# Cycle slower to loose weight.



## sddg7tfl (16 Feb 2013)

Just thought i'd post about my current training regime as it may be of interest?
(Skip to the end section if i'm boring you).

First some background history of the first 3 years / 5130 miles.
Back in March 2010 weighing *17 stones 1 pound* my doctor advised i take up exercise as my asthma
was getting worse.
So i dug out my 1988 Raleigh mountain bike, overhauled it completely and started riding to/from work.
Those 1.3 mile rides after not being on a bike since 1988 were painful on the legs ... and i'd be amazed how blokes wearing trench coats would whizz past me on bikes over 40 years old. 
Anyway, i had a lockup garage 6 miles away, so took a packed lunch and drink and set off one saturday to see if i could cycle this distance. I did, then i popped the bike in the garage and phoned for a taxi to take me home. I had three days of aching legs after that six miles!
The following weekend (after driving all week) i taxied back to get the bike & 3 days of legs pains!

By July 2010 i was cycling 30 miles at weekends on the heavy 1988 mountain bike.

During August 2010 i bought a Garmin Forerunner 305 watch to record/upload rides to Garmin Connect.

By September 2010 i was cycling 60 miles at weekends after changing components on the bike to make it easier to ride (slick tyres/seat/etc).
My weight was now *16 stones 4 pounds* (Even though i was eating all the normal junk food and still not making any attempts at dieting).

March 2011 i bought a mountain bike to start exploring some of the fenland waterway tracks (and started throwing in evening cycle rides after work of around 22 miles to supplement my weekend 40-60 milers).

November 2011 i bought a mid-range road bike for dry weather use.

December 2011 i bought i cheap and nasty lower range road bike for wet weather/night use.
My weight was now *15 stones 11 pounds* but still eating Mcdonalds/Kfc/Kebabs/Etc.

June 2012 i bought a Garmin Edge 800 + o/s mapping.

August 2012 i started migrating all my records from Garmin Connect to Strava. (Which probably upset a few people as suddenly they'd loose a KOM to this new kid on the block who'd ridden a segment 12 months earlier ).
All through 2012 i continued riding the three bikes, often racing myself, often being lazy, but always
finding time amongst my busy work/home life to get out there.
At the end of 2012 (and having successfully completed the Strava/Rapha Festive 500kms in 8 days) my weight was *13 stones 10 pounds!*

So that's *47 pounds* cycled off* *without** even considering dieting. 


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Time to diet down to my ideal weight (11 stones).*
Now all this time i've been building fitness and speed whilst carrying excessive weight.

I can average 17mph over a 30 mile circular course.
I can thrash a two mile segment at 90% of my heart rate to win a KOM ... i have a few now.
I can bonk after 60 miles, but keep going at 10mph for another 20 miles. (Horrible, plus the lack
of concentration from a dulled brain makes pot-holes harder to avoid).

*My diet while cycling plan.*


Limit daily calories to 1500 (allowing for cycling calories).
Do not believe the calories shown on Strava! (It showed 1350 for a 30 miler yesterday when my Garmin Edge 800 said a more realistic 560 for a 30 miler at 53% of my MHR!).
****Cut the cycling speed right down****
Energetic rides cannot be fuelled by fat alone, so muscle glycogen is used instead.
When muscle glycogen is used, the massive 1-pack strikes up at the end of a 1000 calorie ride demanding 1500 calories of food by sending out hunger signals!

Also by cycling slower and burning less calories per ride, i'll be able to go out and repeat every day,
so ride calories burnt will be less per day, but more overall per week.

Any other tips?

Edit: I will still throw in a single high-effort ride every week. Either 16 climbs up the local flyovers, or a flat-out 30 miler, but will do these a few hours after the sunday roast.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (16 Feb 2013)

sddg7tfl said:


> *Time to diet down to my ideal weight (11 stones).*
> 
> *My diet while cycling plan.*
> 
> ...


 
Yes ditch your flawed science and do it properly. 1500 cals per day for a grown man is *VERY LOW*. Barely more than the UK average intake for a woman.

Muscle glycogen being used is serving it's purpose. It isn't used instead, it is used in proportion with fat.

You'll probably not burn less per ride. If anything by riding slowly enough that fat is easily metabolised you'd be burning more. Carbs 4cals per g | fat 9cals per g. Either way, 1500cals per day simply isn't enough.


I can't say what I really want to,because I will ultimately get banned for it. You evidently need to do a bit more research before you begin this "thing"


----------



## Radchenister (16 Feb 2013)

Why would being factual get you banned? Being abusive and insulting does that IMO?

I am interested in this thread so why not have a civilised debate whilst aiming to educate people like me?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (16 Feb 2013)

Radchenister said:


> Why would being factual get you banned? Being abusive and insulting does that IMO?
> 
> I am interested in this thread so why not have a civilised debate whilst aiming to educate people like me?


Re-read the sentence. The fact I would be banned for saying what I really thought of the idea should be clue enough as to how stupid I think it is,and believe it is.


----------



## numbnuts (16 Feb 2013)

That's the trouble with the internet, every ones an expert


----------



## Radchenister (16 Feb 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T. , my query is does the reference to 1500 calories mean separate to the cycling requirement or including the requirement - is that where the confusion is?

_'Limit daily calories to 1500 (allowing for cycling calories).'_


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (16 Feb 2013)

Radchenister said:


> T.M.H.N.E.T. , did he not reference 1500 as separate to the cycling requirement?


No


----------



## ayceejay (16 Feb 2013)

"My weight was now *15 stones 11 pounds* but still eating Mcdonalds/Kfc/Kebabs/Etc."
Using this statement as a guide can I suggest that rather than count calories (and 1500 per day is way too low anyway) you concentrate on the _quality_ of your food intake.


----------



## Radchenister (16 Feb 2013)

Clear as mud, I'll leave you to it.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Feb 2013)

Bad science aside (an argument for others to take up), may I say well done!.......I hope you manage to keep it off.


----------



## ayceejay (16 Feb 2013)

Putting diet aside, does the question boil down to: which is best for weight loss, short high intensity exercise or long low intensity exercise?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (16 Feb 2013)

ayceejay said:


> Putting diet aside, does the question boil down to: which is best for weight loss, short high intensity exercise or long low intensity exercise?


It should come down to the ability,fitness,experience and time constraint of the person. The method you use, should be applicable. You could say there is a "best" way for one person, but probably not "best" all of the time.

30stone Mary probably wouldn't do well in a 30min HIIT session - but would be better suited to low impact cardio (swimming,walking,cycling) perhaps even light weights.

8 stone dripping wet Catherine who wants to lose a few % BF in order for her abs to show but only has 30mins per day, would be better suited to HIIT within her time constraints.

I'm not entirely sure what supposed benefit there is to the OP's strange idea


----------



## ayceejay (16 Feb 2013)

The aim is to reach "* my ideal weight (11 stones". *
Given that this is the "supposed benefit" and assuming that we want to guide the OP, how is his plan flawed and what else might he consider.
The daily intake of 1500 calories is too low (many interweb sites address this issue)
When deciding on slow versus fast you must consider where you are now and time constraints (see TMHNET above)
With the determination already demonstrated, the OP has that part of the equation covered.
But loosing a lot of weight quickly may not be good for ones health - set realistic goals.


----------



## Kies (16 Feb 2013)

As a complete beginner into sports science and weight loss,what have i gained from this thread?

The OP has lost a lot of weight by cycling a lot,limiting his calorie intake AND eating lots of junk food?

1500 calories is too low for an adult male.

No clearer on slow long distance cycling is better for weight loss than fast short distance riding.



Pulls up chair and dives into popcorn .....


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (16 Feb 2013)

ayceejay said:


> The aim is to reach "* my ideal weight (11 stones". *
> (1)Given that this is the "supposed benefit" and assuming that we want to guide the OP, how is his plan flawed and what else might he consider.
> (2)The daily intake of 1500 calories is too low (many interweb sites address this issue)
> (3)When deciding on slow versus fast you must consider where you are now and time constraints (see TMHNET above)
> ...


(1) Being 11stone isn't a supposed benefit, it's a goal. The benefit of exercise+diet done right is CV fitness + weight -, but only when done right.
(2) It's not only too low but creates a huge deficit which will ultimately in the end, also consume muscle tissue along with it. Muscle loss = less calories used at rest which generally leads to weight gain when calories increase, it only compounds starvation responses.
(3)I think you've missed the important bit. The OP wants to eat_ a lot_ less, cycle slower and cycle more which is still going to create a massive deficit, likely in the range of unsustainable. Nobody at this point knows what if any benefit there is to it,especially it seems the OP - it seems to stem from wanting to eat less - meaning performance would be limited(based on the relative speed at which fat is metabolized)
(4) Yes.
(5) There is no reason we know of that the OP would need to lose quickly. It's already been 2 1/2yrs odd,another 6 months sustainable loss isn't going to be a bad thing. Hell I'm tempted to post my collection of sustainable loss/rapid loss pics gleamed off the 'net. Just to show the reality of the differences.

With that said. I'd love more info. INC - height/age/current diet/current activity level/diagnosed limitations and where the OP got this 1500cal per day slow ride idea from.


----------



## Feastie (16 Feb 2013)

Well done on your weight loss so far! Impressive stuff. I don't really have much definitive stuff to say as I'm not a nutrition expert, but to my understanding you have to be very severely under nourished over quite a long period of time before your body will start metabolising your muscle - people with chronic diseases, cancer, severe malabsorption syndromes and eating disorders, essentially. Your body goes through a lot of other sources of fuel before reaching the point where you start thinking about breaking down muscle in order to generate glucose! So maybe you can read up on it as I'm not 100% but really I don't think you have to worry about your body being forced to break down your own muscle just in order to get by - unless you're about to suddenly stop eating altogether!! I'm not quite sure where the shift occurs but as I said, I'm pretty definite it's at a much more extreme end than just 1,500+your cycling calories/day.

If you're relatively active and moving throughout the day (excluding your cycling sessions) then daily requirements for a man are supposedly 2,500 calories (2,000 for women). If you're sedentary then it'll be less, but if I were you I think I'd address the contents of your diet (healthier foods!), try to work out how many calories you're taking in per day at the moment, and then see if you can cut maybe 500 off and just see how it goes, e.g. aiming for 2,000. To be honest you could probably do this no problem just by changing the types of food you're eating and yet still remain full, which would also have the knock-on of helping with your health in general. It's much more likely to be successful than making a dramatic calorie intake shift if you do things a bit more gradually and in steps, or so I've always thought. I also don't know how much taking into account cycling calories will help - the daily guidelines requirements take into account 30 mins of physical exercise, after all. Aiming for 2,000 or 2,500 (guideline amounts) and then just not bothering to count in cycling calories and treating those as your calorie deficit might also work out quite nicely. If you're going to cycle daily anyway, what's the point of doing it that way round?


----------



## Biker Joe (16 Feb 2013)

Congratulations on your weight loss sddg7tfl.
I admire your dedication
I would, however, question your reasoning on calorie intake. I don't have a lot of experience in this area but to me your reasoning seems flawed in this respect. May I suggest you have a rethink and do more research into dietary requirements for sporting activities. I mean you shouldn't be bonking at all on a 60 mile ride, for instance.
Anyway, well done on your progress so far and I wish you well for the future.


----------



## sddg7tfl (17 Feb 2013)

Sorry about the delay in getting back to this thread.
Several people mentioned the very low 1500 calories per day figure i quoted.



T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Yes ditch your flawed science and do it properly. 1500 cals per day for a grown man is *VERY LOW*. Barely more than the UK average intake for a woman.


 
Since i started dieting 5 days ago i have been "aiming" for this figure, but on every single day have overun towards a more sensible level
of 1900-2100 calories. Obviously if my garmin edge 800 estimates i've used 400 calories on a ride, i will make sure i eat this extra 400
calories. Yesterday i had a ride expenditure of 600 calories, so that was added into the baseline of 1500 calories to make 2100 calories.
I actually ate 2400 calories. (So it wasn't a 1500 day ... more like 1800).



T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> With that said. I'd love more info. INC - height/age/current diet/current activity level/diagnosed limitations and where the OP got this 1500cal per day slow ride idea from.


 
Height: 5'6"
43 years old
Food supplied by girlfriend who is a health freak plus i'm avoiding sugary drinks/fast food.
Maintenance guy in a large factory = on my feet all day.
Diagnosed limitations = Asthma (if that's what you meant).
1500 per day idea = all people on diets actually eat more than they think. Do you measure out 45 grams of Alpen to obtain the correct
calorie figure quoted on the box, or just guess?
So i'm aiming for 1500 calories, but i'm sure i'm hitting 2000 calories.



Feastie said:


> to my understanding you have to be very severely under nourished over quite a long period of time before your body will start metabolising your muscle


 
Proof of the pudding will be weekday *slow* rides ... but then absolutely hammering the bike at the weekend.
I mean surely if i'm starting to become malnourished my benchmark average speed over a 30 mile course will drop and then
i'd know more nutrients are required.
I covered a non-stop 30.0 miler today on a mountain bike in under 2 hours. If i can do the same next weekend i'll assume
everything is fine.



Biker Joe said:


> you shouldn't be bonking at all on a 60 mile ride, for instance.


 
I know ... lets just say a Mcdonalds breakfast caused it!!
I have since changed to eating slow carb release meals before the longer rides.



T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> You'll probably not burn less per ride. If anything by riding slowly enough that fat is easily metabolised you'd be burning more. Carbs 4cals per g | fat 9cals per g.You evidently need to do a bit more research before you begin this "thing"


 
That's what i want ... to burn a lower ratio of glycogen and higher ratio of fat per ride.

Todays fast ride has had *less* achiness and afterburn than yesterdays slow ride ... same distance, although i arrived home today as hungry as a horse. Yesterday a cup of tea sufficed.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (17 Feb 2013)

sddg7tfl said:


> Since i started dieting 5 days ago i have been "aiming" for this figure, but on every single day have overun towards a more sensible level
> of 1900-2100 calories. Obviously if my garmin edge 800 estimates i've used 400 calories on a ride, i will make sure i eat this extra 400
> calories. Yesterday i had a ride expenditure of 600 calories, so that was added into the baseline of 1500 calories to make 2100 calories.
> I actually ate 2400 calories. (So it wasn't a 1500 day ... more like 1800).


Your initial post wasn't clear but working a reasonably active job as well as cycling. You're probably looking to the upper end of 2400-2500cals a day anyway.




> Height: 5'6"
> 43 years old
> Food supplied by girlfriend who is a health freak plus i'm avoiding sugary drinks/fast food.
> Maintenance guy in a large factory = on my feet all day.
> ...


Yep asthma and the likes is what I meant  

I do measure the majority of my food yes. I can generally gauge what's in the meals I don't measure(or have all of the time) by eye these days. It's worth doing for a while,and worth being honest about by using apps like myfitnesspal. I was shocked at how little I ate in times long gone by.



> I have since changed to eating slow carb release meals before the longer rides.


A sensible choice.



> That's what i want ... to burn a lower ratio of glycogen and higher ratio of fat per ride.


Ok. As far as I'm aware though, the ratio of fat stays the same, the balance of glycogen/carb use is changeable.



> Todays fast ride has had *less* achiness and afterburn than yesterdays slow ride ... same distance, although i arrived home today as hungry as a horse. Yesterday a cup of tea sufficed.


That's likely a sign that you are requiring a decent carb source.


----------



## jdtate101 (17 Feb 2013)

There's a lot of recent research (I'll try and track it down and post it for reference) that says doing long slow base miles doesn't work better than using shorter targeted HIT training. If you burn high amounts of energy in intense exercise you will work your cardio system better and deplete your energy reserves. Those energy reserves are then rebuilt either by taking in fuel or by converting fat to energy. As long as you eat sensibly then you should be in a win/win situation. Don't do what most people do and reach for the fridge as soon as you get back from a ride, but think about what you are doing and stick to a meal plan with a realistic calorie count. Too little and you will just starve your body and damage yourself (succumb to overtraining easily).

I was in the same situation as the OP and started cycling at 18.5st. I'm now 12.5st and I do not do long base mile riding, but usually do a mixture of medium and high intensity. I haven't changed my diet one bit except for two crucial points:

1) More fruit and veg to get better nutrition to fuel me during rides/recovery.
2) Portion control (slightly smaller portions to control my intake)

In this way I'm not cutting out any food I love and don't feel like I'm punishing myself by a harsh diet. The reason why most people fail at traditional diets is because they end up hating the fact that they have had to give up all the nice things they love. If you can avoid that trap then you will be more likely to end up making the change in lifestyle stick longterm.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (17 Feb 2013)

jdtate101 said:


> There's a lot of recent research (I'll try and track it down and post it for reference) that says doing long slow base miles doesn't work better than using shorter targeted HIT training. If you burn high amounts of energy in intense exercise you will work your cardio system better and deplete your energy reserves. Those energy reserves are then rebuilt either by taking in fuel or by converting fat to energy. As long as you eat sensibly then you should be in a win/win situation. Don't do what most people do and reach for the fridge as soon as you get back from a ride, but think about what you are doing and stick to a meal plan with a realistic calorie count. Too little and you will just starve your body and damage yourself (succumb to overtraining easily).


Nobody said it works better though? The training stresses are different, the training adaptations are different and ultimately HIIT due to intensity will raise your BMR for hours for roughly the same overall calorie burn for less time input.


----------



## sddg7tfl (17 Feb 2013)

jdtate101 said:


> Don't do what most people do and reach for the fridge as soon as you get back from a ride


 
I used to do exactly that after a fast 30 miler using 1200 calories, and probably ended
up shoving 600 calories straight back in such as:

Peanut butter sandwiches
Pork pie
Crisps
Yoghurt
Fizzy drink
Today's 30 miler was proceeded by sunday roast, although i cut down on the bad stuff and had loads more vegetables.
No hunger at the end of the ride! Even though i had my highest ever average heart rate. (83% of my mhr) on this particular route.


----------



## Garz (17 Feb 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Yes ditch your flawed science and do it properly.
> ...
> I can't say what I really want to,because I will ultimately get banned for it. You evidently need to do a bit more research before you begin this "thing"


 
I think the best advice TMHNET is to work on your social skills and focus on the constructive advice. Whilst I do not have a problem with your posts in general you do come across as aggressive and give out the wrong signals to others. This is another thread I have seen you post in where you either upset someone or provoke them. If you really want to contribute to the forum then tone down the negativity and add some jovial twist re-reading the retort before posting.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (18 Feb 2013)

Garz said:


> I think the best advice TMHNET is to work on your social skills and focus on the constructive advice. Whilst I do not have a problem with your posts in general you do come across as aggressive and give out the wrong signals to others. This is another thread I have seen you post in where you either upset someone or provoke them. If you really want to contribute to the forum then tone down the negativity and add some jovial twist re-reading the retort before posting.


If you don't like my posts, don't read them or put me on ignore. I didn't see anyone crying in this thread due to upset caused by me(if I did upset anyone, let me know and I'll happily apologise). But unlike you, who just turned up for a whine,I have actually contributed constructively.

If you or anyone else really wants to discuss me,nitpick posts and rabbit on about things I didn't directly say(but implied) send me a pm and stop taking one of the few decent threads recently off-topic for your own jollies.


----------



## Ningishzidda (18 Feb 2013)

As an ex resident of Quebec, Canada, I can catagorically state that riding a bike slower shifts more fat.
Especially when the blowing cold wind can be felt for the entire trip, and my body is nowhere near warmed up for well over 20 miles.


----------



## Ningishzidda (18 Feb 2013)

1500 calories.
That is 
4 eggs. two slices of wholemeal toast.
8 oz steak, a whole iceburg lettuce, a whole cucumber. 2 large Tomatoes. 
Three items of fruit. 
Milk in coffee.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (18 Feb 2013)

I'm sure it I've read that it's really important to eat within twenty minutes of returning from a ride, to aid muscle recovery. I also thought that what you ate on a ride and within twenty minutes of a hard ride was calorie negative, I.e, your body used it straight away.


----------



## Ningishzidda (18 Feb 2013)

OP.
Knowing how much to eat before and during a bike ride is up to personal experience. A start point can be roughly calculated as BMR + 25 kCals per mile.

Aim NEVER to bonk.

For a 100 miler, in addition to your BMR, 2500 cals spread over breakfast, lunch and snacks should do it.

If fat is not lost using this, try 20 kCals per mile.


----------



## sddg7tfl (18 Feb 2013)

Ningishzidda said:


> As an ex resident of Quebec, Canada, I can catagorically state that riding a bike slower shifts more fat.
> Especially when the blowing cold wind can be felt for the entire trip, and my body is nowhere near warmed up for well over 20 miles.


 
I've had that. Normally i warm up (get though the achey leg phase) in 6 miles at 15mph in 10c conditions.
Tried a ride a few weeks ago at -5c and didn't "get going" until 15miles in.


----------



## sddg7tfl (18 Feb 2013)

Ningishzidda said:


> OP.
> Knowing how much to eat before and during a bike ride is up to personal experience. A start point can be roughly calculated as BMR + 25 kCals per mile.
> 
> Aim NEVER to bonk.
> ...


 
Useful advice!

When i cycle at 10mph on a mountain bike (barely raising my heartrate over 53% of my MHR) my
edge 800 calculates 600 cals used over 30 miles (20 a mile).

At 15mph (80% MHR on MTB) it rises to 1200 cals over 30 miles (40 a mile).


On a recent 102 miler on a road bike the computer calculated 2900 calories, putting me around
30 cals a mile ... obviously at a higher speed due to the change of bike.
My "effort" on the ride was somewhere between the first two examples above.


----------

