If one looks he

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

They can plainly see that sailing (as RB does it) burns the same amount of
calories as bowling!

Bowling!!!!

Kite flying may be even more strenuous. Pray he doesn't get another heart
attack. Knitting might require the same level of exertion.

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...
If one looks he

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

They can plainly see that sailing (as RB does it) burns the same amount of
calories as bowling!

Bowling!!!!

Kite flying may be even more strenuous. Pray he doesn't get another heart
attack. Knitting might require the same level of exertion.

Boxing looks good, and I'd only have to fight vigorously in the ring for 1
hour to use 1 kcal? Piece o' cake!
They should add dropping and chopping oak trees - I lost 3 pounds yesterday
doing the same.
Scout

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...

Just hang up a heavy bag (no, I don't mean Scotty's wife) and use it a few
times
a week.

And see what it does to your wrists after a few years.

Try this instead:

http://ctr.usf.edu/shotokan/makiwara.html

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:10:38 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:

If one looks he

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

Hey, great chart. Based on the chart I burn about an average of 850
cal/day with training runs of about 8.5 min miles for an average of
about an hour per day. A little more on interval day when the pace
quickens.

What the chart doesn't mention is the metabolic impact. If you run
consistently (or do any aerobic exercise) at a high rate, your
metabolism alters so that you will burn more calories when not
running.

Frank

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:10:38 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:

If one looks he

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

Hey, great chart. Based on the chart I burn about an average of 850
cal/day with training runs of about 8.5 min miles for an average of
about an hour per day. A little more on interval day when the pace
quickens.

What the chart doesn't mention is the metabolic impact. If you run
consistently (or do any aerobic exercise) at a high rate, your
metabolism alters so that you will burn more calories when not
running.

Frank

Frank,

You may like this:

http://www.healthstatus.com/cbc.html

http://www.stevenscreek.com/goodies/calories.shtml

I have a Garmin 205 that estimates calories burned. It works ok on flat
ground with no wind. If you go out and back on the same track it comes close
estimating calories for hills and wind. What's uncanny about the GPS is you
can review your track of high speed turns and sharpen them up even better.
The GPS even works indoors (not everywhere, but much better than older GPS
units).

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:06:05 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:


"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:10:38 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:

If one looks he

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

Hey, great chart. Based on the chart I burn about an average of 850
cal/day with training runs of about 8.5 min miles for an average of
about an hour per day. A little more on interval day when the pace
quickens.

What the chart doesn't mention is the metabolic impact. If you run
consistently (or do any aerobic exercise) at a high rate, your
metabolism alters so that you will burn more calories when not
running.

Frank

Frank,

You may like this:

http://www.healthstatus.com/cbc.html

http://www.stevenscreek.com/goodies/calories.shtml

I have a Garmin 205 that estimates calories burned. It works ok on flat
ground with no wind. If you go out and back on the same track it comes close
estimating calories for hills and wind. What's uncanny about the GPS is you
can review your track of high speed turns and sharpen them up even better.
The GPS even works indoors (not everywhere, but much better than older GPS
units).



Thanks. More good calculators. A more accurate aerobic activity burn
rate is 887 based on the calculators with a 3256 cal/day for all
activities.

I've shied away from GPS, pace/distance calculators, heart rate
monitors and the like, preferring to keep the activity simple, just me
and the woods where I can just let my mind wander and not have to
"keep track" I do wear a watch but only use it on interval day. And
I only do intervals within 5 weeks of any competitive race.

The net result is that I've lost over 26 lbs. over my 12 years of
running, very gradually, with the most coming in later years when I
upped the weekly distance to 35-38 miles.

I actually do think sailing competitively burns a lot more calories
than indicated, particularly on the short courses I've raced on the
last two seasons. Lots or mark rounding and tacking on short courses
in a crowd. I'm generally worn out and sore after race day. And the
owner of the boat I race with typically goes into a race shorthanded.

Frank

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...

I actually do think sailing competitively burns a lot more calories
than indicated, particularly on the short courses I've raced on the
last two seasons. Lots or mark rounding and tacking on short courses
in a crowd. I'm generally worn out and sore after race day. And the
owner of the boat I race with typically goes into a race shorthanded.


I come back tired from sailing too and I don't race. There are usually a few
bruises and one or two muscles a little tweaked that I normally don't use.
My outings are usually all day.


A heart rate monitor is good to use for training. It can indicate when you
are fatigued and helps keep the aerobic output up. On a bike it is easy to
view and not distracting, running is another story.

"Charlie Morgan" wrote
Just hang up a heavy bag (no, I don't mean Scotty's wife) and use it a few
times a week.


What a nice thing to say. I bet your parents would be proud
of you if they saw this post.


Gilligan wrote:
And see what it does to your wrists after a few years.

Try this instead:

http://ctr.usf.edu/shotokan/makiwara.html


Been there, done that, and it is good exercise. Not to diss
a traditional shotokan practice, but IMHO a light bag on a
long lead is better, once you have practiced form. It's more
exercise and develops footwork & balance. Better yet is to
put the bag on a pulley and have a trainer raise/lower the
bag while you work on it.

I recomment wearing at least slightly padded gloves, unless
you want to have really bad arthritis when you get to be
over 35.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .

Been there, done that, and it is good exercise. Not to diss a traditional
shotokan practice, but IMHO a light bag on a long lead is better, once you
have practiced form. It's more exercise and develops footwork & balance.
Better yet is to put the bag on a pulley and have a trainer raise/lower
the bag while you work on it.

You obviously did not see the Steven Segal movie. He was in a coma for 15
years, came out of it, buried a railroad tie in the ground as a makiwari
board and within weeks of his awakening managed to snap the untapered tie
right off with one blow. Plus he was married to Kelly LeBrock! No need for a
weight bag at all.

Did you study Shotokan?

Gilligan wrote:
You obviously did not see the Steven Segal movie.

I can't remember if I have or not... probably not, since I
don't watch many movies.

.... He was in a coma for 15
years, came out of it, buried a railroad tie in the ground as a makiwari
board and within weeks of his awakening managed to snap the untapered tie
right off with one blow. Plus he was married to Kelly LeBrock! No need for a
weight bag at all.


Wow! Was that a true story? It would certainly change my
opinion!

Except I don't think my wife would like the Kelly LeBrock part.


Did you study Shotokan?


No. But I have been in several dojos that took practices
from a wide range of disciplines.

Fencing is more fun and almost as good exercise.

DSK