how in the hell are these people getting 900 calorie burns

~10-ish mile runs will do that much. Depending on the persons weight, perhaps as high as 1200.

I think this is very rare....and a lot of people over estimate. I only came close to burning 1000 calories ONCE while doing turbojam, when I first started to lose weight. Every other time, i was usually around 700. More often now, I tend to burn 500.

ETA - for individuals who feel like they need to challenge how I get the number for my calorie burn, I use a Bodymedia Armband.

LOL@need to challenge.

I've been on MFP long enough to see a recurring theme between unrealistic burns and unexpected plateaus/failure to progress. It's fascinating really, the certainty with which people are convinced their numbers are accurate even when their results don't support their confidence in the numbers.

Oh, sure, there are a lot of variables at play here...I mean, who's to say that my own calculation of non-exercise burn isn't estimated too high, which means my exercise burns are too low and the inaccuracies are buried when netted...

...but I'm sticking with my position that *most* people who think they are burning >900 calories in a single session most likely are not.

In the interest of Science(TM), I compared my workout from last Thursday as measured by my BodyMedia Fit and Polar F11. Holy systematic error, Batman!

I took a 1 hour class with approximately 40 minutes of step and 20 minutes of abs/stretch/cooldown, then did about 40 minutes of mobility work on a foam roller (I've got lots of issues :laugh: ).

Polar F11: Max HR: 183, Avg HR: 135 (reasonable because an hour of that workout was reclining/pretty relaxed). Calories reported: 962! :noway:

BodyMedia Fit: Moderate activity: 39 minutes, Vigorous activity: 18 minutes: total activity: 57 minutes (again, makes sense, given how much time was spent on my back). Average METS: 3.7. Calories reported: 501.

Went back and looked at the data from that Zumba class I remember the HRM said I burned over 1000 calories on. 499 calories burned. :mad: I distinctly remember getting a protein brownie afterwards. I remember reading the calories thinking "not bad" until I had already eaten it and noticed that there were two servings per package, and had all but wiped out all the calories I just burned.:explode:

You see? THIS is why the really knowledgeable experts tell you that you exercise for fitness and eat a deficit of calories to lose weight! You can't out-exercise a bad diet.

I have a polar ft4 and it never tells me anything that high!! Maybe your batteries are wonky or something. That's why i never eat back my exercise calories unless I have work out a LOT, and i mean a lot. Even then, i'll eat back half.

I just don't trust the things

Don't think so. I've had it for probably 10 years and the results are consistent throughout the years and multiple battery changes and even multiple chest transmitter straps.

Well that would piss me off then and that could EASILY mess someone up. ugh

http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm <<< I think I will use this calculator MFP gave me 411 this one gives me 296

Others make very valid points. You can't go by what someone else has entered. I would also suggest you check your HRM. I had an Oregon Scientific which always gave me a REALLY low calorie burn. I recently noticed it was getting lower and lower and started watching my Heart Rate while using it and it would dip down to 80 during high intensity segments. Sometimes it would just go to zero for 10 minutes. Just bought a new Polar FT4 and it is much closer in estimate to the one I replaced with the Oregon Scientific (but it didn't have a strap so I wanted one with a strap and the Oregon was free).

Today I did two twenty minute cardio circuit routines. My Oregon estimated 123 calories for the 40 minutes. The Polar FT4 estimated 301. Same workout different HRM. It is nice to feel I am getting proper credit for busing my *kitten* again.

That said I can burn @600 calories on the Ellipical in 40 minutes which is double what I burn when doing a DVD (Insanity, Jillian Micheals, ect.). The reason is during these circuit burning workouts my Heart Rate drops while I am doing the strength training segments. So yes I burn less calories but overall I am saving more muscle and building more stregth. And we know the more muscle you are able to keep while losing the faster your metabolism will be

How are people getting 900 calries burned in a workout. I do insanity etc and still burn no where close to that.

:laugh: Insanity is normally something I do as a warm up, before I head down to the Gym and do an hour of weights and a couple hours of running/cycling and/or swimming

:flowerforyou:

going by my fitbit i can burn anywhere betwen 1200-1500 calories every tues and thurs playing basketball for two hours so it is possible

There's a hike I do that burns approx 1000 cals in a 90 min period. It's a steep incline and it gets my heart rate up. Definitely not impossible to burn 900 cals per workout.

How is the polar determining your caloric burn? What controls do you have over size/weight/age/etc?

I compare my Basis B1 (which is not an exercise HRM, it's just a daily tracker, and uses things like ahr, perspiration vs ambient temp, etc, to track daily burn), to my Polar bluetooth which reads into Endomondo and get, not equal, but nowhere near as wildly divergant numbers as you do.

I tend to average the two, IE:

If my B1 says I burned 2000 calories yesterday, and I didn't do any exercise at all, and it says I burned 2500 today, when I walked 2 miles and did half an hour of DDPYoga, and my Polar is telling me that was 800Kcal for those two things, I'll figure reality is in the middle, and probably at 625 or 650 or so.

The F11 lets you enter your activity level, age, height, weight, and also tests something called OwnIndex, which you're supposed to test monthly. You have to lie quietly wearing the band and watch, so I assume it's doing something with your RHR.

I like the general idea of the Basis, but for the fact that its HRM doesn't work during exercise, so you still need a chest-strap HRM for telemetry during workouts. I've already got the BodyMedia Fit, which has the same metrics as the Basis (besides the optical HRM) and the chest-strap HRM, so I can't justify a Basis right now. :frown:

How is the polar determining your caloric burn? What controls do you have over size/weight/age/etc?

I compare my Basis B1 (which is not an exercise HRM, it's just a daily tracker, and uses things like ahr, perspiration vs ambient temp, etc, to track daily burn), to my Polar bluetooth which reads into Endomondo and get, not equal, but nowhere near as wildly divergant numbers as you do.

I tend to average the two, IE:

If my B1 says I burned 2000 calories yesterday, and I didn't do any exercise at all, and it says I burned 2500 today, when I walked 2 miles and did half an hour of DDPYoga, and my Polar is telling me that was 800Kcal for those two things, I'll figure reality is in the middle, and probably at 625 or 650 or so.

The F11 lets you enter your activity level, age, height, weight, and also tests something called OwnIndex, which you're supposed to test monthly. You have to lie quietly wearing the band and watch, so I assume it's doing something with your RHR.

I like the general idea of the Basis, but for the fact that its HRM doesn't work during exercise, so you still need a chest-strap HRM for telemetry during workouts. I've already got the BodyMedia Fit, which has the same metrics as the Basis (besides the optical HRM) and the chest-strap HRM, so I can't justify a Basis right now. :frown:

The basis makes no bones about not being an exercise monitor, and i didn't expect it to be. I totally figured i'd continue using the polar for that purpose.

It really has been eye opening for me, to be able to see the metrics day to day. They continually fine tune and update the algorythyms too, which is a plus.

So, like I said, i average. But wrist HRM's are notoriously inaccurate at tracking exertion HR anyway.

They'll ping an average, then compare it with distance judged by steps, and kinda munge it that way.

What it boils down to, is it's ALL guesswork. Just pick consistant metrics of guesswork, and stick with em.

You want to achieve a 900+ cal burn when you earlier asked how fast you'd lose weight on 800 cals a day.

I mean, not that I'm implying you have serious issues or anything, but...

going by my fitbit i can burn anywhere betwen 1200-1500 calories every tues and thurs playing basketball for two hours so it is possible

I think these numbers are high my loop says I burned around that on my very brisk walk lol

It depends on the speed, I used the numbers just as an example, for how big a difference weight can be. For my weight it would be around 600 calories for a 10k run, which is why I used this number, although obviously one would need to be in pretty good shape to do a 10k run in an hour - not me
Based on a running calorie formula: 60 kgr*10k*1.036 = 622 calories, and obviously double the weight would mean double the calories, so e.g. a very muscular tall man of 120 kgs could burn more than 1000 in an hour. I highly doubt the average poster on the site (or the average person in general) is in that good shape and with that much muscle weight, but for sure some are.

a

Heart rate is related to oxygen used. An extremely fit 120 lb woman running 1 mile, her heart rate monitor shows minimal burn. Have an unfit woman with the same height and weight run that same mile, and her HR monitor shows an extremely different burn. Yet the same amount of energy (calories) was used. The difference being the amount of oxygen used.

so your saying the HRM reads erroneously high for one who is out of shape (you say the amount of energy used between the two subjects is the same).

Well not necessarily. Depends on how the HRM is calibrated. If it reads a correct calorie burn for the highly fit person, it will read too high for the unfit person; if it reads correctly for the unfit person, it will read too low for the fit person.

You can't really compare yourself to others regardless. Everyone has a different body and a different fitness level.

I average about 14,000 calories burned a month via running. However, I run a fair amount (around 50 miles a week) and I am at or near my goal weight.