Andre Jute wrote:

Every time I come back from riding my bike, the bike computer tells me,
among other useful information like my pulse rate, how high the hills
were, how fast I pedalled, what my road speed was, the temperature,
rates of descent, etc, etc, etc, much more stuff which I have my
computer print out in neat graphs. Among all this the bike computer
tells me how many watts I expended. The thing cheats of course, as it
takes a downhill or level-road ride as zero watts (you're still
expending energy). It gives peak output and an average for the ride. So
the energy expended is the length of the ride (it only ticks the clock
when the wheels are moving) multiplied by the average output.

Gee, who bothers with having a damned computer to tell us about our ride
when
it is NOT needed or wanted?

It seems a cyclists's computer has grown bells and whistles over the
last 15 years.
In 1991, when I last seriously competetd as a 44 yr old veteran in the
local club's B class division the handlebar mounted 'cyclometer' as it
was called then
simply timed the ride and gave the average speed for the ride as an
updated figure as you went along.
It could be stopped and started at any time to take out time spent
stationery at traffic lights
or at a cafe at which i never ever stopped at back in those days.

The cyclometer was a good training aid as described and I never bothered
with what was an expensive
heartrate monitor to tell me to whip myself harder while climbing a hill
or doing a time trial
if my heart rate fell below ( 220 minus my age ), a figure regarded as
safe
for any cyclist for at least an hour.

I have re-commenced cycling after a 13 year lay-off, but no competition
yet.
I did have serious knee troubles probably caused by a life of
accumulated
cartlidge injuries which seem much better now after an operation and
some rest and change of
occupation from carpenter-builder to tube amp craftsman.

But during the 13 years I went from 82Kg to 92Kg.
But since last July, my weight has dropped from 92Kg to 77Kg, and I have
another 2Kg to lose
before I feel that I will be about the right weight allowing for the
fact that
one inevitably will loose about 10% of muscle per decade, and I consider
that
a bodily fat content of roughly 10% to 15% is about right, although its
hard to
measure this without doing a serious test at the local Australian
Institute of Sport
where they train and test Australia's leading elite cysclists.
I am not able to access their services, and don't want to; looking at
myself in the mirror
after 6mths cycling and about 5,000 kms tells me I ain't too skinny, and
am appraoching
the ideal level of muscle definition and body build that all very
healthy males should aspire to.



But get
this, one kilowatt-hour is 860kJ. So, if you've gone for a ride that
will burst your average audiophile (middle-aged, overweight, fatarsed,
except for Patrick and me, who are ex-athletes and cyclists still) out
into heavy perspiration, say 100W average for an hour, which allows for
some extended peaks at 250W which will drive his heartbeat up to the
maximum, which does no one any good, is 0.1kW or 86kJ. In other words,
an hour's hard ride burns only 86 nutritional calories. You see, those
calories on food packets are really kiloJoules aka "nutritional
calories". You guys better stop eating altogether or you'll have to be
on your bikes eight hours a day.


I was very happy to find that when I re-commenced cycling that my knees
got less sore,
and that the exercise made me fitter.

I am so glad to have placed the old cyclometer I used in the "old days"
into the bin.

And I sure ain't looking for a latter day gadget to tell me how many
calories I have burnt.

At 44, and because I was 82Kg, if I went out and averaged say 32km/hr
over "average terrain"
ie, with a medium amount of hill climbing, then I would have been
burning about
600 calories per hour above what i used when not cycling, which was
about 100 calories, ( 2,400 cal/ day ).
So to lose weight, if I cycled for 2 hours at 32k/h and ate 2,400 cals,
the calorie deficit was 1,200 calories, which equates to about 120gms of
fat loss.
The calorie accounting and fat burning is all slightly more complicated
than this
but basically it was about what I said, and to maintain 82Kg in 1991,
I had to eat more than 2,400 cals per day if I cycled an average of
300km per week
to hold my competiviveness in B grade.
Weight loss is all about running a "calorie deficit", something most ppl
are far too weak willed
to do after week 1, so they binge in week2, and end up fatter.
And its remarkable how so many folks give all sorts of excuses for not
losing weight.
But this I understand, having spent time being UNABLE to use the main
power producing
muscles, those behind your femurs connecting the arse bone to knee
bones.
I was on the hospital waiting list for titanium knees, and it looks like
I can go somewhat
further on my own before accepting the invasive surgery option to make
life more doable.
I was even on Celebrex and Vioox for the knee pain and this **** from
the drug company
has killed quite a few ppl with heart attacks and the company is being
sued for millions and the drugs are now banned for sale.
I am lucky to have escaped injury from the drug side effects, but
probably they
promoted weight gain, since so many drugs do this.

Now days I am doing less distance at a lower average speed; whatever it
is I don't exactly know,
and don't need to know, I am passing most cyclists rather than being
passed by them as I ride around this town's
hundreds of kilometres of cycle paths and low traffic density roads.
Maybe I am burning 500cals now instead of 600 for a medium difficulty
ride. The difference between what efforts
produce in weight loss at 60 is only marginal compared to being 40.
Some rides are what I call damned hard, with lots of hills during a 100k
ride,
and I think the slopes of the hills as well as the headwinds have
generally increased in
angle and velocity over the last 15 years :-0
It feels like it, but I manage the same hills
but at slightly lower speed than 15 years ago; something has to give at
increasing age.
When a 20 year old passes me now I don't care because i'm 39 years
older.
Any healthy male of 20 to 45 should be able to pass me.
When I pass a 20 year old, they don't like it.


After I started again last July with a regular 200km+ per week, the
weight seemed to just fall off
at about 1Kg per week for 2 months before the weight loss rate levelled
out somewhat,
and my body became more efficient with what it did with a given intake
of food calories.
I ate lots. But no chocolate and crap. Before last July I'd spent 6 mths
revising my website
about full time, and such activities are terrible to the width across
the arse.
I keep a graph going for my weight in the evening and morning and
before/after each ride.
Of course the 6 mth exercize program has probably increased my muscle
mass
a guestimated 3 Kg, so the total fat loss is probably about 18kg, so
this is like removing 5 x 4Litre cans of oil from my physique.
During the first 2,000 km, a few spokes in the back wheel broke,
but since my weight is now nearly where I want it I have not broken a
spoke
for months, and the wheel concerned had done perhaps 30,000kms already.
I manage to ride up hills using only 1 gear lower than i used to when
44, ie,
48 x 18 instead of 48 x 16. The youngan's in the club would scamper past
me
on a 48 x 14....
I'm using Vittoria 28mm Randoneer tyres instead of the finer lighter
23mm clinchers that are supposed to give less drag but the web info I
have read indicates that
the tyre weight/type makes less than 1% of speed/difficulty difference
in my application,
and I am aheavy cyclist, so the tyre weight makes little difference. I
have had only
two punctures since July, and only after the rear tyre was worn down to
the red danger zone rubber,
and on town roads littered with broken glass after months of no rain to
keep the glass down.

I also swim rather more than I used to which assists recovery, 40 laps
of the 9M pool
I have is 360M, a nice little paddle before dinner while it cooks.

For this year when I turn 60 I want to try to get to the 40km Age
Standard for Time Trials.
Its a safe race to be in, and no elbowing and argy bargy of the
criteriums that the club has.
But even so, the local cycling clubs have got a new criterium track
devoted solely to criteriums at a nice spot
with a view overlooking the city and with a small grandstand, and with
very smooth wide hot-mix,
so perhaps i will take part.
Criteriums were never my forte; they suit mainly those good at
sprinting, and I cannot sprint
well even to save my life, but then the guys who like criteriums do so
because they do well
and are well suited, and they hate hills, and long distances, and its
here I am right on their wheel
and give them hell if I can.
I believe that fewer guys of my age than ever have retained their
youthful fitness or weight
they had at 30, so i should do OK if I re-join the local club
after this last layoff.

Meanwhile I enjoy the usual 4 hr ride around the town of what must be
about 80k to 100k
with a few nice hills included, there is no substitute for the 'big sky'
experience
of freedom, and the high from exercize, and the views on the way around
of the lakes and bush.
Dodging cars and the occasional other cyclist always keeps one alert;
not staying alert could cost
my life so easily.


Obligatory on-topic comment: That's a worse scam than rating audio gear
in "RMS watts" or "music watts".

We just need enough watts, and not more, or less....

Some want more, but don't need them, and they are welcome....

I need every watt I can lay my hands on when I am on the bike.

Australians purchased 1,200,000 bicycles in 2006.

When I go out for a ride, I see maybe 30 coming the other way, but
15 years ago maybe I see only 3...

Patrick Turner.

Andre Jute
The trouble with most people is not what they don't know, but what they
know for certain that isn't true. ---Mark Twain