BODY COMBAT CALORIE BURN

chandratro
chandratro Posts: 12
in Fitness and Exercise
I have been doing Les Mills Body Combat classes at my gym for about two months now and recently purchased a HRM watch so i could figure out my calorie burn (not just for in classes but for any of my other workouts too). It is a New Balance Life Trainer - I input my weight, height, sex, age so feel it should be pretty accurate. During class and workouts I take my heart rate reading at LEAST every 10 minutes because i want it to be accurate. I am buring 1000 calories in 60 minutes while doing Body Combat - my heart rate gets up to 177 sometimes in class with min being around 150. Does this seem correct?? (I am 5'6 and 180 lbs) I work really hard in class and drip sweat - - -

Replies

  • vonnyliz
    vonnyliz Posts: 9 Member
    hi I love body combat. I'm 5'6 and 162 pounds. I wear my Polar FT7 HRM and burn around 600 calls in class.
  • MrsK20141004
    MrsK20141004 Posts: 489 Member
    Bump, would love to hear more thoughts on this
  • sovannac
    sovannac Posts: 445 Member
    I do body combat at my gym and I burn between 600-700 calories for 50 minutes. The highest my heart rate has gone up was 188 - it was a rough work day, I needed to get some anger out. :) I'm 5'2 and weigh 169.
  • loubidy
    loubidy Posts: 440 Member
    Wowee That many calories?! I absolutely love combat so can't wait to keep going!!
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    No, those are all huge over-estimates. HRMs are the wrong tool for guesstimating the burn of this type of exercise.
  • Qakie
    Qakie Posts: 6 Member
    I do body combat as well and guess its time I got myself a heart rate monitor to check my estimated calorie burn.
  • Kaylyn221
    Kaylyn221 Posts: 123
    I do some of the Combat exercises at home {I don't follow the schedule because I incorporate other exercises on other days too}. I did the 60min. one yesterday and my calorie burn was over 1000. I typically get the same results with a 55min. Turbo Fire. If you do the long high intense cardio workouts and your HR is up the whole time, you will burn a lot of calories.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    No, those are all huge over-estimates. HRMs are the wrong tool for guesstimating the burn of this type of exercise.

    Have you attended a class? You're punching, kicking, jogging, jumping etc throughout the class.

    I still think 1000 calories is a bit much especially if you have to "take a reading". OP does your HRM have a chest strap to continuously monitor your heart rate? Those are more accurate than if you're feeding it a single # every ten minutes, I think.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    No, those are all huge over-estimates. HRMs are the wrong tool for guesstimating the burn of this type of exercise.

    Have you attended a class?
    Yes.

    It's a huge over-estimate.

    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    No, those are all huge over-estimates. HRMs are the wrong tool for guesstimating the burn of this type of exercise.

    Have you attended a class?
    Yes.

    It's a huge over-estimate.

    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.

    Ok, then what type do they work for, running only? Last we debated this on this forum I thought we settled on HRMs not being good for weight training but rather steady state aerobic exercises, which admittedly I did expand to mean classes where you are constantly moving
  • suejersey
    suejersey Posts: 36 Member
    I use my polar F7 - I have been doing combat for about 9 months and I usually burn 575 - 600 calories per class. When I started I was about 180 and am now 140 - same reading at each weight. I average upper 150's heart rate getting up to about 177 for a high. Combat is sooooo much fun. I love it!
  • bonjour24
    bonjour24 Posts: 1,119 Member
    HRMs are better for assessing the cal burn of STEADY STATE CARDIO- such as running. Sadly, theyre not so great at accurately assessing the burn for the kind of stuff youre doing.
    FWIW, my heart rate can push 180 at times, so your heart's not going to explode or anything!
    Sounds like the classes you're doing are great though.
    And if i'm not sure of the cal burn and i know ive been pushing pretty hard, i'll usually go with 100 cals burned every 10 mins. so that's 600 cals max an hour. Its nearly impossible for me to burn any more than that, regardless of the activity.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.

    Ok, then what type do they work for, running only?

    Longer duration, steady state cardio, like running and/or cycling at a relatively consistent pace, for ~30 minutes and up.

    HRMs are grossly misused by many many people on MFP, and are a leading contributor to weight loss stalls due to that misuse.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.

    Ok, then what type do they work for, running only?

    Longer duration, steady state cardio, like running and/or cycling at a relatively consistent pace, for ~30 minutes and up.

    HRMs are grossly misused by many many people on MFP, and are a leading contributor to weight loss stalls due to that misuse.

    Ah. The "HRMs are only good for 0-2 exercises" camp
  • bonjour24
    bonjour24 Posts: 1,119 Member
    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.

    Ok, then what type do they work for, running only?

    Longer duration, steady state cardio, like running and/or cycling at a relatively consistent pace, for ~30 minutes and up.

    HRMs are grossly misused by many many people on MFP, and are a leading contributor to weight loss stalls due to that misuse.

    Ah. The "HRMs are only good for 0-2 exercises" camp

    HRMs are great for telling you what your heart rate is and how hard you're actually working. It's just that the cal burn on them for bouncy activities are not as accurate as other steady and continuous effort activities.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Ah. The "HRMs are only good for 0-2 exercises" camp

    No, that is not at all what I'm saying. HRMs are superb for telling you your heart rate for pretty much all kinds of activities. That is what they actually measure, and they are very very good at that.

    What they are not good for - and not intended for - is doing fuzzy math to guess at a calorie burn from that heart rate.

    People seem to be very confused on this - HRMs do NOT measure calorie burn. They do exactly what the MFP database does - they take some basic data, they apply some generalized math, and based on that they guess.
  • Commander_Keen
    Commander_Keen Posts: 1,179 Member
    there's a few different ways to check it -
    check your heart rate every 5min opposed to 10min
    Use different HRM
    Compare the results with calories burned with the previous session.
  • Commander_Keen
    Commander_Keen Posts: 1,179 Member
    and not intended for - is doing fuzzy math to guess at a calorie burn from that heart rate.

    People seem to be very confused on this - HRMs do NOT measure calorie burn. They do exactly what the MFP database does - they take some basic data, they apply some generalized math, and based on that they guess.

    Prove it.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    HRMs do not work well at all for these types of workouts.

    Ok, then what type do they work for, running only?

    Longer duration, steady state cardio, like running and/or cycling at a relatively consistent pace, for ~30 minutes and up.

    HRMs are grossly misused by many many people on MFP, and are a leading contributor to weight loss stalls due to that misuse.

    Ah. The "HRMs are only good for 0-2 exercises" camp

    No, that is not at all what I'm saying. HRMs are superb for telling you your heart rate for pretty much all kinds of activities. That is what they actually measure, and they are very very good at that.

    What they are not good for - and not intended for - is doing fuzzy math to guess at a calorie burn from that heart rate.

    People seem to be very confused on this - HRMs do NOT measure calorie burn. They do exactly what the MFP database does - they take some basic data, they apply some generalized math, and based on that they guess.

    I understand. When I read through and participated in the thread where the poor correlation between heart rate and calories burned for certain exercises was shown, I asked what might be the burn in certain types of classes. The numbers I was given were actually quite a bit higher than the HRM! I can live with that. We are not privy to Polar's algorithm nor have we done specific testing in each and every single one of these classes to know how much the calculation is off. We know it's an estimate and if we don't like our results on the scale, we know one of the places we can look. We're just using the tools we have to motivate ourselves from day to day; I understand if it's not your cup of tea

Categories