2010 Target Weight

mloc123

yoda81269 wrote: »

@mloc123, these are the same stats/goals as me, I would be interested in your weight loss/training plan to achieve your target weight ?

No great plan, aiming for a pound a week... base period will be between 10-12hrs a week training..bike, run and swim along with watching my diet. Dropped about 6 stone over the last year so hopefully the final 1 will be easy

kennyb3

blorg wrote: »

From my own personal experience I have never tapered more than a few days to maximally a week for anything. Anything beyond a week is completely unnecessary (to my mind) possibly even counter-productive. Remember tapering you don't stop completely just cut back. Frequently don't do anything at all the day before a race or what have you though.

I would imagine that running could well require more tapering compared to cycling and over a week could be optimal for a marathon, depending on your personal circumstances.

sorry i know we are getting off topic so last post. generally 2/3 weeks taper. id be in favour of two myself and like you say you only wind down (i.e only do 75% mileage 2 weeks out, 50% in last week). you would cut longer run tho, cause the idea of the taper is to freshen up! 6 to 9 months of training is already done

Diarmuid

yoda81269 wrote: »

@mloc123, these are the same stats/goals as me, I would be interested in your weight loss/training plan to achieve your target weight ?

<glib>eat less, exercise more</glib>

However in reality that's not far from it. One pound of fat contains 3500 calories. So to lose 1kg in a fortnight you need to burn 550 calories more than you eat each day. Here's a decent calculator

longriver

target weight 75kg
weight now 102kg
height 170cm
chances of losing weight between now and xmas zero
by this time next year every chance!of course I say this every year but next year will be the year
All I have to do is lose 27kg ie 1.2 lbs per week .Sounds easy

blorg

On the topic of losing weight I got swine flu around a month ago and it took around 2kg off me in a week. This is not necessarily a recommendation, there were negatives too.

Planet X

Beasty wrote: »

I would knock back a litre of water, get on the scales and then report back with your 2010 target if I were you;)

Ah, I'm not too bad. Need a belt to hold my 32" jeans up.
Old trousers are a good guide. Tight / loose. :D

Captain Havoc

Wow, some of the figures shown here deserve a real pat on the back, fair play.

I'm currently at 68kg (the first time under 70kg since 2001)
Height is 1m65
Target for SK is 60-62kg.

Delighted with last year, joined club and started doing sportives lost 8kg (put on 2 this month though so net at the moment is 6kg), and down to 32" from 34" inch waiste.

Home:Ballyhoura

blorg wrote: »

On the topic of losing weight I got swine flu around a month ago and it took around 2kg off me in a week. This is not necessarily a recommendation, there were negatives too.

Exact same situation here, Swine Flu around two months ago and lost 2kgs as well while I had it, and it took a while to put it back on. Right now, 171cm (5'7) and 54.5kg (120lbs), which puts me at a bmi of 18.6, just over the lower limit thank god. As you can see I am a born climber. The steeper they get the better is my motto. Shame I missed the national hill climb championships, but got to the Munster ones at least.

What I actually do (or would recommend others to do if confused about how to work out roughly what their optimum weight for racing is) is look up some of the pro cyclists profile on Wikipedia. It gives their height and weight for all to see. If you take someone of roughly the same physique and height as you and who generally focuses in the same disciplines as you (TTs, Sprinter, Climber etc) you will get a rough idea of where you would need to be at. Their muscle mass would obviously be higher than ours but lower body fat percentage would be lower. My main one is Carlos Sastre, but Levi Leipheimer and Danilo Di Luca sometimes get a look in too. It is also interesting to see their bike setup including their fit, like all the measurements for Sastre's bike are here at the bottom. I know every one is different but interesting just to look at anyway!

Nietzschean

Might aswell join in
Height: 177
Weight 2008 : 99kg
Weight July: 73kg
Weight Now: 71kg
Target Weight: 67kg for marmotte

Plan to achieve that, eat lots and lots...working beside zaytoon has its down side...

Chips Lovell

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

What I actually do (or would recommend others to do if confused about how to work out roughly what their optimum weight for racing is) is look up some of the pro cyclists profile on Wikipedia.

The only pro I could compare myself too in terms of height and build is Magnus Backstedt.

Nietzschean wrote: »

working beside zaytoon has its down side...

It's the thinking man's kebab

niceonetom

el tonto wrote: »

The only pro I could compare myself too in terms of height and build is Magnus Backstedt.

You've been using that aul spiel one for ages. Marcel Sieberg is 6'5" and less than 80kgs. That was 30 seconds of googling.

Chips Lovell

niceonetom wrote: »

You've been using that aul spiel one for ages. Marcel Sieberg is 6'5" and less than 80kgs. That was 30 seconds of googling.

Oh there's lots of beanpoles, but only Magnus has shoulders like me.

Repolho

Current weight = 85Kgs
Height = 173 cm
Target weight = 75 Kgs

because thats what I was once upon a time!

niceonetom

el tonto wrote: »

Oh there's lots of beanpoles, but only Magnus has shoulders like me.

What? Surprising scrawny and pale?

Chips Lovell

I've only got to aim for 94kg to be like Magnus;) That and his power output of course, which might be a little trickier.

Ryaner

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

My main one is Carlos Sastre, but Levi Leipheimer and Danilo Di Luca sometimes get a look in too. It is also interesting to see their bike setup including their fit, like all the measurements for Sastre's bike are here at the bottom. I know every one is different but interesting just to look at anyway!

Sastre uses a slightly un-normal setup due to his back problems from a crash a few years back.

Look at Cav vs Thor though.
Cav - 5ft 9 - 69kg
Thor - 6ft - 81kg
Both are sprinters but have different riding styles, Thor being able to blast through the mountains when he needs to which is very impressive at 81kg!

Beasty

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

What I actually do (or would recommend others to do if confused about how to work out roughly what their optimum weight for racing is) is look up some of the pro cyclists profile on Wikipedia. It gives their height and weight for all to see. If you take someone of roughly the same physique and height as you and who generally focuses in the same disciplines as you (TTs, Sprinter, Climber etc) you will get a rough idea of where you would need to be at.

I've Chris Hoy in my sights - I'll be pretty much the same height, weight and thigh size if I hit my target weight. I can then have a go at the track sprint event, and limit my "effort" on the bike to around 20 seconds a time. It also means I can justify avoiding all hills:)

brianthebard

Lumen wrote: »

Stop when you look like Skeletor.

Oh, wait...

Skeletor was actually pretty big....

Man I'm glad I wasn't planning to get serious about cycling as a sport, I never want to weight under 85kg's!

ROK ON

Off topic. But if Cat is 69kg why is he so ****e climbing. There are plenty of guys with far better climbing ability at the same weight or heavier.
Maybe you simply need drugs to climb successfully.

Mods feel free to use your powers and move this post if nec.

Diarmuid

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

Exact same situation here, Swine Flu around two months ago and lost 2kgs as well while I had it, and it took a while to put it back on. Right now, 171cm (5'7) and 54.5kg (120lbs), which puts me at a bmi of 18.6, just over the lower limit thank god.

Holy crap. That's light! If I got within 5kgs of you I'd be surprised (same height)

LastGasp

March 2009 - 88kg, Now 76 kgs. In old money that's the first time I tipped under 12 stone in many years. 70 would be nice but probably unlikely since I haven't been that light since I was about 14.
Target 72 kgs for WW200. Went to buy new trousers for work Christmas Party today, thought I would get away with 32" but they were just a bit too snug ! Have to stay with 34" for another while. Must start doing some stomach exercises - cycling doesn't seem to help work the gut much.
Height 180cms.

blorg

@LastGap- You were going up them hills handily enough last weekend!

Sarunas

Feb 2008: 84kg
Now: 78-79kg
Height: 6' 3"

I would like to put on some more muscle and reducing the body fat %.

tunney

Height: 178cm (5 10)
Weight: 71kg
Goal weight June 1st: 65kg

adamshred

jag con wrote: »

Right here goes my target weight is 85kg.

Height 175cm 5'10
Started 2009 at 120kg.

current weight is 105kg

so i want to be at 85kg by the Wicklow 200 in June 2010

Would you mind me asking what kind of training you'll be doing in order to achieve this? I'm in a similar situation (115kg 6'3)

goal weight is EVENTUALLY 75 - 80kg (a man can dream) but I'm looking to be around 95 - 90 ish in 2010. Having issues with motivation and commitment though :pac:.

Anyway pm me or something if your interested in sharing your plans! Thanks

Ryaner

adamshred wrote: »

Would you mind me asking what kind of training you'll be doing in order to achieve this? I'm in a similar situation (115kg 6'3)

goal weight is EVENTUALLY 75 - 80kg (a man can dream) but I'm looking to be around 95 - 90 ish in 2010. Having issues with motivation and commitment though :pac:.

Anyway pm me or something if your interested in sharing your plans! Thanks

Set a goal, something you want to do (other than just loose weight). Then tell EVERYONE about it. More you tell, the less likely you are to chicken out.
Then start training for it and work on cleaning up your eating habits. Bigger goals will normally make you want to get out more.

With a weekly weight in you can see if you have lost any body fat etc and if you gain weight, the week still should be fresh enough in your mind to figure out where you went wrong. Less than weekly and you get into daily fluctuations which are bad.

Don't do any crash diets. They don't work. You'll also feel like crap. Do watch out if you start cycling a lot more or harder than you have before. I've now dropped over 5kg since the middle of October when I ramped up my training again.

Aka Ishur

Summer 2009 - 106kg
Now - 93kg
March target - 90kg
Summer target - 80-85kg

24-5'11''

Diarmuid

adamshred wrote: »

goal weight is EVENTUALLY 75 - 80kg (a man can dream) but I'm looking to be around 95 - 90 ish in 2010. Having issues with motivation and commitment though :pac:.

I would focus first on what you eat. Consider a very solid 1hr tempo ride on a turbo will burn 500-600 calories. That's about a croissant and a twix. Examine your diet first, knock a couple hundred off your daily intake first,

You say you want to lose 25 kgs in 2010. So that's 25 * 7700 = 192,500 calories in a year or 540 calories each day. To realistically achieve that you need to identify a good chunk of that (say 400cals) in your diet and then do your training on top of that.

My 2cents anyway.

Aka Ishur

Diarmuid wrote: »

solid 1hr tempo ride on a turbo will burn about a croissant and a twix.

Feck it thats depressing!!:rolleyes:

Caroline_ie

Aka Ishur wrote: »

Feck it thats depressing!!:rolleyes:

Remember that the heavier you start off, the faster you will lose your 1st few kg. the heavier you are, the most calories you spend even just sleeping.

By Cutting down your calorie intake, just 500 cals a day you will lose 1lbs/ week. By adding up 3500 cals/week to that worth of exercice you will lose 1kg a week.

500 cals of exercise will be maybe 45 minutes on the bike, but as you lose weight, it will take you longer to spend these 500 cals, but at the same time you will feel fitter, lighter and you will want to spend more time on the bike anyway.

I find that a lot of people who start sport to lose weight and do just enough to lose the weight and are not interrested by the sport, will not keep up with the sport once they have lose the weight and gain some/all of the weight back.

If you are sedentary, eat less.

bunnygreen

A good book on this suject you might be interested in.
Title Racing Weight
Author Matt Fitzgerald
Publisher Velo Press
Apologies if this has already been mentioned,i hav,nt gone through the entire thread.

Ryaner

Caroline_ie wrote: »

Remember that the heavier you start off, the faster you will lose your 1st few kg. the heavier you are, the most calories you spend even just sleeping.

It is based on your muscle mass so not always true. My BMR is only slightly less now than it was last year even though I was 40+ lbs heavier.

Caroline_ie

Ryaner wrote: »

It is based on your muscle mass so not always true. My BMR is only slightly less now than it was last year even though I was 40+ lbs heavier.

I am talking about weight. It takes more petrol to drive a 4 axle truck than a moped... I am not taking into consideration your muscle mass that will indeed burn more energy than your average joe trying to lose weight.

Ryaner you are for example already quite trained and very fit so yes, your muscle will also consume extra energy, but I don't think that should be taken into consideration if you are trying to lose weight - unless you are competing at high level, I'd keep it to basic ( but that's is my personal preference )

If you are heavy but quite muscular, as you lose fat you will also lose muscle ( afaik ) since you will no longer need all that muscle to 'carry' yourself around... if this makes sence. I am not dietician, people may correct me if they can.

niceonetom

Calorie usage will also diminish over time due to increased efficiency. Our bodies get good at what they do regularly, so 1hr @ xBPM doing something that your body is well used to (cycling for most of us) is likely to burn fewer calories than the same t/BPM doing something unfamiliar (say rowing or some other cross training activity).

Ryaner

Caroline_ie wrote: »

I am talking about weight. It takes more petrol to drive a 4 axle truck than a moped... I am not taking into consideration your muscle mass that will indeed burn more energy than your average joe trying to lose weight.

Ryaner you are for example already quite trained and very fit so yes, your muscle will also consume extra energy, but I don't think that should be taken into consideration if you are trying to lose weight - unless you are competing at high level, I'd keep it to basic ( but that's is my personal preference )

If you are heavy but quite muscular, as you lose fat you will also lose muscle ( afaik ) since you will no longer need all that muscle to 'carry' yourself around... if this makes sence. I am not dietician, people may correct me if they can.

My point was that a 170lbs person with 10lbs of body fat will burn the same amount of Cals while sitting still as a 190lbs person with 30lbs of body fat. Even day to day life doesn't impact it enough to accurately measure the difference cause by the additional weight.
It does make a difference if you are exercising. Moving 190lbs on a bike will burn more than 170lbs.

You are correct that you will also loose muscle as you loose fat. Your body will adapt to the exercise it is doing and drop un-needed muscle. It is possible to loose a whole lot of fat without affecting the muscle mass too much. Lean Body Mass and Muscle Mass are different as fat stores water which impacts on the LBM figures.
Regular exercise will also cause your metabolic rate to ramp up too, usually well beyond normal means, especially if you are pushing hard enough to cause muscle to slightly break down during exercise.

In the end though, for most people simply controlling what you eat and exercising regularly are enough to get where you want to go.

aero2k

tunney wrote: »

Height: 178cm (5 10)
Weight: 71kg
Goal weight June 1st: 65kg

Me:
Height: 181cm (5 11)
Weight: 67kg
Goal - no increase

Hi tunney,

Just as a matter of interest, what steps are you going to take to lose the 6kg? From your current training volume, I wouldn't have thought you'd have that much to lose. Also, as a triathlete, won't you be carrying a bit more upper body muscle compared to a pure marathoner or cyclist?

I wouldn't mind swapping a bit of fat for muscle (or maybe more accurately muscle strength), but I'd settle for no injuries and keeping the same weight.

Cheers,
aero

Marchandire

Apologies if I'm going off topic a bit here, but do people find that their fitness improves considerably as they lose weight, or do they find themselves cycling the same number of miles and at the same average speeds despite losing lbs?

I'm 6'3" and 82kg, so I don't necessarily want to lose any more weight, but I'm finding it difficult to increase my fitness levels without a solid target like losing 'x' amount of kg. I've been pushing my miles cycled upward gradually, but find that my average speed hovers at the same level most days. Any advice from people who've already hit their weight targets?

Captain Havoc

My weight has sky-rocketed in December 3+kg

Raam

Hi Marchandire, to increase your speed, try doing some interval sessions designed specifically for speed work. Simply riding lots and lots will not increase your speed. Eventually you reach a plateau with that. Give the intervals a go and see how you get on. I would also say that it's probably the wrong time of year to do any intensive interval sessions as it will be too difficult to maintain your form right through the summer. Instead, wait till Feb or March.

Beasty

Captain Havoc wrote: »

My weight has sky-rocketed in December 3+kg

You're spending too much time messing about on the computer, and not enough on the bike and that new turbo:p

Captain Havoc

Beasty wrote: »

You're spending too much time messing about on the computer, and not enough on the bike and that new turbo:p

Yeah you're right and I won't be on it 'til at least Saturday either.

Ryaner

Marchandire wrote: »

Apologies if I'm going off topic a bit here, but do people find that their fitness improves considerably as they lose weight, or do they find themselves cycling the same number of miles and at the same average speeds despite losing lbs?

I'm 6'3" and 82kg, so I don't necessarily want to lose any more weight, but I'm finding it difficult to increase my fitness levels without a solid target like losing 'x' amount of kg. I've been pushing my miles cycled upward gradually, but find that my average speed hovers at the same level most days. Any advice from people who've already hit their weight targets?

Pushing the miles up and maintaining the same average speed is good and shows improvement. You fatigue as you spend longer on the bike so having an average of 25 over 2 hours shows you are fitter than an average over 1 hour. Obviously this needs to be over similar courses. I maintain almost 30km/h on the first hour of some courses, but my 80km round trip to sally gap and back has my average below 20km/h most times.

blorg

Marchandire wrote: »

Apologies if I'm going off topic a bit here, but do people find that their fitness improves considerably as they lose weight, or do they find themselves cycling the same number of miles and at the same average speeds despite losing lbs?

I'm 6'3" and 82kg, so I don't necessarily want to lose any more weight, but I'm finding it difficult to increase my fitness levels without a solid target like losing 'x' amount of kg. I've been pushing my miles cycled upward gradually, but find that my average speed hovers at the same level most days. Any advice from people who've already hit their weight targets?

As Raam suggested, you are going to get speed from training rather than weight loss (given that your weight seems perfectly normal for your height.) Further weight loss can of course be a side-effect of training (and racing if you wanted to give that a go.)

jwshooter

im 6.1" well built and at the end of the season i was 13st just under 14 how.

my plan is off the drink well little to none for the new year ,no late meals ,it was 9.30 and i eating a Chinese last with 3 beers.

like a poisoned puppy today.

and bed a bit earlier, that with a slightly better diet should get me down to 12.5 stone by the mount leinster challenge.

Rusty Cogs 08

I got down to 70kg @ 188cm two weeks ago. Dodgy milkshake, 4kg lost between midnight and 4am.

biker_joe

Just an FYI for those of you trying to lose weight on the bike, you need to be riding in your "fat burning zone" 60-70% of your Max Heart Rate, going slower is the key to burning fat, although some would think that going fast does it !!

Some HR monitors will give you the calories used with a % fat ..... Eg when I ride a TT my percentage is 15% at 190 bpm and when I do a FAT burn spin at 120 -140 bpm HR the percentage is around 55% .... so more than half the calories used is FAT ....

Anyways .. weight now is 78.9 Kg .( just 6ft ).... below 76 Kg will do for March, help chase those climbers up the hills ....

Biker Joe

ROK ON

My new jeans bought 6wks ago are now too big. I am on 5th belt notch from the 3rd.
There are positives to having a chest infection and not being able to eat.
Looking fwd to weigh in in the morning.

godihatethehils

biker_joe wrote: »

Just an FYI for those of you trying to lose weight on the bike, you need to be riding in your "fat burning zone" 60-70% of your Max Heart Rate, going slower is the key to burning fat, although some would think that going fast does it !!

Some HR monitors will give you the calories used with a % fat ..... Eg when I ride a TT my percentage is 15% at 190 bpm and when I do a FAT burn spin at 120 -140 bpm HR the percentage is around 55% .... so more than half the calories used is FAT ....

Isn't there an argument that if you exercise in the fat burning zone then as soon as you stop exercising you immediately stop burning fat. On the other hand if you exercise in a higher zone your metabolism is boosted for up to 72 hours after you stop exercising and at the end of the day you burn a lot more...

niceonetom

biker_joe wrote: »

fat burning

It's a tricky one.

I have done the lsd fat burning stuff, but these days I'm much less concerned with staying in a zone. I can burn anywhere between 550 and 1000 (polar) calories in an hour on the turbo. Sure, at a lower intensity more of the calories burned come from fatn but 50% of 550 isn't that much more than 20% of a thousand and the higher intensity has the added benefit of being less boring, and if done well, building form.

It's always best to mix things up but weight loss is about burning calories, and the harder you work the more calories you burn. It may not come from fat while cycling but those calories have to come from somewhere if you don't replace them later in the day. Going to bed with a 500kcal debt will reduce your body fat regardless of how that debt was created.

I think high intensity stuff stimulates hormonal production to increase metabolism too (HGH and testosterone) but that's complicated as well.

mloc123

calorie in < calorie out = fat loss

anything else is making it complicated.