I'm not a doctor but…
Cycling injury, recovery and health issues.
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
12 posts • Page 1 of 1
Hi all, I have a question for those who know a bit about training, cardio, weight loss etc.
I’m in the process of trying to lose weight, about halfway to my goal (ie BMI under 25). I ride 3-4 times per week, and for the last few months I had been predominantly riding one particular route during my lunch hour, which is an 18km ride with a vertical climb of about 400-450m. I was doing this on the assumption that doing more hills was “better”.
A week or two ago, I was comparing statistics from my Garmin and noticed that my average HR on this ride was about 140bpm, but my average HR on our local cycleway (quite flat) is about 150bpm riding for the same duration. It didn’t take long to figure out that this was because on the flat ride, I am able to maintain a consistent intensity for the whole ride, whereas on the hill ride I am coasting for about 1/3 of the time while descending back to the office (my HR drops to 100-120bpm).
Objectively speaking, the flat ride is theoretically better (isn’t it?) for achieving weight loss, but is a mere 10bpm going to make any real difference over the course of a 50min ride?
quoting figures from the chart mentioned above
Total Fat calorie expended in 30 min
Low intensity 73
high intensity 82
this would make moderate intensity say 77
the problem is you may only be able to maintain high intensity for say an hour, total 164
moderate intensity you could maintain for 3 hours..................................total 462
not enough hours in the day for low intensity fat burning for most of us
due to time constraints i have switched from long 4hr plus rides to shorter high intensity rides of two hours and despite improving my average speed by 3kph and going at 90 to 95 % of capacity i have lost no weight at all maintaining the same cal intake
after reading as much science as i could understand on cycling and weight loss it seems that the most benificial effort is a bit above moderate for as long as you have time
of course if you only have half an hour at lunch times you should be going flat out( all imo)
Yes, well this kind of gets to my concern, which I didn't really adequately set out above. Comparing:
Hilly ride: 35min (AT) 160bpm, 15min (AT) 120bpm
Flat ride: 50min (AT) 150bpm
They both have approximately the same average HR (give or take), and roughly the same kcal consumption, but one has a consistent intensity, whereas the other I'm not working for about 30% of the time.
Where I'm getting to is trying to decide how often to ride each given ride. I'm thinking that in the interests of my knees (higher cadence on the flat), if both rides have similar energy consumption then I should be doing more rides on the flat course, and maybe doing the hilly course once a week for strength.
Maybe I'm fussing over nothing much anyway
Well, 18km ride... If you start climbing the moment you leave the office you would be climbing a 5% grade for 9kms to do 450m vertical ... That's a really big hill!.
Back on topic ... ;-p ... Hilly ride is 35 minutes ... Flat ride is 50 minutes. On the flat you can push hard for 40min (5 min warm and down)... That's going to give you more of a work out than say 20 minutes of climbing with rest coasting.
But then you could do the hilly ride and turn around to do another 15 minutes when you normally finish.
All depends how hard you are pushing yourself... And if you are riding on an empty stomach you might get better weight loss as the body has to find fuel from somewhere ( although 50 minutes probably won't deplete glycogen levels that much ).
toolonglegs, here in Hobart:
We have a few hills. From my office, I have the choice of several different climbs - Strickland Ave/Fern Tree (400-500m, the ride I've been talking about), Bonnet Hill (about 200m) and Mt Nelson (300m), all of which I can do in an hour, or there's the bike track, which is dead flat and about 18km one way.
Here's Strickland Ave (although not to Fern Tree), although I think you've misread me, it takes me 35min to the top, then 15min back to the office. It's about 1/3 of the way up Mt Wellington pictured above:
The graph is a bit weird, because the data says 438m elevation, but that might due to some up and down on the way up. Some guys I know extend this to the Springs on Mt Wellington, which is 700m in their lunchhour!
and the bike track:
Thanks for your thoughts - I feel I can push myself harder on the bike track, primarily because I'm not in traffic. I'm also more able to do sprints for the same reason on certain Strava segments. Sometimes I ride on an empty stomach, others I don't - this depends on what my diabetes is doing!
Just checking... some people WAY over estimate meters climbed.
If you are climbing for 35 minutes and have a bit of a warm up first then do that hard when you are feeling fresh, do the flatter bike path at a steadier pace on days when you are feeling it a bit. Either way it is all about consistency ... are you getting at least one long ride in a week?... those are the rides that really get the fat moving due to using up all your energy stores.
I get 2-4 lunchtime rides in (as above), and on the weekends I usually get out for 1.5-2hrs. I've been averaging around 70km/week, which I'm trying to lift to 100km/week. For the last 6 months on the weekends I've been predominantly mountain biking (due to new toy acquisition), which sacrifices distance/speed for gradient - but the time riding is roughly the same and the HR is also usually around 150 average. It's been a while since I've done a long ride on the roadie as a result...
A long ride is time wise...not km's. Yeah we quote km's per week a lot but hours per week would be a better of measure of the amount we do.
You would probably see a big improvement if you could get a 2-3 hour ride in once every couple of weeks or so... might hurt to start with (well not on the mtb because you will be having to much fun ) but you adapt to it quickly.
Last year i lost 32kg's going from 117kgs to 90kg (i put back on 5kg), looking at my Strava data i averaged around 4-5hours a week on the bike over 8 months at average speeds of say 28-29km/h and diligently recorded calories consumed and calories burned, which for me was the biggest contributor making sure that i was using more calories than i put in, and it worked as my goal was to lose weight more so than build fitness. I now ride 10-12 hours a week and my mind has shifted to being the fittest cyclist i can be as opposed to just losing weight.
I wouldn't worry about being critical of 10bpm here or there or worrying about a fat burning zone, it all gets in the way of how easy weight loss can actually be with the right mind set alongside simple healthy(or moderated) diet and exercise.
Depends, You would think that doing more hills would burn more callories but if you do the same ks on the flat you could easily burn more callories buy just pushing yourself faster, if your legs hurt that means you have worked the muscles and, when you work the muscles they need energy to repair the muscle cells inter burning calories. But there is a fine line between over working your muscles if you over work your muscles this is doing more damage than good, if you get up in the morning and you muscles hurt dont work the same muscles that hurt again becouse when they hurt that means they have not fully repaired them selfs,
12 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: bongo