Advanced search

Answers


more calories shown on home-trainer display = more efficient cardiovascular training?

Despite of what I wrote about using water bottles for dumbells, I do have access to a nice little real fitness-room at the place where I work. There also is a cycle-trainer there and as I can't ride my bicycle in the snowy weather we have now, I am happy to have at least that. There are some anvantages too (though I prefer real cycling when I have the option) - it shows the pulse, calories, power in watt, speed, time, and more. And there are 15 levels.

I calculated my ideal training pulse withthe help of a formular and try to go 20 minutes at that pulse. If I do that at level 10 I get the best results in watts and calories. If I use, say, level 6, I have to go very fast to get my pulse up, and still the watts and calories are less than at level 10. Or I go even faster to get the same watts, and then my pulse gets higher and I won't do that for 20 minutes surely.

At level 14 or so I hardly can move the pedals at all but if I do, the pulse also gets high faster that the watts do.

So what is best for keeping my cardiovascular system fit? to train always at level 10 where I get the best result, or to use other levels too?
sssss
 (no votes)

submit an answer
  • Member status
  • none

Categories: Human Body.

Tags: Calories, fitness, cycling, pulse.

 

Report abuse

6 answer(s)


Reply

 Jon-Richfield says:

There is no one answer. It depends on health, age, physical condition, temperament, etc etc, plus prejudices.

Personally I go for a period of convenient length (40 mins personally, but circumstances dictate. But try for at least 20 mins if possible. 20 Mins of sustained exertion beats 10 minutes of rupturing guts, tendons and aorta.)

Lots of macines have all sorts of programmes, which I personally find to be useless and distracting. I just set the level that I can sustain for my 40 minutes and that is that. It is a level that brings my pulse rate up to a desirable stable level for my age and holds it there. That is a good, safe and effective level for superannuated unfit vestiges of humanity. It also makes for simple control and suits my personality. It works for younger people with no special interest in super-fitness, but who wish to stay healthy without causing trouble in ligaments, tendons, blood vessels, blood pressure, joints etc. It is a good maintenance strategy and keeps one healthy and feeling it.  I also add some muscular exercise for upper body strength etc to finish off.

Younger people who want to be fitter (not counting pros who have pro coaches etc) can aim for a progressive increase in endurance and intensity, but also should be careful about injury. You can stay fitter and healthier longer by pushing the envelope than by tearing it.

 

sssss
 (no votes)

Tags: Calories, fitness, cycling, pulse.

top

posted on 2010-12-13 20:28:57 | Report abuse

Reply

 translatrix says:

I think you haven't quite understood my question.

I train for a GIVEN time (20 minutes in my case because I want to use some other stuff in the fitness room too) at a GIVEN pulse (as far as that is possible).

But even so the power/energy shown on the display varies dependent on the level I choose, at a middle level it is highest.  Is the middle level more efficient for training or not?

sssss
 (no votes)

Tags: Calories, fitness, cycling, pulse.

top

posted on 2010-12-14 05:27:32 | Report abuse

Reply

 Jon-Richfield says:

Sorry, you are right that I misunderstood, but I am sure that by now you are used to that sort of thing from me.

However, it makes very little difference. Personally I only use such figures as exercising apparatus make available for comparative purposes. For example, if I trust the figure for pulse (which I never do unless I have calibrated the device for reliability; so far the score has been one device out of three!) and to the extent that I trust the figure for speed or time or incline, those are the figures I use. Figures for energy and all that kind of unverifiable thing I'd treat with the deepest reserve. In fact I have learned to discount them absolutely. Not long ago I use a formula supplied by a Masters graduate in human kinetics or something to calibrate the calories figure on a treadmill I have been using; I concluded that the device overstated the calories by a factor of at least two. This makes excellent sense, because that way they sell more treadmills.

Now, as long as I stick to the same speed and incline, that overoptimistic calorie reading is a linear function of the time, but fiddle with any other parameters, and readings go very illogical.

My advice accordingly is that you concentrate on your levels of physical stress, (joint pains and all that) duration of sustained exertion, untoward signs and symptoms, pulse rate, and possibly thirst. As most apparatus represent any other parameters, I believe them to be flimflam.

There certainly are formulae for all sorts of bodily training and exertion parameters, but it does not follow that the internals of the commercial devices represent them accurately, relevantly, or even honestly.

sssss
 (no votes)

Tags: Calories, fitness, cycling, pulse.

top

posted on 2010-12-14 08:00:59 | Report abuse

Reply

 translatrix says:

Well, I really think it's not that important for the nombers to be exact as long as they go up where they should go up and down ehere they should go down. (The timer is quite exact, that's all I can say about it).

The pulse meter does seem to get it wrong sometimes, but most times my ideal training pulse can be determined by how I feel too: strongly accelerated breathing but no feeling of lack of air, no pulsating sensations in the lips or anywhere,...

Anyway: fast/easy and slow/hard at a given pulse P gives definitly worse calory results than middle/middle.

Is it better to always train middle/middle or does it make sense to use the combinations fast/easy and slow/hard too, that was really my question.

sssss
 (no votes)

Tags: Calories, fitness, cycling, pulse.

top

posted on 2010-12-15 12:49:41 | Report abuse

view branch...

The last word is ...

the place where you ask questions about everyday science

Answer questions, vote for best answers, send your videos and audio questions, save favourite questions and answers, share with friends...

register now


ADVERTISMENT