Calories Burned in workout

dom17

Hi

I am trying to drop a few kilos and am using an app that calculates calories from food and calories burned from their database. I am a bit sceptical about the calories burned. So I used my Polar HR monitor in the gym this morning and according to it, I burned 825 calories. I thought this is a bit high, so I will give details of my workout and can anyone with experience give me their thoughts as to whether the HR monitor is close to correct. thanks in advance.

chinups 7 reps
squats 20kg x 15 reps
chinups 7
squat 40kg x 12
chinups 7
squat 60kg x 10
chinups 6
squat 80kg x 8
chinups 6
squat 105kg 5 sets x 5 reps

OH shoulder press
10kg x 15 reps
20kg x 10
30kg x 8
37.5kg 5sets x 5 reps

Deadlift
40kg x 15
dips x 10
60kg x 10
dips 10
80kg x 8
dips 10
90kg x 5
dips 10

Kettlebell Finishers
using 2 12kg kettlebells 30sec work 30 sec rest 2 rounds of each exercise

half snatch
clean & jerk
alternating dead clean
high pull
swing

Sorry its a bit long winded. The chins and dips are done as a superset with the warmup for the particular mainlifts.

Thanks again

Mellor

What's your weight, and how long does it take you?

zzfh

Mellor wrote: »

What's your weight, and how long does it take you?

this...yeah that number seems very high alright.whats your stats?

dom17

I weigh 90.5 kgs did the workout in 60 mins minimal rest in warmups 2 min rest in 5 x5 lifts

zzfh

hard to say,if i was to look at the workout and be put on the spot id say 300-400 very roughly.
i think even on a treadmill going 60-70% you would be doing well to burn the 825 cals...

anyone else?

Alf Veedersane

What are your calorie requirements for maintenance and how much below are you aiming for?

What do you take in from food?

I'd be wary of being over reliant on calories burned.

Mellor

dom17 wrote: »

I weigh 90.5 kgs did the workout in 60 mins minimal rest in warmups 2 min rest in 5 x5 lifts

If you were to run at 10km/h for 60mins, you burn about 850-900 calories, at a guess. I don't think the workout you describe in the OP is that kind of intensity/output.
A more accurate figure is probably 450.

Therrs a number of reasons why the HRM is off. Not set your correct weight, estimated MHR being off, or even lack of fitness causing an overly raised HR - so it over estimates exertion.

MaceFace

Mellor wrote: »

If you were to run at 10km/h for 60mins, you burn about 850-900 calories, at a guess. I don't think the workout you describe in the OP is that kind of intensity/output.
A more accurate figure is probably 450.

Therrs a number of reasons why the HRM is off. Not set your correct weight, estimated MHR being off, or even lack of fitness causing an overly raised HR - so it over estimates exertion.

My HRM reports similar to the OP even though it is correctly used. I attribute the high calorie count to the software (I use Edomondo) not being able to understand weight training. The monitor only knows my HR, not what type of lifting I am doing. For example, I could be squatting my ass off and my HR is 155. After I finish a set, I take a break of 45 seconds, and the HR may lower to 120 before I start another. During that break, I am not engaging any muscles, but with a HR of 120, the software does not know that. It makes its own assumptions, but the calories burnt under load (150HR) vs sitting (120HR) will be hugely different, but the heart rate is only 20% less.
Its the same reason that if I get my HR to 150 deadlifting or 150 doing bicep curls - the deadlifting will be engaging more muscles so burning many more calories.

Gummy Panda

Its not much tbh. Its like 200-300 calories or so depending on body weight. Weight training isn't for burning calories. Its for sparing lbm and nutrient partitioning when dieting

Mellor

MaceFace wrote: »

For example, I could be squatting my ass off and my HR is 155. After I finish a set, I take a break of 45 seconds, and the HR may lower to 120 before I start another. During that break, I am not engaging any muscles, but with a HR of 120, the software does not know that. It makes its own assumptions, but the calories burnt under load (150HR) vs sitting (120HR) will be hugely different, but the heart rate is only 20% less.

When you finish a set your energy consumption doesnt revert to resting just because you aren't engaging any muscles. You heart is still pumping hard, which uses energy. As does breathing hard. The internal energy burned is much higher than the work done.
Also, I don't think it's correct to assume that a 20% lower HR equals 20% less calories. I'd assume it's a nonlinear relationship.

Its the same reason that if I get my HR to 150 deadlifting or 150 doing bicep curls - the deadlifting will be engaging more muscles so burning many more calories.

But the curls would require a lot more reps to produce the same HR, and working snsller muscles over a longer time. The net effect would probably be a similar energy use.

MaceFace

Mellor wrote: »

When you finish a set your energy consumption doesnt revert to resting just because you aren't engaging any muscles. You heart is still pumping hard, which uses energy. As does breathing hard. The internal energy burned is much higher than the work done.
Also, I don't think it's correct to assume that


Its the same reason that if I get my HR to 150 deadlifting or 150 doing bicep curls - the deadlifting will be engaging more muscles so burning many more calories.

[/QUOTE]

Well the question is - if someone does a 60 minute workout, with an average (and steady) heart rate of 150, do different exercises result in greater calorie expenditure than others?

Mellor

MaceFace wrote: »

Well the question is - if someone does a 60 minute workout, with an average (and steady) heart rate of 150, do different exercises result in greater calorie expenditure than others?[/quote]
I don't know for sure, but I'd imagine that if two workouts both gave a similar steady 150bpm, then the energy burned would be similar, regardless of actually exercises.
"Bigger" lifts are going have an bigger impact on HR. So if the total HR averages about the same, the workload probably does too.

dom17

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

What are your calorie requirements for maintenance and how much below are you aiming for?

What do you take in from food?

I'd be wary of being over reliant on calories burned.

according to various online calculators 2700 calories/day (bit high ?) I am working to 1800/day plus any calories burned through exercise. average about 2000/day. Now if 2700 is maintanence plus exercise I should be losing more weight than I am.

Mellor HR monitor set correctly and I would be fit enough

I did this workout today and come in just over 500 cal.

4 supersets of 5pullups/5dips

24 rounds x 1 min work about 40 sec/20sec rest
1- high fast rows with strong band
2- plyometric push-ups
3- medicine ball seated twists

so thats 8 rounds of the 3 exercises at high intensity (was sweating like a pig)

and then the same kettlebell finishers as previous post

all in all workout time was 50 mins. To me this seems a more realistic reading.

Thanks for the responses

Alf Veedersane

dom17 wrote: »

according to various online calculators 2700 calories/day (bit high ?) I am working to 1800/day plus any calories burned through exercise. average about 2000/day. Now if 2700 is maintanence plus exercise I should be losing more weight than I am.

Mellor HR monitor set correctly and I would be fit enough

I did this workout today and come in just over 500 cal.

4 supersets of 5pullups/5dips

24 rounds x 1 min work about 40 sec/20sec rest
1- high fast rows with strong band
2- plyometric push-ups
3- medicine ball seated twists

so thats 8 rounds of the 3 exercises at high intensity (was sweating like a pig)

and then the same kettlebell finishers as previous post

all in all workout time was 50 mins. To me this seems a more realistic reading.

Thanks for the responses

How did you calculate maintenance? Not that 2700 is necessarily high or anything. Your height and weight are factors there.

And why 1800?

If you're eating below maintenance, you'll see results. You don't need to delve into how far below maintenance the exercise brings you.

If you feel more tired and performance suffers then eat more. If you're feeling good and getting results, then you're on the right track.

dom17

calculated maintenance using a couple of online calculators entering height,age,weight and activity, they all came in about the same.
I weigh 89.5 kg today want to get it down to 80 kg by June.
So I am using an app called myfitnesspal and entering my goals and stats it recommended 1800 cal plus calories burned through exercise. So for eg today 1800 + 500 (exercise) gives me 2300 cal

A kilo of fat is 3500 cal so without doing the maths here I should be dropping a kilo a week easily. Point is Im not. I know I am losing fat as trousers are looser and shirts are tighter. Only been calorie counting for 2 weeks now so I will plough on and see what happens.

I am wondering if 1800 cal could be too low.

Alf Veedersane

dom17 wrote: »

I know I am losing fat as trousers are looser and shirts are tighter.

This seems to be something you're ignoring or, at best, not giving enough consideration.

You need to disregard weight as the metric of success. You look better. You're probably fitter and stronger.

That's more important than what the scales says.

dom17

True enough, but I do need to get my weight down as I have to have a knee replacement and the more weight I can lose the longer I can delay it. I reckon if I can get it down and maintain it at 80kg I'll never have it done.

I have managed the knee for the last few years at around the 90 plus kg range.Hell I was 96kg at the beginning of the year thanks to my birthday being a week before xmas and xmas pigouts. So as I said I'll keep on going and switch the workouts around to keep the body guessing.