Need help and advice to lose more weight and achieve a cyclist (climber) body.

Options
2»

Replies

  • makkimakki2018
    makkimakki2018 Posts: 414 Member
    Options
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    makkimakki2018 wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    makkimakki2018 wrote: »
    mattrus1989 wrote: »
    Nairo Quintana is 5"6 and 59kg. I think that would suggest that you're fine from a weight perspective (in terms of going as low as sensibly possible). What's your FTP?

    220 watts

    is it a weight or composition issue that you have? or do you think you'll just be quicker if you're lighter?

    Both weight and composition are an issue. But ive also seen better results (quicker) since losing weight. So if i said i didn't think being lighter doesn't give me an edge I'd be lying to myself.

    but do you understand that the massive deficit you're running and the fact that it is causing you to burn muscle WILL affect your performance?

    Yes and when i hit that bump in the road ill stop but for now id like to try and reach my goal of 125.
  • onemanpeloton
    onemanpeloton Posts: 58 Member
    Options
    makkimakki2018 wrote: »
    mattrus1989 wrote: »
    Nairo Quintana is 5"6 and 59kg. I think that would suggest that you're fine from a weight perspective (in terms of going as low as sensibly possible). What's your FTP?

    220 watts

    I think the key to your future success will be unlocked with good structured training now. Your weight is fine, aim for a higher FTP. Your w/kg is lower than mine and I am not a competetive racer. I'm 80kg with an FTP of 280w.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    edited July 2018
    Options
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    edit: there are also other things professional cyclists do that I don't think are smart - riding with freshly broken bones being one of those things. Yes I'm specifically thinking of Lawson Craddock. While I'm rather impressed and I'm glad he's managed to raise quite a lot of money for the velodrome that he first started riding at, riding hard (or in many cases, at all) with broken bones, especially when you are potentially going to get caught up in a crash, is not a good idea.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.
  • Silentpadna
    Silentpadna Posts: 1,306 Member
    Options
    makkimakki2018 wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    makkimakki2018 wrote: »
    mattrus1989 wrote: »
    Nairo Quintana is 5"6 and 59kg. I think that would suggest that you're fine from a weight perspective (in terms of going as low as sensibly possible). What's your FTP?

    220 watts

    is it a weight or composition issue that you have? or do you think you'll just be quicker if you're lighter?

    Both weight and composition are an issue. But ive also seen better results (quicker) since losing weight. So if i said i didn't think being lighter doesn't give me an edge I'd be lying to myself.

    You know what else may be lying to yourself? Thinking that just getting lighter is what you need and that what you are doing is going to fuel your desired performance to the level you think it will.

    Think about it. If 125 is quicker, why not 115? Why not 105?

    I readily admit to not being an expert on the cycling thing, but I am knowledgeable enough to know potentially dangerous behavior when I see it. There has to be some point on the leg (and related parts) strength versus optimal mass for efficiency without sabotaging your body's energy....
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Options
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.

    Wasn't disagreeing with you.

    Was trying to point out to OP that his weight goal, at his height, probably won't lead to the results he's seeking.

    And it is very rare to consistently achieve personal bests as related to athletics like cycling or running while on a severe cut.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Options
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.

    Wasn't disagreeing with you.

    Was trying to point out to OP that his weight goal, at his height, probably won't lead to the results he's seeking.

    And it is very rare to consistently achieve personal bests as related to athletics like cycling or running while on a severe cut.

    Ah ok yeah that makes sense. And while I don't know if anyone has said this outright to the OP, but no successful professional cyclist is eating 1000-1,300 net calories regardless of their BMI. I find it sad that I more or less said the exact same thing in a different thread, but with a broader scope and addressing a smaller amount of net calories, maybe 12 hours ago.
  • J_Fairfax
    J_Fairfax Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    Also the professional cyclists are on performance enhancing drugs. Don't forget that fact.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.

    Wasn't disagreeing with you.

    Was trying to point out to OP that his weight goal, at his height, probably won't lead to the results he's seeking.

    And it is very rare to consistently achieve personal bests as related to athletics like cycling or running while on a severe cut.

    Ah ok yeah that makes sense. And while I don't know if anyone has said this outright to the OP, but no successful professional cyclist is eating 1000-1,300 net calories regardless of their BMI. I find it sad that I more or less said the exact same thing in a different thread, but with a broader scope and addressing a smaller amount of net calories, maybe 12 hours ago.

    and with that weight goal his body would have to be ridiculously undeveloped in order to build/maintain the thigh/leg muscles necessary for climbing...
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,982 Member
    Options
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.

    Wasn't disagreeing with you.

    Was trying to point out to OP that his weight goal, at his height, probably won't lead to the results he's seeking.

    And it is very rare to consistently achieve personal bests as related to athletics like cycling or running while on a severe cut.

    Ah ok yeah that makes sense. And while I don't know if anyone has said this outright to the OP, but no successful professional cyclist is eating 1000-1,300 net calories regardless of their BMI. I find it sad that I more or less said the exact same thing in a different thread, but with a broader scope and addressing a smaller amount of net calories, maybe 12 hours ago.

    Now I'm curious as to successful professional cyclists' net and gross calories.
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,484 Member
    edited July 2018
    Options
    @kshama2001, you asked-
    Between 4000-7000 cals.

    https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2016/07/18/fueling-the-peloton-in-the-tour-de-france/amp/

    Not the most scientific source but hope it quenches your curiosity.

    Cheers, h.
    ETA: I think that may be low.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,982 Member
    edited July 2018
    Options
    @middlehaitch Thanks!

    Sorry to hear about your son :(

    Glad he's better now.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    mitch16 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    jmf286 wrote: »
    Here is a discussion about leanness and cycling and the perils of going too lean. Apparently there aren't any professional male riders who weigh less than 60 kg. Maybe you should check if your goals are realistic?

    https://cyclingtips.com/2011/11/the-pursuit-of-leanness/

    That's simply not true as of now (or even of a few years ago) and I'm not sure where you got that stat from (it doesn't appear to be in the article you linked). A very quick google search, aided by my following professional cycling, showed that a number of current professional cyclists are 60kg (132lbs) or lighter. Some of them are currently on their way to climbing up alpe d'huez (at the Tour de France) as I type this. Mind you most of the people I found in my five minute search are shorter than the OP, but not all of them are.

    That doesn't mean that I think that the OP should strive to be that light. I think the logical thing would be to train specifically for climbing and probably to get a coach to aid in that depending on what his non-weight specific goals are. As others have noted, the OP isn't a professional athlete. He (likely) doesn't have a series of coaches, riding isn't his literal job, he doesn't have a series of soigneurs, he doesn't have a nutritionist and/or chef who specializes in feeding professional cyclists, etc.

    Most of the current big-name riders (Cavendish, Froome, Sagan) weigh more than 60 kg--but that's because most of them are taller than 5'9" (longer levers/physics/and all of that). Most of them are in the 20-ish BMI range.

    But I don't doubt that there are other riders on the tour who are shorter or have different body composition... It's kind of like track and field--sprinters have denser bodies with massive thighs, and the distance competitors tend to be longer and leaner.

    I don't think we're disagreeing.

    Wasn't disagreeing with you.

    Was trying to point out to OP that his weight goal, at his height, probably won't lead to the results he's seeking.

    And it is very rare to consistently achieve personal bests as related to athletics like cycling or running while on a severe cut.

    Ah ok yeah that makes sense. And while I don't know if anyone has said this outright to the OP, but no successful professional cyclist is eating 1000-1,300 net calories regardless of their BMI. I find it sad that I more or less said the exact same thing in a different thread, but with a broader scope and addressing a smaller amount of net calories, maybe 12 hours ago.

    Now I'm curious as to successful professional cyclists' net and gross calories.

    Ask and you shall receive:
    https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/tour-de-france/this-is-what-you-have-to-eat-to-compete-in-the-tour-de-france-182775

Categories