downhill skiing calories burned

jasonweinberg

i have been trying to figure out how to accurately record calories burned based on amounts found on mfp and elsewhere. if i go downhill skiing for "an hour" i spend at least half that time, probably more, sitting on the lift. what i have been doing is estimating how much time i am actually skiing, as opposed to including the time i spent on the chairlift. common sense tells me that is right and of course i know in the end i am simply burning whatever it is i'm burning, but i wish i had an real answer to this...anyone?

sarahwright01

only true way to know is to get a heart rate monitor....sorry friend that is a tough one~

jasonweinberg

no $$. how much do they cost? and is heart rate really an accurate measure of calorie burning?

Bermudabarbie

I have no idea of this at all. But I think you are correct, you would not include the time sitting on a chair lift as actual exercise performed.

emersoam

I'd use a heart rate monitor and keep it running he entire time (on and off lifts)! It's all apart of the fun afterall. And even time on a ski lift will burn more calories than laying in front of the TV! (Trust me, i can relate to this...we live in MN/WI so must of our "ski time" is spent on the lifts).:laugh:

SkierElle

I would time yourself one time down and then estimate the amount of runs and multiply it, although that is hard to do because you probably don't go down the same ones every time! I usually just don't record it... but it is curious.

jasonweinberg

I would time yourself one time down and then estimate the amount of runs and multiply it, although that is hard to do because you probably don't go down the same ones every time! I usually just don't record it... but it is curious.

that's basically what i do. but i just wonder whether the people who create these "hourly calorie burning" fiures mean for it to be done that way...can't wait till we get some natural snow so i can o x-country. that's a calorie burner!

electromg

I don't know, but it has to be a lot...I am always STARVED after going skiing, which is strange figuring most of it is waiting.

Alison_84

Was just wondering this myself... going skiing tonight from about 5-9, but there's no way I'll be actually on the hill for 4 hours! I cut that in half, hopefully that makes up for it...

tayaleagh

I was wondering the same. I just estimate that 6 hours on the hill (lodge time not included) is probably more like 3 hours of actual skiing. Hope that's accurate?!

jasonweinberg

i go with somewhere about 33%. if i am on the mountain for three hours i put down one hour five hours 1.5... 6 hours 2...8 hours 2.5...

JHB2011

I wish I could figure it out too. I had an app on my phone that "calculated" it, and one run said it was like 29 miles long which was impossible haha.
If anyone has a good answer, help us!

statist

First thing is just to ask software producers what they mean by 1 hour of skiing. Then maybe record your skiing by smartphone. One app that I know is named "AllSport GPS" (for Android), which suppose to do that. It even suppose to deduct the rest time. But even so it is like too much effort to get these measures and then synchronize them with MyFitnessPal software. I think best quick measure to estimate calories burned is vertical drop you skied (and not the length which just decreases with slope steepness-tangent), because it seems more closely relate to the energy spent.

statist

non

statist

I would time yourself one time down and then estimate the amount of runs and multiply it, although that is hard to do because you probably don't go down the same ones every time! I usually just don't record it... but it is curious.

that's basically what i do. but i just wonder whether the people who create these "hourly calorie burning" fiures mean for it to be done that way...can't wait till we get some natural snow so i can o x-country. that's a calorie burner!

I think they have no idea what they are doing at all. Perhaps they never ski and do not realize that to go down you have to go up first.