Stronglifts and Abs

ExcelWithMel
ExcelWithMel Posts: 192 Member
I'm not stupid, but how does strong lifts (or any other type of lifting program) create a more defined mid-section? I see before and after pictures, and there is noticeable difference, but not on my body.

I completed a round of ChaLEAN extreme and definitely started to notice some muscle definition especially in my arms, back, and shoulders, but I still am obsessed with my belly fat.

I've completed 2 weeks of Strong lifts now and my measurements have not changed, but I am seeing even MORE muscle. All which is great, but I really want to slim down my mid-section and was wondering how this actually works, and when might I start to see some progress?

On my strong lifts days, I also do 100 reverse curls (5 sets of 20).

In addition to Strong lifts, I do running or yoga on alternating days, with one day off most weeks.

My diet is pretty clean, but could be better.
«1

Replies

  • ahviendha
    ahviendha Posts: 1,291 Member
    oops read your question wrong.

    why do you ask how? when you squat, do you feel your ab muscles contracting? that's creating muscle.

    deadlifting, when you tighten your core, you're creating muscle.

    but it does take time. it took a good 2 months of consistent lifting for my abs to be more defined. but they are rock hard, and go all the way around my body whereas circuit training or pilates seemed to work only the front, or sides. weight lifting gives me everything i want with (it feels like) half the work
  • chunkmunk
    chunkmunk Posts: 221 Member
    I don't think any type of exercise creates a more defined mid-section. Definition will only come with loss of body fat. What lifting does, and what other ab workouts do, is strengthen the abdominal/core muscles.

    My opinion, anyway. And I'm feeling much stronger in my abs and core afer 10 plus weeks of stronglifts. The only accessory ab-work I do is 3 sets of 12 reverse crunches on A days.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    You should tighten your ab muscles before each and every lift. You can do the lifts without your abs at first so (like me), you may not be tightening your abs, and you're missing out on that great workout. But, you can't progress very far without using and strengthening your abs because the lifts will just break down. For example, you won't be able to keep your chest out and your torso relatively upright for squats if you don't have the core muscles to hold yourself up under the barbell.

    In fact, lifting belts work because they "strengthen" your core and give your abs something to push against. You also can't target belly fat. While doing extra ab work might help build up some of that muscle, it's not helping you lose weight around your middle. The only thing that works for that is decreasing your bf%, so losing fat. Keep up the lifting and make sure you're eating at a deficit. Just keep with it.
  • Will_Thrust_For_Candy
    Will_Thrust_For_Candy Posts: 6,109 Member
    The program will absolutely help with abdominal strength but 2 weeks is not very much time.....patience is a virtue in the weight training world!

    I also do yoga on my non lifting days and have found that to help strengthen the abs too.

    As far as having visible abs.....fat loss is the only thing that will make that happen! Keep at it and the results will follow!
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    I do basically zero additional ab work. I hate it. I LOATHE it. I refuse to do it. Just won't. Probably once every 6 months someone talks me into it, I do it one day and remember why I hate it, and never do it again. Squats will work your abs. IF you don't believe me, go do a bunch of ab work til you are sore, then go squat the next day. except you probably won't be able too because it will hurt too badly. (I have done this exact thing)

    So. Belly fat.

    I store my fat on my lower belly. When I was 16 and 135 and otherwise not fat, I had a little ring of belly fat. It sucks, and its entirely genetic, and all you can do for it is keep losing fat til it goes away.
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    By the way - that isn't meant to imply that you CAN'T do extra ab work if you want to.

    but if your concern is having a flat lean tummy, the only thing you can do is lose fat. No exercise in the world will make you spot reduce.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Deadlifts and Squats work your abs plenty.
    As you reduce your body fat your abs will become more visible.
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    I don't think any type of exercise creates a more defined mid-section. Definition will only come with loss of body fat.

    Yup. And body fat loss comes with a calorie deficit.
  • sandradev1
    sandradev1 Posts: 786 Member
    I've completed 8 weeks of Stronglifts and my hip and waist measurement have both decreased by 2.5 inches, in that time. My body fat % has also decreased which is why I measure so much less.

    The only other thing I do is very light cardio on non-lifting days. Just be patient, the lifts do work all of your body.
  • ExcelWithMel
    ExcelWithMel Posts: 192 Member
    Such supportive answers. Thank you everyone. No, you are right - I shouldn't expect results in 2 weeks, but I did ChaLEAN over 3 months, and now this and I guess I expected a smaller mid-section by now.

    I will keep at it, I will also concentrate more on tightening my core during the workouts.

    I hope my diet is right. I am 5'8", @170 lbs., 40 years old. I set my target at 1,500 calories per day, but that's just to keep me in line before I enter my workouts in because I tend to eat those calories back. I usually eat 1,800-2,200 calories per day based on how hard I worked out/hungry I am. I burn on the average 350 calories per day, 7 days per week (anywhere from @250 on my lifting days all the way up to 850 when I run and do yoga on the same day). My macros are set at 35C/35P/30F. I don't eat much flour or sugar, but I do need to watch how many glasses of wine I have on a weekly basis.

    Any additional advise on eating, etc. is appreciated.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Such supportive answers. Thank you everyone. No, you are right - I shouldn't expect results in 2 weeks, but I did ChaLEAN over 3 months, and now this and I guess I expected a smaller mid-section by now.

    I will keep at it, I will also concentrate more on tightening my core during the workouts.

    I hope my diet is right. I am 5'8", @170 lbs., 40 years old. I set my target at 1,500 calories per day, but that's just to keep me in line before I enter my workouts in because I tend to eat those calories back. I usually eat 1,800-2,200 calories per day based on how hard I worked out/hungry I am. I burn on the average 350 calories per day, 7 days per week (anywhere from @250 on my lifting days all the way up to 850 when I run and do yoga on the same day). My macros are set at 35C/35P/30F. I don't eat much flour or sugar, but I do need to watch how many glasses of wine I have on a weekly basis.

    Any additional advise on eating, etc. is appreciated.

    Your calories sound about right; I weigh more than you but workout less than you do (I love my two rest days), and I eat 1900 calories. Except I drink far more beer than wine. :smile:

    Edited to add semicolon, which is why I could never be a computer programmer...
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    Such supportive answers. Thank you everyone. No, you are right - I shouldn't expect results in 2 weeks, but I did ChaLEAN over 3 months, and now this and I guess I expected a smaller mid-section by now.

    I will keep at it, I will also concentrate more on tightening my core during the workouts.

    I hope my diet is right. I am 5'8", @170 lbs., 40 years old. I set my target at 1,500 calories per day, but that's just to keep me in line before I enter my workouts in because I tend to eat those calories back. I usually eat 1,800-2,200 calories per day based on how hard I worked out/hungry I am. I burn on the average 350 calories per day, 7 days per week (anywhere from @250 on my lifting days all the way up to 850 when I run and do yoga on the same day). My macros are set at 35C/35P/30F. I don't eat much flour or sugar, but I do need to watch how many glasses of wine I have on a weekly basis.

    Any additional advise on eating, etc. is appreciated.

    Your calories sound about right; I weigh more than you but workout less than you do (I love my two rest days), and I eat 1900 calories. Except I drink far more beer than wine. :smile:

    Edited to add semicolon, which is why I could never be a computer programmer...

    ^ thats actually not a big deal anymore, modern IDE's have parsers/syntax checkers/thingies. Plus compilers have better error handling now anyways and they'll tell you where they think there's something missing. So, you could now! If you wanted! but its boring, so don't. Seriously. dulllll.

    Er anyway.


    OP - those calories seem fine yes. Be consistent for 8 weeks, if you don't see any changes, come back and we'll revisit it.
  • collingmommy
    collingmommy Posts: 456 Member
    I'm on week 6 of stronglifts, i measure every two weeks and weigh on Fridays. I've already lost 16 inches. All over my body. I'm hoping to do the stronglifts for12 weeks then go to another lifting program.
  • kopmom
    kopmom Posts: 491 Member
    My abs is the biggest area I would like to see change. I have been tempted to add some supplement to my SL program (beyond my running, training for a half marathon) BUT I am holding off because I am only starting week 4 of SL and do see change in my ab area.
  • sarahstrezo
    sarahstrezo Posts: 568 Member
    Taso has it right. Keep doing the heavy compound movements and eating at a deficit.

    It just takes time. Lots of time and patience.

    The only direct ab work I do is 3 sets of plank once per week. My core strength has increased tremendously from lifting heavy the past 7 months. But....I also still have a small amount of belly fat. unfortunately, it's usually one of the last places to go.

    IMO, most women aren't going to see defined abs or a '6-pack' until you get at or below 20%BF. I'm at about 21-21.5%BF right now and you can see from my profile pic, that my stomach is flat, but I do not have a defined 6-pack. I still have a pudge of belly fat that sits right below my belly button that drives me NUTS!

    Your midsection will thin out as your body fat decreases.
  • ECR1989
    ECR1989 Posts: 158
    From various internet checks (which I know aren't totally accurate but i took the average from them) I'm around 24-25% body fat. I'd like to get down to around 20-21% but it's just taking a long time. I don't want to be able to see a six-pack, but i'd love to just lose the fat around my midsection and also on my thighs.

    I'm eating around 1800 cals a day (not eating back exercise cals) and doing SL 3x a week as well as cardio about 4/5 times a week. Either jogging on the treadmill for 3-5k or swimming for 45 mins. I try to eat fairly freshly and have cut down majorly on how often I eat out, and how often I go out with friends for wine. Does anybody have any idea how long roughly it takes somebody to lose 4% BF at the rate I'm at?

    I'm just starting to worry, I don't feel I've lost any weight in a while, and whilst my clothes are fitting a bit better (a bit) I'm getting frustrated by the slow progress. I want to be strong, lose body fat and hopefully at the same time the last stubborn 10lbs or so. Will I achieve this with SL? Or will it increase my weight as I get stronger?
  • xidia
    xidia Posts: 606 Member
    With that much cardio, my guess is you may not be eating enough. What's your BMR & TDEE?
  • sarahstrezo
    sarahstrezo Posts: 568 Member
    From various internet checks (which I know aren't totally accurate but i took the average from them) I'm around 24-25% body fat. I'd like to get down to around 20-21% but it's just taking a long time. I don't want to be able to see a six-pack, but i'd love to just lose the fat around my midsection and also on my thighs.

    I'm eating around 1800 cals a day (not eating back exercise cals) and doing SL 3x a week as well as cardio about 4/5 times a week. Either jogging on the treadmill for 3-5k or swimming for 45 mins. I try to eat fairly freshly and have cut down majorly on how often I eat out, and how often I go out with friends for wine. Does anybody have any idea how long roughly it takes somebody to lose 4% BF at the rate I'm at?

    I'm just starting to worry, I don't feel I've lost any weight in a while, and whilst my clothes are fitting a bit better (a bit) I'm getting frustrated by the slow progress. I want to be strong, lose body fat and hopefully at the same time the last stubborn 10lbs or so. Will I achieve this with SL? Or will it increase my weight as I get stronger?

    I also think you might not be eating enough with that much cardio. I would also suggest tracking your measurements as a way of getting your BF%. I use the US Navy Body Fat Calculations. You plug in your measurements and it gives you your LBM and BF%. You can plug in your old measurements (if you have them) and get an idea of the progress you are making. It's taking me a while to get down on my BF%. It's taking me a while to find my 'sweet spot' of cals where I have enough energy to work out hard but low enough that I lose. Unfortunately, that amount is causing a very, very slow loss....like .25-.4lb per week. But, I'm at the point where I'm not willing to sacrifice performance for a faster loss.
  • jayliospecky
    jayliospecky Posts: 25,022 Member

    ^ thats actually not a big deal anymore, modern IDE's have parsers/syntax checkers/thingies. Plus compilers have better error handling now anyways and they'll tell you where they think there's something missing. So, you could now! If you wanted! but its boring, so don't. Seriously. dulllll.

    Ok, did we stop talking about calories and abs and stuff? Because you lost me. :indifferent:
    I also think you might not be eating enough with that much cardio. I would also suggest tracking your measurements as a way of getting your BF%. I use the US Navy Body Fat Calculations. You plug in your measurements and it gives you your LBM and BF%. You can plug in your old measurements (if you have them) and get an idea of the progress you are making. It's taking me a while to get down on my BF%. It's taking me a while to find my 'sweet spot' of cals where I have enough energy to work out hard but low enough that I lose. Unfortunately, that amount is causing a very, very slow loss....like .25-.4lb per week. But, I'm at the point where I'm not willing to sacrifice performance for a faster loss.

    I'm at the point where I'm not willing to sacrifice food for a loss.

    *sigh*

    Sorry. Back to the OP, you've gotten lots of great advice here. Genetics play a pretty big role in where our bodies store fat, as others have already said. For me, my stomach is my worst area, and it didn't help that I had two kids, either. I'm doing my best, but I've accepted that it will probably never look a certain way. And that's okay. I'll keep doing things to make myself more fit, and if I end up exceeding my own expectations, well hey! That would be nice. But if not, that's okay, too. We're all built differently. I have a feeling if I ever got lean enough to have visible abs (and if I didn't have all the lovely loose skin I carry), I would probably look quite gaunt in other parts of my body.

    Eeps, I think I'm rambling. That's because I'm procrastinating. >.<

    Carry on.
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    Alright hopefully you don't get offended by my response.

    By the looks of it, all you need is time. You look like you have some great stomach muscles, I wouldn't say you're lacking core exercises from the looks of it but that's just my opinion. There also seems to be some fat to be lost. Unfortunately you don't get to pick and choose where fat comes off. I know a guy who's completely ripped on the bottom and all smush op top and it's not from the lack of upper body exercises that's for sure. He does way more of that then legs. I'm a pear. I can't make myself not a pear. I carry my weight in my *kitten* and lower gut. I can't keep my boobs. I can't not have skinny chicken legs. On a calorie deficit you'll lose fat, from wherever your genetics likes to lose fat from. You just need patience for that place to be your gut! You look great!
  • ECR1989
    ECR1989 Posts: 158
    From various internet checks (which I know aren't totally accurate but i took the average from them) I'm around 24-25% body fat. I'd like to get down to around 20-21% but it's just taking a long time. I don't want to be able to see a six-pack, but i'd love to just lose the fat around my midsection and also on my thighs.

    I'm eating around 1800 cals a day (not eating back exercise cals) and doing SL 3x a week as well as cardio about 4/5 times a week. Either jogging on the treadmill for 3-5k or swimming for 45 mins. I try to eat fairly freshly and have cut down majorly on how often I eat out, and how often I go out with friends for wine. Does anybody have any idea how long roughly it takes somebody to lose 4% BF at the rate I'm at?

    I'm just starting to worry, I don't feel I've lost any weight in a while, and whilst my clothes are fitting a bit better (a bit) I'm getting frustrated by the slow progress. I want to be strong, lose body fat and hopefully at the same time the last stubborn 10lbs or so. Will I achieve this with SL? Or will it increase my weight as I get stronger?

    I also think you might not be eating enough with that much cardio. I would also suggest tracking your measurements as a way of getting your BF%. I use the US Navy Body Fat Calculations. You plug in your measurements and it gives you your LBM and BF%. You can plug in your old measurements (if you have them) and get an idea of the progress you are making. It's taking me a while to get down on my BF%. It's taking me a while to find my 'sweet spot' of cals where I have enough energy to work out hard but low enough that I lose. Unfortunately, that amount is causing a very, very slow loss....like .25-.4lb per week. But, I'm at the point where I'm not willing to sacrifice performance for a faster loss.

    You may be right on that - I could try upping my cals for a bit and see how that goes, or toning down the cardio. I don't mind not doing cardio but at the moment I don't find SL that strenuous on my body so doing lots of cardio until I feel it with the weight-lifting. It's also hard to not do cardio, it becomes addicting in a way - not even just for the cal burns, but I feel more like I'm doing something towards my fitness level and weight loss when it comes to cardio.

    I took measurements about a week ago, so will do so again at the beginning of April - when I'm weighing myself again so I'll have a better idea of my progress. And then I'll try and take my total carbs until to 1900-2000 or something. I'm at 1800 now and not eating back exercise cals, and am rarely under by much (normally only 50 cals) so won't be too hard to add an extra 100 or something. Thanks for your advice! I don't want to achieve a 6 pack, only lose more fat from the stomach and thigh area.... It's getting there slowly but surely!
  • xidia
    xidia Posts: 606 Member
    I'd really suggest you run your numbers through www.fat2fitradio.com/tools to find out how much you need to eat rather than just guessing. They have a BF% calculator there too.
  • nexangelus
    nexangelus Posts: 2,080 Member
    ECR1989, I agree with xidia, when weight/fat loss stalls on a deficit with lots of cardio, you need to up your cals or dial down the cardio. Stronglifts is an amazing strength builder and body shaper if used right. No excess cardio will have the same effect, simple as...

    To the OP, you look like you have abs starting to show already! Nice! SL works the core really well, so no accessory ab work is needed. They start to show when your bodyfat gets low enough.
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    ECR1989, I agree with xidia, when weight/fat loss stalls on a deficit with lots of cardio, you need to up your cals or dial down the cardio. Stronglifts is an amazing strength builder and body shaper if used right. No excess cardio will have the same effect, simple as...

    This. If you love the cardio I'd add some cals, but if you're just doing it because you think you need it to lose weight, I'd dial it down a little
  • ECR1989
    ECR1989 Posts: 158
    Well according to fat2fit my maintenance cals will be 2230 a day. So I'm eating 1800 which is a little less than TDEE -15%. So I could up it by 100...

    I don't mind toning down the cardio at all, but I just want to be fitter as well as stronger. I still get out of breath when I run for a tram or whatever, or climbing up stairs so that seems the best way to go, as well as with strength. I could probably do a little less cardio and up my cals to 1900 and see how that goes...
  • dixiewhiskey
    dixiewhiskey Posts: 3,333 Member
    I am so happy to see this question being asked and answers being provided.

    I've experienced a stall recently, upped my cals, bought a HRM and turned to Stronglifts again. Some of you may remember a thread I started here about starting out. I was always curious how this workout would work the ab area as that's really the only place left to reduce for me.

    Highly recommend to anyone that if you don't have a HRM, get one! Just doing everyday walking to subway/gym, strength training, 1 hr of grocery shopping and 5 minutes of soccer, I burned almost 900 cals. It's safe to say that I now understand why I am at a plateau as I underestimated my exercise and wasn't eating enough (even at 1700 a day!)
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    I am so happy to see this question being asked and answers being provided.

    I've experienced a stall recently, upped my cals, bought a HRM and turned to Stronglifts again. Some of you may remember a thread I started here about starting out. I was always curious how this workout would work the ab area as that's really the only place left to reduce for me.

    Highly recommend to anyone that if you don't have a HRM, get one! Just doing everyday walking to subway/gym, strength training, 1 hr of grocery shopping and 5 minutes of soccer, I burned almost 900 cals. It's safe to say that I now understand why I am at a plateau as I underestimated my exercise and wasn't eating enough (even at 1700 a day!)
    I would suggest against this. Just so you know the calculations for HRMs are based on cardio burns such as running, not strength training, not at all. The documentation I've seen published at universities for polar watches reflect this and those who know a lot more about this then I do have confirmed this for me. I'm sure they are not advertised for measuring strength burns. They usually always mention running and treadmills. The calculations are based on your heart rate under cardio conditions, they tend to over estimate things like strength training, or sun bathing or nothing or boogy man scare or 'the deed' etc...anything that gets your heart rate up that isn't cardio lol.

    HRMs don't know when you're not doing cardio.
    Steppers don't know when you're doing cardio.

    It's harder to estimate the strength training burns. That's why mfp puts a strength training option in as a separate thing I suppose:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/help/faq/91-doesn-t-strength-training-burn-calories-why-don-t-you-show-any-calories-burned-for-strength-training

    Lots of other sources out there as well. Upon initial googling I wouldn't hold my breath for trusting a personal trainer but just to give you an example:
    http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
    A heart rate monitor (HRM) is capable of estimating calorie burn pretty accurately—but only for aerobic (cardio) exercise, not for strength training. Here's why:

    A HRM won't give you an accurate idea of how many calories you burn during strength training, because the relationship between heart rate and calorie expenditure is not the same during strength training as during cardio exercise, which is what the HRM's estimate is based on. Unless your weight training is very vigorous circuit training, the heart rate monitor will be overestimating your calorie burn by a fair amount.

    The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

    Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.

    So while a series of strength training exercises may elevate your heart rate like aerobic exercise does, you're not actually using as much oxygen and burning as many calories as you would be if you were steadily using several large muscles all at once, as when walking, running, swimming, or doing aerobics for example.

    The heart rate monitor doesn’t know whether your increase in heart rate is due to several large muscle groups working (cardio), an isolated muscle group lifting a weight (strength training), or even if adrenaline or excitement is increasing your heart rate. It just knows your heart rate, and the formulas it uses to estimate calories are based on studies of aerobic exercise, not other activities. So, it's going to overestimate your calorie expenditure when the rise in heart rate is stimulated by using isolated muscles at maximum intensity, which is what occurs during strength training.

    Written by Dean Anderson, Certified Personal Trainer
  • tameko2
    tameko2 Posts: 31,634 Member
    Thanks CG - that was a good quote.

    Y'all need to worry less about the details honestly. Try something CONSISTENTLY for four weeks (that means log everything, even splurge/cheat days, do the same overall types of exercise and activity from week to week), and see what your results are. If you are making progress in some way (visual, measurements, scale)and feel good then keep doing it.

    EVERYTHING THAT TELLS YOU YOUR CALORIC EXPENDITURE IS AN ESTIMATE.

    Heart rate monitors use your heart rate, a series of calculations based on what data it has on you (your age, gender, etc) and what kind of burns it expects when it sees your heart rate go to a certain level but its ALL based on averaged data, which means its not an exact gospel truth.

    Calculators like Fat 2 Fit are the same way - they're only as good as the input you've given (if you under or overestimate your activity level -- and frankly everyone seems to underestimate around here) and they are based on averaged data across wide populations.

    They can't tell if you are a fidgeter, or you tend to slump over in your chair and hardly move for 8 hours, or if you gesture wildly while you talk, or what not, and all that stuff matters.

    So, use them as a good starting point (and heart rate monitors are actually fantastic tools for judging your performance and for training for any kind of endurance sport, I do like them a lot for those things) but don't freak out about how correct or not correct they are.

    Its all averages and estimates. All you can do is start out with some reasonable amount, try it CONSISTENTLY, and then see what happens.
  • xidia
    xidia Posts: 606 Member
    I am so happy to see this question being asked and answers being provided.

    I've experienced a stall recently, upped my cals, bought a HRM and turned to Stronglifts again. Some of you may remember a thread I started here about starting out. I was always curious how this workout would work the ab area as that's really the only place left to reduce for me.

    Highly recommend to anyone that if you don't have a HRM, get one! Just doing everyday walking to subway/gym, strength training, 1 hr of grocery shopping and 5 minutes of soccer, I burned almost 900 cals. It's safe to say that I now understand why I am at a plateau as I underestimated my exercise and wasn't eating enough (even at 1700 a day!)
    I would suggest against this. Just so you know the calculations for HRMs are based on cardio burns such as running, not strength training, not at all. The documentation I've seen published at universities for polar watches reflect this and those who know a lot more about this then I do have confirmed this for me. I'm sure they are not advertised for measuring strength burns. They usually always mention running and treadmills. The calculations are based on your heart rate under cardio conditions, they tend to over estimate things like strength training, or sun bathing or nothing or boogy man scare or 'the deed' etc...anything that gets your heart rate up that isn't cardio lol.

    HRMs don't know when you're not doing cardio.
    Steppers don't know when you're doing cardio.

    It's harder to estimate the strength training burns. That's why mfp puts a strength training option in as a separate thing I suppose:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/help/faq/91-doesn-t-strength-training-burn-calories-why-don-t-you-show-any-calories-burned-for-strength-training

    Lots of other sources out there as well. Upon initial googling I wouldn't hold my breath for trusting a personal trainer but just to give you an example:
    http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
    A heart rate monitor (HRM) is capable of estimating calorie burn pretty accurately—but only for aerobic (cardio) exercise, not for strength training. Here's why:

    A HRM won't give you an accurate idea of how many calories you burn during strength training, because the relationship between heart rate and calorie expenditure is not the same during strength training as during cardio exercise, which is what the HRM's estimate is based on. Unless your weight training is very vigorous circuit training, the heart rate monitor will be overestimating your calorie burn by a fair amount.

    The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

    Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.

    So while a series of strength training exercises may elevate your heart rate like aerobic exercise does, you're not actually using as much oxygen and burning as many calories as you would be if you were steadily using several large muscles all at once, as when walking, running, swimming, or doing aerobics for example.

    The heart rate monitor doesn’t know whether your increase in heart rate is due to several large muscle groups working (cardio), an isolated muscle group lifting a weight (strength training), or even if adrenaline or excitement is increasing your heart rate. It just knows your heart rate, and the formulas it uses to estimate calories are based on studies of aerobic exercise, not other activities. So, it's going to overestimate your calorie expenditure when the rise in heart rate is stimulated by using isolated muscles at maximum intensity, which is what occurs during strength training.

    Written by Dean Anderson, Certified Personal Trainer

    <theoretical section> since Tameko is right about not stressing it in practice.

    The quote is based on isolation exercises, and since SL is compounds, I'd expect a more accurate burn rate than for isolations. But I agree, I don't know how accurate it actually is.