Maths Problem

petethedrummer

With it being winter time.... I want to lose 1 kg of bodyfat by training in my fat burning zone. The first 2 questions I have are.... what is the Fat burning zone? And what % of max heart rate is it?

Lumen

petethedrummer wrote: »

what is the Fat burning zone?

It's the bit of the grillpan that just won't come clean no matter how many brillo pads you use.

nordicb

It's highly individual, but I like this graph...

Lusk_Doyle

^^^I just get a headache from looking at that! Ride more. Eat less crap!

RayCun

The 'fat-burning zone' is the heart rate zone in which the largest proportion of calories burned come from fat.
If you train harder, a lower proportion of calories will come from fat but you will still burn more calories and use more fat.

sconhome

And the benefit of working out at such a low intensity is that you can repeat again tomorrow and not have to worry about recovery from high intensity session that will burn more calories. Ideal time for fat burning workouts is first thing in the morning without any breakfast. Grab a coffee and go!

RonanCFD

Looking at that, I feel like I'm training all wrong. I'm early 40s, and tend to hit a heart rate just over 180 when feeling pretty maxed out going up the steep bit of Howth hill so the peak heart rate for my age doesn't look too unrealistic. But I feel comfortable holding a heart rate of 150-155 for 3 or 4 hours on a long ride. Surely I must be in an aerobic zone for that length of time? And to keep my pulse down in the Fat Burn zone I think I would hardly be putting any effort in at all...

kenmc

Much easier just to buy lighter bits. More fun too!

RayCun

RonanCFD wrote: »

Looking at that, I feel like I'm training all wrong. I'm early 40s, and tend to hit a heart rate just over 180 when feeling pretty maxed out going up the steep bit of Howth hill so the peak heart rate for my age doesn't look too unrealistic. But I feel comfortable holding a heart rate of 150-155 for 3 or 4 hours on a long ride. Surely I must be in an aerobic zone for that length of time? And to keep my pulse down in the Fat Burn zone I think I would hardly be putting any effort in at all...

Are you close to vomiting when you reach the top of that hill? Then it isn't your max heart rate.
The min HR on that chart is just a guess too.

Beasty

RonanCFD wrote: »

Looking at that, I feel like I'm training all wrong. I'm early 40s, and tend to hit a heart rate just over 180 when feeling pretty maxed out going up the steep bit of Howth hill so the peak heart rate for my age doesn't look too unrealistic. But I feel comfortable holding a heart rate of 150-155 for 3 or 4 hours on a long ride. Surely I must be in an aerobic zone for that length of time? And to keep my pulse down in the Fat Burn zone I think I would hardly be putting any effort in at all...

Forget the max HRs shown in that chart - everyone is different. Find out what yours is and work back from that. If you're feeling maxed out at 180 you can probably get nearer 190!

I'm 53 - my Max HR recorded is 186 (which means I must actually be 34!) - I suspect my Max HR should be a bit higher (they also reckon you can hit a higher HR running than cycling)

petethedrummer

nordicb wrote: »

It's highly individual, but I like this graph...

Ok this is getting somewhere. I am 35 next week, so until I work out the correct values my fat burn heart rate is between 111 and 130 bpm.

Next question: Is it better to keep it to the lower end or the higher end of that range or is it all the same?

Information Thus Far:
Age: 35 years
Height: 179 cm
Weight: 74 kg
Fat Burn Zone: 111-130bpm
Target bodyfat Loss: 1Kg
Target distance in Zone: ??km

DaithiMC

RonanCFD wrote: »

Looking at that, I feel like I'm training all wrong. I'm early 40s, and tend to hit a heart rate just over 180 when feeling pretty maxed out going up the steep bit of Howth hill so the peak heart rate for my age doesn't look too unrealistic. But I feel comfortable holding a heart rate of 150-155 for 3 or 4 hours on a long ride. Surely I must be in an aerobic zone for that length of time? And to keep my pulse down in the Fat Burn zone I think I would hardly be putting any effort in at all...

These charts can be misleading by using the terms Aerobic and Anaerobic - the reality is you are using both systems to a more or lesser degree depending on your exercise levels.

The formulas that relate HRmax to age can be way off and need to be considered as a VERY general guide and your observations of an above 180 max are more accurate and specific to you so you could take your observation as being your HRmax. This may go up slightly as you get fitter so keep an eye on it. If you take a HR monitor and measure your HR as soon as you wake up in the morning this is as good an estimate of your resting HR and with now HRmax and HRmin you can figure out (or put into your software on the phone or HRMonitor) the different zones.

Also as someone pointed out, exercising by getting your HR to 120 is better for engaging fat energy sources. Some research shows that doing this fasted also trains your body to use these reserves more efficiently, so for instance, doing an hour first thing in the morning and then waiting for an hour or two before eating is a protocol that some trainers go by for fat burning and training the body to use these sources.

Always hydrate well though. It seems that the volume of exercise is important too so this is why a lot of trainers recommend long rides at lower HR for fatburning.

I read a lot about this recently and it seems to me that doing alternate low HR hour long+ sessions and higher intensity shorter sessions is a good plan to follow. So thats what I plan to do until the boredom kicks in!!

petethedrummer

OK OK we'll not worry about upper end or lower end of heart rate. it will vary. Next question. How do I measure effort in this zone to know how much energy I have outputted per hour or per km?

Information Thus Far:
Age: 35 years
Height: 179 cm
Weight: 74 kg
Fat Burn Zone: 111-130bpm
Energy per hour: ??
Target bodyfat Loss: 1Kg
Target distance in Zone: ??km

Lumen

Pete, just join the Breatharians. They have the ultimate low-everything diet.

You'd have no choice but to burn fat.

Prana toast, prana bhuna, prana crackers. The permutations are endless.

petethedrummer

Lumen wrote: »

Pete, just join the Breatharians. They have the ultimate low-everything diet.

You'd have no choice but to burn fat.

Prana toast, prana bhuna, prana crackers. The permutations are endless.

Maths will solve my conundrum. I don't want feelings or opinions, I want numbers.

DaithiMC

petethedrummer wrote: »

OK OK we'll not worry about upper end or lower end of heart rate. it will vary. Next question. How do I measure effort in this zone to know how much energy I have outputted per hour or per km?

Information Thus Far:
Age: 35 years
Height: 179 cm
Weight: 74 kg
Fat Burn Zone: 111-130bpm
Energy per hour: ??
Target bodyfat Loss: 1Kg
Target distance in Zone: ??km

I didn't suggest not worrying about upper and lower HR - just that over a period of time (months depending on your training and level of fitness) they can change. It is reasonably straightforward to measure both the way I suggested above.

In relation to energy - some apps calculate your calorific expenditure over a total spin so just divide that by the number hours the spin lasted for. Caution though is that most of these are also general estimates so unless you know your BMR and can then observe level of effort from a power metre then it will always be an estimate and you just have to find a system that you think is close to your specific case.

petethedrummer

DaithiMC wrote: »

In relation to energy - some apps calculate your calorific expenditure over a total spin so just divide that by the number hours the spin lasted for.

Which apps? I want their numbers.

RonanCFD

I don't want to hijack Pete the drummer's thread, but thanks for the very interesting & detailed replies - lots to look into & think about!

DaithiMC

petethedrummer wrote: »

Which apps? I want their numbers.

Strava, Sports Tracker, Mapmyride all have an estimate of calories use - not sure but if you use these with a HR monitor they may be more accurate. I find wide differences between estimates made by Strave and Sports Tracker.

petethedrummer

My fitnesspal says this

How Many Calories Did I Burn?
Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding)

Your Weight: 75Kg
How Long: 60 Minutes
Calories burned: 592

is this including what I would have burned had I been lying down or is it over and above my basal rate?

DaithiMC

petethedrummer wrote: »

My fitnesspal says this

How Many Calories Did I Burn?
Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding)

Your Weight: 75Kg
How Long: 60 Minutes
Calories burned: 592

is this including what I would have burned had I been lying down or is it over and above my basal rate?

That should be specific to the exercise period you did. So if your basal rate for a day is say, 2000, you just used, according to your software, (592/2000)*100% of your daily need. If you did nothing for the rest of the day then you should be able to calculate your caloric deficit for the day normalising your BMR to 23 rather than 24 hours and then summing the exercise calories with your BMR calories and subtracting a normal day's BMR.

This is also an estimate though as you would probably continue for a few hours after your exercise to burn at a higher rate than your BMR.

petethedrummer

According to here my BMR is 1736.8 Calories/day according to here it is 1,689 calories/day.

That seems awful low! Can someone verify these.

And there is a 3% discrepancy.

petethedrummer

DaithiMC wrote: »

So if your basal rate for a day is say, 2000,

What is my Basal rate?

niceonetom

Abs are made in the kitchen etc. but it's probably necessary to leave diet out of this thread or there'll be worms all over the gaff but... Has anyone ever actually gotten leaner from low intensity exercise like this? I mean weight loss preferentially from fat without also losing muscle etc? I never have and I haven't noticed it in others. Maybe for very heavy people who are starting from such a low level of fitness that any exercise would have that impact. The leanest athletes I see tend to be the ones that do lots of very explosive/anaerobic stuff...

Is the "fat burning zone" not debunked yet? Shouldn't we be doing HIIT and basking in the afterglow or whatever it's called?

i_surge

Is the LCHF diet not working?

I've had good results in the past with daily 2 hr spins in the upper endurance/low tempo zone with a recovery drink and balanced meal afterwards. Constantly pedaling and staying in the zone.

You're training the aerobic system and feel like you've had a good workout yet it's easy enough that you don't need to eat carbs on the bike to get home and can do it day after day.

Pottling around at the lower end is good for fat burning but a waste of time in terms of aerobic benefits unless you're putting in BIG hrs on the bike.

While they work well for fat burning short term, there's some evidence that fasted training or too much intensity can screw up the hormonal systems causing burnout and illness long term.

petethedrummer

Quiet you two. Right now, all i want to know is my Basal Metabolic rate.

niceonetom

I'm beginning to question the ingenuousness of this thread.

Ole Rodrigo

Why can't you count calories?

Ikg = 7700 cals.

petethedrummer

ror_74 wrote: »

Why can't you count calories?

Ikg = 7700 cals.

Yes but I want to know how far I have to cycle to achieve this.

diomed

I'm in my 60s. According to that chart I'm always in the maximum effort zone when cycling. If I was in the fat burn zone I wouldn't be moving.

AstraMonti

The answer is 42.

In a more serious note.. copy paste from your previous thread



Fats contribute a greater percentage (and amount) of energy at 25% VO2max (i.e. walking pace), around 50% of the energy at 65% VO2max (i.e. steady state pace), and around 25% of the energy at 85% VO2max (i.e. an intense aerobic bout with some significant anaerobic energy involved)

So start walking Pete and when you reach Belfast you should be grand.

The diagram in post no3 has no correlation between my age, my hr and what I consider anaerobic. I am completely off the scale.