Endurance Training and Weight Loss

Endurance Training and Weight Loss

Author
Discussion

944fan

Original Poster:

4,962 posts

184 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
Context - I ended last year and started this in a mess. The anxiety I have had for years was at its peak, I had stopped exercising, put on loads of weight, was eating crap and drinking enough to make Oliver Reed say "fking hell mate, calm down". I decided this year I would sort it for good. The wife and I committed to stop drinking forever, I went back to the drs, had blood tests and am being treated for low testosterone (possibly the cause of the anxiety), had counselling and importantly got back to excising. I decided I want to do something big so I entered a half ironman triathlon.

Now to the point of the thread. During the training I have lost 2.25 stone. But in the last month or so it has plateaued massively. I have hardly lost anything. Partly this is because I am in peak phase of training and just cannot manage the volume or intensity without eating a lot but mostly I am in calorie deficit.

I know endurance training is not optimal for fat loss and HIIT and strength training are better but I needed something I could get into and maintain. Any ideas on how I can continue to lose weight whilst still doing training that is effective for endurance sports?

Was thinking of maybe after the event doing low carb again as that worked for weight loss, but not for training and then maybe have 4-6 weeks of weight loss specific training to drop some pounds before resuming the base training over the winter?

AntiLagGC8

1,724 posts

111 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
Congrats on making the change! smile

I think the first question for others to be able to help is your diet. Are you tracking/recording what you're eating? If so what is your deficit?

The answer maybe to switch food choices to ensure you've got enough energy for training but still lose weight.

How far are you from your ideal weight?

944fan

Original Poster:

4,962 posts

184 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
I use MFP religiously. I have been trying to get most of my carb intake around exercise but that isn't always possible. I try to get a good portion of protein (180g) and the rest carbs and fat. I eat a good 8 portions of fruit and veg a day, mostly veg, not mad keen on fruit so usual limit that to 1 apple, 1 or 2 satsumas and possible some dried fruit with nuts.

Early on it worked well but the volume and intensity was low. Then I was aiming for about 500 cal a day deficit.

At this moment in time the training is huge. Yesterday I did 4.25 hours on the bike, this morning I did 2.6 km swim in the lake and am just about to go for a 19km run.

I wonder if perhaps the exercise cals are being massively over estimated by my Garmin. On the bike I have a power meter so the cal consumption is "quite" accurate as it directly measures work done. Swim and run it uses a formula. When I switched to the power meter the cal estimate for a ride dropped considerably, by almost 50%.

Perhaps I should halve the calories reported by Garmin ?

mcelliott

8,626 posts

180 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
Completely ignore what the garmin says, it is total bullst as far as calorie read out is concerned. I recently completed a 450km bike ride - the garmin said 21k calories burned, and in actual fact I'd only burnt 13k.

Granfondo

12,241 posts

205 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
mcelliott said:
Completely ignore what the garmin says, it is total bullst as far as calorie read out is concerned. I recently completed a 450km bike ride - the garmin said 21k calories burned, and in actual fact I'd only burnt 13k.
How did you calculate the true calorie burn?

mcelliott

8,626 posts

180 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
Granfondo said:
mcelliott said:
Completely ignore what the garmin says, it is total bullst as far as calorie read out is concerned. I recently completed a 450km bike ride - the garmin said 21k calories burned, and in actual fact I'd only burnt 13k.
How did you calculate the true calorie burn?
When I downloaded it to Strava, generally I think it gets it to within 95% accurate, but the garmin is way out.

esuuv

1,306 posts

204 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
I think all of the training system calories are to be taken with a pinch of salt.............make sure you eat sensible numbers, and don't eat to keep up with what MFP etc says you "can" eat.

Are you taking measurements - theres obviously a point where you are putting on muscle and therefore not necessarily losing a lot of weight, also what are you eating when you train? lots of energy drinks etc will mean you get fit without necessarily losing weight.

Any fasted training? when i was training for IM last year I was cycling 35 miles each morning to work on just a cup of coffee - was cycling about 300 miles a week, swimming 6/7k a week and running as much as i could tolerate - I was eating everything in sight and losing about a kilo a week.

AntiLagGC8

1,724 posts

111 months

Sunday 12th June 2016
quotequote all
944fan said:
I use MFP religiously. I have been trying to get most of my carb intake around exercise but that isn't always possible. I try to get a good portion of protein (180g) and the rest carbs and fat. I eat a good 8 portions of fruit and veg a day, mostly veg, not mad keen on fruit so usual limit that to 1 apple, 1 or 2 satsumas and possible some dried fruit with nuts.

Early on it worked well but the volume and intensity was low. Then I was aiming for about 500 cal a day deficit.

At this moment in time the training is huge. Yesterday I did 4.25 hours on the bike, this morning I did 2.6 km swim in the lake and am just about to go for a 19km run.

I wonder if perhaps the exercise cals are being massively over estimated by my Garmin. On the bike I have a power meter so the cal consumption is "quite" accurate as it directly measures work done. Swim and run it uses a formula. When I switched to the power meter the cal estimate for a ride dropped considerably, by almost 50%.

Perhaps I should halve the calories reported by Garmin ?
I agree with you and Mcelliott.

If you think you're in a calorie deficit and are using estimates and not losing weight my first thought would be that somewhere at least one of the estimates is wrong.

It's also not an exact science in the sense there are a huge number of variables so I'd recommend you try reducing food by another 250/500 calories (depending on the number you're eating of course) and monitor.

It's mentioned above about measurements, my personal view is pictures and measurements once a week at the same time and then review once a month to see what changes. If you don't see a change in a month then something is wrong and its time to review. I know a great deal about my body and what training works for me by experimenting and monitoring.

944fan

Original Poster:

4,962 posts

184 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
I've been taking photos every few weeks. Can notice the difference from early on but not recently.

I have also been using a hand held body fat scanner and calipers. I know these aren't very accurate but they seem consistent and those numbers aren't shifting either.

I don't think I am putting on muscle. I put on a bit last year when I was swimming loads but I think I have cashed in my beginners gains already.

I think it must be the Garmin over estimating. Yesterday I did 2.6km swim in the lake which took me 43 mins. I wasn't even trying and wearing a wetsuit I wasn't out of breath when I finished. Garmin had clocked 720 cals. I just don't think that is correct.

I am going to take half of what garmin says on run and swim and leave bike as is (this is pretty accurate from the power meter) and see how I get on.

I think I need to get this half ironman out of the way first then go back to some focus on weight loss. I might do a sprint tri later in the year and that is more about power and speed and so HIIT training will work better for that and boost weight loss

Foliage

3,861 posts

121 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
weight is an irrelevant metric especially with what your doing, how is your body and its shape, how is the fit of your clothes? how is your performance, can you lift more, run further faster, swim cycle further faster. that all that matters weight, forget it, don't get focused on it.

Whats your diet like? what do you eat?

If your in a deficit you should feel hungry, that's how you know its working, or in my experience anyway. Mentally a deficit makes me grumpy.

Edited by Foliage on Monday 13th June 09:33

paulrockliffe

15,639 posts

226 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
Ignore the industry nonsense about weight loss, a lot of it is unqualified people that have done some other unqualified persons course and read a book spouting whatever it takes to get you in a gym where you can pay for their services in telling you what to do. By unqualified I mean proper degree-level qualifications vs a 6 week course on something vague.

You won't find a better way to lose weight than riding your bike, if you're swimming and running too then you're in a great position to make good progress. As you'll know, you can cycle for hour after hour after hour. If you've got the time then a 4 hour bike ride is going to burn more calories than an equivalent amount of effort running as you'll only exercise for 75 minutes or so, despite it being more intense. If you go to the gym and do HIIT you'll use the same amount of effort over much less time. HIIT might work best if you're time-limited, but if you're not, bike, swim, run in that order.

Don't get hung up on the rate of progress too much, you'll take a while for your body to get used to eating less - hormones and psychology - but it'll get there in the end if you keep doing the exercise you're doing. All I'd advise is to restrict your diet to things that take effort to eat when you're on the bike. Don't get your calories from energy drinks and gels, you won't drop into fat burning on the bike and it's very easy to take on enough calories to cover off the exercise, so you don't lose weight.

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
Endurance training is certainly good for burning loads of calories but you need to eat loads of calories to do the training. You need to focus more on the diet and don't worry so much about excessive amounts of exercise. I'm sure saying you cycled 5000 miles on a Saturday afternoon is good for bragging rights in the cycle café but that's all it's good for really, assuming your main goal is weight loss and not bragging rights in the local cycle café.

Viz Top Tip: cyclists, easily cover 50 miles in an afternoon by hiring a car.

popeyewhite

19,626 posts

119 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
944fan said:
I know endurance training is not optimal for fat loss and HIIT and strength training are better
Entirely wrong. You'll burn more total calories endurance training.

popeyewhite

19,626 posts

119 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
Endurance training is certainly good for burning loads of calories but you need to eat loads of calories to do the training.
Not quite correct - the principle here is that the body will adapt to the rigours of training and will NOT need extra calories. It's possible the OP is ignoring the "NOT need calories" bit laugh In truth most endurance runners I know, and I know a lot, have tiny appetites.

944fan

Original Poster:

4,962 posts

184 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
popeyewhite said:
Hoofy said:
Endurance training is certainly good for burning loads of calories but you need to eat loads of calories to do the training.
Not quite correct - the principle here is that the body will adapt to the rigours of training and will NOT need extra calories. It's possible the OP is ignoring the "NOT need calories" bit laugh In truth most endurance runners I know, and I know a lot, have tiny appetites.
I had made that mistake early on. I was doing long runs and taking gels because I thought I was bonking, in reality my legs were just giving up through lack of run strength. I have been doing 90 mins run empty stomach a couple of times.

Swimming makes me extremely hungry for some reason.

ETA - I guess the endurance runners you know are all tiny though? I still weight 104kg so need to eat a far amount. Would love to get down to around 90kg. I am 6'5' and quite broad so will never by light,

Edited by 944fan on Monday 13th June 11:34

popeyewhite

19,626 posts

119 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
90 minute runs is a good standard. Glycogen (blood sugar) is normally totally depleted at 40 minutes so the rest of the run you will just be fat burning. Keep the pace quite slow. Eat a normal portion beforehand and just something carby with a bit of protein (some pasta, say) after. Once used to the exercise your body will not need any extra calories so don't give in to some type of reward scenario. Good luck.

Foliage

3,861 posts

121 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
944fan said:
ETA - I guess the endurance runners you know are all tiny though? I still weight 104kg so need to eat a far amount. Would love to get down to around 90kg. I am 6'5' and quite broad so will never by light,

Edited by 944fan on Monday 13th June 11:34
And here is your probably, completely broken thinking. your size has no real effect on how many calories you need. Eat 2200 everyday, deficit if you want, exercise like that and the weight will fall off. Its gonna hurt tho and the mental battle will be tough.

ETA - have the same problem, rewarding myself with food after longs runs, my weight is slowly increasing because of it, and im finding it hard to get a grasp on it.

Edited by Foliage on Monday 13th June 11:42


Edited by Foliage on Monday 13th June 11:44

RizzoTheRat

25,085 posts

191 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
Are you using a heart rate monitor with your garmin? My understanding is they calculate calories more accurately with hear rate data, but it's also dependant on which device you have as some calculate it differently.
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-mea...

944fan

Original Poster:

4,962 posts

184 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
RizzoTheRat said:
Are you using a heart rate monitor with your garmin? My understanding is they calculate calories more accurately with hear rate data, but it's also dependant on which device you have as some calculate it differently.
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-mea...
Yes. So on the bike it uses the power meter (most accurate), running uses HR (slightly accurate) and swimming it just makes it up as you go along. I believe the newer Garmins have HR monitor that record in the water and then download when you get out but mine doesn't.

Mine does have the option of uploading the VO2 file if you can get one but I haven;t been able to find anywhere local that does VO2 testing. I also understand the VO2 max is fairly useless indicator so it doesn't seem worth seeking one out..

popeyewhite

19,626 posts

119 months

Monday 13th June 2016
quotequote all
944fan said:
ETA - I guess the endurance runners you know are all tiny though? I still weight 104kg so need to eat a far amount. Would love to get down to around 90kg. I am 6'5' and quite broad so will never by light,
The runners I know are all sizes, but none of them carry any excess.