Cycling gets you very fit

byrnem31

I done a 45 min blast on the defy sunday. Pushed it hard enough, got the heart rate up fairly high and 636 calories burned.

Was doing a zoom kickboxing class Monday for an hour and burned 600 calories. I trained doing punches with 2kg weights in each hand for most of the session too.

Very surprised with the results.

Obviously if I was in the gym, the kickboxing results would differ and I also get more toned in my arms kickboxing.

But for a low impact sport, it can get you really fit. I was a casual cyclist until recently but I'm starting to get into it.

Thelonious Monk

I only cycle as a means of transport, but once you get used to it, it doesn't even feel as taxing as walking. Although I'd cycle a fair bit most days going to shops or into town or whatever, I don't even consider it as exercise and have to do other stuff to keep fit.
Might be different for others.

magicbastarder

i think the first time i realised 'wow, i *am* kinda fit' was years ago, a few months after i'd started cycling from blanchardstown to leopardstown four days a week.
had gone for coffee with some colleagues, and i opted to take the stairs up from the ground floor to the third floor; a colleague joined me. i talked the whole way up (not unusual for me) and realised when we reached the top, my colleague, who often claimed to be fit, was too out of breath to answer me.

LollipopJimmy

How are you measuring calories burned?

Macy0161

I'd only go as far as claiming cycling can make you aerobically fit. The more I've focussed on cycling, the weaker my upper body has got!

smacl

byrnem31 wrote: »

I done a 45 min blast on the defy sunday. Pushed it hard enough, got the heart rate up fairly high and 636 calories burned.

Was doing a zoom kickboxing class Monday for an hour and burned 600 calories. I trained doing punches with 2kg weights in each hand for most of the session too.

Very surprised with the results.

Obviously if I was in the gym, the kickboxing results would differ and I also get more toned in my arms kickboxing.

But for a low impact sport, it can get you really fit. I was a casual cyclist until recently but I'm starting to get into it.

I find if I'm cycling in the hills I get a great calorie burn rate but not so much on the flat, even if I'm pushing quite hard. I was a competitive martial artist in my younger years, primarily chinese stand up wrestling and some full contact kick boxing. Wrestling and Judo are fantastic for burning calories, probably more so than boxing and kick-boxing, as you're dealing with a lot of resistance for a lot of the time. I reckon the same is true of climbing on the bike, where you're essentially lifting your weight plus the weight of the bike as you pedal.

Wahtever keeps you moving and you manage to enjoy doing at the same time is all good as far as I'm concerned. Cycling is certainly a great activity that you can sustain as you get on a bit.

Wishbone Ash

byrnem31 wrote: »

...and 636 calories burned..

How do you know?

Different devices and apps all give very varying amounts of calories burned. Large pinch of salt required.

magicbastarder

there are no calories in salt, WA.

dahat

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'd only go as far as claiming cycling can make you aerobically fit. The more I've focussed on cycling, the weaker my upper body has got!

Did press ups at home on Monday & only managed a pathetic 8, i was hugely embarrassed given my exceptional aerobic fitness.

Macy0161

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Different devices and apps all give very varying amounts of calories burned. Large pinch of salt required.

fwiw, I've found I've had expected weight loss using Garmin(s). But anything heart rate depends on reasonably accurate setting of zones. My bolt (without a power meter) with the same settings gives significantly higher (when I'm on my gravel bike, I use my Garmin watch for calories).

Obviously, if you're cycling with a power meter kj expenditure is a pretty good estimate of calories burned.

D13exile

I used to run 10kms a day (from when I was a schoolkid) up to about 9 years ago but my knees and ankles started getting sore. A long time cycling friend introduced me to road cycling and we had a Obi Wan/Anakin kind of relationship whereby he taught me the ways of the force aka road cycling. Well just like Obi Wan and Anakin, this relationship has since changed whereby he only manages the occasional spin now and when we do get out together on the bikes, he's huffing and puffing doing 25kph whereas I'm hardly even working up a sweat as I normally average 35kph, so as I like to say to him, "I am now the Master"....to which he replies "only a master of evil you sh!t":D.

Cycling is a great, low impact aerobic exercise and it has many other benefits such as calming the mind when out in the fresh air admiring the scenery. However it does nothing for the upper body and so I do a weights session to stop me wasting away from the waist up. Working on my core is also a priority as it helps a lot when out on the bike.

However its all about enjoying it. No matter whether you do 10kms or 100kms, whether you can cycle at 40kph or 20kph, do what feels good for you. Just don't neglect your core, do some stretching to keep your muscles supple and lift some weights to keep your upper body in check.

smacl

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

How do you know?

Different devices and apps all give very varying amounts of calories burned. Large pinch of salt required.

Absolutely, and I reckon many of the devices err heavily on the 'generous' side. That said, if you you use the same sensor across different exercises, e.g. HRM, the relative effort expended is reasonably good even if the absolute values may not be. I really need to get in the habit of using the HRM more often but rarely bother with it these days.

silverharp

its better to have good fitness in different areas, a bit weird someone being able to dead lift 150KG but get out of breath running for a bus, or only be cycling fit but have no particular upper body strength. From a cycling perspective if you have good core and upper body strength it must make rides and recovery more pleasant in relation to back, arms and grip etc.
What I found great was combining endurance cycling with interval training on the Concept 2 rower as its a more reasonable way to train max effort short bursts, plus doing typical gym work. You would also tend to have a better level of base fitness through the winter

ted1

Well I’ve ran several marathons with minimal run training. Fitness is solely from commuting. I’m also over 100kg so not built from marathons.

So yes agree with the thread title.

ThewhiteJesus

i cycle and run(average distances only) and i can tell you, it's the running that keeps me fitter.
But the cycling keeps the knees healthy as my physio told me after i had all sorts of issues, after some cycling the knee problems disappeared as my knees got stronger,
like most things a bit of everything is probably best

MojoMaker

The bike computer/watch/fitness trackers have a vested in interest in maximising the calorie expenditure they report to the average user.

My rule of thumb from cycling-specific training programs was 350-450 calories per hour from cycling (cruising <> pushing it) for a cyclist within normal weight tolerances.

Heavier cyclists get more (initial) benefit from any type of activity but as the weight drops and the BMR lowers, the calorie benefit from exercise also drops.

650 kcals for 45 mins not-balls-out-FTP test-work on the bike sounds a bit optimistic. Running at threshold for an hour gives more calorie benefit, but is also much harder on the body.

A great way to keep the overall body in shape, including upper torso to match cycling fitness is to drop in a couple of decent swim sessions per week. Absolutely brilliant for neck, shoulders, chest, traps, and lower back.

gaffmaster

I think the more accurate assessment is - Cycling is an efficient fat burner.

magicbastarder

MojoMaker wrote: »

The bike computer/watch/fitness trackers have a vested in interest in maximising the calorie expenditure they report to the average user.

i've often noted that if i put my activity into a fairly dumb online calculator (1 hour at 22mph sort of detail), they give an estimate about double what strava would. you can guess which i'd consider closer to the truth.

Macy0161

I tend to injury myself running, because aerobically I could (and have) go out an run 15-20km no bother. I'd be crippled for days after. But not as bad as when I've dropped into 5 a sides - I used to play a couple of times a week, but cycling and running are linear as opposed to all the turning in football.

Anyway, I wouldn't argue it isn't better to be doing strength or core training too for overall health. But fitting in 30 minutes of body weight exercises a week is so much harder to fit in than a 4+ hour cycle

In fairness to myself, I did go to an S&C class for a good while a couple of times a week pre-covid. And previously did Pilates and Yoga. I'm pretty disciplined around cycle training (and diet (on weekdays at least)), but that type of thing is something I seem to need a class.

dahat wrote: »

Did press ups at home on Monday & only managed a pathetic 8, i was hugely embarrassed given my exceptional aerobic fitness.

The family are watching operation transformation (don't get me started on it as a concept for sustainable weight loss) - I'm resisting doing the minimum fitness test as it expects 12 press ups for my age...

cletus

It's a fairly broad statement. We could get into health related components of fitness vs performance related components of fitness, requirements of types of fitness for a sporting application, or just what do people mean by 'fit'.

But in general, yes, cycling is good for 'fitness'

TooObvious

I remember doing a circuit training class with one of the lads from the club. He was a savage cyclist, very quick on the climbs, had raced the RAS etc. so expectations were high. Unfortunately he couldn't squat or lift anything over his head at all, his posture in the squat was actually upsetting to watch.

So cycling will increase your cardio respiratory fitness, however if that's all you do it will lead to a decrease in flexibility, mobility, muscle mass etc all important elements of "fitness"

LollipopJimmy

TooObvious wrote: »

I remember doing a circuit training class with one of the lads from the club. He was a savage cyclist, very quick on the climbs, had raced the RAS etc. so expectations were high. Unfortunately he couldn't squat or lift anything over his head at all, his posture in the squat was actually upsetting to watch.

So cycling will increase your cardio respiratory fitness, however if that's all you do it will lead to a decrease in flexibility, mobility, muscle mass etc all important elements of "fitness"

This is part of the reason McGregor doesn't actually use that FiftyOne bike he has and cycles a mountain bike, the belief is that road biking has a negative effect on posture and flexibility.

I advised a pro fighter recently on a bike (not all fighters have big bucks and he was bargain hunting!), he wouldn't even consider a road bike. These guys would speak to Doc Dalby on the regular too so not just based on hearsay

byrnem31

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

How are you measuring calories burned?

I got a free watch with my huawei p30 pro. Absolutely amazing watch with GPS. When you turn on the tracker for outdoor cycling, it measures loads of statistics and even plays a video with background music of your journey/route. It vibrates when you are cycling too hard also reminding you to recover for a few seconds. Huawei gt 2e. It has a Sleep tracker, it tracks martial arts, swimming etc, it's waterproof etc. Battery lasts 2 weeks, comes with a wireless charging doc. I think to buy is only about €120 new and now I don't need to buy an expensive cycling computer. Not bad for free.

byrnem31

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'd only go as far as claiming cycling can make you aerobically fit. The more I've focussed on cycling, the weaker my upper body has got!

Buy some resistance cords and tone up your arms with them. €15 in declathon. Push ups, chins ups etc. You don't need expensive training equipment. Unless it's a bike of course.

Johnny Jukebox

I cycled about 200km/week exclusively up to about 2 years ago. Then I started a man's Pilates class about twice a week. The difference was negligible at first but now I can feel my core powering me up hills, if that makes any sense. Highly recommended !

ps. The all man's is now all woman's plus me... c'est la vie..

Thelonious Monk

gaffmaster wrote: »

I think the more accurate assessment is - Cycling is an efficient fat burner.

There's no such thing as a fat burner. Liposuction maybe is all.

smacl

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

There's no such thing as a fat burner. Liposuction maybe is all.

There was a fair bit of talk on here a couple of years back on lipolysis, where the idea was that moderate paced endurance cycling for long periods was an effective way of burning fat as a form of energy. Lot of discussion on fasted cycling too from memory. I'll see if I can dig out the thread.

Edit, this one; https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98213812

Bigjimdawg

Higher intensity exercise is fueled primarily by stored carbohydrates as opposed to fat so technically speaking there is an intensity level that will rely more on fat oxidation to fuel exercise. It's really not all that relevant though as your body will simply store more fat throughout the day to make up for it.

Caloric expenditure is all that really matters when it comes to fat loss and higher intensity activities expend more calories.

GreeBo

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

How are you measuring calories burned?

The standard way,

Average number of cakes and biscuits eaten per hour x avg calorie per cake x time outside on the bike...is that not how everyone does it?

GreeBo

Like most activities if you only do that you get conditioned to do that.
I cycled daily for years and was still really only cycle fit, ask me to run 5k and Id be in a heap, also +1 on the upper body dimension, it doenst serve much purpose during cycling so it will naturally dwindle if you just focus on cycling.

I think rowing is without doubt the best bang for your time spent.

magicbastarder

ideally, you really should combine swimming, with cycling and running, in that order.

Bigjimdawg

GreeBo wrote: »

Like most activities if you only do that you get conditioned to do that.
I cycled daily for years and was still really only cycle fit, ask me to run 5k and Id be in a heap, also +1 on the upper body dimension, it doenst serve much purpose during cycling so it will naturally dwindle if you just focus on cycling.

I think rowing is without doubt the best bang for your time spent.

To be fair if you have developed excellent aerobic fitness through cycling it's not going to instantly translate into being an excellent runner. But with some specific training (running) you will probably see improvements very quickly and you will be at a huge advantage in comparison to someone starting from the couch.

Bigjimdawg

magicbastarder wrote: »

ideally, you really should combine swimming, with cycling and running, in that order.

Why though? Op isn't trying to be a triathlete as far as I know so what's the rationale for doing all of those activities in that order?

Macy0161

byrnem31 wrote: »

Buy some resistance cords and tone up your arms with them. €15 in declathon. Push ups, chins ups etc. You don't need expensive training equipment. Unless it's a bike of course.

I look at them gathering dust, along with my TRX set and some kettle bells, every time I do the turbo!

magicbastarder

Bigjimdawg wrote: »

Why though? Op isn't trying to be a triathlete as far as I know so what's the rationale for doing all of those activities in that order?

was just a joke.

Bigjimdawg

magicbastarder wrote: »

was just a joke.

My bad.

magicbastarder

OT, i once read that no matter how fast you run a marathon, that the calorie burn is pretty much unchanged; it's fairly linear at abuot 100 calories per mile (for an average male, i would guess).
i wonder for what range of speeds the same would apply in cycling? obviously the big difference there is air resistance becomes much more prominent.

Bigjimdawg

magicbastarder wrote: »

OT, i once read that no matter how fast you run a marathon, that the calorie burn is pretty much unchanged; it's fairly linear at abuot 100 calories per mile (for an average male, i would guess).
i wonder for what range of speeds the same would apply in cycling? obviously the big difference there is air resistance becomes much more prominent.

I think organising your training purely based on what burns the most calories (I know that's not what you're suggesting) is misguided.

Higher intensity activities burn more calories it's that's a simple concept to understand. So maybe we should go out and cycle, jog, row etc as hard as we possibly can for as long as we possibly can. Well yes that will be fantastic for burning lots of calories in the short term but it will inevitably lead to overtraining, injuries as well as being extremely unenjoyable.

The best thing would be to pick an activity you enjoy, train sensibly using a structured plan and focus on improving your fitness (simply training more and harder as you get fitter will handle the weight loss aspect provided your diet is in check).

Ideally some combination of CV training and strength training would be ideal as they both have unique benefits when it comes to maintaining health and aging well.

ted1

magicbastarder wrote: »

OT, i once read that no matter how fast you run a marathon, that the calorie burn is pretty much unchanged; it's fairly linear at abuot 100 calories per mile (for an average male, i would guess).

With marathons I always say speed and weight is linear. 25kg = 1 hour
50kg runner = 2 hour marathon
75kg runner = 3 hour marathon
100kg runner = 4 hours marathon.

Could allign with calories burn which really is the effort to move the mass

magicbastarder

Bigjimdawg wrote: »

I think organising your training purely based on what burns the most calories (I know that's not what you're suggesting) is misguided.

ah yeah, i just thought it was interesting that doubling your speed doubled your calorie burn, you might have expected a non-linear relationship there. (that's assuming what i read was accurate)

eeeee

dahat wrote: »

Did press ups at home on Monday & only managed a pathetic 8, i was hugely embarrassed given my exceptional aerobic fitness.

Thinly veiled 'I can do 8 push-ups' :P

magicbastarder wrote: »

ideally, you really should combine swimming, with cycling and running, in that order.

Can we de-mod someone? :P




Cycling is a really broad and varied sport. I do track for example, and do 2 gym sessions a week with that, lots of power and strength work, work on rollers, mainly riding fixed etc. so lots of core work on and off the bike.

I'm not a long distance person, I lose the will to live at it.



Road cycling where you're going out at a moderate pace for ages is a different thing.


MTB is different again, sprinty, lots of upper body, strength, core etc, BMX even more so.


There are different kinds of fitnesses within cycling, even within the same discipline - I'm an endurance track rider, and I do **** all strength and gym work in comparison to a track sprinter. I also don't do enough endurance on the road but that's a training failure from me

byrnem31

Simon on gcn on YouTube is fit as a fiddle with litte t Rex arms.

The kickboxing is great for helping the cycling fitness levels also. It's all about core strength which is ideal for when cycling too. Loads of upper body workout also. It's a good mix to have.

You need a day that pushes you hard followed by a recovery day, ie. cord band resistance on the easy days at home, both on the arms and legs. You are still getting a workout while stretching the muscles that are sore from a heavy workout ;as opposed to a hard day straight into nothing the following day and be in bits on the 3rd day.

fat bloke

byrnem31 wrote: »

Simon on gcn on YouTube is fit as a fiddle with little t Rex arms.

This is definitely a problem. Cycling indeed gets you fit (for cycling at least) but I find I can hardly open jars anymore and am frequently shamed and embarrassed by flimsy plastic packaging.:o

silverharp

I feel a bit sorry for that guy who has the well known over 50's cycling channel in the UK , he doesnt seem to be getting too much bang for his buck

cletus

What the majority of people refer to as 'fit' seems to be cardiovascular fitness. That's one component of "health related" fitness (as opposed to fitness for sport/performance)

The other components are muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility and body composition.

Ideally your training would address directly the first four, and this training then indirectly affects the fifth, body composition.


Once you move past these general health components, you move into performance related components; agility, coordination, balance, power, reaction time, and speed.

Something that's worth thinking about - very often the types of training we do for performance, we do at a risk to our general health.

Wishbone Ash

byrnem31 wrote: »

...You need a day that pushes you hard followed by a recovery day, ie. cord band resistance on the easy days at home, both on the arms and legs. You are still getting a workout while stretching the muscles that are sore from a heavy workout ;as opposed to a hard day straight into nothing the following day and be in bits on the 3rd day.

....or just get out and ride the bike and forget about all the science.

magicbastarder

i did not get out on the bike on sunday because i spent the day moving a ton or two of firewood around. i guess that will serve me for upper body workouts for, i dunno, six months?

Taxuser1

Anyone see training affect sleep or food? the more I train the less I need of some basics like sleep and food. Getting older of course so I know sleep is less needed but I’d get by with 5 hours generally on a set 5 day training week. Energy is generally boundless mid summer at a high.

07Lapierre

I’m not taking any chances. I’m terrified I’ll overtrain and burn out. That’s why I have a beer every Friday evening. You can’t be too careful!

smacl

magicbastarder wrote: »

i did not get out on the bike on sunday because i spent the day moving a ton or two of firewood around. i guess that will serve me for upper body workouts for, i dunno, six months?

I think it was Lumen who said here a couple of year ago that the only reason we have arms is to stop our head hitting the handlebars :pac: