[Closed] Body Fat %

At your current W/Kg you've got a big chunk you can achieve on the W side of the equation

And you have the magic formulae? Please enlighten me!

I will add thats this is Trainerroad assessment specific to my setup, so not real world, I tend to push out more like 3.8w/kg in competition.

Seems quite low as it is (to me).

Yes and I wish people would stop banging on about it. I have a job which means I travel about the country during the week so am often not in one location, am the sole earner so its important to me and have two young kids. There isn't much more time to give to racing TBH, otherwise I would!

Talk about off topic... 🙄

Blimey 3 pages dissecting diet, lifestyle and training regime. I think the only problem the OP has (at least in relation to this topic 😉 ) is how he's measuring body fat percentage.

Talk about off topic...

You do know how the Internet works right? You don't get to control everything on it....

Talk about off topic

I'd query if body fat % is even a sensible KPI for someone racing 3/4 races? Bunch finesse and a decent sprint will win you lots of points.

if he spent more time training and less time reading this thread.....

I'd query if body fat %

It was an indicative question based on weight loss. When aren't blessed with masses of power and superior climbing ability, the KG part of the W/KG equation can help a little.

I'm not turning myself into Geraint, just helping myself sensibly to a bit more of the W/KG number in balance.

FWIW I can see an Ab now, and even the end of my cock if I look past my double chins at just the right angle.

if he spent more time training and less time reading this thread.....

You dont need that much protein, maybe 50g per day, the people who say other wise curiously also sell protein.

And you have the magic formulae? Please enlighten me!

Well no, as I neither know who you are or what you get up to. But if you already know that by race day you'll be up to 3.8 W/Kg or so, then why worry so much? As obviously one or both sides of the equation are going to start moving the right way.

FFS, he asked why his body fat isn't going down, not if he's training enough.

For the majority of people there's a clear correlation, that's why it's being suggested. Total time training in this case isn't a lot.

For the majority of people there's a clear correlation, that's why it's being suggested.

+1

Not that he has a clue what his BF is if he's using those daft scales.....

Not that he has a clue what his BF is if he's using those daft scales.....

Whilst this has become clear (calipers arrive tomorrow), this

For the majority of people there's a clear correlation, that's why it's being suggested. Total time training in this case isn't a lot.

Is a bit muddied; Lets remember I am losing weight (7lb since 25th December) yes less calories and my training have worked, but my question was based on the scales not showing a [b]body fat % [/b]reduction, not the lack of a weight reduction.

A measure which I now understand thanks to the help of people here, to be invalid with the mechanism I am using.

Please remember I've gone from 77KG to 74KG in 4.5 weeks.

not to get into the whole long steady miles vs hiit stuff
done a fair bit of CPET testing on athletes and myself and other coaches and in z2(h/rate ) the some of the best i have seen
in terms of energy supply is 70%from fats 30% from carbs most being around 60/40 or less .
so if you training a lot in higher zones that is a lot of energy coming from carbs and not fat....
those figures are unique to each individual and a view into how 'efficient' they are
hope that helps

But if you already know that by race day you'll be up to 3.8 W/Kg or so, then why worry so much

Because wouldn't we all like our number to be higher, eh?

Because wouldn't we all like our number to be higher, eh?

Yes of course we would, but if you've maxed out your training time and there's a lower limit to your body fat which is achievable on that time, then there comes a point where you have to accept your level and get on with it.
None of us on here are going to be world champions, are we?

[i] soobalias - Member
if he spent more time training and less time reading this thread..... [/i]

[i] LS - Member
For the majority of people there's a clear correlation, that's why it's being suggested. Total time training in this case isn't a lot. [/i]

No, and, errr, no. As we all know, you can't out-exercise a bad diet.

I'll try again. If someone wants to burn more fat, then it may be worth while getting to understand what drives fat storage. while also considering how and why fat is released for use.

Lean people can be unfit. Fit people can be chubby. Soooo, perhaps we could:

a) not rely on exercise to mitigate poor diet.

b) address the issue of body fat reduction or lack of, and stop sniping at the OP for not exercising enough.

OP has already explained how time crunched they are. So perhaps lets discuss BF reduction, within those constraints.

And as for the anecdotal advise. It may have worked for you, but that doesn't guarantee the OP the same results.

wilburt - Member

You dont need that much protein, maybe 50g per day, the people who say other wise curiously also sell protein

That is the protien intake for anaverage person though. From the wonders of the internet: "A sedentary person needs to eat about 0.8g of protein per kg of body mass each day. Athletes, and people who want to build muscle, need about double this (1.2 – 1.7g of protein/kg of body mass)"
[google lifted from abc.com.au]

So personally, if I was doing minimal amounts I'd need 48g, but as I'm training, taking the middle value I'd need ~87g. Even with a protein bar a day (which i dont eat) that suggests I'd need more protein.

You dont need that much protein, maybe 50g per day, the people who say other wise curiously also sell protein

Good luck training for racing eating that little protein a day, your thighs would just shrink month on month...

I'm not sniping, if anything I'm trying to stop the OP getting too hung up on something that it's quite easy to take too far to the extreme (I've been there).
The performance limit that the OP will hit is likely to come from his training restrictions well before his body fat, and if he's doing intense intervals then trying to do both at the same time can be a knife-edge.

[i] LS - Member

The performance limit that the OP will hit is likely to come from his training restrictions well before his body fat, and if he's doing intense intervals then trying to do both at the same time can be a knife-edge. [/i]

Most probably. But if OP is wondering why they are not experiencing the expected BF loss, then I'd suggest "[i]more exercise[/i]" isn't the correct answer [u][b]without[/b][/u] addressing changes in diet to compliment the OP's regime.

Everyone wants to get best results for least input. If someone is max'd out for time available to exercise. Then that's how it is.

Already been mentioned but nutritional Ketosis & riding in a fasted state for body fat loss.

We have the Withings scales. My stick thin, healthy, fell running, 9 year old measures about 80% fat, she's a human pork scratching.

Judging by the skin over her sixpack, I'd guess she's basically zero fat!

The scales are indeed... bobbins

Everyone wants to get best results for least input. If someone is max'd out for time available to exercise. Then that's how it is.

Already been mentioned but nutritional Ketosis & riding in a fasted state for body fat loss.

This is pretty much the point I'm trying to make - fasted rides and all that work, but if there's limited time available and that time is taken up by interval training, then it'll be very hard to fit in without dropping something that probably gives a higher performance gain.

There are times - and I was already asking in the Trainerroad thread - when I may be able to drop in a fasted Z2 turbo session on "rest" days, something which I'll start to implement - in fact I've got one tomorrow morning at 6am. This was to get more bike time in.

FWIW I'm likely to end up 500cals under target today after a 700 cal turbo session and I feel stuffed after 3 wholemeal pitta's, 1 pot of low fat houmous and a soy protien isolate shake for lunch.

This mornings breakfast was 45g of oats with semi skimmed milk.

[i] LS - Member
This is pretty much the point I'm trying to make

then it'll be very hard to fit in without dropping something that probably gives a higher performance gain. [/i]

Ah, ok, I see where you're coming from now. I was focusing more on the fat loss Q, as opposed to improving performance.
🙂

and I feel stuffed after 3 wholemeal pitta's

The scales are indeed... [s]bobbins[/s]

Already been mentioned but nutritional Ketosis & riding in a fasted state for body fat loss.

Hmm. But then again.. does that result in reduced base metabolic rate over time?

On your daily protein requirements, you need far more than needed by a standard person! At least the amount recommended for athletes, ideally more, as a high protein diet helps reduce muscle loss when you're trying to lose fat.

Also, why soy protein shakes? You're obviously not vegan, so why are you choosing a protein powder that isn't as effective as whey or casein? Ideally, a whey/casein mix is the one.

Agreed on cutting out most of the carbs with very little other nutritional value, eg your bread. Just a waste.

Get your protein, carbs etc. from proper food not manky shakes. Jacket potato and tuna can be done in a microwave minutes.

Ans unless you have specific issues, then bread really isn't the devil some people now make it out to be.

Get your protein, carbs etc. from proper food not manky shakes

I really don't get the aversion to shakes, they're cheap, convenient, and you get the lowest protein to calorie ratio which is ideal if you're worried about BF %.

36p per 500ml, 110cals, cheaper than milk, and certainly the 347cal Frij I was drinking.

So let me get this straight. You're saying that a protein shake over a normal diet will help the regular trainer?

No one's saying that. What's being said is you can get a lower calorie, convenient protein intake from a shake. If neither reduced calories or convenience - or perhaps expense - is important to you, don't bother.

You could cook a chicken breast at about £1 - £1.50 depending on quality, if you have the time & inclination.

Higher protein intake than average is proven to help athlete's who experience muscular stress, yes.

So let me get this straight. You're saying that a protein shake over a normal diet will help the regular trainer?

No, where did I post that?

Also, if you're expecting to compete and win in cycling, you're far from a 'regular' trainer, who would be dropped in just about any race within 200yards of the start line.

Get your protein, carbs etc. from proper food not manky shakes. Jacket potato and tuna can be done in a microwave minutes.

Yeah, I always have a baked potato and tin of tuna in my gym bag...

molgrips - Member

Already been mentioned but nutritional Ketosis & riding in a fasted state for body fat loss.

Hmm. But then again.. does that result in reduced base metabolic rate over time?
.
.
in a word ... No!
2yrs into keto and strong as an Ox n ripped to the bone 🙂

Good luck training for racing eating that little protein a day, your thighs would just shrink month on month...

I've been on less than that for a year or so whilst consistanty improving my strength and results, not bad considering I'm also up against old man time.

@krypton The 0.8g per KG is UK RDA for an average male btw nothing about sedentary life you've just added that bit for fun. Even that figure is arrived at after the meat lobbyists have leant all over the advisory commitee so considered by some to be on the high side.

Body builders perhaps need more but who want to be a bodybuilder and a cyclist?
In context of this, a cycling forum I don't see any evidence( thats actual evidence not a study by proteins shakes r us.) to suggest anything over the RDA is needed.

I've been on less than that for a year or so whilst consistanty improved my strength and results, not bad considering I'm also up against old man time.

Great anecdote.

IIRC Team Sky eat about 25% of their calories from Protein which will be a lot more than 50g a day....

to suggest anything over the RDA is needed.

Pretty much any professional cycling team will be eating well over the RDA..

In context of this, a cycling forum I don't see any evidence( thats actual evidence not a study by proteins shakes r us.) to suggest anything over the RDA is needed.

Maybe you should type "protien for cyclists" into google.

OK so the maximum the UK goverment recommends for any age male adult is 55g...

But we think the professional full time cyclist (sponsored by protein bar manufacturers) are taking extra and you want what they've got, how much more do you need given your near pro physiology 50%, 100% ?

That's still probably less than your getting from an average meat diet( possibly one plate!)

Maybe you should type "protien for cyclists" into google.

Ah yes, that'll give me the facts

Wilburt according to mfp I got 111g today. I must be awzums

OK so the maximum the UK goverment recommends for any age male adult is 55g.

Except it doesn't say maximum, it says "estimated average"

in a word ... No!
2yrs into keto and strong as an Ox n ripped to the bone

Sample size of 1, too many variables between individuals to draw any conclusion.

And I'm not doing keto. Step too far for me.