Logging gym classes

ceiswyn
ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
I’ve just started to get over the horrors of school PE and dip my toe in going to classes at the gym, and I was looking for advice on the best way to log things that don’t have specific entries in the DB.

For example, I’m currently logging my Dance Fit class as dancing, and my Body Balance as yoga, and Body Pump as strength training... but I know that the strength training entry is basically guesswork anyway. So is there a more accurate way to do it or should I just carry on approximating?
«1

Replies

  • bendyourkneekatie
    bendyourkneekatie Posts: 696 Member
    Honestly once you get away from running or walking, which are fairly straight forward 'moving x weight over y distance in z time' equations it's all guess work. Body pump is actually in the database under cardio (as it really is more cardio than strength), but still: look around a class, different weights, different effort levels, etc. I used to do attack and there's no way me doing all the extra tuck jumps as high as I could was burning the same as the person who didn't ever get two feet off the ground at once.
    So guess based on the info you can gather. Guess conservatively. Track your rate of loss. Adjust if necessary.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    When I search the database for 'body pump' under cardio no results come up. That's why I logged the cardio aspect as 'strength training'. Though point taken :)
  • jerber160
    jerber160 Posts: 2,606 Member
    a heart rate monitor might suit your needs. polar ft. fitbit...garmin....
  • RadishEater
    RadishEater Posts: 470 Member
    I will log a 45 min body pump class as 35 min doing "Calisthenics, home, light/moderate effort" since we do intervals often and do increase the heart rate throughout class.

    For all the rest of the strength classes i.e barre, pilates, trx I log as pilates with shaving 10 mins off the actually time, since there is usually stretching and talking how to do the exercises.
  • SarahLascelles1
    SarahLascelles1 Posts: 95 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    When I search the database for 'body pump' under cardio no results come up. That's why I logged the cardio aspect as 'strength training'. Though point taken :)

    try searching "Less Mills"
  • SarahLascelles1
    SarahLascelles1 Posts: 95 Member
    Sorry, Les Mills, not Less Mills.
    I suppose I should just be grateful the phone didn't correct it to "Les Mis"
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    Now I have this mental image of adding a red flag to the bar and belting out ‘Do you hear the people sing?!’ as I go :D

    Aha, now I see; my gym lists it as two separate words and the DB has it as one. Wow, the MFP search facility is terrible if its fuzzy matching misses that!
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    edited February 2018
    jerber160 wrote: »
    a heart rate monitor might suit your needs. polar ft. fitbit...garmin....

    I’m a postgrad student without an income so I am not going to splash out on an expensive bit of kit; especially one that’s actually no more accurate than manually logging against the MFP database. And doubly so as I’m allergic to the metal of my current watch and need to keep the back off my wrist. But thanks for the suggestion.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    jerber160 wrote: »
    a heart rate monitor might suit your needs. polar ft. fitbit...garmin....

    For those kind of classes you might as well use a random number generator.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 31,724 Member
    Here's a different view: If you do the same things consistently, log them conservatively and consistently, eat back about the same fraction of the logged exercise calories, stick with the routine for 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on your actual real-world results . . . you'll do fine.

    All exercise estimates are approximations. All MFP or "calculator" calorie goals are statistical estimates. All food logging has errors.

    To succeed, you don't actually need to be 100% accurate. You just need to be consistent, look at your results, and adjust. That's the successful way to work with estimates.
  • briscogun
    briscogun Posts: 1,135 Member
    I actually use the UA Record app to log my workouts since it is much more robust and has a lot of options included for different workouts (gym, walking, running, workout videos, etc), then it just feeds over to MFP. MFP only really has good tracking for cardio exercises.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Here's a different view: If you do the same things consistently, log them conservatively and consistently, eat back about the same fraction of the logged exercise calories, stick with the routine for 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on your actual real-world results . . . you'll do fine.

    All exercise estimates are approximations. All MFP or "calculator" calorie goals are statistical estimates. All food logging has errors.

    To succeed, you don't actually need to be 100% accurate. You just need to be consistent, look at your results, and adjust. That's the successful way to work with estimates.

    But I don’t do the same things consistently :) Walking yes, and I know how to log that and how much to eat back. But as I lose weight and gain in fitness and confidence, I’m more or less constantly trying new things and changing up my routine. I’m familiar with the principle of eating back 50-75% of logged calories, and I know MFP counts are only a ballpark, but I do need to be in the right ballpark. Or I might as well not bother logging exercise at all.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Here's a different view: If you do the same things consistently, log them conservatively and consistently, eat back about the same fraction of the logged exercise calories, stick with the routine for 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on your actual real-world results . . . you'll do fine.

    All exercise estimates are approximations. All MFP or "calculator" calorie goals are statistical estimates. All food logging has errors.

    To succeed, you don't actually need to be 100% accurate. You just need to be consistent, look at your results, and adjust. That's the successful way to work with estimates.

    But I don’t do the same things consistently :) Walking yes, and I know how to log that and how much to eat back. But as I lose weight and gain in fitness and confidence, I’m more or less constantly trying new things and changing up my routine. I’m familiar with the principle of eating back 50-75% of logged calories, and I know MFP counts are only a ballpark, but I do need to be in the right ballpark. Or I might as well not bother logging exercise at all.

    There is an option for circuit training, which is probably appropriate for most class type environments.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 31,724 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Here's a different view: If you do the same things consistently, log them conservatively and consistently, eat back about the same fraction of the logged exercise calories, stick with the routine for 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on your actual real-world results . . . you'll do fine.

    All exercise estimates are approximations. All MFP or "calculator" calorie goals are statistical estimates. All food logging has errors.

    To succeed, you don't actually need to be 100% accurate. You just need to be consistent, look at your results, and adjust. That's the successful way to work with estimates.

    But I don’t do the same things consistently :) Walking yes, and I know how to log that and how much to eat back. But as I lose weight and gain in fitness and confidence, I’m more or less constantly trying new things and changing up my routine. I’m familiar with the principle of eating back 50-75% of logged calories, and I know MFP counts are only a ballpark, but I do need to be in the right ballpark. Or I might as well not bother logging exercise at all.

    Yes, ballpark. But not standing squarely on home plate.

    Large numbers of things are close in RPE (rate of perceived exertion) and type of work-creating movement. When you try something new, think what it's similar to, estimate. Look up some MET equivalents, check various online calculators (especially activity-specialized ones with more variables), estimate.

    Think about (estimate) the probable magnitude of estimating error as a percentage of your day's calories - might be a big percent for endurance athletes, but usually not for gym classes. In maintenance, I estimate my spin class to burn around 20% of my total daily calories. Suppose I'm off by half that, a large estimating error - 10% of my daily calories. In the US, food package labels calories are allowed to be off by 20%, or so I've read. Some things (eating or exercise) will be over, some under. It's all estimates. So: Meh. If I don't gain/lose/ mauntain as expected, I'll adjust.

    Keep approximating, make your best estimate, adjust based on results.

    Betting it'll be close enough.

    Not logging exercise is 100% guaranteed to be wrong.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Large numbers of things are close in RPE (rate of perceived exertion) and type of work-creating movement. When you try something new, think what it's similar to, estimate. Look up some MET equivalents, check various online calculators (especially activity-specialized ones with more variables), estimate.

    Think about (estimate) the probable magnitude of estimating error as a percentage of your day's calories - might be a big percent for endurance athletes, but usually not for gym classes.

    Which is exactly what you can see I am already doing from my first post. In which I estimated Body Pump as similar to strength training.

    But there’s a 200kcal+ difference between the strength training entry and the specific Body Pump entry that has now been pointed out to me. Since I only eat back half anyway, that meant that I underate on a day when I’m already at the rock bottom of the calorie count my body will tolerate, and would explain why I felt seriously crap the next day until my main meal.

    I have never expected complete accuracy, and I’m entirely familiar with the process of adjusting over time. But I DO need my initial logging to be close enough that I don’t undereat while in a low calorie phase and crash.

    So thanks to the person who actually answered my question and pointed me at entries that are a better ballpark. I’ll use those next time :)
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Here's a different view: If you do the same things consistently, log them conservatively and consistently, eat back about the same fraction of the logged exercise calories, stick with the routine for 4-6 weeks, then adjust your calorie goal based on your actual real-world results . . . you'll do fine.

    All exercise estimates are approximations. All MFP or "calculator" calorie goals are statistical estimates. All food logging has errors.

    To succeed, you don't actually need to be 100% accurate. You just need to be consistent, look at your results, and adjust. That's the successful way to work with estimates.

    But I don’t do the same things consistently :) Walking yes, and I know how to log that and how much to eat back. But as I lose weight and gain in fitness and confidence, I’m more or less constantly trying new things and changing up my routine. I’m familiar with the principle of eating back 50-75% of logged calories, and I know MFP counts are only a ballpark, but I do need to be in the right ballpark. Or I might as well not bother logging exercise at all.

    If you aren't doing the same things consistently, but you are exercising consistently, you may want to try the TDEE method?
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Large numbers of things are close in RPE (rate of perceived exertion) and type of work-creating movement. When you try something new, think what it's similar to, estimate. Look up some MET equivalents, check various online calculators (especially activity-specialized ones with more variables), estimate.

    Think about (estimate) the probable magnitude of estimating error as a percentage of your day's calories - might be a big percent for endurance athletes, but usually not for gym classes.

    Which is exactly what you can see I am already doing from my first post. In which I estimated Body Pump as similar to strength training.

    But there’s a 200kcal+ difference between the strength training entry and the specific Body Pump entry that has now been pointed out to me. Since I only eat back half anyway, that meant that I underate on a day when I’m already at the rock bottom of the calorie count my body will tolerate, and would explain why I felt seriously crap the next day until my main meal.

    I have never expected complete accuracy, and I’m entirely familiar with the process of adjusting over time. But I DO need my initial logging to be close enough that I don’t undereat while in a low calorie phase and crash.

    So thanks to the person who actually answered my question and pointed me at entries that are a better ballpark. I’ll use those next time :)

    This doesn't really make sense to me, though. Just because you used a database entry for body pump doesn't mean that number is actually more accurate for you.
  • AudreyJDuke
    AudreyJDuke Posts: 1,092 Member
    Interesting discussion, thanks!
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    edited February 2018
    Dnarules wrote: »
    This doesn't really make sense to me, though. Just because you used a database entry for body pump doesn't mean that number is actually more accurate for you.

    You don’t think that the DB entry for the activity I actually did is likely to be any more accurate than the one for a different activity that has even more individual variation?
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,253 Member
    Dnarules wrote: »
    If you aren't doing the same things consistently, but you are exercising consistently, you may want to try the TDEE method?

    And if I exercised consistently, that would work. But I have a number of dodgy joints from past injuries that my old weight exacerbated, so there are quite often days where I have to do very little. So I’d much rather just log the exercise I know I’m actually doing.

    Plus, on days where I’m not feeling motivated I tend to coax myself into exercise by pre-logging healthy meals and leaving no space for chocolate, so that if I want chocolate I gotta get off my bum. That won’t work if I just have a single number.