Running fast pace/low cal burn vs slow pace/high cal burn

Options
2

Replies

  • Josedavid
    Josedavid Posts: 695 Member
    Options
    Baby... controversy mode OFF. I am not gonna argue with you. I am not going to tell you about the successful stories from many clients. And if this is the kind of help you give when someone ask for something, thank you.

    I am not in a competition to prove whos better doing what. But your attitude is just childish
  • sjohnny
    sjohnny Posts: 56,142 Member
    Options
    This got me curious so I went and looked at four runs from the last couple of weeks of different distances or intensities. Here's what my results were (I'm 6'4" 205lbs and have only been running since November)
    3.1 miles 24:08 (7:47/mile average) 475 calories - 19 calories/minute, 153 calories/mile - this is the fastest I have ever run 5K
    3.5 miles 30:06 (8:36/mile average) 530 calories - 17 calories/minute, 151 calories/mile - comfortable pace for that distance
    6.2 miles 1:00:29 (9:44/mile avg) 951 calories - 16 calories/minute, 152 calories/mile - pretty easy pace for that distance
    10 miles 1:43:18 (10:20/mile avg) 1523 calories - 15 calories/minute, 152 calories/mile

    I was surprised at how little difference there was in the calories/mile regardless of time/distance/speed.

    Then I looked at a day where I did 10x400m intervals (200m walk breaks in between each) this included about a 5 minute warm up run (this workout kicked my butt)
    5 miles 55:15 685 calories - 12 calories/minute, 137 calories/mile - the walk breaks really seem to bring the calorie burn down.
  • tappae
    tappae Posts: 568 Member
    Options
    Estimates based on heart rate aren't particularly accurate, because there are different reasons your heart rate may elevate. Do you get a little nervous when training someone else? Anxiety could raise your heart rate and skew your results. Do you do a lot of talking while training? That can make your heart have to work harder, but it won't necessarily increase your caloric burn. Another possibility is that your HRM is just wrong. I don't know what type you have, but mine is often way off. In building my aerobic base, I've been trying to keep my heart rate down around 140-145 while running. Sometimes, my HRM will report that my heart rate is around 220 or so. When I stop and manually count the beats, I find that it's really around 145 and the HRM usually adjusts while I'm standing there.
  • camelgirlmn
    camelgirlmn Posts: 226 Member
    Options
    You're a certified personal trainer?!

    And you think you can burn 1,000 calories in a half hour?!

    :noway:

    1- yes i am, no big deal
    2- thats why my hrm told me today, thats why i ask

    Oh it's not a big deal at all...just further proof that there are more certified Personal Trainers out there that have little to no knowledge about the human body and its' physiology.


    ^^^^^^^ EXACTLY
  • secretlobster
    secretlobster Posts: 3,566 Member
    Options
    What kind of heart rate monitor do you have? I've used both Polar, which will attribute a higher calorie burn to a lower heart rate sustained for the same amount of time, and the Motorola MOTOACTV which doesn't have "target zones" like the Polar and thus will usually show a lower burn for the same activity.

    I maintain that it is EXTREMELY unlikely you are burning 1000 calories in 30 minutes by running, even in an hour that is a remarkably high burn considering your moderate speed. Your heart rate, both resting and running, is on the better side of "normal" so I don't think you are burning as much as the HRM tells you. I'm guessing that the calories burned, in terms of HRM calculation, is based on what "zone" you are in.

    It helps to remember that your HRM's calorie calculation is really just an estimate based on the factors it knows about you, and your current heart rate.
  • TrailRunner61
    TrailRunner61 Posts: 2,505 Member
    Options
    Good job on the 'as always', awesome burns!

    I've noticed the same thing with my biking (HRM). If I go slower, but steady at about 3rd gear, my heart rate stays up at around 135. If I switch the gears up and down to compensate for hills, or to just pedal harder, 1st to 7th gear, I burn less even though I'm breathing and sweating harder and my pulse will go up with the hills but then drop down to about 115. I guess staying 'in your zone' does burn more?
  • jenncaroon
    jenncaroon Posts: 91
    Options
    Hi, I ran 15 miles yesterday and burned 1603 according to my HRM. It took me 2 hrs and 25 mins. I weigh about 150 and am a 48 yo female. In 58 mins of boot camp this am using weights (15 lb dumb bells) and cardio I burned 584 again according to HRM.
  • Josedavid
    Josedavid Posts: 695 Member
    Options
    Ive been checking my previous run logs and some factors could appear in todays burn. Anyway, thanks all for your input, the well based because you help people and the troll ones because... you know... without you trolls the forums would never be the same...! :)
  • dawnorcutt
    dawnorcutt Posts: 3 Member
    Options
    agreed!!
  • Zangpakto
    Zangpakto Posts: 336 Member
    Options
    I really don't think you are burning 1000 calories in 30 minutes of running, regardless of what your HRM says... If that's you in your picture :)

    What's your resting heart rate and your average heart rate when you run?

    Edited to add: Many people will debate this, but at a slower pace, many HRMs are programmed to estimate your calorie burn as higher, because the manufacturers believe that you are burning more calories from fat, rather than dietary fuel, at a lower heart rate. There seems to be evidence of truth in this.

    Well not that they believe but it is true you burn a higher percentage of fat during low intensity, however for arguments sake, lets assume 40/60, you burn 1000c in an hour that is 400 fat, 600 glycogen stores because of HR, now lets assume in that hour you only burn 600 because of low intensity fat zone at 60/40 makes it 360 fat and 240 glycogen. Remember I am pulling these percentages out my *kitten*, I have my PT book here somewhere but not looking right now...

    But then what about the extra effort and the increased metabolism effect after training? To burn fat at those LOW levels you aren't going to increase your metabolism in the slightest... Also check that? you burn 600calories total at low level, which equates only to glycogen in high levels, and not even fat...

    A higher percent doesn't mean it is better... I personally think and feel it gives a people an excuse to be lazy... Lower level? Go for longer, much longer then... that is my recommendation.... Ran 30km on sunday at my best half marathon pace, and the last few km was hell, however depleted liver and muscle glycogen stores means I was primarily using fat as my fuel which is why it was hell as it takes such a long time for the conversion to take place.... Goes usually something like liver glycogen > muscle glycogen THEN only fat for fuel...

    Also at end of the day, just run, eat healthy and be happy... If you run and try justify eating more, then when you pick up like millions of other runners do during training don't complain... Diet even when racing is important.... Like racing weight generally could be considering your height in inches * 2.2 then for males * 1.1... Then even around there your looking at roughly 10-15 pounds either way... But would be a good place to start...
  • cal_73
    cal_73 Posts: 77
    Options
    I use a Polar FT4, and over a fixed distance, I burn less calories if I run the entire route than mixing it with running and walking - my theory is that when I stop running and walk a bit, my heart rate is still quite elevated (140 - 150) and so the hrm records more of a burn..?

    I've noticed this too. I think your theory is partially right but I also think the Polars include your basal rate - IE: they record calories you would have burned just sitting around. So when you exercise longer it shows you burned more calories even if the work done is the same. Just my guess.
  • rheelizabeth
    rheelizabeth Posts: 160 Member
    Options
    Wow.

    I really dislike the message boards on here, never get anything good out of it, just a lot of hate.


    If you don't have anything nice to say, keep your ugly mouth shut!
  • arc918
    arc918 Posts: 2,037 Member
    Options
    My $.02 - having run over 18,000 miles in the last 10 years (which does not make me an expert):

    Very few people on this site can burn 1,000 calories in a half hour. Burning an honest 1,000 in a hour is a tall enough order.
  • secretlobster
    secretlobster Posts: 3,566 Member
    Options
    If you don't have anything nice to say, keep your ugly mouth shut!

    The hypocrisy in this one sentence is just beautiful.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 33,991 Member
    Options
    Wow.

    I really dislike the message boards on here, never get anything good out of it, just a lot of hate.


    If you don't have anything nice to say, keep your ugly mouth shut!

    Pot, meet kettle.

  • bcampbell54
    bcampbell54 Posts: 932 Member
    Options
    If you don't have anything nice to say, keep your ugly mouth shut!

    Irony!
  • Josedavid
    Josedavid Posts: 695 Member
    Options
    Dudes, dudettes,

    Look, I had a question, I asked it. I got some very good inputs and some troll ones. I asked administration to remove this thread because is just not beneficial for the community.

    All the people who helped me with the information provided, thank you.

    All the people trying just to prove i am a very bad trainer or my question had no sense at all... hey, is your word, ok, i just hope you are all fine and perfect.

    Once and again... do not create controversy and do not start "fights" which is absolutely not nice in the forum
  • Josedavid
    Josedavid Posts: 695 Member
    Options
    My $.02 - having run over 18,000 miles in the last 10 years (which does not make me an expert):

    Very few people on this site can burn 1,000 calories in a half hour. Burning an honest 1,000 in a hour is a tall enough order.

    Obviously the information was proven to be wrong
  • arc918
    arc918 Posts: 2,037 Member
    Options
    My $.02 - having run over 18,000 miles in the last 10 years (which does not make me an expert):

    Very few people on this site can burn 1,000 calories in a half hour. Burning an honest 1,000 in a hour is a tall enough order.

    Obviously the information was proven to be wrong

    Sure thing.

    Why don't you try walking tomorrow, I bet you could burn 2,000 in 15 minutes if you slow it way down...
  • arc918
    arc918 Posts: 2,037 Member
    Options
    At 170 lbs I burn generally between 120 and 130 cal per mile no matter the speed. A few more calories at faster speeds, but not much.

    To burn 1000 calories in 30 min you would have to be running 16 mph or a little under 4 minute miles.

    Your HRM or other calculation method is off unless you really were running around that fast or weigh more than 350 lbs.

    Your science is messing up a sound fantasy!

Categories