A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Figuring out calories burned?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old September 8th 04, 11:02 PM
Terry Morse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

gds wrote:

And what good does knowing this do? I'm serious. I mean if you have
fun keeping track of this that's fine with me. But what nutritional
value does it add? Will you eat more to make up a "deficit" or eat
less because you in "surplus"?


Yes. If I burn more calories than usual on a given day, I'll eat
more that evening. If it was a particularly long day (5000+ kcal),
I'll even eat two dinners. I'll still eat the same amount during a
ride, just to keep from bonking. I can't afford to lose any weight,
so the calorie monitor keeps me from doing that.

--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
Ads
  #42  
Old September 9th 04, 07:38 PM
gds
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Terry Morse wrote in message ...
gds wrote:

And what good does knowing this do? I'm serious. I mean if you have
fun keeping track of this that's fine with me. But what nutritional
value does it add? Will you eat more to make up a "deficit" or eat
less because you in "surplus"?


Yes. If I burn more calories than usual on a given day, I'll eat
more that evening. If it was a particularly long day (5000+ kcal),
I'll even eat two dinners. I'll still eat the same amount during a
ride, just to keep from bonking. I can't afford to lose any weight,
so the calorie monitor keeps me from doing that.



Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.
I'm sorry and don't mean to be attacking anyone. But my experience in
sports and training has now run about 50 years. This includes years of
training for sports in which weight was critical-wrestling, boxing,
karate-as well as running and cycling and I have neve once needed to
calculate calories burned.
Well perhaps my age (60) has something to do with it. When I was
really serious about training there was no such calculator.
Again, I have no problem with folks doing this but it certainly isn't
necessary.
  #43  
Old September 9th 04, 07:38 PM
gds
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Terry Morse wrote in message ...
gds wrote:

And what good does knowing this do? I'm serious. I mean if you have
fun keeping track of this that's fine with me. But what nutritional
value does it add? Will you eat more to make up a "deficit" or eat
less because you in "surplus"?


Yes. If I burn more calories than usual on a given day, I'll eat
more that evening. If it was a particularly long day (5000+ kcal),
I'll even eat two dinners. I'll still eat the same amount during a
ride, just to keep from bonking. I can't afford to lose any weight,
so the calorie monitor keeps me from doing that.



Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.
I'm sorry and don't mean to be attacking anyone. But my experience in
sports and training has now run about 50 years. This includes years of
training for sports in which weight was critical-wrestling, boxing,
karate-as well as running and cycling and I have neve once needed to
calculate calories burned.
Well perhaps my age (60) has something to do with it. When I was
really serious about training there was no such calculator.
Again, I have no problem with folks doing this but it certainly isn't
necessary.
  #44  
Old September 9th 04, 07:51 PM
David Reuteler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

gds wrote:
Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.


this doesn't work for me when burning a *LOT* of calories (5,000+ cals
on high mileage days) for days on end. for me this usually means touring
and yea, i've lost a fair bit of weight without being hungry in the
slightest. i have to make a mental note to eat more than i feel is
"correct" and i'm not exactly carrying around a lot of body fat (6'2" 175).

in normal usage i don't have this problem & weight maintenance is pretty
easy.
--
david reuteler

  #45  
Old September 9th 04, 08:06 PM
Terry Morse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

gds wrote:

Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.


No, I don't typically feel more hungry after a hard day in the
saddle. If anything, my appetite is supressed for several hours.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
  #46  
Old September 9th 04, 11:02 PM
gds
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Reuteler wrote in message ...
gds wrote:
Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.


this doesn't work for me when burning a *LOT* of calories (5,000+ cals
on high mileage days) for days on end. for me this usually means touring
and yea, i've lost a fair bit of weight without being hungry in the
slightest. i have to make a mental note to eat more than i feel is
"correct" and i'm not exactly carrying around a lot of body fat (6'2" 175).

in normal usage i don't have this problem & weight maintenance is pretty
easy.


Interesting! I understand about not feeling especially hungry when
going through periods of very high work levels- I think exhaustion
tempers the hunger feeling. But I (and most other folks I think) know
that when you do really big days- 80+ miles say- that you are going to
need to eat a little extra. In a period in which you sustain burning
5000 calories per day for several days you will lose weight at any
level of fitness as I think it very hard to replace that quantity and
have the digestive system work well enough to sustain the work.
But back to the issue. What good does an (inaccurate) caloric
consumption estimator do? At any level to be useful it would have to
be accurate and then you would have to be equally accurate at
measuring the calories that you consume- another less than accurate
activity other than in laboratories.
I think I'll just stick with having another glass of red wine with
that extra slice of lasagna. Oh! and I'll have that cookie over there
too!

Seriously, can't most of you who work out regularly estimate your
weight within 2 lbs? I have a pretty good sense of both water loss and
actual weight change in that range as do most of my sports friends. I
too am lean and am not interested in losing weight as a goal- but I do
keep track of it because I find that my performance is best within a
quite small range.
  #47  
Old September 11th 04, 06:17 PM
Claire Petersky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevan Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 12:06:24 -0700, Terry Morse from
Terry Morse Software, Inc. wrote:

gds wrote:

Don't yo just feel more hungry? Of course if you excersize more you'll
need to replace more calories. But do you really need to calculate
this-especially as the calculation is probably not much more accurate
than your guesstimating that you "need" an extra helping of lasagna.


No, I don't typically feel more hungry after a hard day in the
saddle. If anything, my appetite is supressed for several hours.


That happens to me, too. My stomach just seems to shut down. When I do

really
long rides, I have to schedule time to eat, because I don't get hunger

pangs.

So, what's up with this? There's been times on STP where I simply force
myself to eat, because it's a long ride, whether you do it in one or two
days, and I know that I have to keep eating to keep pedalling. After I
finished this year, my friends insisted that I have a burrito or gyro or
something before getting on the bus to get home, and I followed their advice
more out of sheepish exhaustion rather than any desire to eat. But the year
before I didn't eat before getting on the bus, and I was *miserable* by the
time I got home.

So, why is it that sometimes we don't feel like eating during or just after
a long ride? This does not sound like Wisdom of the Body to me.


--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
please substitute yahoo for mousepotato to reply
Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky


  #48  
Old July 9th 12, 09:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Figuring out calories burned?

On Wednesday, September 1, 2004 9:56:51 AM UTC-7, chris christanis wrote:
I had a cheap Bell computer that did it for me but it fell off (cheap). So I
bought a cateye but it does not tell you calories burned. Anyway to figure
this out?


Some time ago there was a formula for calories burned in the Bicycle magazine. I can not locate it so anyone else have it?
  #49  
Old July 14th 12, 02:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,345
Default Figuring out calories burned?

On Wednesday, September 1, 2004 9:56:51 AM UTC-7, chris christanis wrote:
I had a cheap Bell computer that did it for me but it fell off (cheap). So I
bought a cateye but it does not tell you calories burned. Anyway to figure
this out?


In short - no. And what's more, the Bell was probably incorrect. It was no doubt figuring distance and weight. Any climbing adds to calories burned and any coasting downhill subtracts. But it was an approximation that was more accurate the flatter your course.

It requires a computer that looks at speed, distance, climbing and cadence and even then it is only approximate. Though closer than the Bell.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
calories burned - HRM vs. Web sites?? Bob General 24 February 3rd 06 08:04 PM
Calorie Estimates.... LaoFuZhi UK 59 July 26th 04 07:17 PM
Polar Heart rate monitor help Peter Jones Australia 15 April 2nd 04 02:19 PM
Influence of weather on calories burned? Sb083459 General 9 April 1st 04 11:56 AM
Strange fatigue again...? (long) Mitch Pollard General 42 October 12th 03 02:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.