Misleading exercise articles...

[andydude]

Agreed. I read an article that said the original "fat burning zone" was bollocks and that "total energy spent" was the right measurement. Gotta love the internet - you can find a conflicting article to anything...

 

So true. But I think it's still generally accepted that of that total energy spent, if you train at 70% MHR you'll burn more fat as a percentage of total energy spent (which in my mind is the best to lose) where 90% of MHR will burn current calories and even muscle which you actually want.

[covie]

Agreed. I read an article that said the original "fat burning zone" was bollocks and that "total energy spent" was the right measurement. Gotta love the internet - you can find a conflicting article to anything...

 

Hell thats not the internets fault its the medical proffesion in general,

 

One study shows this and then everyone beleives it then another study shows that and everyone beleives it.

 

Take dieting,for decades we get told. must carbo load must carbo load must carboload, then Atkins comes out with a diet that has no carbs in it, and endurance athletes "excel" on this diet. Bla bla bla yahdiyadiya.

[Eldron]

.on the same gear ratio I would assume?....not so.?

 

Gear is irrelevant really - increase load/pain until failure. Remember to check heart rate before passing out!

[andydude]

The ramp test is the ultimate max HR indicator. It is pain threshold dependant of course.

 

I can never get it as high in training as in racing, no matter what test. I guess it's a mental thing where in racing I go "above" myself, which isn't practically possible, which would mean that I go "below" myself in training.

[covie]

So true. But I think it's still generally accepted that of that total energy spent, if you train at 70% MHR you'll burn more fat as a percentage of total energy spent (which in my mind is the best to lose) where 90% of MHR will burn current calories and even muscle which you actually want.

 

If you dont consume a lot of protein otherwise you will build muscle and gain weight.

[covie]

So true. But I think it's still generally accepted that of that total energy spent, if you train at 70% MHR you'll burn more fat as a percentage of total energy spent (which in my mind is the best to lose) where 90% of MHR will burn current calories and even muscle which you actually want.

 

If you dont consume a lot of protein otherwise you will build muscle and gain weight.

[Eldron]

So true. But I think it's still generally accepted that of that total energy spent, if you train at 70% MHR you'll burn more fat as a percentage of total energy spent (which in my mind is the best to lose) where 90% of MHR will burn current calories and even muscle which you actually want.

 

Disclaimer - I am in no way an expert!!!!

 

The article I read said that the 70% represented the rate at which the body could turn fat into energy so that would be the ideal rate...expect - any rate higher than that will still burn the fat at max rate but start looking to other energy sources like blood, gut and muscles for energy. As long as your gut and blood has sufficient energy your muscles will be spared.

 

The only time I stick to the 70% is during bonk rides. I find bonk rides work best for fat burning.

[Eldron]

I can never get it as high in training as in racing, no matter what test. I guess it's a mental thing where in racing I go "above" myself, which isn't practically possible, which would mean that I go "below" myself in training.

 

Thats normal in my view - unless you have a granite mind you never psuh yourself as hard in training as you do in racing. Aint ego a strong motivator