[Closed] Training and diet talk...

I'll have it with fries... supersized.

Your fries come [s]with[/s] inside your bucket o' coke.

Right. 100g of cooked red kidney beans 17.5g carbs. There are 400g in a tin, so that's 70g for a whole tin, which is a decent amount to eat if your meal is based on beans, speaking from experience.

There are 20g of carbs in a slice of Hovis Best of Both thick sliced. So four slices of that (as you might have in a sandwich based lunch) is similar amount of carbs to a whole tin of beans.

However pinto bean were only 10g carbs per 100g, so a whole tin of those is only going to be as much as two slices of bread. If you have say toast for breakfast, sandwiches for lunch and maybe a snack at some point in the day you could easily be on 6-8 slices a day, that'd be up to 160g of carbs. If you were filling up on beans you could get that from a little over two cans of beans. Which if you are eating really beany meals isn't as hard as it sounds. I've made chilli with six or eight cans in it and eat maybe an eighth of the finished product. Also if I rustle up a quick dhal for a curry I can easily eat most of a can no bother.

We talking total carbz or net carbz (minus fibre)?

No iDea... where do we stand on custard? I have powder, I have milk??

WARNING WARNING WARNING!

REALLY BAD JOKE ALERT!

No iDea... where do we stand on custard?

Anywhere you like, be a bit messy though.

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT!

[img] [/img]

where do we stand on custard? I have powder, I have milk??

Anywhere you like, be a bit messy though

'pends how thick, surely?

Molly, 1 can equals 70g carbs. That's no different to 100g of pasta or rice, a decent size meal. So why do you still feel hungry after eating beans? the carb content is the same.

Kev

'pends how thick, surely?

I guess you could add cornflour, if we are getting scientific.

the carb content is the same.

Net carbz is lower, due to a higher fibre content in the beanz.

Starch carbs aren't the same as bean carbs and carbs in the food don't necessarily equate to carbs absorbed by the body.

You could weigh out a certain mass of coal, wood, oil, paraffin, petrol and avgas that would contain the same numerical value of calories but they certainly wouldn't burn in the same way - same with food carbs.

The numbers on the packets and in the nutritional tables are only approximately relevant to how useful that food may be to your body for energy production - that to me is why iDiet is so useful as a basis for healthy and productive eating, it doesn't rely on numbers but on real life experience.

Find what works for you, tinker with it and learn from your bodies response - it's the only way really 😀

What about making porridge with custard?

The Southern Yeti:

What about making porridge with custard?

Sicko.

*reports post*

Molly, 1 can equals 70g carbs. That's no different to 100g of pasta or rice, a decent size meal. So why do you still feel hungry after eating beans? the carb content is the same

Well.. that is an interesting question. As I understand it, there are loads of factors that lead to feeling full. Blood sugar, the amount of stuff actually in your stomach, there's some hormone or other secreted by your stomach lining in response to carbs, and there's the brain aspect too. That's not to say it's in your mind as such, but I think your brain has a lot to do with how hungry you feel. I found that if I eat very plan dull foods I feel full pretty quickly, whereas if something's yummy I eat a lot more.

I think if I eat a load of beans my blood sugar doesn't go up quickly, and my brain and my stomach lining have not tasted carbs cos it's still locked away in the fibre. Incidentally, if I do eat a huge serving of beans and feel hungry, I can eat just one biscuit or even a few raisins, and I feel full immediately.

Sicko

Microwave is going...

Microwave? You always struck me as the sort of person who cooks porridge on the hob.

/Yeah I went there.

molly, I reckon it's the brains reaction to the sugar levels, or lack of in the of case beans. As we are all sugar addicts our brains are waiting for the sugar hit before it tells us we're full. Then, because of the nature of sugar we want more despite recognising we're full. Therein lies the problem, I think. I just try not to rise to the sugar craving, if I do I'll eat a couple of satsumas or something, that works for me.

of to Zzzzss now. Yoga tomorrow.

Kev

I tend to agree, Kev. A lot of this is psychological, a little like I imagine kicking fags to be.

Sometimes if I just think of cakes I am suddenly hungry whereas I wasn't before.. oh wait.. this is a well known effect 🙂

So today's topic is training, lactate threshold training to be precise.

Is there a cheap / easy way to determine what one's threshold is?

I'd also like to know how people have got on with determining their max HR's.

Diet is off topic today... unless it can quickly help to improve one of the above.

Run 3-4 times 800m flat out, measure your highest reading. Or same thing up hill. You have to be honest with yourself and ask if I was being chased by a Tiger could I go faster! (Sure you could but you know what I mean)

Any x-your age etc is rubbish imo, I have seen some widely differing measurements.

Agree on the age thing, unless I'm still less than 21.

Do max HR's differ between sports? Matt Fiztgerald reckons they do.. but IMO max is Max?

Uphill sprint at the end of a bike race.

You think you're going as hard as you can when the sprint starts, then you try to sprint as hard as you can to the line. Death with extra death on top.

Having said that, maybe you can't reach your max HR after 2+ hours of racing anyway. so perhaps the 3x800m is the best option

They differ between sports as different movements use less or more muscle mass - swimming max HR is lower much than running max HR.

Re' lactate threshold, it varies day to day - as you saw yesterday :-/

Your threshold is just that, go on feel. What intensity can you sustain on a given session...

They differ between sports as different movements use less or more muscle mass - swimming max HR is lower much than running max HR.

I understand that, but if someone is calculating HR zones for running and cycling say, should they calc them differently.

There seems to be so much written about zone training which I've always eschewed in favour of 'feel'.

stick with 'feel'

HR is slow to respond and affected by lots of variables

I'm looking forward to doing a nice long ride that 'feels' easy. Think I'm going to cruise the next sportive.

Not sure how relevant this is.

But I finally managed to get out on the road bike yesterday.
I cycled north west out of Coventry.
Very windy, very hilly.
I ran for 2.5 hrs on empty / stored reserves.
Ran out of water in number one bottle and then hit the 50/50 water and juice I had in number 2 bottle.
I'd never usd the 50/50 mix before.

I certainly slowed after 2.5 hrs.
The 50/50 may have helped as after 2.5 hrs, I could keep going, but could only manage short bursts of [i]go[/i].
Does this describe me hitting my [i]lactic threshold[/i] ?.

Sounds like you ran out of stored fuel and were knackered.

[i]Sounds like you ran out of stored fuel and were knackered.[/i]

Well, while asking on here, I've had a quick google for lactic threshold.

Seems, based on my ride yesterday, that yes, I may have depleted most of the glycogen in the muscles I was using.
But it also seems that as a function of using that stored energy, that there must have been lactic acid present I the muscle ?.

Also, when I reached this point, a feeling I became aware of.
That I couldn't go as hard, anymore, but for short bursts.
Then the 50/50 may have assisted ?.

They differ between sports as different movements use less or more muscle mass - swimming max HR is lower much than running max HR.

I've notice my max sustainable HR whilst running over 10k has dropped by about 10 beats over the last couple of years (though the speed hasn't). Is this just because the muscles have become a bit more efficient and aren't stressing the cardio-vascular system so much, or have I just become lazy and I should still be running at that same HR?

lactate is used as fuel by muscle, most notably heart muscle. it's not the bad guy

Ian.

I would have thought that as a function of the natrual aging process.
That we are all destined to have lower maximals as we get older.
Until it becomes... Zero 😯

[i]lactate is used as fuel by muscle, most notably heart muscle. it's not the bad guy [/i]

So, after my 2.5 hrs and becoming distinctly aware of not being as [i]strong[/i] on the bike as I may have been an hour earlier.
(started to lose my climb)
Is this related to the build up / presence of L/A ?.

Yes, I have caught that the acid can be used, even though its a by-product of the primary fueling cycle ????

The trouble with riding on feel, is that I end up going 85% all the time, and my form plateau's, recovery rides are as important as the hard rides....I'm beginning to think that 75% of my riding should be below 75% effort...

So how do you calculate 75%?

How did you calc your max?

I would have thought that as a function of the natrual aging process.

[i]How did you calc your max?[/i]

I have an, admitedly, uncalibrated HRM.
I've observed HRs up into the mid 180s, which, ime, rubbishes the age related calculation.

I'd be a bit surpized that anyone would rely on a basic calc of 220 - age, etc.
Especially as Molgrips would point out how differrent we all are.
But also for what iDave posted about different exercises generating different MHRs.

However, I've also read iDave mention that HR isn't that crucial a metric to observe and record.

I was thinking that I use my HRM to learn what differrent HRs feel like.
Then I could reduce my useage of the HRM and go more by feel.

I do the feel thing a bit now.
If I use a bike in the gym.
The HRM on those is very dodgey, so Ignore it and try to stick to how I feel.
With my aim to be sub 70 percent MHR for the duration, with occassional [i]sprints[/i].

[i]It'll reach zero at 82[/i]

Probably not a linear thing.

But I hope you far exceed 82.
😀

TSY - I have used HR for many years as a training tool and race pacer. In tri's I merely take normal max HR for running and -10bpm for the bike and another -10bp for swimming. this has worked for me.

I have had two max tests albeit taken slightly differently and they came with different ideas of zone differences due to the approach. One works better than the other, so that's the one I use.

At first the weaknesses in feel alone (both in under and over estimating) are very apparent. However, for me at least, the HRM and feel quickly come closer to the extent I now can judge my HR to win plus/minus 2-3 bpm especially at the threshold moments.

funnily enough the sport that I find most difficult to judge by feel alone is biking. Too easy to drift along (on a road bike) and so my HRM is particularly valuable then.

never understand the idea that HR is too variable. To me that is a strength and important to know when this happens so that you can adjust accordingly. If you are under the weather you can pick this up very quickly with your RHR and how you HR reacts when training etc. Speed or power alone won't show that.

Thanks Teamhurtmore.

So what max HR test did you find the most useful?

I've been wearing a HR monitor for the last few months when training and still feel like I'm crusining into the 160's. Have seen it as high as 201.

One thing I've noticed is that the longer the duration of the exercise the lower it gets without my pace dropping significantly.

[i]One thing I've noticed is that the longer the duration of the exercise the lower it gets without my pace dropping significantly.[/i]

Then I guess all that time training must be paying off.

Yesterday, after 2.5hrs, I had a lot more trouble staying with the front and if I did needed to close a gap, my HR would rise significantly.
So for me, the longer I was cycling, the higher my HR went.
I don't think I'll ever be as fit a TSY.

How old you ?, TSY.
I'll be 43 in June

33 in June 🙂

Solo, I really would like your advice on a quintissential Paleo text or website.

So how do you calculate 75%?

How did you calc your max?

So. After reading THM's post.

I'm now just wondering what the overall emphasis on using an HRM is or should be.

I suppose it may depend on what you seek to achieve.

I'm now wondering if MHR is influenced by the amount of lactate coming to the heart.

[i]Solo, I really would like your advice on a quintissential Paleo text or website.[/i]

I thought we weren't allowed to mention the 'D' word today.
Especially after I have now read last night's thread....
Ding, Dong !.

Anyway, I think you know which Paleo text I sometimes refer to.
But as we all know.
Theres a universe of info out there on the matter.

Solo - I wouldn't ask if I knew!