  
when you say burn "ALL" your fat first didn't you mean the fat that is readily found
in the bloodstream and liver and not "ALL" the fat that is stored in the bodies fat cells..
so you'll agree after the bodies "readily available fat" reserves are depleted then the
body begins metabolizing protein also.. not once "ALL" the bodies fat is depleted Embarassed

let's remember we don't now how long SM is "jogging" for
from what SM has told us so far.. we don't have that info
the total workout time could be much longer than 35 minutes
but you're quite right to "assume" it would be under 2 hours Wink
smarauder68

cyclingtv wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Much of what you're saying is myth and nonsense.  Yes, if you go anaerobic you'll burn calories from glycogen stores and circulating sugars, however, during the period of oxygen debt you will burn more calories overall and burn more fat.  Further, when you go aerobic again after catching your breath, you'll be burning more calories aerobically than with an easier ride/jog because the HR will usually be higher.  smarauder won't be working out hard enough or long enough to ever worry about burning muscle tissues, so that point is absolutely irrelevant.  You're talking about exercise duration of two hours or more to burn muscle tissue, as in ultra-endurance events such as the marathon.  You'd have to go through ALL of your fat and glycogen stores to start worrying about burning muscle tissues.  Ain't gonna happen in 35 minutes NO WAY.  Losing fat does not have to be a slow process whatsoever; but to be healthy, a person should lose no more than 1-2 lbs. per week.
can't dispute much of your analysis.. the length of the workout is a big factor but  
when you say burn "ALL" your fat first didn't you mean the fat that is readily found
in the bloodstream and liver and not "ALL" the fat that is stored in the bodies fat cells..
so you'll agree after the bodies "readily available fat" reserves are depleted then the
body begins metabolizing protein also.. not once "ALL" the bodies fat is depleted Embarassed

let's remember we don't now how long SM is "jogging" for
from what SM has told us so far.. we don't have that info
the total workout time could be much longer than 35 minutes
but you're quite right to "assume" it would be under 2 hours Wink


I generally jog about 25 to 30 minutes on a treadmill and then switch to the bike to continue the workout....I used to just jog for 45 minutes but I'm taking it easier on my knees. I only have about ah hour or hour 15 for my time in the gym.
cyclingtv

that being what it is.. give what cape suggests a try.. good luck..
Bartali

I stand corrected for perpetuating common myths Wink

CapeRoadie wrote:
Spin as fast as you can and go as hard as you can for 60 seconds, and you'll find HRmax.  Easy.


In true WWE fashion .... don't try this at home (alone)!!

It aint easy!
CapeRoadie

cyclingtv wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Much of what you're saying is myth and nonsense.  Yes, if you go anaerobic you'll burn calories from glycogen stores and circulating sugars, however, during the period of oxygen debt you will burn more calories overall and burn more fat.  Further, when you go aerobic again after catching your breath, you'll be burning more calories aerobically than with an easier ride/jog because the HR will usually be higher.  smarauder won't be working out hard enough or long enough to ever worry about burning muscle tissues, so that point is absolutely irrelevant.  You're talking about exercise duration of two hours or more to burn muscle tissue, as in ultra-endurance events such as the marathon.  You'd have to go through ALL of your fat and glycogen stores to start worrying about burning muscle tissues.  Ain't gonna happen in 35 minutes NO WAY.  Losing fat does not have to be a slow process whatsoever; but to be healthy, a person should lose no more than 1-2 lbs. per week.
can't dispute much of your analysis.. the length of the workout is a big factor but  
when you say burn "ALL" your fat first didn't you mean the fat that is readily found
in the bloodstream and liver and not "ALL" the fat that is stored in the bodies fat cells..
so you'll agree after the bodies "readily available fat" reserves are depleted then the
body begins metabolizing protein also.. not once "ALL" the bodies fat is depleted Embarassed

let's remember we don't now how long SM is "jogging" for
from what SM has told us so far.. we don't have that info
the total workout time could be much longer than 35 minutes
but you're quite right to "assume" it would be under 2 hours Wink


Yes available fat.  sm has no worries at 35 minutes was my point.  Thought he said he has 35 minutes.  Still, anything under 2 hours and he isn't going to bonk or "hit the wall" (burn muscle for fuel).  And if he simply supplies the blood with sugar during his workout (e.g., by sipping Gatorade or similar every 10 minutes), there's no way he'll be using muscle as a fuel substrate.
CapeRoadie

smarauder68 wrote:
cyclingtv wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Much of what you're saying is myth and nonsense.  Yes, if you go anaerobic you'll burn calories from glycogen stores and circulating sugars, however, during the period of oxygen debt you will burn more calories overall and burn more fat.  Further, when you go aerobic again after catching your breath, you'll be burning more calories aerobically than with an easier ride/jog because the HR will usually be higher.  smarauder won't be working out hard enough or long enough to ever worry about burning muscle tissues, so that point is absolutely irrelevant.  You're talking about exercise duration of two hours or more to burn muscle tissue, as in ultra-endurance events such as the marathon.  You'd have to go through ALL of your fat and glycogen stores to start worrying about burning muscle tissues.  Ain't gonna happen in 35 minutes NO WAY.  Losing fat does not have to be a slow process whatsoever; but to be healthy, a person should lose no more than 1-2 lbs. per week.
can't dispute much of your analysis.. the length of the workout is a big factor but  
when you say burn "ALL" your fat first didn't you mean the fat that is readily found
in the bloodstream and liver and not "ALL" the fat that is stored in the bodies fat cells..
so you'll agree after the bodies "readily available fat" reserves are depleted then the
body begins metabolizing protein also.. not once "ALL" the bodies fat is depleted Embarassed

let's remember we don't now how long SM is "jogging" for
from what SM has told us so far.. we don't have that info
the total workout time could be much longer than 35 minutes
but you're quite right to "assume" it would be under 2 hours Wink


I generally jog about 25 to 30 minutes on a treadmill and then switch to the bike to continue the workout....I used to just jog for 45 minutes but I'm taking it easier on my knees. I only have about ah hour or hour 15 for my time in the gym.


Start doing lateral band walks for your knees.
CapeRoadie

Bartali wrote:
I stand corrected for perpetuating common myths Wink

CapeRoadie wrote:
Spin as fast as you can and go as hard as you can for 60 seconds, and you'll find HRmax.  Easy.


In true WWE fashion .... don't try this at home (alone)!!

It aint easy!


60 seconds, Bartali...  Laughing
MerlinGuy

CapeRoadie wrote:
Spin as fast as you can and go as hard as you can for 60 seconds, and you'll find HRmax.  Easy.


60 seconds or until the whole world starts to turn pink, your peripheral vision is reduced to the size of a dime, and the heart beat in your ears sounds like a Chinook helicopter is landing right behind you.
CapeRoadie

Laughing  The master of simile and metaphor has returned!

"You ever kill anybody?"

"I hurt somebody's feelings once."
MerlinGuy

CapeRoadie wrote:
Laughing  The master of simile and metaphor has returned!

"You ever kill anybody?"

"I hurt somebody's feelings once."



"Lessee, two parts gin, one part brandy, one part Creme de Menthe... "
berck

I found this article today about burning fat as fuel on a ride.
CapeRoadie

So tired of these M.S., R.D.'s, who are really good at making large vats of really disgusting spaghetti as cheaply as possible for hospital patient menus also trying to offer  sports medicine advice.  I'd rather read what the PhD's in sports nutrition are saying.  Anyway, what Ryan, the Nancy Clark of cycling nutrition, is saying is pretty basic stuff, and she writes it in a very confusing and convoluted fashion.  She suffers from using too many words to say very little, a classic Strunk & White faux pas.  For example, she writes:

Quote:
For example, one study measured the effects of carbohydrate feeding at 30, 60, and 90 minutes intervals and compared the results to cyclists who received no carbohydrate at all during a two-hour ride at 65 percent VO2 max. The carbohydrate feeding did decrease fatty acids available for fuel later in the ride, but ultimately there was no effect on how much fat was used for fuel. What the carbohydrate feedings actually did was maintain blood glucose levels, which can be used as fuel. Muscle glycogen use was not actually affected by the carbohydrate feedings.


Jesus Christ, lady!  All you just said was:

1.  If you eat carbs during a ride, you'll use carbs for energy, and if you don't you'll burn what's available:   fats.  GENIUS!!!!

Fuck.

2.  She's wrong.  Muscle glycogen is SPARED if there is increased glucose in the bloodstream.

Another example of this type of VELOSNOOZE writing:

Quote:
Endurance training itself is likely the most important factor in turning up fat burning, particularly muscle fat, and ultimately losing body fat. Weight loss efforts aside, your best performance results are more likely to come from completing training rides at the desired intensity and duration. This also ensures that your energy output is high, ultimately working in favor of losing body fat.


WTF!!!  What does any of that nonsense actually mean?  Who the fuck knows?  She hasn't defined "endurance training".  She says "your best performance results" come from "completing training rides at the desired intensity and duration".  That's really fucking telling us a lot, isn't it?!  Oooh, "energy output is high" must lead to "losing body fat".  Really in-depth shit, that, isn't it?

Imagine... exercising harder and longer, and burning more calories.  No wonder people who read this shit are actually more confused.  Sorry, berck, that type of writing is crap.  Can't stand it.  Speak clearly, use the language, say it succinctly.  Hate that kind of writing.  I bought one of Ryan's books last year hoping for something interesting.  She could have written it all in about 10 pages instead of 300.  She should go back to school to learn how to write.
cyclingtv

CapeRoadie wrote:
Yes available fat.  sm has no worries at 35 minutes was my point.  Thought he said he has 35 minutes.  Still, anything under 2 hours and he isn't going to bonk or "hit the wall" (burn muscle for fuel).  And if he simply supplies the blood with sugar during his workout (e.g., by sipping Gatorade or similar every 10 minutes), there's no way he'll be using muscle as a fuel substrate.
one technique used by early risers is to drink only water in the morning and go to
the club for a daily workout at a steady pace for an hour or so drinking only water..
afterwards drink plenty of water, wait a couple hours. follow with a 'soy/whey' protein shake..
targets fat stores as both availble fat and sugar are low and the protein helps recovery..
they then have a normal lunch and dinner.. I've tried it and lost about 2+ lbs a week of fat..
I felt great all the while and didn't get overly tired.. btw cape.. don't bite my head off now.. ok Very Happy
CapeRoadie

cyclingtv wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Yes available fat.  sm has no worries at 35 minutes was my point.  Thought he said he has 35 minutes.  Still, anything under 2 hours and he isn't going to bonk or "hit the wall" (burn muscle for fuel).  And if he simply supplies the blood with sugar during his workout (e.g., by sipping Gatorade or similar every 10 minutes), there's no way he'll be using muscle as a fuel substrate.
one technique used by early risers is to drink only water in the morning and go to
the club for a daily workout at a steady pace for an hour or so drinking only water..
afterwards drink plenty of water, wait a couple hours. follow with a 'soy/whey' protein shake..
targets fat stores as both availble fat and sugar are low and the protein helps recovery..
they then have a normal lunch and dinner.. I've tried it and lost about 2+ lbs a week of fat..
I felt great all the while and didn't get overly tired.. btw cape.. don't bite my head off now.. ok Very Happy


Limiting carbs is what a lot of pros do in the off-season.  In a build period, no way, but for base training many say it works!

Breakfast is still the most important meal of the day, however...

CHOMP!
berck

CapeRoadie wrote:
Sorry, berck, that type of writing is crap.


No apologies necessary. I wasn't saying I agreed with her. I did notice some confusing things. I just thought I'd throw it in for discussion since fat burning had been discussed here.

Many people rely on what the learned and never really push beyond that. Sometimes things change, or lets say, theories change on how things work.
Jackov

So what should I do, eat or not eat during my ride*



*hour ride to pub, 2-4 pints over next hours, ride home.
last km

Don't eat, it occupies space required by the beer........
MerlinGuy

CapeRoadie wrote:
Sorry, berck, that type of writing is crap.


Where were you when Carmicheal was handing out advice during TdF broadcasts?
CapeRoadie

MerlinGuy wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Sorry, berck, that type of writing is crap.


Where were you when Carmicheal was handing out advice during TdF broadcasts?


I know, but that was just soundbite TV.  I didn't expect much.  I expect more from a hundred-plus page book.  Some of his stuff is pretty good, anyway, if you read him.
MerlinGuy

CapeRoadie wrote:
MerlinGuy wrote:
CapeRoadie wrote:
Sorry, berck, that type of writing is crap.


Where were you when Carmicheal was handing out advice during TdF broadcasts?


I know, but that was just soundbite TV.  I didn't expect much.  I expect more from a hundred-plus page book.  Some of his stuff is pretty good, anyway, if you read him.


Doesn't matter what type of bread you use, a crap sandwich is a crap sandwich.
thunderthighs

berck wrote:
I found this article today about burning fat as fuel on a ride.


thats called an anobolic diet..does work, but its not for all...

ciao

       justcycling.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Dr.Fuentes Consulting Room
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum