# Weight loss training?



## BoneDigger (Aug 5, 2006)

Which is better for weight loss, 1) long, moderately paced rides, or 2) shorter more intense rides (such as intervals)?

Todd


----------



## Spunout (Aug 12, 2002)

Longer moderately paced rides.


----------



## BLUEMEANIE (Mar 16, 2009)

^ You might be correct but I thought hard sprint intervals would be better for building lean muscle, increasing metabolism and in turn burning more fat.


----------



## BoneDigger (Aug 5, 2006)

You may both be right, and thus my confusion. I thought longer moderate paced rides would be in the "fat burning" zone longer and thus burn more fat, but a recent article in Men's Health kind of has me thinking intervals are better. I'm confused...

Todd


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

3) eating less


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

u want base miles.... training in zone one has been backed by many studies to train the body to burn body fat - higher intensity training will trip you anaerobic quite quickly (especially when you're unfit), burning glycogen in your muscle more than anything else...

i get what is being said for intervals - but cycling really doesn't bulk you up - you just get more efficient - go to the gym for that.

the common sense way to do it is to cycle at zone 1 - that is as brisk as you can while maintaining the ability to say a whole sentence out loud usu. around 130-140bpm...

eat the majority of carbs before riding, and always only in the morning - mid afternoon. off the bike curb your calories and catch up on veggies, and some fruit.

stick to wholefoods/grains. common-sense basically.


----------



## aussiebullet (Sep 26, 2005)

wankski said:


> u want base miles.... training in zone one has been backed by many studies to train the body to burn body fat - higher intensity training will trip you anaerobic quite quickly (especially when you're unfit), burning glycogen in your muscle more than anything else...
> 
> i get what is being said for intervals - but cycling really doesn't bulk you up - you just get more efficient - go to the gym for that.
> 
> ...



Just to clarify the body doesn't need to be trained how to burn fat it will do so from word go as long as the intensity is low enough that there is no need to draw on glycogen : as an example when doing 5min @ VO2 followed by 5min rest your not drawing glycogen at rest but still your burning alot of kcals while recovering to start your next 5min VO2 yet you are not "training your body to burn fat" but the focus is on improving power @ VO2 in this instance. Zone 1 is also active recovery not intended for anything other than taking your bike for a walk and getting a little blodd flow to the legs following hard training or racing and is usually less than 2hrs and will burn next to no kcals, zone 2 is where it is at, you will burn the most amout of kcal's in this zone in one day and be able to repeat for consecutive days without too much fatigue. Agree with the rest of your post.
For me weightloss does not happen on the bike but happens in the kitchen. l build power and or endurance (CTL) on the bike and just count calories to lose weight. l can move my weight up down and round and round a simple rule for me is : to eat well before during and after training, if l am not training but l eat than l move. Kcal's in V's kcal's burnt it is really that simple there is no magic zone just mathematics.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

yeah - it is junk words used by many guides - of course the body uses different sources of energy at the same time to do work, you just want to monopolise the use of the type you want to get rid of. 

sorry about the zones confusion - it is variable - as my post above alludes to, it was not intended as an easy zone 1 in the traditional 5 zone chart that is popular in gyms - rather more akin to 3 zones, kinda like this one: http://www.ultracycle.net/monitor/zt.php

point being that the bulk nutritional information out there is right - its an in out arithmetic, you wanna ride hard, but not doing silly things such as trying to break yourself on the bike while restricting calories - its pretty unsustainable IME. One of the best things i learnt on the bike was eating properly, feeling destroyed after a hard ride is not fun.


----------



## BoneDigger (Aug 5, 2006)

Thanks for the great advice. To clarify, I realize that I have to expend more calories in order to lose weight. I started out at 265 and am now down to 210; that's a 55 lb loss. I am healthier and happier, but I still have another 30 lbs to lose. I am now back to riding again, and I love this sport. I just want to use the bike in the most efficient manner to lose the weight I still need to lose. I am not training for a race, although I plan to do a metric century in September. Most of my rides are lunch rides of about 20 miles, averaging aound 14 mph. On Fridays I ride a 2.5 hour ride at about the same pace (almost 35 miles). I count every calorie in and every one expended with a program on my Ipod Touch. 

So, without a heart rate monitor, I don't know my heartrate while riding. Is a monitor necessary, or can I get by without one? Does the above schedule sound OK, or do I need to up the speed? The duration is about all I have time for right now. Maybe later this summer I can throw in some longer rides on Saturday or Sunday.

Ideas?

Todd


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

great work todd, keep it up...

normally i would say more hours on the bike, but those stats reveal that something maybe amiss w/ speed... 35mi in 2.5h sounds a little on the low side, so your tempo may not be high enough (unless that is an insanely steep ride)....

no, u do not need a HRM - they're a bit like cadence meters, u use them at the beginning to get an idea, then rarely pay attention to them... as i mentioned above, u wanna push yourself yet not to the point where you become breathless, u want to be able to speak with some effort a full sentence at that tempo - and hold it there.... are you pushing all the way on your current rides? 

with limited time, the truth is cycling isn't that time efficient - u may see better results with running if your knees are fine, and ~200lbs is a good time to start. I know... boooring.... but you may want to consider cross training at least a little (maybe one lunchtime session to begin with?) - running will help your aerobic fitness too. 

best of luck!


----------



## BoneDigger (Aug 5, 2006)

I do a lot of treadmill work between rides. My average speed is 14 mph on most rides. My area (east Texas) is hilly, but not mountainous. I get a lot of speed on descents and not much on climbs.

Todd


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

which is heavier? a pound of lead or a pound of feathers?


----------



## ganginwood (Dec 4, 2006)

wankski said:


> training in zone one has been backed by many studies to train the body to burn body fat - .


these studies talk about the body using fat for energy. it has nothing to do with "burning fat" fat is a dirty fuel.

as the intensity increases...the body is searching for a cleaner fuel. this is where it looks for protein and carbs.

riding slow isn't burning fat to lose weight. its buring fat for fuel. you lose weight by burning calories....and you obviuosly burn more calories from riding harder.


----------



## V5CVBB (Oct 4, 2008)

The feathers of course. They would require the larger container. 

Todd. I'm down to 208 from 267 so we are in similar places. I find that no matter how hard I work, my weight is determined by my diet. Much more so now than when I was heavier. 

What has been working for me is 2 or 3 hard rides per week with all the miles I can get time for at a slower pace just to burn calories. I use a HR monitor and I've found that at 70-75% maxHR I can do 60-90min on the easy days without taking too much out of me recovery wise. This lets me get my training in to boost LT and V02max while riding nearly everyday to just burn calories. 

The hard days really burn the calories, but many of us can't do many of those per week. My main use for my HR monitor is making sure my easy days stay fairly easy.

Kevin


----------

