🚀 go-pugleaf

ddozier@daled.net.com (Dale Dozier) writes:

>         Heart Rate -vs- Weight and Calories Burned Per Hour
> 
>                               WEIGHT
> HR        100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^ ???

Thanx for taking the time to do the calculations and putting all your grey
matter to work, but you've done what seems to be in-escapable in today's 
society: discrimination.  I was a competetive swimmer before I turned cyclist/
triathalete and, believe it or not, the bigger (height and build) the swimmer
is usually the better swimmer.  As a result, I'm a fairly lean (~10% body fat)
180 lbs. at 6 feet tall.  I guess it would have been nice to increase the 
range.  (I'm really not flaming, just pointing something out.)

Also, I'm just curious why you (and others over the past discussions of the 
net) are so concered about such conversions (running to biking to walking to
fill_in_your_favorite_other_past-time).  I understand the desire to know just
how much your "burning off" during a ride, but I think that a calculation
like that is also quite complex and individual dependant (although I would 
agree that the table you listed may be within +/-20-30 calories...)

Brian Huilman           University of Wisconsin - Madison
                        Department of Electrical/Computer Engineering
"Avoid the Bonk"        brianh@cae.wisc.edu
             _   __o
           ___  `\<,    "Speed is the reward for hard training."
             -  O/ O

>ddozier@daled.net.com (Dale Dozier) writes:
>>         Heart Rate -vs- Weight and Calories Burned Per Hour
>> 
>>                               WEIGHT
>> HR        100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^ ???
>
>society: discrimination.  I was a competetive swimmer before I turned cyclist/
>triathalete and, believe it or not, the bigger (height and build) the swimmer
>is usually the better swimmer.  As a result, I'm a fairly lean (~10% body fat)
>180 lbs. at 6 feet tall.  I guess it would have been nice to increase the 
>range.  (I'm really not flaming, just pointing something out.)
>


It really wasn't meant for the Net but for me personally and I was 
just sharing MY chart. No discrimination was entended. Sorry. The
numbers are easily interporable up to any weight you wish. 10%
body fat is my goal for competitive reasons. Right now I am at
about 15%. Since I have been training at lower intensities and 
watching the calories AND the fat I have lost 2lbs in 2 weeks. I have
been using this home made chart as a guide so that I eat enough
for the ride/run without over eating. I also assume that at lower
intensity training that more calories will be coming from fat.
I did a century in 6 hours and did not bonk using this table.
That is really the use that it was entended for.  As I collect
more data I will post an update that may be more accurate
up to 300 POUNDS! :-)

-Dale

brianh@hp-20.cae.wisc.EDU (Brian Huilman) writes:
>I'm hoping that perhaps with all of this political change about to take
>place in the country, the 'common folk' will also see this as an opportune time
>to take control of/change their lives for the better.  This country has been
>run by overweight, cholesterol ridden, heart-attack-candidates for too long.
>Time for America to start getting into shape physically, mentally, and
>politically/governmentally!!!!  (I'll step down from my soap box now... :)

	I don't think it's fair to speak of the previous leaders
of our country as overweight, cholesterol ridden, heart-attack candidates.
Based on what I've seen, Bush is more physically fit than Clinton,
and certainly a better runner compared to his age group.  Reagan
is also a great example of fitness for a man his age.  Pick on the
old gaurd politically all you want (not in this group please)
but I believe they are among the most fit Presidents we've had in
a long time.

-Jon

"Clinton starts out running slow, and then tapers off." -Some TV reporter.

Men, Woman, Children, Mr, Nugent;

	As you know I spend 10-14 hours a day in research libraries
all over the globe uncovering little known facts to inform you about
the enjoyment, and of course safety, pertaining to the variety of
vehicles discussed here in rec.motorcycles and rec.bicycles. I was
in Guam when I came across the following information comparing the
legal proceedings of motorcyclists vs. bicyclists; as well as an
indication of the public perception of each.

From 1988 to 1990...

*Juries awarded 67% of injured motorcyclists $$$$, 45% of bicyclists.
*Juries awarded >$50k 40% of the time to motorcyclcists, 24% for bicyclists.
*Juries awarded 69% of motorcyclists who were "cut-off" $$$, while only
 awarding 30% of bicyclists $$$$.
*Just barely over 50% of bicyclists were awarded money when rear-ended.
*There are 10 million regular bicycle riders, and 23 million who ride
 "once in a while". There are 4.2 million motorcyclists.
*It also mentioned that bicyclists "rarely" collect money when riding
 at night without illumination.
*3 out of every 4 motorcyclists make up 75% of the motorcycling population
 while only 2 out of every 5 bicyclists make up only 40% of the bicycling
 population.

	The article is from the December 1991 issue of Bicycling, which
I have borrowed and will return promptly to its rightful owner upon my
next journey through Guam. Just food for thought. As a rider of each
vehicle, and a damn concerned American, I will continue to research and
enlighten you with information as it becomes available, or I choose to
just make it up off the top of my head.

Thank-you all for voting;

Tod J. Johnson
DoD #883
"Go Slow, Take Geritol, Whats a peg?, Whats a Toe-Clip"

In article <4236@cvbnetPrime.COM> tjohnson@atc1.UUCP (Tod J Johnson) writes:
>From 1988 to 1990...
>
>*3 out of every 4 motorcyclists make up 75% of the motorcycling population
> while only 2 out of every 5 bicyclists make up only 40% of the bicycling
> population.

That explains it. I have always felt that 3 out of every 5 riders were in the
majority, but Tod (yet again!) has brought enlightenment.

Thank you, Tod; and for the rest of you out there, I hope you considered my
advice and voted Johnson/Nemeth '92.

Still accepting applicants for the Unofficial Tod Johnson Devotee Club,

-s
--
  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / shamim@cs.arizona.edu
  "Take this cross and garlic; here's a Mezuzah if he's Jewish; a page of the
    Koran if he's a Muslim; and if he's a Zen Buddhist, you're on your own."
 Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to league@prep.ai.mit.edu

In article <4236@cvbnetPrime.COM> tjohnson@atc1.UUCP (Tod J Johnson) writes:
>Men, Woman, Children, Mr, Nugent;
>
>	As you know I spend 10-14 hours a day in research libraries
>all over the globe uncovering little known facts .....

[semi-interesting stuff deleted]

>*3 out of every 4 motorcyclists make up 75% of the motorcycling population
> while only 2 out of every 5 bicyclists make up only 40% of the bicycling
> population.
 	
	Is this part a gag, or do you want to clarify it?

If 2 out of every 5 bicyclists made up 75% of the bicycling population, that
would be _very_ interesting indeed.

-math literacy strikes again!
-Mark Janeba

tjohnson@atcc5.prime.com (Tod J Johnson) writes:

>*3 out of every 4 motorcyclists make up 75% of the motorcycling population
> while only 2 out of every 5 bicyclists make up only 40% of the bicycling
> population.

Tod, I found the other statistics interesting, but what's with the one above?


-- 
Gregg Mack    512-891-8704  ---------- __o       __o       __o       __o
gmack@paceline.sps.mot.com  -------- _`\<,_    _`\<,_    _`\<,_    _`\<,_
Motorola RISC uProcessors   ------- (*)/ (*)  (*)/ (*)  (*)/ (*)  (*)/ (*)
Austin, Texas  USA          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~