-
f I can train 3-4 hours in zone 2 without eating
You'd train harder taking on fuel and burn more calories in the same time.
They did similar experiment in one of those post-xmas diet shows on TV this week, showing a couple of runners, lasting longer with fuel so using more calories (even with the extra taken on). If you can do 3-4 fasted, day to day and not carve holes in your kitchen looking for food, good on you. I'd decimate the local shops...
-
The point is, if you have 3-4hrs of ride time, then doing that time harder because you can, because you're fueling it, means you'll burn more calories than if you did 3-4 hours of unfueled riding. Exactly what the differences would be depend on the individual and state of training.
There's a whole heap of other stuff like - recovery, muscle damage and the ability to do back to back training days at the same intensities, problems with long-term energy imbalance like RED-S, properly fueled rides are less likely to result in URT infections. Riding fasted now and then has benefits but I wouldn't create a whole program around long fasted rides.Wiggo just nailed a fuck load of catabolic asthma meds. Insta weight loss.
You are reading a single comment by @elllguapo and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
hippy
@elllguapo
even with all this science - training harder is still training harder ...
My hypothesis is - if I can train 3-4 hours in zone 2 without eating, the resulting calorie deficit is greater than it would be if I did a one and a half hour high int pass fuelled with carbs. Works for me in the winter so my lsd passes give me greater cal deficit than fueled high int passes (or even better non fueled high int passes).
I dont know - read some bullshit about how Wiggo lost weight when he went from track to road and I bought it straight out... you know distance passes after an espresso = marginal gains