Robmeister's Fitness Goal

[Robmeister]

Longer runs (i.e. time) will burn more kcals than shorter ones, regardless of speed

Absolutely....no argument there.

(well, if you're walking that kills that theory).

My argument exactly.....time + speed + distance (in whatever proportion is all important IMO)

I think you should concentrate on time rather than speed.

Again, IMO speed does play a decent role as I can crawl at 1.0 mph for an hour and that's the intensity my 83-year-old mother-in-law achieves pulling her basket, running her errands.

I got the 8.5 mph from you and Paul....as a GOAL....yeah it's not important now (sh** I can't do it NOW)....

But your 5 miles in 42 minutes = about 7.2 mph.  And Paul's 3 miles in 20 minutes (at the time he retired from the military) = 9.0 mph are both damn decent no matter HOW ya slice it.

I think 8.5 mph for 4 miles is a good goal for me, ya selfish bastard  .

Also, I ain't no runner....but it seems if one is to win a marathon....maintaining a certain, winning pace in addition to time and the 26 miles is ALL important. (I understand it's the 26 miles yer arguing is more important than the speed)

Thanks for helping me think these thangs through  

[Robmeister]

Just keep pushing yourself bro! You can't fail with the SBG crew behind you!

Thanks, Shdwwlk 

[schro]

Ya know, all of this planning is on the output. What do you plan on doing to reduce the input (i.e. food)?

[Robmeister]

Ya know, all of this planning is on the output. What do you plan on doing to reduce the input (i.e. food)?

Exellent point.....That's a critical ingredient.

That Isagenix cleansing program I wrote about a ways back in this thread works GREAT!

[Razor X]

Schro is absolutely right; controlling your food intake is essential.  No amount of exercise will take weight off if you don't change your diet.

Just remember that to lose two pounds a week, you have to have a caloric deficit of 1,000 every day.  Be careful not to cut your calories much more than that because your body may go into starvation mode and slow down your metabolism. 

Good luck.  We all know you can do it.

[Robmeister]

Just remember that to lose two pounds a week, you have to have a caloric deficit of 1,000 every day. 

Interesting.....thanks, Razor !

[Razor X]

Just remember that to lose two pounds a week, you have to have a caloric deficit of 1,000 every day. 

Interesting.....thanks, Razor !

Sounds easy enough, but it's easier said than done!

[Robmeister]

Just remember that to lose two pounds a week, you have to have a caloric deficit of 1,000 every day. 

Interesting.....thanks, Razor !

Sounds easy enough, but it's easier said than done!

Mathmatically speaking, how does burning calories fit in to that?.....seems like if you burn 500 calories a day then your intake deficit would be reduced to 500 calories.

[Razor X]

Mathmatically speaking, how does burning calories fit in to that?.....seems like if you burn 500 calories a day then your intake deficit would be reduced to 500 calories.

Yes, that's right.  You have to burn 3500 calories less than you consume to lose one pound of body fat.  So if your caloric intake is 500 less than what you burn off, then by the end of one week, you should be one pound lighter. (500 calorie deficit per day x 7 days = 3500 calorie deficit for the week).

This is where it helps to know your resting metabolism rate -- that's the amount of calories you burn in a day from doing absolutely nothing.  If you know what that is (most gyms and fitness centers can do a quick test to measure it for you), you know how to adjust the calories you take in to faciliate weight loss.  When cardiovascular exercise enters into the equation, you should be running even more of a deficit. 

If you're lifting weights, that will help build muscle which in turn burns more calories.  Each additional pound of muscle burns an extra 50 calories per day.  But bear in mind that muscle weighs more than fat, so if you're building muscle, you may not see the numbers on the scale changing the way you expect them to.

[Bald_freak]

Mathmatically speaking, how does burning calories fit in to that?.....seems like if you burn 500 calories a day then your intake deficit would be reduced to 500 calories.

Yes, that's right.  You have to burn 3500 calories less than you consume to lose one pound of body fat.  So if your caloric intake is 500 less than what you burn off, then by the end of one week, you should be one pound lighter. (500 calorie deficit per day x 7 days = 3500 calorie deficit for the week).

This is where it helps to know your resting metabolism rate -- that's the amount of calories you burn in a day from doing absolutely nothing.  If you know what that is (most gyms and fitness centers can do a quick test to measure it for you), you know how to adjust the calories you take in to faciliate weight loss.  When cardiovascular exercise enters into the equation, you should be running even more of a deficit. 

If you're lifting weights, that will help build muscle which in turn burns more calories.  Each additional pound of muscle burns an extra 50 calories per day.  But bear in mind that muscle weighs more than fat, so if you're building muscle, you may not see the numbers on the scale changing the way you expect them to.

That's the complex way of looking at it. But I'll tell you what's a little simpler. Get a copy of "body for life" It follows the same principle, but makee it alot easier by reducinng the number crunching. I let a few people borrow my copy and they all lost some seriuos weight from it.

[Robmeister]

......Get a copy of "body for life"

Hell yeah !  I've followed that program or parts of it for the last 6 years (although not for 6 years straight).

Today I start my experimental "High-Weight / Mega-Rep" baby steps program.

Have before pics taken....will provide them with mid-point shots (March 1st) or after shots (June 1st).

[Robmeister]

Ok here are my stats:

Running:            I’ve gone from running 2.0 miles @ 4.8 mph to 2.3 miles @ 5.2 mph   ---   Averaging 3.7 days a week (slightly above my goal)  --  on track to gradually increase this to 4.0 miles @ 7.5 mph by the end of May (California Vacation   )

Resistance:         I’ve gone from reps of 12 – 6 – 3 (3 sets) to 22 – 11 – 5    ---   Averaging 3.3 days a week (slightly below my goal)  -- on track to gradually increase this to 75 - 38 - 19 by the end of may with pretty significant weight/plate settings 

Weight Loss:             Averaging 2.3 lbs per week (10.1 lbs per month)  -  gotta keep the average above 2.0 lbs per week to lose 45 lbs by the end of May.

The eating program (Don’t like the word “diet”) is working out really great, man.  Slow carbs, veggies & protein….as much and as often as I like.  Day off one day per week…..go NUTS….beer, Mexican food, donuts, candy….ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.    What’s amazing is that you’d think you wouldn’t want to weigh in the very next day after the JUNK day….you’d think, BLOATING, WATER WEIGHT, and just plain ol’ junk still in yer stomach.   But those are the days the scale dips by a pound or two.   Weird…but I ain’t arguing 

I gotta tell ya, knowing I’ll be updating you guyz….while I don’t lose sleep over it….it adds just enough incentive to make the difference between blowing off a workout and getting my ass to the gym.


r.m.

[schro]

Keep it up, Rob!!!!

[PBurke]

sweet!!!!!! my son came home yesterday bragging about his time in the mile. 5:45 i just laughed and said i can run the mile in 5 flat (5 hours)

[Timmay]

Talkin about losing pounds and stuff....well i went out and bought one of those electric potato peelers....AWESOME.....