Soldato
Yes, those cyclist sprinters certainly don't lift for power.
HIIT
- Thread starter stufflol
- Start date
Caporegime
^ 
was just about to say cycling sprinters have ridiculously powerful legs.
was just about to say cycling sprinters have ridiculously powerful legs.they need big legs but the upper body looks similar to a regular sprinter like bolt and not exactly huge.
tbh I can already feel my thighs getting bigger and this is with running a massive calorie deficit :O
eating only 1500 calories a day and doing 20mile bike rides every 2-3 days which according to my garmin burns around 1900 calories.
need to drop about 2 stone :| then properly start working out hard
I can't lose weight from lifting like other people seem able to
I just feel even hungrier than normal and overeat
at least not at a speed fast enough for me
tbh I can already feel my thighs getting bigger and this is with running a massive calorie deficit :O
eating only 1500 calories a day and doing 20mile bike rides every 2-3 days which according to my garmin burns around 1900 calories.
need to drop about 2 stone :| then properly start working out hard
I can't lose weight from lifting like other people seem able to
I just feel even hungrier than normal and overeatat least not at a speed fast enough for me
Last edited:
Man of Honour
er I always said I don't lift for power and size... I couldn't care about getting as big as possible.
My aim is to have a cyclist sprinters body which I will no doubt find easier to achieve.
but on the subject of cardio just finished my bike ride
1900 calories melted btw according to garmin which is apparently accurate to within 10% when using a heart rate strap
now to cook me some food
That was my point. You're training for something specific - GOOD for you, genuinely, I'm not being facetious or demeaning when I say that, and I wish you all the best for your goals.
What I was saying was that just because someone doesn't do shed loads of steady state cardio, doesn't make them unfit, their fitness is just established differently. I train for power, and functional strength, but ideally be an all-rounder. That suits me, and is probably more beneficial to me in life than being 1 extreme.
That graph is good it shows you're hitting your cardiovascular zone of your heart rate, peaking into some higher anaerobic zones, and dipping to some fat burning zone too.
Which is perfect for your sort of training. Poo pooing weightlifters and saying they're unfit is somewhat wrong though. 
they need big legs but the upper body looks similar to a regular sprinter like bolt and not exactly huge.
tbh I can already feel my thighs getting bigger and this is with running a massive calorie deficit :O
eating only 1500 calories a day and doing 20mile bike rides every 2-3 days which according to my garmin burns around 1900 calories.
need to drop about 2 stone :| then properly start working out hard
I can't lose weight from lifting like other people seem able to
at least not at a speed fast enough for me
Unless those 20 miles are twice up the Alpe d'Huez on a 40kg bike, you do not burn 1900 calories!
let me go weight me and the bike on the scales.
okay that won't work my carpet is to thick and the scales weigh my half as much as on a hard floor lol..
to dark to do it outside to.
but I am 90kg
the bike must be over 15kg (hybrid aluminum XL frame)
Using a garmin 800 with hr strap so it is using
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html
Firstbeat Algorithm (1st Generation)
which is supposed to be accurate to within 7-10%
Last edited:
Nonsense. It has no idea about how aero you are, windspeed or direction, or how much rolling resistance you have. The number is pretty much plucked from thin air.
The only way you can see how much work you are doing is using a power meter or some description, using a generic formula is basically just a guess.
The only way you can see how much work you are doing is using a power meter or some description, using a generic formula is basically just a guess.
There is a white paper explaining how it works here
http://www.firstbeat.fi/userData/firstbeat/download/white_paper_energy_expenditure_estimation.pdf
it learns the user over time
anyway it's proven to be accurate to within 10% how can you say it's nonsense ?
nonsense would be if it didn't know
my age 32
height 6.35
weight 90
bike weight 15
activity level 6hours/week (I think I cba to check what it's set to)
if I am an athlete NO
what my heart rate was.
anyway it wasn't 1900 I just picked that number from thin air because I couldn't be bothered to check the exact number.
It was Calories: 1,538 which is only 769 calories an hour @ 81% max heart rate average
http://www.firstbeat.fi/userData/firstbeat/download/white_paper_energy_expenditure_estimation.pdf
it learns the user over time
anyway it's proven to be accurate to within 10% how can you say it's nonsense ?
nonsense would be if it didn't know
my age 32
height 6.35
weight 90
bike weight 15
activity level 6hours/week (I think I cba to check what it's set to)
if I am an athlete NO
what my heart rate was.
anyway it wasn't 1900 I just picked that number from thin air because I couldn't be bothered to check the exact number.
It was Calories: 1,538 which is only 769 calories an hour @ 81% max heart rate average
Last edited:
There is a white paper explaining how it works here
http://www.firstbeat.fi/userData/firstbeat/download/white_paper_energy_expenditure_estimation.pdf
it learns the user over time
anyway it's proven to be accurate to within 10% how can you say it's nonsense ?
nonsense would be if it didn't know
my age 32
height 6.35
weight 90
bike weight 15
activity level 6hours/week (I think I cba to check what it's set to)
if I am an athlete NO
what my heart rate was.
anyway it wasn't 1900 I just picked that number from thin air because I couldn't be bothered to check the exact number.
It was Calories: 1,538 which is only 769 calories an hour @ 81% max heart rate average
I only burn 2500 doing a marathon according to my forerunner, your garmin is way off, 1900 for a 20 mile bike ride lol, I could burn less than that running 20miles which uses loads more calories than cycling
I have to agree with this. There is no way you're burning that amount of calories riding a bike. Even if you're hitting a very good average speed of 20mph, you're not going to burn over 600 calories per hour. I ride 20miles a day, if I were burning these sorts of calories I'd be a stick....
what calorie algorithm is your forerunner using?
I thought cycling used more calories.
try running up a 10% gradient
then try cycling up a 10% gradient
see which is harder
and I doubt either of you two are anyway near as heavy as me which massively effects how many calories you burn...
go read the white paper for firstbeat , it's tested to be accurate within 10% as long as you have fed it all your data accurately.
it's supposed to be as accurate as you can get without a vo2max test.
why would garmin bother to license it from the finnish research company if it was as worthless as the time/distance ones
eating 1500-2000 calories a day I lost over 3 stone since july I'll go with what I'm being told as pretty accurate (20-30mile bike ride every 2-3days)
Last edited:
Soldato
No chance you burn 1900 calories riding twenty miles. Strava came out with that for the 63 mile ride I did last week (similar size and weight to you) and although that's a finger in the air job as well it's much more believable!
Your argument about riding and running is flawed too! Running uphill is generally easier than riding uphill but you can freewheel down a descent and use zero calories!
Your argument about riding and running is flawed too! Running uphill is generally easier than riding uphill but you can freewheel down a descent and use zero calories!
Fitness is a crud term used by cardio bunnies, which encompasses a vast range of physiological adaptations from musculature, cardiovascular, central nervous system and pain thresholds...
+1
Fitness is often miscontrued as endurance.
Fitness, as I have been lead to believe, is the body's ability to recover from/return to its normal resting rate/state after exercise.
Doesn't matter if Person A runs 10 miles in an hour and takes 5 minutes to fully recover, if Person B runs only 5 miles in an hour but takes just 3 minutes to fully recover technically they are the fitter. Perhaps not the best comparison but you should hopefully see the point.
So that entire time 1900 was a nonsense figure anyway....
Every time I read stuff you post it looks like total crap
Then 10 posts later you back track
Poor trolling, sir
Precisely.
Associate
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 692
A lot of people here are getting hit confused with intervals or tempo exercises, this very common.
Hit won't help weight loss please stop comparing its cal burn to think it does.
Hit is very short intense exercise where your at your limits, well above all thresholds.
Thus 30secs is ideally the max time you do them for, eg 30x 3
Hit is best done on bike but easier on turbo given you need to get up to max effort asap and not worrying about gearing or route.
Personally if your looking for weight loss simple CV work will be fine but you mustn't be a slow ass, push yourself when you run or bike.
Hit is just a "in" thing atm it will go out of fashion soon when next thing comes along Lol.
Hit won't help weight loss please stop comparing its cal burn to think it does.
Hit is very short intense exercise where your at your limits, well above all thresholds.
Thus 30secs is ideally the max time you do them for, eg 30x 3
Hit is best done on bike but easier on turbo given you need to get up to max effort asap and not worrying about gearing or route.
Personally if your looking for weight loss simple CV work will be fine but you mustn't be a slow ass, push yourself when you run or bike.
Hit is just a "in" thing atm it will go out of fashion soon when next thing comes along Lol.
Soldato
The OP's crosstrainer might be a bit more difficult, but keeping 'form' whilst doing hard efforts running/cycling/rowing/etc isnt really hard?
Much more likely to pull something sprinting (I wouldn't class running as HIIT) than you are doing a comfortable paced run.
Than what? Pulling badly on a rower and wrenching a spinal erector (hehe)? Pedalling at a gash angle on a bike and tweaking medial ligaments?
Physical activity is something most people aren't geared for any more due to sedentary lifestyles, so their chances of breaking themselves by jumping straight into [insert activity] is highly likely, anyway.