You’re likely losing nothing, and just like Mr Harrison’s chart says I’m likely losing nothing - and for reference, if it’s a 90 minute z2 ride followed by a short run I probably would actually have around 40g in the last 30 minutes of the ride to set up the run (I can also play around with it more as I put in 20-25hrs/wk).
Point being though, the thread was started with a post by a person indicating he’s following a protocol and is gaining weight. This is not the norm, but not an uncommon occurrence among folks. If you’re gaining weight doing endurance sport and the thing you’ve changed is suddenly you’re fueling your rides at 80-100g/hr, then that’s where you should look to start your change. Nobody is saying no fuel, but maybe 80-100g is a bit much if you’re gaining weight.
I think to carb or not, you need a clear definition of what your goals are.
Are you fueling and chasing performance?
Or Are you trying to lose weight?
Even in that case I must be doing something wrong being able to lose weight while eating 90-120g of carbs an hour during a sweet spot workout.
My blood and health are as good as they can get, tbh; I so I must be doing something wrong.
This debate of fueling workouts is never ending but I think it depends on your goals. For me what works is I know I can eat “crazy amounts of sugar” and still lose/ maintain weight depending on my goals. Kudos to those that don’t but for me personally it doesn’t work. I tried the whole paleo/ keto fat adaption of living and fueling workouts but my health was sh!t and kept getting sick. It works for some but not me
I carbs.
I haven’t listened, but like most things people that do this likely heard it and took it too far. Prior to the whole craze about getting 100g/hr over the past few years - which if you can handle it will absolutely improve performance, coaches would prescribe rides/workouts where you’re supposed to “eat like you would in a race” - mine actually still does prescribe this. The guidance has actually been fairly clear - folks just interpret in an extreme form.
This is like so many other aspects in our sport, where someone takes a piece of info “So and so says…”, takes it out of the original context and often applies it far and wide with no consideration of the actual implications. Good advice, poorly understood and incorrectly applied in too many cases.
Other than that repeat mess we are destined to see again here and elsewhere, this makes me think of another concept seeing more light and attention… Minimum Effective Dose. It’s mentioned more recently in the context of the minimum amount of training stress to get the desired training adaptations. But I see it as potentially applicable in nutrition aspects as well.
So much of our sport falls in with the “it depends…” area where each of us needs to experiment and find what works. We need to be careful not to take one piece of advice so firmly and literally without understanding how and why that would even apply to us (and may not in some cases).
Paraphrased “Trainer Beware!” may be over the top, but I think it gets to the point that it pays to look a bit deeper and really consider the width and depth of the options we have at our disposal.
80g of carbs is about 310 calories. If he’s burning close to 750 calories per hour, why would he need to be burning 1150kcal’s to qualify for this conversation?
Need is probably a strong word, but you can’t say it wouldn’t help. Let’s get real, you are going to eat that 310 calories anyways. This is part of the crux of the OP’s issue. He is ingesting more calories than he’s burning. But it’s not because of what he’s eating on the bike. It’s what he’s eating off the bike. I bet if we did a poll here, despite all the people that say “if you’re gaining wait in an endurance sport you’re doing it wrong,” I’d wager 99% of the people here aren’t losing weight. If you aren’t trying to lose weight, you’re likely not only replacing those 750 calories an hour, but in many cases eating more than that “OFF” the bike because you’re hungry because of what you did on the bike. Think about it. Riding a bike gives you a free 1000 calories per day? 1500 calories per day? 2000 calories per day? We are all eating off the bike because we are HUNGRY because of what we did on the bike. If you eat on the bike, even if it is a Z2 ride, I argue, you not only feel better on the bike, but you won’t eat as much off the bike because your sugar’s won’t crater and you won’t reach as readily for the fast food, the ice cream, or the potato chips. Everyone thinks not eating on the bike is going to help them lose weight. It’s wrong. You don’t need that much help to get through the ride, but you may need that much help to get through the next 4 hours before your next meal.
My opinion is that if you’re training for an endurance sport and you’re losing weight without a conscious effort or plan (probably true in general aswell) then you’re doing it wrong.
Again, lots of comparisons to eating 80-100g of carbs/hr and eating nothing. So you’re either not reading into anything I’m saying, or you believe not ingesting a high amount of carbs on non high intensity rides is not eating.
I don’t eat junk food, I can resist ‘raiding the pantry’ after a long ride and I can get through long ride at a good pace without chugging sugar all day.
Having copious amounts of sugar actually makes me crave more of it, quite hard to start a ride with a sugary bottle and not finish with one. And I got into a bad point of always craving a soft drink on long rides. Still yet to explain why if you can get through the ride fine, recover fine and not overeat after the ride , that you need twice as many carbs on the ride?
Some decent insights here. I would caution you against assuming correlation as causation. I would recommend journaling your intake in something like a Myfitnesspal or Cronometer. Do this for a few weeks and monitor your weight/body comp. I suspect your added carbs/calories were in addition to eating habits that did not change elsewhere. You can’t cheat thermodynamics. Calories in, calories out. If you take in more carbs than you need, you will store them excess as fat, it doesn’t matter if it is in-ride or not. I doubt it has anything to do with the constitution of your in-ride nutrition specifically, and more about overall quantities.
I used to ride with electrolytes only in my bottles, and if it was going to be a harder ride, I’d take some gels and/or rice cakes or other solids.
I’ve been experimenting with upping carbs in my bottles. I usually do ~1hr HIT on the trainer and outdoors is usually <2hrs group smash fests or crits.
I’ve been aiming for a ~10% solution in 750ml bottles 2:1 Torq powder (although I will try malt:fruc DIY soon). So around 75g/hr + a gel (23g).
I must say RPE is definitely down using carbed bottles, I even on the 2 hour rides total Kcal is at ~1500 so around what I should have floating around from food or glycogen stores, the mix has definitely helped with perceived effort.
I haven’t done any 2:30+ or century rides yet (on this protocol), but you bet I will be taking some energy in my bottles when I do
That’s a good move and nobody would tell you otherwise. There is some really good information in this thread from folks for both sides of the coin.
In my simple mind it’s simple. If it’s a hard and/or longer ride then playing with carbs is something worth trying and if your stomach can tolerate more you can try more as it’ll help. If it’s not a hard and/or long ride there’s probably nothing necessarily wrong with eating or not eating, but there is zero reason to fuel it like a Tour de France stage
It really is very simple and none of this is really new. The only significant change I’m aware of over the last 23 years (my time in endurance sport) is now people are pushing towards the gut being able to handle more than previously thought. For a long time it was thought that 300kcal/hr was an upper limit - not anymore. Otherwise, there are zero changes.
Most importantly though, if you weren’t having issues prior to fueling rides at a higher amount and now you’re having weight gain and/or other physiological changes that aren’t positive, it seems the fueling is a pretty obvious place to start.
Like Dr. Alex pointed out before: If your body weight was stable without fueling, and the only change you do to your lifestyle is starting to fuel, then yes, you will now have a calorie surplus. In other words, not fueling rides before, was what was offsetting overeating elsewhere.
You have to look at the big picture. What is your metabolic basal rate. How many calories do you burn through working out and balance this with how many calories you take in both on the bike and off.
Not wanting to restart the debate because I realize this doesn’t have a lot to do with the “should you carb for a 1 hour ride” topic, but somewhere above someone said something like, “if it’s so good, why don’t the pros use it?”. Well, they do. Just sharing for that part of the conversation.
Thank you all for your comments. I am following @Dr_Alex_Harrison 's advice plus talking more with my own doctor. Point 9 in his post is most valuable.
If hungry, and struggling to maintain weight, it’s perfectly acceptable to not fuel as much, and just eat more solid food off the bike, rather than fueling “optimally.” “Optimal” performance fueling is only optimal if you’re not gaining weight, and your blood panel looks good. Otherwise performance will absolutely be better with less fuel because blood panel results and body weight will be better.
I am back in SS Base MV (so I can ride more with friends). Here is what I have been doing.
I am watching my pre-ride meal closer. How much oatmeal etc.
Adjusting my on bike intake based on my regular off the bike diet. It is, believe it or not pretty balanced. Lost of fruits and veggies, but I am back to food journaling to make sure I am honest. On bike food for now is “real” food as I work off the situation.
Bought UCAN and when I recover from my sugar detox rides I’ll see if this might be a better option.
I am losing weight pretty quickly by not taking the carbs in liquid form…I am more aware…for instance my 2 hour rides where getting 80grams in liquid form and a cliff bar etc…NOT any more. Pre-ride breakfast at 5:00am and then water in one bottle and electrolyte in the other. for hour rides in SSB. No problems and performing well.
Prior to TR I did train a lot and raced a lot in grad school and USA Cat 4-5 (and now masters )using another system and coaches. I have returned to the old fueling methods I learned then and will continue to experiment. I have also had a referral to a sports nutritionist who specializes in endurance sports.
I have a life long dream to ride the Milano- San Remo event in June (canceled last year and this year unable to fly to Italy until it was to late). I will compete this dream in 2022 with the help of the Dr and nutritionist in tandem. It is not a problem for me to train. Results from the sugar detox and returning to a more simple off the bike fueling method are good. Lost some weight already and feel better/last longer at higher watts on rides.
I am looking at total diet and not just on the bike fueling.
I am on a mission for my health and performance. I am a father and husband. The bike keeps me alive and happy so I can be alive and happy with them,
It will be a journey, but I guess I put myself out there to be criticized, called fat, had my ftp questioned etc…I am okay with it, especially if someone else did the same knuckle head mistake I have.
Most of your comments kept me reading and thinking. Others…made me think I was on Facebook. I came here to discuss and thanks to some found some good thoughts. Going to go blow things up now since it is Independence Day here. enjoy your cycling and fueling!
Part of this is likely to be initial water loss due to glycogen loss. A tradeoff worth making at the moment. Just providing info because more info is usually better for smart folks.
I would love to hear how this unfolds for you in the future, if you wanted to update this thread at any point.
carbs.
