Guest guest Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 --- In , " john roberts " <johnhrob@n...> wrote: With the exception of one period when I trained up to a > marathon I've been pretty active for the last 10-20 years " and " > significantly overweight. Even when I ran the marathon, while not heavy I > was some 20 lbs heavier than now. > _______ Also ran a marathon a few years ago and was about eight pounds lighter at the time. Am wondering if one, via a CRON diet, reduces their weight below, say their former marathon weight, by about ten pounds, would running or training for another marathon be any easier, discounting for effects of additional age? More to the point, do you curently find it any easier to run longer distances now? Aequalsz (A former high school sprinter who could barely complete a marathon.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 It makes no sense to do long distances while practicing CRON. That aside, Lance Armstrong's claims that he changed from competing with world class cyclists to beating world class cyclists by shedding about 10 pounds off his competition weight. Admittedly, he did it as an inadvertent consequence of chemo. While he's obviously genetically blessed, if one can lose that much weight in the worst way possible (chemo), losing it via CRON has got to be better. As a side note, Lance says that he weighs all his food with a scale and counts all his calories. Don aequalsz wrote: >Also ran a marathon a few years ago and was about eight pounds lighter >at the time. Am wondering if one, via a CRON diet, reduces their >weight below, say their former marathon weight, by about ten pounds, >would running or training for another marathon be any easier, >discounting for effects of additional age? More to the point, do you >curently find it any easier to run longer distances now? > >Aequalsz > >(A former high school sprinter who could barely complete a marathon.) > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 As JW posted the significant work done while running is lifting your body weight with each step. So absolutely, losing weight makes running easier. Look at the typical distance runner, very little upper body musculature. Sprinters OTOH do benefit somewhat from upper body strength so they don't gravitate towards such slender statures. To keep this discussion CRON relevant. Running and training for marathon distance is generally considered to be beyond the amount of exercise considered beneficial. Since you would have to consume more calories to support that level of activity and CRON is about calories not BMI. My personal philosophy is that life without quality is not worth extending so this becomes a personal choice. My marathon goal was just to finish one, and brag about that for the rest of my life... I did and I do. While I suspect it would be far easier now at more than 20 lbs lighter, I have no desire to test that theory. FWIW, I ran Bay to Breakers in SF a few weeks ago and there's a killer SF hill between mile 2 and 3 of that 7.5 mile long race. While I started with the mass of runners, I was one of the very few I saw who actually ran up the hill. No doubt a benefit of my lower weight and regular jogging. Despite taking two minutes to get to the starting line I beat 57,000 of the 60,000 runners to the finish line, not bad for a jogger. So to answer your question, yes marathon distance running will be easier at a lighter weight, but A) it will still be a non-trivial physical effort, so you must train up to the distance, and since running 26.2 miles is beyond what you body carries in glycogen stores (that's what hitting the wall is about) you might want to be careful of allowing %BF to drop too low. Have fun and good luck, but you're on your own...I'm content with more moderate distances these days. JR -----Original Message----- From: aequalsz [mailto:aequalsz@...] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 12:27 PM Subject: [ ] Re: Weight & Exercise --- In , " john roberts " <johnhrob@n...> wrote: With the exception of one period when I trained up to a > marathon I've been pretty active for the last 10-20 years " and " > significantly overweight. Even when I ran the marathon, while not heavy I > was some 20 lbs heavier than now. > _______ Also ran a marathon a few years ago and was about eight pounds lighter at the time. Am wondering if one, via a CRON diet, reduces their weight below, say their former marathon weight, by about ten pounds, would running or training for another marathon be any easier, discounting for effects of additional age? More to the point, do you curently find it any easier to run longer distances now? Aequalsz (A former high school sprinter who could barely complete a marathon.) ________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by Internet Pathway's Email Gateway scanning system for potentially harmful content, such as viruses or spam. Nothing out of the ordinary was detected in this email. For more information, call 601-776-3355 or email support@... ________________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 You walk because you have to start somewhere. Three mph is not very fast walking. Keep increasing the effort that you put into walking and I don't think you'll ever get so accustomed to it that it stops being aerobic. Not if you work hard enough to keep your breathing and heart rate up. Eventually you will reach a speed barrier, but then you can add weights. If you get so used to that that you don't even sweat or breath hard, then you are such prime condition that I wouldn't worry about anything except maintaining that level of conditioning. (|-|ri5 -----Original Message-----From: jwwright [mailto:jwwright@...]Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 3:30 PM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Weight & Exercise That's what I'm pointing out. I think I'm still aerobic walking, but I do know if I dig a garden I sweat a lot, and I never get used to it, so I think that's non aerobic. People who do real work, are often in "that" mode and it doesn't seem to help their health. I think you can't just keep increasing the level of effort to stay aerobic, because eventually you reach your maximum and you're no longer aerobic, right? If it's true I reach that I reach a point where I'm no longer aerobic, why walk? Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: chris Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 6:59 AM Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Weight & Exercise Something doesn't sound right with that statement. Why couldn't it be that your body is now stonger and adjusted to that level of exercise without stress? If you are not sweating, or breathing hard, if your heart rate is unchanged, that probably means that you now must increase the level of effort in order to be "aerobic". (|-|ri5 << They say if you start sweating (about 20 min walking) that's a sign you're aerobic. But eventually, I get to a point that I can walk at 3 mph for an hour and not sweat. Does that mean I'm no longer aerobic? (rhet) I don't think so. >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.