Maximize Fat Loss or Maximize Performance: Why do I have to

stubbysticks

...choose?

I just started monitoring my heart rate when I exercise & learning about the different zones & what the benefits are of training in a particular zone. Not new to exercise, just new to heart rate training.

Basically, I've learned that Zones 1-2 are where you maximize fat loss, with up to 85% of the calories burned coming from fat. Awesome, right? And Zone 3 isn't bad either, because you get maximum cardiorespiratory benefit in this zone, with 50% of your calories burned coming from fat. Still awesome.

Zones 4-5 are where you spend more time if you want to maximize your performance, but only 10-15% of the calories you burn come from fat.

I'd still like to lose at least another 40-50 lbs. On the other hand, my fitness level has improved so much that I've got myself thinking I can do a half marathon this fall. In order to do that, I need to improve my running pace a bit so I've been incorporating a lot of Zone 4-5 work into my exercise.

My question is this: Have any of you intentionally lowered the intensity of your exercise to stay in the maximum fat-burning zone? I can't say I'm considering doing this, but it's a little disconcerting to know that working to maximize my performance & achieve something I never thought physically possible also means slower fat loss.

I suppose I could purposely keep my distance runs slow enough to stay in Zone 2.

Thoughts?

ShannonMpls

But - you're going to burn more overall calories at higher intensities, right? So even if a smaller percentage of them will come from fat, you will STILL burn more fat overall at higher zones.

Look at the chart here:
http://exercise.about.com/od/weightloss/a/The-Truth-About-The-Fat-Burning-Zone.htm

(I 100% ignore exercise zones on the advice of my trainer)

stubbysticks

Ah...that does make sense. Nice link, the little chart was a neat example! Now I'm going to have to run some numbers of my own to see how my workouts come out. Like I said, i just started using the chest strap to monitor heart rate so I'm going to keep wearing it for all of my workouts (strength training too) to see where I'm at.

ShannonMpls

Ah...that does make sense. Nice link, the little chart was a neat example! Now I'm going to have to run some numbers of my own to see how my workouts come out. Like I said, i just started using the chest strap to monitor heart rate so I'm going to keep wearing it for all of my workouts (strength training too) to see where I'm at.

I love my HRM - and I wear it during strength training too but take the results with a grain of salt, especially doing your style of heavy lifting.

I just try not to make it more complicated than it needs to be. I tend to be obsessive over numbers and the last thing I want to do is add zones to the mix You're doing so well...I say keep it up!

goyabean

I suggest interval training bring your HR to max then slow it down then up then down. Just to keep your body guessing and continue progressing. Good luck your doing awesome!

rbear713

I second the interval/circuit training - what a great workout style....little weights and not heavy overall exertion, but I'm always sore the next day or two - you burn and burn tons of cals like this AND greatly improve your fitness/performance level as well....


As far as the zones thing goes - I also agree with the ignore them part. I've dropped 75 - 80 punds in about 3 months by going as hard as I can on a daily basis (my HR hits 148 - 153 for 60 to 90 seconds over and over in the gym) and I havent gotten ANY weaker - if anything, I'm a lot stronger than i was 3 months ago. My trainers know zones and how they work, but never seem to be too concerned with them...at least not where I'm concerned...


Just work as hard as you can - that way you are maximizing you burn and your performance! Keep up the great work!!!

George1567

I use my HR monitor with every workout, upload every time to the polar fitness website and review my results. I have never seen a workout that said it was 85% from fat. To narrow it down I have never seen one that was even 40%. I too agree with the replies that say to not get caught up in zones and just workout. Keeping an eye on your fitness program is responsible, but somedays you just workout and others you can kill it. I let my body tell me how it's going to go each day I workout. I see some amazingly fit/lean bodies from the crossfit programs.....and those guys and gals workout like their hair is on fire. I don't know this to be fact, but watching from the cheep seats tells me they don't worry much about HR in the middle of molesting one of those huge industrial tires. Looks like to me they worry more about the stopwatch, which puts it in a "intervial" setting. Research and experiment........that keeps me excited to go workout. When it gets to be the same old routine, is when the motivation fades.

tigersword

The zones are pretty much irrelevant. How much you burn during exercise doesn't matter much, as fat burning is pretty consistent. If you burn more fat during exercise, you burn less fat the rest of the day, and if you burn less fat during exercise, you burn more fat the rest of the day. For the most part, it washes out.

BAMFMeredith

But - you're going to burn more overall calories at higher intensities, right? So even if a smaller percentage of them will come from fat, you will STILL burn more fat overall at higher zones.

Look at the chart here:
http://exercise.about.com/od/weightloss/a/The-Truth-About-The-Fat-Burning-Zone.htm

(I 100% ignore exercise zones on the advice of my trainer)

Word. I met with a trainer last night who told me to ignore the whole "fat burning zone" thing and go balls to the wall. When you do HIIT you go way out of your lower "fat burning" zones, but you burn more fat in a shorter amount of time. So rather than spending an hour walking on a treadmill, I can do 30 minutes of HIIT and burn fat more efficiently.

Acg67

http://alanaragon.com/myths-under-the-microscope-the-fat-burning-zone-fasted-cardio.html

carrie_eggo

http://alanaragon.com/myths-under-the-microscope-the-fat-burning-zone-fasted-cardio.html

^^This

scottb81

If you are doing this to train for a half marathon you need to run a lot aerobically to generate the physiological adaptations that give you endurance.

You cannot run a lot in zone 4 & 5 and zone 5 is not aerobic anyway.

Do lots of miles in zone 2. Do some miles in zone 3. Do a few miles in zone 4 & 5. And when you want to run but are tired run in zone 1.

By building up your aerobic system with lots of miles in zones 1, 2, & 3 you will naturally get faster at those heart rates over time. The added benefit is that by going faster you will also burn more calories at the lower heartrates.

stubbysticks

I don't know this to be fact, but watching from the cheep seats tells me they don't worry much about HR in the middle of molesting one of those huge industrial tires.

^^^^
LOL nice.

See, I knew asking my question would attract a bunch of people who know more than me. Appreciate that link @acg, great info in there. You have all convinced me that I don't need to worry too much about the whole zone business & I should continue working toward my fitness goals. @scott, I do think I have all the zones pretty well covered, anyway. I'm currently running 11-14 miles a week & that includes distance, speedwork & tempo runs, plus I strength train 3x weekly too.

The only reason I even started thinking about it was because a trainer I talked to at my gym asked if I wore a HRM & wondered why I didn't. I suspect he asked because of the half-marathon goal I mentioned, because when I really start training for it I'll probably need to learn about VO2 max & stuff like that.

Thanks so much to all of you for your input!

BigJohn82

Interval training sounds like the best option for you, plus its fun!

I do though, keep my heart rate lower during my cardio before my weight session.

stubbysticks

I wanted to follow up on this topic because I recently had a New Leaf metabolic assessment at my gym, & the exercise test helped them calculated exactly where my zones are. The workstation cranked out a neat 12-week heart rate training program based on my zones that includes 9 prescribed sessions in various arrangements, 60 min/6 days a week for the 12 weeks. For the first 4 weeks, there are 3 interval sessions that stay in zones 1-3 alternated with 3 steady-state sessions in zones 1-2. I'm almost at the end of Week 1.

Last weekend right before I started the program, I ran a 7k race with a goal time of 57 min which I pretty much hit dead on. I then jumped into my 1 hr daily cardio sessions (treadmill mostly) & at such low intensity there was only a little bit of jogging mixed in here & there.

Just last night I decided to compare my HRM data & see how those percentages for fat-burning fit in.
- During my race on Saturday, my avg HR was right smack in the middle of my Zone 4. The HRM said I burned 573 calories, so 15% of that is a whopping 86 fat calories burned in a hour of pushing myself as hard as I could.
- For my first 3 cardio sessions this week, my avg HR was right on the line between my Zones 2 & 3. The HRM said I burned an average of 519 calories per 1 hr session, so 50-85% of that is 260-441 fat calories burned in a hour of NOT pushing myself as hard as I could.

Huge difference. The more I go through the program, talk about it with my trainer, & read articles online written by elite triathloners & the like, the more I understand the purpose of the heart rate training. I'm training my body to get used to burning fat more efficiently during extended periods of cardio. For example, I did 4.96 miles during my first Zone 2 workout. By continuing through the training program, I expect to see myself cover longer & longer distances during my Zone 2 sessions without exerting myself more.

So although "balls to the wall" is still going to get you a good calorie burn, it's not going to maximize your performance long-term. Basically Scott hit the nail right on the head...a good aerobic base will help you progress & improve your speed, & ultimately that's what I'm trying to do beyond lose fat.

It's fascinating really...anyway, thought I'd share!

vicky1112

Hi guys

I am new here. So just a quick question.

Does it take into account the calories you burn when doing strength training?

tigersword

I wanted to follow up on this topic because I recently had a New Leaf metabolic assessment at my gym, & the exercise test helped them calculated exactly where my zones are. The workstation cranked out a neat 12-week heart rate training program based on my zones that includes 9 prescribed sessions in various arrangements, 60 min/6 days a week for the 12 weeks. For the first 4 weeks, there are 3 interval sessions that stay in zones 1-3 alternated with 3 steady-state sessions in zones 1-2. I'm almost at the end of Week 1.

Last weekend right before I started the program, I ran a 7k race with a goal time of 57 min which I pretty much hit dead on. I then jumped into my 1 hr daily cardio sessions (treadmill mostly) & at such low intensity there was only a little bit of jogging mixed in here & there.

Just last night I decided to compare my HRM data & see how those percentages for fat-burning fit in.
- During my race on Saturday, my avg HR was right smack in the middle of my Zone 4. The HRM said I burned 573 calories, so 15% of that is a whopping 86 fat calories burned in a hour of pushing myself as hard as I could.
- For my first 3 cardio sessions this week, my avg HR was right on the line between my Zones 2 & 3. The HRM said I burned an average of 519 calories per 1 hr session, so 50-85% of that is 260-441 fat calories burned in a hour of NOT pushing myself as hard as I could.

Huge difference. The more I go through the program, talk about it with my trainer, & read articles online written by elite triathloners & the like, the more I understand the purpose of the heart rate training. I'm training my body to get used to burning fat more efficiently during extended periods of cardio. For example, I did 4.96 miles during my first Zone 2 workout. By continuing through the training program, I expect to see myself cover longer & longer distances during my Zone 2 sessions without exerting myself more.

So although "balls to the wall" is still going to get you a good calorie burn, it's not going to maximize your performance long-term. Basically Scott hit the nail right on the head...a good aerobic base will help you progress & improve your speed, & ultimately that's what I'm trying to do beyond lose fat.

It's fascinating really...anyway, thought I'd share!

Huge difference while exercising, but irrelevant overall. When you burn more fat during exercise, you burn less fat over the next 24 hours. When you burn less fat during exercise, you burn more fat over the next 24 hours. It all balances out throughout the day. That's why the science says that heart rate training is irrelevant for fat burning. Fat is relatively inefficient as an energy source, so the body only burns fat during low intensity activities, high intensity activities require a different fuel system, because fat can't be burned fast enough to keep up.

alundgren2002

As a person that is currently training for a half, has done them before, a full last year and also does obstacle races, let me tell you, interval training is what you need to help strength your recovery and endurance. DO NOT do it during your 'long runs' but the other runs, sprints with recovery work FABULOUS and help increase speed, heart health and muscle recovery. I have gone from a 1 min recovery heart rate of 130 to 103 in under 6 months. That, to me, is more important the what 'kind' of calories I burn. Calories are calories, period. AND all those calculations are estimates, period.
Do what you like and will stick with and do what feels healthy. I am willing to bet that a lot of the people here know more than a trainer at most gyms. There are some FABULOUS ones, but not all.

ALSO- keep in mind that as you get stronger and your heart is healthier, it will take more effort to reach those same heart rate zones. So, what you are doing with the HRM is preventing yourself from overdoing at this time and that is not a bad thing. You will also get to see your heart health improvement in the numbers.

stubbysticks

@tiger, I get that, & maybe I didn't make myself clear. Yes, burning calories is burning calories & I'm not saying low intensity workouts are the best way to burn fat. Any exercise you'll do & keep up consistently is the best, really.

When it comes to training your body to run better & faster, this is where the heart rate training can make a huge difference. Before I started this program I had some pretty decent endurance built up & I have a few races behind me. The problem is that I've been doing most of my running in Zones 3 & 4, & by staying there I'd eventually reach a point where I just couldn't get any faster. Actually I think I was pretty much at that point, because I wasn't improving any & I ran a whole fricken lot. If I'm running 7k in 57 minutes in Zone 4, perhaps at the end of my program I could run that 7k in 57 minutes in Zone 2 instead...which I obviously wouldn't do in a race, meaning I could run it in Zone 4, but with a much better time.

@alundgren, I'd like to run my first half this fall, so this is kind of where all of this is going for me. The program is pretty neat, the first 4 weeks builds aerobic endurance with some interval sessions mixed in, then towards the end there are some threshold sessions that include intervals from Zones 1-4 to really push that heart rate.

stubbysticks

Hi guys

I am new here. So just a quick question.

Does it take into account the calories you burn when doing strength training?

Strength training is separate from my program so no...but if you're asking if an HRM measures calories you burn while strength training, it does. I don't know how accurate it is, my guess is that it would be more accurate for circuit training since your heart rate stays up more consistently, but I don't know for sure.

tigersword

Hi guys

I am new here. So just a quick question.

Does it take into account the calories you burn when doing strength training?

Strength training is separate from my program so no...but if you're asking if an HRM measures calories you burn while strength training, it does. I don't know how accurate it is, my guess is that it would be more accurate for circuit training since your heart rate stays up more consistently, but I don't know for sure.

HRM's are only accurate for aerobic exercise. Strength training uses the anaerobic energy system, so an HRM is pretty much useless for estimating calorie burns, as your heart rate doesn't apply.