NSW Cyclists Fined $1.33m in 2016.

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by DBourne

I agree that bang for buck running gives better/quicker results.. But running also sucks balls.

Least cycling you get a sense of speed, you can cover decent amounts of ground (which also is an achievement in itself) etc.

I went from 100kg to 69kg within a year from no other changes than just beginning to ride. So I wouldn't say it doesn't work.

Not just that, cycling is low impact which is gold for those who have bad knees and joints from the waist down. I suffer from Rheumatoid Arthritis and running is out of the question for me. I do/can walk and endure some jogging, and hiking. But I still get some (not a lot) joint pain in the knees/ankles from that. Cycling is my way to push myself and not feel that kind of pain other than the good kind in terms of pushing yourself fitness wise.

[DBourne]

Originally Posted by blueoval

Not just that, cycling is low impact which is gold for those who have bad knees and joints from the waist down. I suffer from Rheumatoid Arthritis and running is out of the question for me. I do/can walk and endure some jogging, and hiking. But I still get some (not a lot) joint pain in the knees/ankles from that. Cycling is my way to push myself and not feel that kind of pain other than the good kind in terms of pushing yourself fitness wise.

Na, BS you're just a poser

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by commodorenutt

- trakkies tucked into his socks to avoid them getting mauled in the chain. Dunno what's a worse look....

Definitely function over form!

I have been guilty of this on occasion, I am there for a purpose not for looks

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Yep, the same setup has always worked just fine for me. I've literally always trained barefoot wearing a singlet and boxer briefs... yes, it's probably a good thing I have a home gym.

I also train at home, I guess in a commercial gym you would not be allowed to train bare foot. some sort of foot wear would probably be mandatory.

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by DBourne

Na, BS you're just a poser

ok you got me....hahaha

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by blueoval

Not just that, cycling is low impact which is gold for those who have bad knees and joints from the waist down. I suffer from Rheumatoid Arthritis and running is out of the question for me. I do/can walk and endure some jogging, and hiking. But I still get some (not a lot) joint pain in the knees/ankles from that. Cycling is my way to push myself and not feel that kind of pain other than the good kind in terms of pushing yourself fitness wise.

Hahaha i dunno mate, try smashing down a gravity or DH track hammers the old knees

[Dave1966]

Originally Posted by xr8cam

I will never agree with cycling 5 x a week @ 20mins being more effective at weight loss than hard walking same frequency. A person needs to cycle 5 x the distance of that of a runner to get the same benefit. Period. The two use different muscle groups & have different oxygen uses. If you choose to cycle to work, there are as many pros & cons as public trans or driving. That's it from me. Greener pastures and all that.

Thanks for the tip good to hear from a pro. was also told swimming is real good

[Dave1966]

Geez the girl just showed me this
http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/b...e-201209145290
Is it true

[Junkyard-Dog]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I also train at home, I guess in a commercial gym you would not be allowed to train bare foot. some sort of foot wear would probably be mandatory.

Yeah probably, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't let me bring in my 1000W PA system and play Metallica there either.

[OzJavelin]

Originally Posted by DBourne

I went from 100kg to 69kg within a year from no other changes than just beginning to ride. So I wouldn't say it doesn't work.

So no changes to diet at all in that year? No changes in less takeaway, less alcohol, less processed food, reduced food intake in general?

I would never deter someone from doing exercise as it usually always beneficial in moderation, but generally it doesn't seem to provide significant weight loss .. despite the old adage of "burn more calories than you intake".

It can be fun, feel very rewarding, good social interaction, and most importantly physical fitness ... but without changes to diet it's usually not a silver bullet for weight loss.

I see a lot of tubby MAMILs on bikes .. and while I'm a very thin build (from diet not exercise) I don't kid myself that I'm likely anywhere as fit as a lot of them.

[ivorya]

Originally Posted by DJM83

Hahaha i dunno mate, try smashing down a gravity or DH track hammers the old knees

Suspension is your friend... ;)

When you bottom out though........

[DBourne]

Originally Posted by OzJavelin

So no changes to diet at all in that year? No changes in less takeaway, less alcohol, less processed food, reduced food intake in general?

I would never deter someone from doing exercise as it usually always beneficial in moderation, but generally it doesn't seem to provide significant weight loss .. despite the old adage of "burn more calories than you intake".

It can be fun, feel very rewarding, good social interaction, and most importantly physical fitness ... but without changes to diet it's usually not a silver bullet for weight loss.

I see a lot of tubby MAMILs on bikes .. and while I'm a very thin build (from diet not exercise) I don't kid myself that I'm likely anywhere as fit as a lot of them.

In that year, absolutely NO changes to diet. And it was a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad diet back then, but I also had a period of a few years where I didn't exercise at all, so I would say that's why.

Now, I agree 100000% that it isn't a silver bullet, as my weight has yo yo'd ever since, and so has my cycling motivation.

However, I found myself back around the mid 80's even though I was doing a fair amount of riding (150k+ a week).

Didn't seem to matter if I did a big week or little week, I was gradually putting on weight.

Since September, I've really knuckled down on my diet (to a point) and I've dropped down to 71kg, and that is during a period were I've done very little riding.

So you're absolutely correct that it isn't a magic way out, but if it is something that gets you on the right path then awesome!

I dare say the tubby MAMIL thing is the same as anything, where people do 1 or 2hrs of exercise then go, awesome I can reward myself with eleventy beers, massive bbq then wash it down with some sweets.

[OzJavelin]

I'm pretty much the opposite to most people here .. I'm too busy (code for "lazy") to exercise so I've implemented a modified version of the 5/2 diet .. basically just evolved to "try to not over eat and consume too much sugar" .. I've dropped 25% of my original starting weight and maintained it within a few kg for four years.

Not really much to do with cycling .. but the more cyclists I can get off the road by convincing them to diet instead .. the easier my drive into work on narrow, winding country roads ;)

[prydey]

Originally Posted by DBourne

However, I found myself back around the mid 80's even though I was doing a fair amount of riding (150k+ a week).

Didn't seem to matter if I did a big week or little week, I was gradually putting on weight.

i started riding late 2012 and went from 102kg back to 90kg in about 3 months. like you, i went from no exercise to quite a bit of riding, so initial weight loss was quite dramatic. since then, my weight has barely changed. still around 90-94. i'm 6'2 so i'm never going to be a light weight.

the point is, i'm still losing size. not dramatic, but gradual. so even though my weight is not going anywhere, i'm still losing fat, but also developing muscle, so it kind of cancels out.

my diet is pretty good. my eldest daughter is type 1 diabetic, so we all live by her diet needs.

the trick to losing weight is to find something that you will be motivated to do. if someone told me that the only way to lose weight was through walking or running, i would be 120kg by now.

[SumoDog68]

Originally Posted by xr8cam

I will never agree with cycling 5 x a week @ 20mins being more effective at weight loss than hard walking same frequency. A person needs to cycle 5 x the distance of that of a runner to get the same benefit. Period. The two use different muscle groups & have different oxygen uses. If you choose to cycle to work, there are as many pros & cons as public trans or driving. That's it from me. Greener pastures and all that.

It is very far from being that simple . Running vs cycling energy usage is not 5 to 1 , it varies depending on intensity .Distance is irrelevant as naturally you will cover much longer distance on the bike than walking. Time spent at intensity level is a better measure than distance in this case.
Runners just can’t put in the same volume of exercise as cyclists without experiencing more inflammation, soreness and muscle damage. This is due to high impact vs low impact exercise type.
Cycling can be as hard as you want it to be - intensity is the key .

[DBourne]

Originally Posted by OzJavelin

I'm pretty much the opposite to most people here .. I'm too busy (code for "lazy") to exercise so I've implemented a modified version of the 5/2 diet .. basically just evolved to "try to not over eat and consume too much sugar" .. I've dropped 25% of my original starting weight and maintained it within a few kg for four years.

Not really much to do with cycling .. but the more cyclists I can get off the road by convincing them to diet instead .. the easier my drive into work on narrow, winding country roads ;)

haha, I can imagine you going to a Doctor for a check up.

DR: Well done sir, you've lost weight!
You: Yeah I do it to get rid of bikes... long story, let me show you a thread on my phone

[Junkyard-Dog]

I think it's horses for courses really. I used to run instead of cycling but I was just getting too much joint pain in knees and discomfort in my feet. Running is probably never going to be suitable to me as my primary cardio exercise simply because of my large frame (6'2" @ 85kg, 15% bf) and I'm sure there are plenty of people in the same boat. I don't see why anyone would snob out one choice of exercise over the other, that is just hilarious.

Cycling is great for burning calories. It's also a great source of entertainment. If we're going to blindly hate things, let's choose something that hasn't been done to death.

[DBourne]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

If we're going to blindly hate things, let's choose something that hasn't been done to death.

I hate your ability to be logical.

Boo logic

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

I think it's horses for courses really. I used to run instead of cycling but I was just getting too much joint pain in knees and discomfort in my feet. Running is probably never going to be suitable to me as my primary cardio exercise simply because of my large frame (6'2" @ 85kg, 15% bf) and I'm sure there are plenty of people in the same boat. I don't see why anyone would snob out one choice of exercise over the other, that is just hilarious.

Cycling is great for burning calories. It's also a great source of entertainment. If we're going to blindly hate things, let's choose something that hasn't been done to death.

Logic has no place in this thread. Ban him now!

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by xr8cam

I will never agree with cycling 5 x a week @ 20mins being more effective at weight loss than hard walking same frequency. A person needs to cycle 5 x the distance of that of a runner to get the same benefit. Period. The two use different muscle groups & have different oxygen uses. If you choose to cycle to work, there are as many pros & cons as public trans or driving. That's it from me. Greener pastures and all that.

Running is crap and for those of us of bigger build that even wearing size 28 pants at 82kg, running is still too bad on the joints. I have too many injuries these days anyways that I will never be able to run again, not that I would want to run anyway as I always thought it sucked.

[stig_3754]

Running helped me lose 25kgs (currently 6'3" and 90kg) and keep it off for the last 5 years, no joint issues to speak of here. It might be crap for you but don't assume it's crap for everyone else.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Sorry guys :(

I'll try to be more emotional in my next response.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by mcnews

Running is crap and for those of us of bigger build that even wearing size 28 pants at 82kg, running is still too bad on the joints.

If you have crap running form, yes. Running properly negates most of the criticisms.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Let's all just make assumptions about how other people exercise and the form they use when exercising even though we have no experience to base those assumptions on.

I don't predict any issues at all.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

I don't see why anyone would snob out one choice of exercise over the other, that is just hilarious.

Runners would cop more criticism if they chose to run in packs in the middle of the road.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Originally Posted by b0son

Runners would cop more criticism if they chose to run in packs in the middle of the road.

I can't speak for anyone else here but personally I choose to ride along a designated bike path 90% of the time.

Try harder next time.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Let's all just make assumptions about how other people exercise and the form they use when exercising even though we have no experience to base those assumptions on.

Does several seasons of competitive athletics not count? We run in spikes, no cushioning. No issues if you do it correctly.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Originally Posted by b0son

Does several seasons of competitive athletics not count? We run in spikes, no cushioning. No issues if you do it correctly.

No it doesn't count unless you saw all of the people in this thread exercising during your time in competitive athletics.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

I can't speak for anyone else here but personally I choose to ride along a designated bike path 90% of the time.

I'm not saying all cyclists do it, but there's certainly enough that do on inappropriate roads at inappropriate times to warrant criticism. You might recall the numpty that overtook a group of cyclists in Sydney, then abruptly stopped in front of them and took most of them out. He certainly wasnt in the right, but when people brought up the obvious question of why a large group was training on a major arterial road at peak hour, the typical response was that they were 'entitled' to ride whenever and wherever they liked.... speaks for itself really.

[Junkyard-Dog]

This is the first I have heard of that story but it doesn't surprise me at all given the amount of animosity I've experienced in the relatively small amount of time I've spent riding on the road. I don't want to paint all automobile drivers with the same brush though...