Slow vs Fast

26DEEP91

What is better to lose weight
Run 10 kmph for 20 min
Or
Run 14 kmph for 10 min
Share your views

VintageFeline

Neither. Calorie deficit is what leads to weight loss.

TimothyFish

You will burn more calories if you can run at a pace you can sustain and you sustain it for a long period of time.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

JustRobby1

As a distance runner myself, my burns are always far greater on my long run days than on my speed interval training days. Worry about speed later. Initially just focus on (slowly and incrementally) building up your endurance and distance. This is not just for calorie burn purposes either. It will ultimately make you a stronger runner.

PAV8888

You burn more calories per minute during a more intense run/walk
You burn elevated calories for a longer period of time during a longer lasting run/walk

There may or may not exist an additional after-burn effect from a more intense run.
You may or may not be adverse compensations (NEAT reduction, higher appetite) because of being tired, or feeling virtuous after either.

Ultimately your caloric balance is what will determine your weight change, not your running prowess.

On a personal level, while there is ZERO question that my increased walking activity is an integral part of whatever success I've found, most of my weight loss took place once I decided to really look into my calories IN.

JessicaMcB

I think this will be different for different people. When some people run long they report suffering from "runger". As someone who basically only exclusively runs long distance at this point I actually find the opposite to be true and basically only have issues on rest day. YMMV so I would try both training variances to see how they impact your hunger levels as, if one has you eating back everything you burned plus some THAT is the least effective re: your personal weight loss.

lynn_glenmont

26DEEP91 wrote: »

What is better to lose weight
Run 10 kmph for 20 min
Or
Run 14 kmph for 10 min
Share your views

You perform more work (although possibly a little more efficiently) moving your body mass 3.33 kilometers (20 minutes at 10 kmph) than moving the same body mass 2.33 kilometers (10 minutes at 14 kmph), so I would have to say, other things beings equal (that is, assuming you eat the same amount regardless of which workout you do, and that the workout you choose doesn't affect whether you stick with your effort to loose weight), that running 10 kmph for 20 minutes will be more effective in losing weight.

26DEEP91

Thx brothers and sisters for your views,
It will definitely help me to design my exercise

heybales

If by lose weight you mean burn more calories so that you can eat more, adhere to the diet, but still have a good deficit - then it depends on how much time you got.

If the exercise is solely for that purpose - then go as hard as you can for your limited time - that still allows you to recover and do the same thing tomorrow.

Will take ramping up to that pace slowly if not used to running, and some experimenting on what that pace is - too high and you've knocked out your workout at same intensity tomorrow - but still go slower to allow recovery is still good.
Next day slower pace then to see if no more than a day's recovery was needed.
Much easier to start from slow going up though, than fast coming down - guess which would be more injury prone.

jennifer_417

Whichever one burns more calories.