Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

“Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird
Quote | Reply
PROBLEM SOLVED Doh! The answer is simple, my weekly hours exercise is 3.5 not 7. Adjusted for that, my approximation is much more inline with Matts numbers
**************************************




Hi, I hope someone can help me untangle this nutrition conundrum!

I am three weeks into a triathlon training phase for the first time and I’ve been reading Matt Fitzgerald’s food book “Racing Weight” because I felt I’d been getting too tired relative to my workouts. First off Matt said scrap any ideas of losing weight once in a training phase. I’m carrying an extra 10 lbs but okay, I can happily stop the 300 cal daily deficit I’ve been using for the last 3 weeks.

But then he goes on to talk about grams of carbs and protein to eat. He has a chart which says for 7 hours exercise a week, which is what I’m doing, I should eat 3 g carb / lb of racing weight, and 1.2 g of protein / lb of racing weight. He says grams, not percentages are king for carbs and protein. He doesn’t give grams for fat but mentions 13% or total calories.

So for me at a racing weight of 157 lbs, that calculates to 472g / 1900 cals carbs (65% of total cals); 189g / 697 cals protein (23% of total cals) ; 36g / 338 cals fat (13% of total cals).

This gives a total of 2934 cals, which seems a lot doesn’t it?

I say that’s a lot because when I look at my calorie burn over the last three weeks of training, it averages 300 calories per day. Apart from workouts I’m fairly sedentary. So say I take 2000 cals as my base, that gives me a total daily of 2300 cals. If I assume that 100% of the 300 exercise cals should be carbs, and 50% of the 2000 base should come from carbs then that results in carbs of 323 g / 1300 cals (57% of total cals). This is 140g (30%) less than Matt recommends!!!

If I then take his 1.2g protein, I get the same 189g of protein giving 697 cals, but that’s now 30% of the total cals, which he definitely says is too high a percentage for protein, but it’s the grams which are supposed to matter.

I then do 13% fat of total cals to get 32g / 303 cals from fat. I find these fat levels hard to stick to because I eat oily fish and avocadoes. (I don’t eat refined sugar or alcohol or fizzy drinks, nothing like that)

Can anyone tell me what I am missing regarding the mismatch between Matts recommendation and my sanity check?

(FYI over the past 3 weeks, I've been averaging 2040 cals a day, 171 g carbs, 118 g protein, 95 g fat)
Last edited by: Jackj: Mar 6, 19 14:00
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [Jackj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Eat whatever makes you feel strong during your workouts.
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [Jackj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I may have misunderstood, but are you sayunf that your one hour per day of training burns only 300 kcal? That does not sound enough, and maybe why your calculation is lower
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [Jackj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your sanity check seems too complicated (to me) and as a result has too many estimates in it.

Where does the 2000 figure come from? Plus I don't see the need to drill into the carb portion of either part of that figure. Are the 100% and 50% rations a guess? Are ratios of different (perceived) parts of a diet a thing? If they are then go ahead but it seems like adding more errors to me. You are then comparing your carb total from a 2934 calorie diet as a ration of a 2300 calories diet. Unless I read it wrong.

Why not just put height, weight and age into a daily calorific calculator and tick active. I bet you get a lot closer to 2934 than you do to 2300. Does it have to be more complicated than that?
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bingo! That's the answer. It's 7 hours for two weeks, doh! So now I adjust my Matt calculations and it more or less comes bang in line with my sanity check. Thank you fruit thief :-)
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [OddSlug] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you for your thoughts oddslug. I made a mistake in my calculations, so the discrepancy has gone away now. But just so you know, where the calories come from is as important to me as the total calories. That said, out of interest, I put my stats into a calorie calculator and it said 2500 per day.
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [Jackj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I find the numbers in that book to be somewhat impossible, actually.
So for my training load, it suggests 3.75g carb/lb daily

that is 200lb at race weight=750gr carb/day = 3000 cal/d of just carb alone. Seems impossible.
then 0.55gr protein/lb/d=110gr=440 cal
add fat and I am getting a lot of calories a day, at least a third more to almost double what I typically eat and struggle to stay down to race weight
Quote Reply
Re: “Racing Weight” book’s calories seem weird [iamuwere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi iamuwere, I am going to try what he says. It's a big bump in cals for me but I have been feeling too tired relative to my workout load.
Quote Reply