Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns. (Page 3)

so I am (214/.63)*5.2=1766 Calories burned in 45 minutes?

but if I did it in 200 minutes I would burn the same amount?

That is a great tool to use and probably valuble for that price.   However, caloric expenditure from V02 max test run off of estimation calculations as well. 

I am not saying those test arnt good and very useful, and fairly accurate.   I am basically just pointing out that machines at the gym are estimates.   Is that not true? From what I recall, to get near EXACT measurements, I believe the test is done in an airtight room with a certain temp and then they measure the amount of heat you produce.  Similar to the tests that are done with food. That is not something the average person can just go do. The simple point that was suppose to be seen from that is that there are a lot of estimations that go into this science.

I wasnt bashing anyone in my statement and was simply stating some generalized ideas.   Yes, I am a wellness coordinator by trade.   I am not a dietician nor am I am exercise physiologists that test caloric expenditure.  Is anyone that posted one? 

You always give amazing advice. Thanks for your contributions. 

Have to sit down tonight and go through the whole thread.  Tons of great info.

Now for those saying 10 MPH is a leisurely pace.... not for me  That's part of the problem.

Making the equation less ambigious:

Calories burned =  Body Mass (kg) x Distance Run (km)

or Calories burned = Body weight in lbs x Distance Run (miles) x 1.34

I don't know...I'm 5'2.5" and 124 lbs, so maybe a closer example, and 15mph on a mtn bike on dirt would be pretty tough for me I think. 10mph could be more reasonable of she lives in a hilly, windy area and/or rides a mtn bike.

Does your swim pace include resting? My hubby is about the same pace and that's because he still needs to rest every 25-50m. 

Its just that many of the things you posted are common misconceptions and half truths.  Those have been pointed out already.

Deb,

If you are doing this:

 I work out around 3 hours a day and do Yoga, spinning, Zumba, TurboKick, and weights 3 X a week with at least one day in-between, one hour full-body.

3 hours a day is a lot of working out. You should wear your HR monitor again for a while. Even though Polar isn't super accurate, it will give you some decent numbers to work from for your caloric expenditures.

Also, 400 calories and hour for cardio is WAY off for you if you are 5 ft 4 and 143 lbs. I think you would be hard pressed to do a level of exertion to burn 400 calories an hour. I am 6ft, 210 lbs and 400 an hour is a medium hard run for me.

The swim is without resting

Calories burned = Body weight in lbs x Distance Run (miles) x 1.34

Is that net or gross calories?  That would be 143 * 1.34 * 1 = 191.62.  That seems way high.  If I do 5 miles in an hour that's 958.1.  Even minus the 75 calories at rest, I am not burning close to 800 in one hour running .....

How many calories would you think you burn in an hour of cardio if not 400?  For spin they say as high as 1000 even though I calculate 400 for it also (and this is all net calories).  I log all my food, even weigh it, and keep track of it on Myfitnesspal.com ... have the phone app so if I eat it, I log it on the spot.

The key to losing weight is sleeping.  Go to sleep.

(It is 3:53 here and 12:53 in Vegas.)

This thread rocks ...

Losing weight is a food issue, not an exercise issue.  I say that as I sit here stuffing my face with a breakfast omlet.  If you eat the right foods it's REALLY hard to eat too much.  I had to stuff it in to get the calories I need to keep my energy up.  Now as I say that... Where are my M&M's...

Are you sure?  That's seeems way high!  Like 2x higher than I expected.  135 lbs  * 5 miles * 1.34 = 904.5

Ah, I see now that the multiplier should be .73 -- still higher than I'd have thought but 492.75 seems more reasonable

214*.63*5.2=701

That seems much more reasonable