how much gym work and how much riding?

need to drop 50 pounds AND build/tone muscles to get back in cycling shape. My plan is to eat and act as though i'm at my desired weight and be healthy about it. I'm a foodie and limiting myself to protein shakes and egg white omelets makes me very cranky so I'm going to try to count calories, do 5 hours of cardio a week, weight resistance 2-3 times a week. My question is, is this an average amount of exercise for people at their desired weight and NOT dieting? (never at my desired weight long enough!) and how much road cycling equals this kind of gym work?
any comments welcome!

Hard to know equivalent energy expenditure of what you are mapping out and how it compares to road cycling..when we are not certain about how many hours of cycling and degree of intensity.

But 50 lbs. sounds significant enough that you still need to adjust your food intake --decrease/eliminate types of unhealthy foods, limit size portions for good stuff, etc.

Unless you plan to lose 50 lbs. by cycling across the U.S. and eat same amount of food now.

The rule of thumb is to burn more than what you eat on a daily basis or similar.

To eat meals and feel 80% full.

YOu probably know how you ramped up to 50 additional lbs. from desired weight..

I've been losing some weight lately, not really on purpose even. I'm not an expert but this is what's done it for me.

I like food. I like some things that are not so good for me, and a lot of things that are. I try to eats lots of the things that are good. At dinner time I fill half of my plate with salad and other veggies. That way I'm still eating lots but I figure no one ever got fat from too much broccoli (as long as it doesn't have a cheese sauce.) Steam some broccoli, add a little soy sauce and some sesame seeds and you're good to go.

I also hate exercise. It's boring. That's part of why I got into cycling. I don't see it as exercise. I see it as a cheap way to commute and a good way to explore. I also enjoy skating, hockey, skiing, and paintball. They're fun. Any calories burned are beside the point.

There was a great post last week that said eat food, not too much, mostly plants. I like that, and I'd like to add to it go outside and play.

If you want to lose weight, remember not to do too much strength/power work in the gym. That type of work-out builds muscle and muscle and muscle weighs more than fat...

In my first year of cycling (and I pretty-much only cycle) I lost only a few kgs, but I did drop two dress sizes... So my body changed shape and lost fat, but because I was building muscle, the change was not so noticeable on the scales.

Like you, I don't want to (so don't) diet. I do watch what I eat and minimise fatty and sugar foods. "They" say to lose weight you should be lifting your heart rate to speed up your metabolism, but not to the point where you can't talk.

And be prepared for permanant weight loss by exercise to take time. If you have not done alot of exercise before, remember you are asking your heart, your lungs, your muscles to start responding to your demands in different ways - this is a metabolic change. It takes time. Its hard, but you should try and be patient. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copaiba

My plan is to eat and act as though i'm at my desired weight and be healthy about it

---

No can do. You'll be starving yourself.
Try Weight Watchers. At least go long enough to get the required materials to do it on your own.
I lost 40 lbs using their points system and got my initial education about healthy eating there (i've since learned a lot more through college classes and other reading).

I know there are quite a few WW success stories on TE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoadRaven

If you want to lose weight, remember not to do too much strength/power work in the gym. That type of work-out builds muscle and muscle and muscle weighs more than fat...

---

Roadraven, this statement is very misleading. I absolutely advocate resistance training for my weight-loss clients and use it when I want to lean down as well.


while muscle may be heavier than adipose/fat, most women will not bulk up because they lack sufficient testosterone. this is even more true later in life.

however, muscle burns more calories than fat does, which means the more muscle tissue you have on your body, the more calories you're going to burn just sitting around. this is a good thing.

That statement is misleading in another way as well.

One cubic inch of muscle cells weigh more than one cubic inch of fat cells.

or

a five pound mass of muscle cells is smaller than a five pound mass of fat cells.

or

a 140 pound woman who is 19% body fat but is more muscular wears a size eight

while a 140 pound woman who is 24% body fat and less muscular wears a size twelve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zencentury

No can do. You'll be starving yourself.

---

How so?

If you mean going from 2500 calories a day to 1500 calories a day, that might feel like starvation, but it really would only feel that way until you adjusted.

Didn't someone say here recently that it was recommended to them to determine the maintenance calorie level required for the desired weight, eat that, and let your weight "drift down"? I think that's what the poster is suggesting she is going to do, in so many words.

That's not starvation, unless it is under about 1300 calories. Active people of normal weight for their height who exercise can eat more than 1300 calories to maintain their weight.

Karen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by velogirl

Roadraven, this statement is very misleading. I absolutely advocate resistance training for my weight-loss clients and use it when I want to lean down as well.


while muscle may be heavier than adipose/fat, most women will not bulk up because they lack sufficient testosterone. this is even more true later in life.

however, muscle burns more calories than fat does, which means the more muscle tissue you have on your body, the more calories you're going to burn just sitting around. this is a good thing.

---

+1 this is a very important point.

As for weight loss and eating, eating 80% of required calories is the optimal level for weight loss while maintaining a good metabolic hormone profile. If you eat less your metabolism goes haywire. Realize that required calories means recommended daily intake which for women is estimated as 1500 to 2000 calories a day (but is quite a bit higher if you're muscular), plus whatever you expend during exercise.

Thank you all for your replies.
OK. I do think this is interesting because i like math - its SO abstract. I am 185 lbs and to lose weight I would eat 80% of calories needed to maintain a light to moderately active lifestyle= 1600-1900 calories. I want to be 135 lbs and that would require 1600-2100 calories to maintain. So a 1500 calorie/ 5 meals a day plus a cookie diet would work, right? Assuming I restrict sugar and refined/ over-processed foods, eat enough protein with veggies AND
If I do 2-3 weight resistance workouts per week, I should preserve muscle if not gain muscle. Right? I also just saw a guy who lifts 2-3 times a week instead of the 6 times he used to lift and his NECK SHRUNK thank god; he's more lean and less bulky which really is what I want. Bulking up is way too easy for me.
Good grief, it sounds so simple, doesn't it? Too simple? Balancing calories and exercise is so tricky when you look like a pre-columbian fertility goddess and you want to look as much like Charlize Theron as possible!
But I really love riding the bike, not going to the gym, and the reason for the weight gain is a knee injury caused by overtraining muscles that obviously weren't strong enough. I wasn't squatting, lunging, doing sit-ups, flies or stretching at the time so I guess my question is: how much of that stuff do you guys do? My goal is to tour on my bike - 40 to 70 miles a day - and the longest ride i've ever done was 45 miles - one day.
I really am not a natural athlete so skiing, paintball or anything fast isn't that fun for me. I like belly-dancing (not good at it, just like trying)...and hiking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by velogirl

Roadraven, this statement is very misleading. I absolutely advocate resistance training for my weight-loss clients and use it when I want to lean down as well.


while muscle may be heavier than adipose/fat, most women will not bulk up because they lack sufficient testosterone. this is even more true later in life.

however, muscle burns more calories than fat does, which means the more muscle tissue you have on your body, the more calories you're going to burn just sitting around. this is a good thing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wahine

+1 this is a very important point.

As for weight loss and eating, eating 80% of required calories is the optimal level for weight loss while maintaining a good metabolic hormone profile. If you eat less your metabolism goes haywire. Realize that required calories means recommended daily intake which for women is estimated as 1500 to 2000 calories a day (but is quite a bit higher if you're muscular), plus whatever you expend during exercise.

---

My apologies ladies
You are right and thank you for clarifying what I said
I was in a rush and didn't explain myself well.

In fact, in the last week I have only just posted in the suggestions about what to teach women about how it would be useful for females to know how muscle/fat work in women...

Thank you for both being so eloquent. I was trying to highlight that huge muscles as a goal is not particularly useful if your goal is to bike, and that careful development of muscles is useful but bulking up like the hulk may be not so desirable... I will take more care when wording things in future posts. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copaiba

My question is, is this an average amount of exercise for people at their desired weight and NOT dieting? (never at my desired weight long enough!) and how much road cycling equals this kind of gym work?
any comments welcome!

---

I can't really comment on what the average dieter does/doesn't do, but I will offer this suggestion: If you want to make lifestyle changes that are sustainable, then devise a workout regimen that you can actually stick with. It really doesn't help in the long run to approach your diet with guns blazing, only to exhaust your mind and body. Five hours of cardio plus resistance training sounds good--assuming you're otherwise a pretty fit person. If not, I think you might want ease into it a bit more or you run the risk of overdoing it and burning out. Increase the number, length and intensity of your workouts gradually. Incorporate rest, stretching and recovery into your regimen as well, so that you avoid injury and fatigue.

No matter how much you work out, it still ultimately comes down to calories in versus calories out. You can overeat even if you're working out 20 hours a week so even if you up your workouts, you will still be faced with the challenge of taking in fewer calories than you're burning. Plus, the more you work out, the hungrier you will find yourself, so suppressing your appetite--at least from my experience--becomes harder. When I'm riding full tilt during the summer, I call my appetite "The Beast," if that tells you anything.

As for how gym workouts compare to road riding, the answer to that depends on the intensity and length of both. My hour-long spin classes are more intense than my average road ride, but my average road ride is several hours in length so I assume that I burn more calories doing that than I do in spinning. But I also have to eat more before, during and after those longer rides, too, so that has to be factored in as well.

Just my two cents.

Hi Copaiba,

Before you start hard on your weight loss regimen with exercise, cycling, strength training, DO GET YOUR SELF CHECKED OUT. Make sure your body can handle the workout you are asking. knee problems, heart, breathing, metabolism, diet...

50 pound is a lot no matter how tall you are. So get a checkup and get a green light first.

And you may want to take a class at local junior college, adult education class, or sign up for a gym class at a local gym. Maybe even join a recreational/touring bicycle group. Another good way is join TNT Team in Training fundraiser. They have good coaches, well structured and fun. Keeping it fun is so important in maintaining your interest over the long haul.

Wish you luck,
Smilingcat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by velogirl

Roadraven, this statement is very misleading...

...muscle burns more calories than fat does, which means the more muscle tissue you have on your body, the more calories you're going to burn just sitting around. this is a good thing.

---

I meant to add:

I have a couple of friends who have worked at body building in their 40s and have been successful at "bulking up" - but it has taken alot of effort on their parts - more than the men around them seem to take. Thankyou for explaining the difficulty of this velogirl.

I didn't have a clear understanding of the testosterone/muscle/bulk-not bulk relationships...

Thanks again

while most women won't bulk up, I will say that there are women who have excess adipose who appear to bulk up when they lift because the muscle (under the layer of fat) has increased in size. however, if they were to lean down (ie lose some fat), you'd still find that women don't bulk up naturally.

I have bulky muscles anyway, especially my quads and calves. But they've been covered by a smoothing layer of fat for so long, I forgot about them. Now that I've been going to boot camp, my arms are slimming way down and I can see muscles I never knew I had. I'd have to be really thin, though, to get real definition. I don't care too much about the rest of my body (I'm not showing off the stretch marks over my abs, for instance), but I would love to have well defined feminine arms!

Karen

It sounds like you're setting yourself up for failure, unless you REALLY like being roped into a routine.

For example, if you hate going to the gym, you probably will end up finding lots of reason to NOT go ("it's too crowded, I'm too tired, it's too late/early" etc.). You might want to purchase some hand weights, maybe get some dvd's and don't forget your core work. You can do push ups, one-arm rows, overhead presses, crunches & lunges. Hit the major muscle groups with compound exercises (as listed above) & ditch the bicep curls, tricep kick backs, etc. Single joint exercises don't burn as much fat & can set you up for joint problems in the beginning. You will need to pace yourself and listen to your body. Don't push yourself through pain in the beginning. Three weight workouts a week, 30 minutes each, 12 reps in GOOD form is plenty.

Clean up your diet. No fast food. Veggies, whole grain breads, low fat protein & fruits. High fiber will fill you up & keep your blood sugar stable. Be sure to carry something for snack attacks that will keep you out of the vending machines. Eat, don't drink, your calories, unless it's a protein shake after weight training. Watch the cookies, they can set off cravings.

In answer to your original question, I do something aerobic and/or weight train in a gym almost every day. My usual work out is 30 to 90 minutes. I've been working out for 20 years, though, so I know when to back off. My diet is good, but I'm a chocoholic. I allow myself one piece of good dark chocolate a day.

Know that this is a lifestyle change, not a temporary fix. If you want to get in shape & stay there, you'll need to adopt new habits. If you aren't willing to do the work, wait until you are. Yo-yo dieting makes it harder to take the weight off & it is very bad for your health.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dogmama

.
Eat, don't drink, your calories, unless it's a protein shake after weight training. Watch the cookies, they can set off cravings.

---

I wouldn't drink a commercially produced protein shake. Chocolate milk just is fine.
and if I want a cookie or five I will have them. life is too short to deny yourself small pleasures.
I do tricep pulldowns and skull crushers too. I do not want bingo arms.

Everything in moderation.

This page can be extremely helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dogmama

It sounds like you're setting yourself up for failure, unless you REALLY like being roped into a routine.

---

I actually do better with my fitness goals by having a fairly strict routine. What helps, however, is that it's a routine of activities--cycling, spinning, yoga and, just recently, running, and a small amount of weight training--that I like. I think it's key to enjoy what you're doing and, with as many options as there are on the market, I think it's easier than ever to find something that you do enjoy. I think variety helps, too, along with knowing how and when to rest and recover.

That said, I think being too dogmatic can be counterproductive if you constantly beat yourself up if and when you falter. All too often, people fall off the diet/exercise wagon because they see it as all or nothing proposition. They miss one workout or eat one piece of cake and the voice inside their head says "I"m a failure" instead of "my next decision will be a healthier one." I think it's actually better to learn to eat just one cookie than to deprive yourself of them entirely, only to later eat a whole box out of frustration and a sense of deprivation. But, then again, I like cookies!

My advice is to just take it one day, one meal, one workout at a time until the changes in your routine and lifestyle become automatic. By then, the changes in your overall health, weight, energy level, peace of mind, etc., will hopefully serve to further motivate you.

Good luck with your goals!

What's Your Exercise Personality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zencentury

What's Your Exercise Personality?

---

What if any of the three options sounded good to me on most of those questions? :confused::cool:

And what if all the answers apply? I'm apparently a self-motivated team player. The only reason I'm not more spontaneous is that I'm usually already doing something. I guess that's good.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zencentury

I wouldn't drink a commercially produced protein shake. Chocolate milk just is fine.
and if I want a cookie or five I will have them. life is too short to deny yourself small pleasures.
I do tricep pulldowns and skull crushers too. I do not want bingo arms.

Everything in moderation.

This page can be extremely helpful.

---

The page you linked to has a section on weight training http://exercise.about.com/cs/weightl...r_weight_2.htm and they recommend compound movements for weight loss. I think the original question was about losing weight. I do a few single muscle exercises, but the majority of my lifting is compound. If time is short, I drop the singles.

BTW - don't you mean tricep pushdowns? Pulldowns are usually lat pulldowns, for the upper back. :)

I agree that most protein shakes would gag a maggot. There are a few, though, that aren't too bad. I mix it with chocolate soy milk so I get protein and carbs. Chocolate milk is supposed to be good too & certainly cheaper. Protein powders are sometimes supplemented with glutamine & other nutrients that help with muscle recovery. Since I work out often, I need to get nutrients back into the muscle quickly. Chocolate milk doesn't have as high a level of whey protein, which is the protein that is used quickly.

I think it all depends on your activity level & your basic outlook on life. I love cookies, but they set off cravings, so I have to be very careful. I hate waking up with a sugar hangover. :(

In reality I don't do half the weight training i used to except for my arms and shoulders and that's purely for vanity. Everything else is on the stability ball or yoga.

I linked to that page because it's a good site and provides links for many fitness related subjects. I'm sure there will be lurkers who find it useful.

To answer part of the op's question, this is what my 'routine' is:

Monday - spin 1 hour/ weights afterwards, 15 minutes.
Tue- 2 hours of tennis, doubles. Not a lot of cardio, but I play with men, so it's hard hitting and running around playing out points. Enough to leave me panting.
Wed - 1 hour tennis practice, singles
Th - same as Tue
F - NOTHING
Winter Sat/Sun - Spin class and lifting on Sat, 35-40 easy miles/social ride on Sun.
Spring-Fall Sat/Sun - Sat solo ride, about 50-60 miles, pushing myself. Sunday, easy 35-40 mile social ride.

...and I still gain weight, if I eat what I want. I love bread and Cheez Its. :D

To not gain weight, I have to watch what I snack on, and feel hungry at night when I go to bed. And eat one plate of food, not two because it tastes SOOO good. Right now, I'm not resisting very well, and slowly gaining a pronounced pouch on my belly! :rolleyes:

If I want to lose, which I usually do in the Spring/Summer, I drink lots of fruit smoothies instead of snacking on Cheez -Its, and eat more salads. When it's cold outside, I want heavier fare and I get the snacking compulsion. I also stop lifting in the warmer months, because I'm out of the gym, and I DO bulk up across the back and shoulders, as little as I lift. I might also do a weekday ride or two if the day is too beautiful to resist! And I bike commute everywhere.

Right now in the winter, I'm 5-8 pounds heavier than what I usually am in the summer.

I'm older (49), so my metabolism is slower than most.

Can someone explain to me why some women don't want beautiful defined muscles? I honestly do not get this, never have.

I don't mind defined muscles. I have them. It's the bulking up I don't like. For hill climbing, I DON'T need added weight on top. I climb best when I'm about 110, but then I'm hungry all the time. 113 is a happy medium. Now I'm 117-118. 5 or so pounds I don't want to haul up on climbs!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deedolce

I don't mind defined muscles. I have them. It's the bulking up I don't like. For hill climbing, I DON'T need added weight on top. I climb best when I'm about 110, but then I'm hungry all the time. 113 is a happy medium. Now I'm 117-118. 5 or so pounds I don't want to haul up on climbs!

---

Okay, that I understand. I'm just not used to women using the phrase "bulk up" when that's what they mean. Sorry!

No worries...:D

I absolutely agree with you velogirl, weight training is a good idea for all women, as is eating a diet high enough in protein when trying to lose weight to preserve lean body mass. I also agree with you that women are unlikely to bulk up by weight training due to lack of testosterone, most women have to work really hard and eat in a very specific way to gain even a little muscle. But, I want to correct one thing, a pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat, and in fact it is more compact.

For example when I gained weight and ended up at 174 lb, I viewed it as an 'unintentional bulk'. By that I mean when you gain weight, for whatever reason, you gain muscle along with the fat to tote all that extra fat around. SO, when I lost weight, I wanted to do everything I could to preserve muscle mass as I lost fat. I did that, so now at 141 lb, I am wearing the same size clothes (6) as I did when I weighed 120 lb but carried less muscle. At both weights I was at 22% bodyfat. I also feel better at this weight, and find it easier to maintain.

Even for cycling, its the mass to power ratio we are looking for to optimize performance, not to simply get as light as possible. A light body weight, without the muscle to power your rides, doesn't do you that much good.

The best indicator of progress is not simply your scale weight, but your %body fat.

[/I]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by velogirl

while muscle may be heavier than adipose/fat, .

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

But, I want to correct one thing, a pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat, and in fact it is more compact.

---

I'm pretty sure I said that very early on in the conversation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

But, I want to correct one thing, a pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat, and in fact it is more compact.

[/I]

---

1 pound (of muscle) = 1 pound (of fat).

I didn't say 1 lb of muscle weighed more than 1 lb of fat. a pound is a pound is a pound. what I did say is that muscle tissue is heavier than fat tissue. in other words, 1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat.

:)

Which weighs more: a pound of feathers or a pound of lead?

:rolleyes:

See posts #6 and #7

But what you are saying isn't what you mean. You just said it again, muscle tissue is heavier than fat tissue, its NOT heavier, heavier would mean it weighs more, its DENSER (defined as weight per unit volume), which is the same thing as saying its more COMPACT (same weight would occipy a smaller volume). Sorry to be so annonying, I kind of have this thing about language being precise, especially with scientific terminology. What is important is that we all agree on the advice, which is that muscle is a GOOD THING to have! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by velogirl

1 pound (of muscle) = 1 pound (of fat).

I didn't say 1 lb of muscle weighed more than 1 lb of fat. a pound is a pound is a pound. what I did say is that muscle tissue is heavier than fat tissue. in other words, 1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat.

:)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zencentury

I'm pretty sure I said that very early on in the conversation

---

Yes you did Zen. I am agreeing with you. Sorry if my comments offended so many. I was only trying to correct the language being used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

Yes you did Zen. I am agreeing with you. Sorry if my comments offended so many. I was only trying to correct the language being used.

---

you didn't offend anyone that I know of and certainly not me. but it did seem that you mis-interpreted what I wrote earlier in the thread.

:)

If a five ton canary is flying around inside of a two ton truck, is the total weight seven tons?

..wanders off, mumbling in a corner...

I'll answer.
No.
However, if the canary sits on the floor the answer is yes.

Now lets say a rooster sits on the peak of an A-frame house.
One side of the house faces east, the other faces west (duh).
If the rooster lays an egg which side of the house will the egg roll to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zencentury

I'll answer.
No.
However, if the canary sits on the floor the answer is yes.

Now lets say a rooster sits on the peak of an A-frame house.
One side of the house faces east, the other faces west (duh).
If the rooster lays an egg which side of the house will the egg roll to?

---

If a rooster can lay an egg, then pigs can probably fly, too!