Eating back exercise calories

I started MFP a little over a week ago, but I have been exercising on a regular basis for over a year and a half. Lost 30 lbs then plateued hence the change in tactic.

Based on the link you gave my TDEE is 2961-20%=592.2=2368.8
MFP keeps me at 1200 cal/day... I walk (run-keeper) and swim 45-50 a day and do boot camp 3 times a week.
(and my job is not sedentary)

Can you please give me an idea how that translates so I can loose the next 30?

I really try not to eat my burned calories back, but still try to meet my calorie goal. I found in the past that when I was eating them back, I would gain or stall. But definitely just learn your body and figure out what helps you lose good luck

I have walked about 2-3 miles per day for over a year and boot camp since june with the exception of one week when I dislocated a disc and was bed bound...

started swimming instead of bootcamp to get back on track... 3 weeks and returned to bootcamp last week

Ok - So your body isn't long-acclimated to a high amount of cardiovascular activity. Swimming for almost an hour? That burns a crapload of calories. Is it necessary to eat 2300 calories every day? Probably not, but if you're regularly that active, I would strive for at least 1800 consistently. The exercise is really the variable here, so it may help you (for experimentation's sake) to keep calories consistent.

Thx... I keep the calories with exercise under 1200 (eat about 2/3's of exercise back- min550-800/1000 cal/day)...hoping that in a few months I will see a couple of dress sizes gone.

This is a very unhealthy approach. You should aim for no less than 1200 net (1200 plus what you burn from exercise)

Thx Eric... what I meant is I keep my calories at 1200 + about 2/3 of the calories I burn any given day. So I am close to what you are saying. I began a pretty strong regiment 5 weeks ago so I burn anywhere from 600-1000/day. If I eat all that back, I will not loose anything. The first week (just started week 3 on MFP) I lost 3 lbs then nothing for the second and now 2. My body is weird especially as I am not 100% healthy. I really am loving the exercise though so I am hoping to just concentrate on not overeating and continuing with what I am doing and not worry about how fast the weight goes off. I am 38, and have been active but overweight all my life. I am ok with shedding the pounds slowly as long as it goes by the time I turn 40. Wanna be a hot cougar ;O)
THANK YOU!

ROWRRR.... I turned 40 last weekend and i burn about 1000 an hour at the gym according to my Heart Rate Monitor (but im very overweight). My problem would be i burn so much at the gym and have become addicted to going i would need to almost eat another full meal every day just to keep it around 50-75% of exercise burnt + the highish MBR and TDEE to start with. Guess i'll have to cut back to only 5 days a week at the gym til i lose weight and the metabolism slows down if i'm guessing that correctly. Now eating around 1500 - 1900 calories a day for the first week and training 6 out of the 7 days and twice on 3 of those cause i was bored and had the luxury of being on leave from work this week, i'm over double my weekly exercise goal. Lost 3Kg's and feel great far more energy, better stamina and muscles were only screaming in agony for 2 days sure but was it fat or muscle now i don't know. Tape measure doesn't report anything major missing, ofcourse the most noticeable bit is the last fat that will move and thats the stomach and chest area which is where the majorty of my 40% fat is.

The MFP gives you a deficit to start with based on what you want to achieve and that takes into account your probable BMR + a basic equation of TDEE - 10-20%. so if you had a het/deficit of zero you'd already be losing weight you don't need to drop below that recommendation. Now i get the exercise bit, If you don't eat back some of your exercise nutrients lost you are depriving your body of what it needs to repair and build up muscles etc, and will in fact do the opposite. Which in turn will lead to less fat weight loss, and less muscle mass which weighs more then fat. Less Lean Muscle mass will show as less weight so you'll be like WooHoo, but it's not all fat you lost.

Lastly i would think it's not only the calories you want back as much as the Proteins/Fats/Carbs that contain the calories? Cause obviously a person in say my weight range (108Kg's) has plenty of "fat" calories on hand without even eating anything.

For instance you could replenish with all carbs or all proteins and you'd be getting calories as a result but then you wouldn't have replenished the other 2 aswell which the body needs to function. Is this correct? If not forget me for being stupid