Weight Matters (train hard and eat whatever you want is BS)

No shit

6-9 miles a day is hard training? I must've missed that memo.

Take a conservative estimate of 100 calories burned per mile ran (it can fluctuate based on a number of factors, but using that as a base). Your 6 mile run would BARELY burn off a Big Mac (http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/nutritionfacts.pdf), let alone the fries and soda you shoved in your pie-hole along with it.

I would take down 3-4 pints of Ben & Jerry's a week and still lost weight in college b/c the 1300+ calories in the entire pint were burned and then some by the 14+ miles I was putting in. That was not every day, no. Usually did that on workout days(3-4 mi warm-up, workout, 3-4 mi cool-down) and long run days. But, then again, I wasn't stupid enough to down a whole pint of ice cream on my easy 4-6 mile days.

Moral of the story is, your training output wasn't matching your diet's input. Should you go completely strict and eat celery sticks for every meal, no, but neither should you cram the cookies in whenever you feel like it. Had you used some common sense and shown just the tiniest bit of restraint you could still enjoy some of the more unhealthy foods out there while seeing fitness improvements and the weight you desire

I also get annoyed with people saying "your body will find your proper weight." What does that even mean?

If you're overeating, you're overeating. Don't listen to the chumps

gsgwgwegwge wrote:

I also get annoyed with people saying "your body will find your proper weight." What does that even mean?

If you're overeating, you're overeating. Don't listen to the chumps

I agree. I over eat. My wife over feeds me, she over eats and thinks its something else. And our dog snacks all the time.

We love each other to death.

Tonight she made my fav meal and I ate a bowl of it big enough to feed a Thai village.

I then went back and had an extra bowl bigger than the first. And I gave the dog a little piece of meat from each bowl.

It might have been a bigger piece if I hadn't bitten it in half before I gave it to him. It was my fav after all, and he is a fatty.

It was for his own good.

The saying isn't "train hard and eat whatever you want," it's "train hard and eat what you're hungry for." There is a difference.

Not a big Lance Armstrong fan but I was impressed when I read how he weighed his food during peak train periods to make sure he didn't eat too much. The power to weight ratio is huge in cycling and just as important in running. That 2.5 seconds per pound per mile formula is pretty accurate and when you start doing the math you realize that every pound does matter.

Bernard Lagat (5'8"/134) is proportionately the same weight as Solinsky and proportionately 10-15 pounds heavier than Bob Kennedy and Galen Rupp.

Lagat also kicks Rupp's butt every single time.

KB is the same height and a few pounds HEAVIER than Lagat.

Have you considered that maybe guys like Rupp are TOO skinny?

Train hard--I mean hard intervals/hills, not just jogging 6-9 miles a day--and the weight will take care of itself. On the other hand, I've seen mediocre marathoners (3+ hours) running 50-60mpw actually GAIN weight on their marathon training...because they NEVER go hard, and right after a workout they go out and eat (too much).

Solinksy isn't "the" exception; there's nothing different about him that allows him to weigh more than everyone else. His body fat % is quite low, though. If it were really a rule it wouldn't have random unexplained exceptions.

I've never heard anyone advocate train hard and eat whatever you want.

I don't think you should do fad diets or spend too much time trying to lose weight, though.

Train hard. Eat right and be consistent.

Okay, when did I say 6 to 9 miles a day was training "hard". Nope, I never said it was hard. So good job on putting words in my mouth. Secondly, I am showing dietary restraint. (You would know this if you actually read my post semi-carefully.) I fully admitted that I was eating like crap and I didn't start to see any real results until I cleaned up the diet and started eating extremely healthy. In other words, your flaming me on stuff that I already admitted to and fixed. And this might be just my own personal thing (but I'm sure some people could relate), I have a do or die mentality. I mean that I'm either going to eat extremely healthy and put in big miles and tough work outs. Or I'm going to drink too many beers and eat too many slices of pizza. Doing the whole "balancing act" of eating some unhealthy foods but then doing tough works-outs is just annoying. I'd rather either go all out for optimal fitness or not really care and eat and drink whenever/whatever I want. Anyway, I think you missed my point. I wasn't upset I wasn't losing weight and getting fit doing 6 to 9 mile runs. I learned quickly that diet is the MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR towards achieving my weight and fitness goals.

Also, cool this thread generated some responses. It's always good to stir up the shit from time to time.

Also, I don't eat McDonalds or drink soda. So that entire second paragraph was irrelevant.

coach d wrote:

Bernard Lagat (5'8"/134) is proportionately the same weight as Solinsky and proportionately 10-15 pounds heavier than Bob Kennedy and Galen Rupp.

Lagat also kicks Rupp's butt every single time.

KB is the same height and a few pounds HEAVIER than Lagat.

You are not exactly a math wizard nor visually strong, are you? Lagat is a little less than 2 lbs/inch. Sol is 5 inch taller (6'1"). Therefore, at same lb/inch ratio that lagat has, sol would weigh 144 lbs. He weighs TWENTY lbs more than that Einstein. Putting math aside, Have you ever looked at the two for crissakes? and I will not even do the math for you, but lagat is NOT 10-15 lbs heavier than Kennedy (or rupp for that matter), no matter how you might attempt to define "Proportionately".

"I learned quickly that diet is the MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR towards achieving my weight and fitness goals."

The key word there is MY. For some people diet is not as important as it was for you. Some people eat crap and train great and they feel and race great. Then they eat better but dont train hard and that is when things fall apart. For most people, exercise quantity and quality is just as important as diet in reaching their body weight and fitness goals.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

"I learned quickly that diet is the MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR towards achieving my weight and fitness goals."

The key word there is MY. For some people diet is not as important as it was for you. Some people eat crap and train great and they feel and race great. Then they eat better but dont train hard and that is when things fall apart. For most people, exercise quantity and quality is just as important as diet in reaching their body weight and fitness goals.

Fair point. Everyone is different. If I don't eat right, my training basically falls apart. I guess my general point was that people should NOT underestimate the importance of their diet even if they feel that they are doing the work. But if someone can truly eat whatever he or she wants and still produce excellent results, more power to em. I guess I wasn't blessed with the genetics (or something) to pull that off. So train hard, eat right, and start setting new PRs. Best of luck everyone.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

coach d wrote:

Bernard Lagat (5'8"/134) is proportionately the same weight as Solinsky and proportionately 10-15 pounds heavier than Bob Kennedy and Galen Rupp.

Lagat also kicks Rupp's butt every single time.

KB is the same height and a few pounds HEAVIER than Lagat.

You are not exactly a math wizard nor visually strong, are you? Lagat is a little less than 2 lbs/inch. Sol is 5 inch taller (6'1"). Therefore, at same lb/inch ratio that lagat has, sol would weigh 144 lbs. He weighs TWENTY lbs more than that Einstein. Putting math aside, Have you ever looked at the two for crissakes? and I will not even do the math for you, but lagat is NOT 10-15 lbs heavier than Kennedy (or rupp for that matter), no matter how you might attempt to define "Proportionately".

Power to weight ratio is great but the pounding of running makes extra weight that much harder on the body. The heavier you are as a runner, regardless of height, the more abuse your body is going to take.

gaining extra weight is a serious issue for distance runners.

losing weight can cause a pretty high increase in relative vO2 max. ie... that 20 pounds of fat you were carrying around isn't sucking up oxygen anymore. no wonder you are feeling fitter. I'm trying to get under 150. 5'11'' about 12% body fat.

Getting Lean And Fast pretty much wrote:

I was fat and then got skinnier. Now I'm hoping to be fast! Also I'm gonna get skinnier, and therefore faster! I swear!

For some reason, your story hasn't inspired me to action.

Getting Lean And Fast actually wrote:

...diet is the majority of what fitness comes down to.

ABSOLUTELY wrong. Diet is a factor, yes. The majority of fitness? You're dreaming.

I'm not hoping to be faster. I am faster. (I know this based on my paces during long runs and interval work-outs.)

Okay fine, I'll hedge, FOR ME, diet is the most important factor toward determining my running performance (pretty sure I already stated this).

Oh, and only on LetsRun is 6'0'' 178 lbs "fat".

Getting Lean And Fast wrote:

Oh, and only on LetsRun is 6'0'' 178 lbs "fat".

Check any BMI chart. 6'0" and 178 is just BARELY on the Normal side of the Normal/Overweight boundry. So yeah on a site dedicated to distance running, a sport in which many participants are generally closer to the Underweight/Normal boundries of those same BMI charts, you can expect to be flamed for being a fatty... Fatty