Calories burned swimming
Options
DPernet
Posts: 481 Member
Found this on Livestrong. Posting it here so that I can research it a bit more when I get home from work :laugh:
The following equation provides the calories that women burn during an hour of swimming: Calories = [(0.4472 x Average Heart Rate) -- (0.05741 x Weight) + (0.074 x Age) -- 20.4022] x 60 / 4.184. The following equation provides the calories that men burn during an hour of swimming: Calories = [(0.6309 x Average Heart Rate) -- (0.09036 x Weight) + (0.2017 x Age) -- 55.0969] x 60 / 4.184.
Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/213642-how-many-calories-are-burned-when-you-swim-for-one-hour/#ixzz2LcromffZ
The following equation provides the calories that women burn during an hour of swimming: Calories = [(0.4472 x Average Heart Rate) -- (0.05741 x Weight) + (0.074 x Age) -- 20.4022] x 60 / 4.184. The following equation provides the calories that men burn during an hour of swimming: Calories = [(0.6309 x Average Heart Rate) -- (0.09036 x Weight) + (0.2017 x Age) -- 55.0969] x 60 / 4.184.
Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/213642-how-many-calories-are-burned-when-you-swim-for-one-hour/#ixzz2LcromffZ
0
Replies
-
I've checked a bunch of different on-line calculators and have settled on this one. The output is is midrange between the pessimistic and optimistic calculators.
Uses weight, distance and time.
The MFP calculator only counts time yet if my distance in a specific time is more than another day, the MFP calculator doesn't change. So I take the number from this web site and adjust the time to match this calculator.
http://42.195km.net/e/swim/
I can't use heart rate in any calculation due to a beta blocker I am on for migraines. It slows my heart rate.0 -
Thanks, looking forward to checking out the link to that alternate calculator.0
-
That works out to 722 calories an hour for me at age 42 and 112lbs. Should it take into account what distance is covered in an hour??0
-
Try the 'Speedo Pace Club' website. You can log in, calculate your swims, and even set yourself a swim route anywhere in the world. It's fab! They also have swimming tutorials to improve your technique, and swim squad.0
-
That works out to 722 calories an hour for me at age 42 and 112lbs. Should it take into account what distance is covered in an hour??
Don't think so. Just your average heart rate during the swim0 -
I tried using this formula but I get a negative number. To me, regardless the actual heart rate, the formula should never yield a negative number if it is valid. Since it is not, there should be a range defined over which it is valid.
Can't use it anyway because Metoprolol keeps the HR from rising. Can't wait to get rid of it.0 -
I tried using this formula but I get a negative number. To me, regardless the actual heart rate, the formula should never yield a negative number if it is valid. Since it is not, there should be a range defined over which it is valid.
Can't use it anyway because Metoprolol keeps the HR from rising. Can't wait to get rid of it.
If you get a negative number then you've not done the calculation correctly. It's probably where there are 2 '-' signs. This always gets people :flowerforyou:
I would suggest copying the formula into Excel and using it there
Calories=((0.6309*Avg Heart Rate)--(0.09036*Weight)+(0.2017*Age)--55.0969)*60/4.1840 -
--=+
Why would anyone use a double negative in a formula instead of a plus?
That doesn't make sense either. The numbers get extremely high. As in over 2000.
=((0.6309*Avg Heart Rate)--(0.09036*Weight)+(0.2017*Age)--55.0969)*60/4.184
Substituting the Cell names it looks like this:
=((0.6309*HeartRate)--(0.09036*Weight)+(0.2017*Age)--55.0969)*60/4.184
is the same as
=((0.6309*HeartRate)+(0.09036*Weight)+(0.2017*Age)+55.0969)*60/4.184
It is not a Pounds vs kg either because that doesn't change the number much.0 -
I love that alternate calculator @fishgutzy. Thanks for sharing!0
-
I have simplified my "calculation."
To avoid possible over calculation I just enter one minute per lap "light/ moderate effort."
Based on what I have found, the light/moderate assumes 1 lap (50yd) per minute. The "fast/vigorous" assumes 75 yds per minute.
So even if it takes me 100 minutes to finish 90 laps, I enter 90 minutes. If it takes me 85 minutes to swim 90 laps, I enter 90 minutes. (I don't do it 85 minutes yet. Got more strength work to do) My typical time is 95 minutes for 90 laps.
Once I can get my HRM transmitter to not flipped over on push off I'll try using that to gauge calories.0 -
Based on what I have found, the light/moderate assumes 1 lap (50yd) per minute. The "fast/vigorous" assumes 75 yds per minute.
That is helpful. I usually swim at the fast/vigorous pace then.0 -
Based on what I have found, the light/moderate assumes 1 lap (50yd) per minute. The "fast/vigorous" assumes 75 yds per minute.
That is helpful. I usually swim at the fast/vigorous pace then.
I don't think it's that simple, though. 75 yards/minute might be easy for some and impossible for others. I've asked the question outside the forum, and speculated that 70% on up to all out should be fast/vigorous, and anything less should be light/moderate. I had lots of agreement, and no dissent. When I started back in the pool, 1:15 for 100 yards would have been an all out sprint for me, and I may not have even made it in time. Now 1:15 is somewhere around 75%, so while it's still fast/vigorous for me, it's on the low end of the fast/vigorous spectrum. There are plenty of people who've been at it longer than me and 100 yards in 1:15 or 75 yards/minute would be a cakewalk.0 -
There are plenty of people who've been at it longer than me and 100 yards in 1:15 or 75 yards/minute would be a cakewalk.
75 yards per minute is "easy" for competitive swimmers. It is quite a bit beyond what I can do. I might get that fast if I use fins and sprint as hard as a I can. But no way could I maintain that pace for an hour.
Top level competitors can swim 10km under 2 hours. I'm perfectly happy with my 3:54. I'm too old to develop the upper body strength needed to pull my time down by half. I might get it under 3 hours after I get to my goal weight (30# to go).
There are other calculators that go beyond 75 yard per minute assumption, linked above.
But for the average fitness (non-competitive) swimmer the two assumption built in here are probably fine once you know what is behind the number it spits out.
BTW, none of the swimmers at my Y that swim faster than I do swim as far as I do. But I still watch their form to see what I can learn from them. From some I learn what not to do
0 -
Well it works for you. My point is that it can't be universally applied as a rule. For example: I swam 5 X 100 at the tail end of 2.5 miles today. My splits for each 100 were 1:25, 1:20, 1:20, 1:15 and 1:15. At the end of my workout, this is fast vigorous because I had to give it about 80% + effort to make those times. Nearer the beginning of my workout coming off a day of rest (I never swim on Sunday), I could achieve these times giving it 70-75%. The amount of effort on my part can vary by day and by positioning in the workout. The record holder for the 100 Freestyle at my high school men's team did it in 48.91 seconds which means that posting a 1:15 100 would be 65% effort. I would qualify that as moderate rather than vigorous. Times may mean something, but they're not conclusively to be applied across the spectrum.0
-
Of course.
My only point was to point out the basis behind the two selectable options from the free style menu.
Some people put down "fast" when they should actually put moderate. Over estimating kCal's burned can be "hazardous" if one eats back most of the exercise calories.
Clearly neither category applies to competitive swimmers. Using another web based calculator and entering the number directly is appropriate in these cases.
I am not and never will be competitive in the pool. Way too late for that. :bigsmile:0
